hellholehorror I didn't like how much it shook around. I thought that it was done just for the sake of doing it and heighten tension but really it made it look a bit poo and distractingly messy. The gore effects looked good. Really good sound. Perfectly matched the picture and had good direction. I wasn't too keen on the continuation of the first movie. It somehow didn't work that well. It relied too much on stupid character decisions and coincidence. Robert Carlyle pops up everywhere. Some good and bad points progress the series having changed it for the worse.

Thomas Drufke The 21st century has been flooded with films and TV shows about zombie apocalypses, so it's difficult for any of them to stand out and feel completely fresh. But there's something about the '28' series that really hits well for me. There's something so glorious about seeing the streets of London be a wasteland that only occupies a select few living and undead.Similar to how the Cloverfield films are related but not directly tied in, 28 Days Later is a prequel of sorts, but the characters and plot are entirely different. 28 Weeks Later picks up after London is deemed safe and virus free, as the undead have starved to death after the events of the previous film. Of course, apparently it was a good idea for the military to reoccupy London and start building up a civilization again, even though it was the center of disaster only a half a year earlier. Implausible probably, but we've never really seen an apocalyptic series that attempts to go back and restart civilization from the same area. Usually we either see everything as the apocalypse is going down, or maybe several years later. So, in that way I like what the film tried to do.I also found the cast to be quite impressive. Not only do you have some nice lead turns from Robert Carlyle and Catherine McCormack, but you have Idris Elba, Rose Byrne, Jeremy Renner, and Imogen Poots before they became famous. All of which, do a wonderful job in roles that aren't necessarily flushed out. That partly because it's only 100 minutes long, but mostly because the film never takes a breath. That could lead to pacing and character issues, but with a non-stop action-horror, it actually works to the benefit of the experience. Adding to that experience are running zombies. Yeah, I'm looking at you every other horror film, it's cool to make them run.But perhaps the biggest compliment I can give to the film is its utterly unpredictable. With a horror film, you expect there to be an ample amount of deaths, but the way in which Juan Carlos Fresnadillo directs the deaths is terrifyingly unexpected. And when you can't see where the terror is coming from in a horror film than you're in for something special. In all, 28 Weeks Later improves upon 'Days' scares, story, characters, and plot to make for one exciting entry in the horror/sci-fi/drama genre. +Great performances+Horrific scares+Refreshing take on apocalyptic zombie flicks+Unpredictable9.0/10

mistoppi Did 28 Days Later need a sequel? Probably not, but I'm still glad we got one.The story in 28 Weeks Later is happening in significantly smaller area. In 28 Days Later the main characters travel a lot while in this one the characters mostly stay in London, and especially that small, secured area in London. The more confined milieu gives the story something more, since the virus and the infected aren't really a thread somewhere outside, but it's inside, among you. And it creates even more chaos when the US soldiers are trying to control the situation. It's brilliant and agonising.While all of the movie is very good, one of the most effective moments is at the beginning of the film, when Don (Robert Carlyle) runs when the infected attack his wife. Another friend of mine had seen the movie and described it to me when we were younger, when I was about 11 or 12. And I still remember the way she described it and how impressive, maybe even awesome that scene was. You're used to seeing people being heroes in movies, and that was the opposite. Even if we may not really experience Don's fear in that scene, his actions are incredibly powerful. Also the shaky camera, quick and fast shots at the beginning were a bit worrisome. I was afraid that's what most of the movie was going to be like, because it just kept going on and on. It's effective, but also makes everything really hard to follow. Yet you could see the most important things. The only thing I like less about this movie is how American it seems. Of course it takes place in UK, and Juan Carlos Fresnadillo is a Spanish director, so it's not the movie itself. It's mostly how the US army is involved in securing London, letting people back in London. It's annoying, but also it seems really typical. It's annoying because you know that's exactly how it would go.28 Days Later doesn't necessarily need a sequel. 28 Weeks Later is different, and a certain touch is missing with Danny Boyle, but Juan Carlos Fresnadillo has made something haunting and amazing. You don't need to see it, since the story is different, but it's still absolutely worth your time.

Reidal80 I like 28 days later but after watch 28 weeks for my 4 time I realized love this one more , it feels like fulfill all the horrors ,also got more action and chaotic sense of fear, run is all you got...and dam they're fast! I know some people complain and don't like this movie saying the camera was a bit shaky, weird angles and fast shots but hey guess they start watching this movie thinking in the slow pace of the first one, so, give it another try because this is a hell of a good movie. The acting is very good, love Robert C ,Rose Byrne and the amazing Jeremy renner in his role of a marine with a kind heart(By the way : best death in the movie burnt by flamethrower! The only movie of virus, zombies etc that gets close to 28 weeks later is Dawn of the dead remake from Zack z... The music is also good and memorable, the places, empty streets and dangerous tunnels, wow post apocalyptic for real, i can talk about this movie for decades, so I'm out of here, see you in London!