**It destroyed the franchise** 28 Years Later is another tired franchise revival that ruined its respective franchise. The film was akin to a hollow, uninspired cash grab, with zero respect for the original story. It started out good, but didn't know what it wanted to be, and the choices made by the... **It destroyed the franchise** 28 Years Later is another tired franchise revival that ruined its respective franchise. The film was akin to a hollow, uninspired cash grab, with zero respect for the original story. It started out good, but didn't know what it wanted to be, and the choices made by the characters were just too ridiculous to lead anyone to believe they survived for up to 28 years. It's dull, disappointing, and felt like a betrayal to fans of 28 Days Later, 28 Weeks Later, graphic novels, and comics. If you want my opinion: if you're a fan of the franchise, don't waste your time or money on this utter waste of time.

28 Years Later: The Boring Temple. The first hour concerns people irrelevant to the final goal. The kid is cool. The mom is cool. Why do I have to watch the rest? Would rather the focus be on resolving whatever situation with the guy they stole the baby from. That guy was cool. Had a human baby. That's pretty wild. Could have been better and shorter. (Funny note: I thought I had watched bone temple because of the bone temple at the end)

"What the !@#$ did I just watch?" **SPOILERS AHEAD!** The first hour and fourteen minutes of this movie is weird, stupid, and a colossal waste of time. Dean's 1/10 review is understandable. The first (17) minutes of this movie is damn near unbearable. I assume "Boots" has some historic significance,... "What the !@#$ did I just watch?" **SPOILERS AHEAD!** The first hour and fourteen minutes of this movie is weird, stupid, and a colossal waste of time. Dean's 1/10 review is understandable. The first (17) minutes of this movie is damn near unbearable. I assume "Boots" has some historic significance, but all it does is take me out of the movie constantly. Also, the decision to weave in some medieval nonsense and some war footage just made it worse. Had it continued any longer (the medieval nonsense pops up again later, but not the "Boots"), I'd have stopped watching. From the (17) minute mark onward, until about that hour and fourteen minute point I mentioned, the movie is varying levels of stupidity. It's a whole lot of adults doing stupid !@#$. There's nothing I dislike more in a movie than supposed competent adult characters doing legitimately stupid !@#$. Dad is stupid. Grandpa, or whoever he is, is stupid. Mom is fine. Soldier boys are stupid. Villagers are stupid. Rage beasts are rage beasts, so they get a pass. The boy is stupid, but I blame the father for that. After that hour and fourteen minute point that I mentioned, the movie focuses on the mom, the boy, and the doctor, and this is where the movie shines. But then it's back to stupid. "Samson" has a really big d- Is that thing real? How big does it get when... "Samson's" big d*** is probably the best part of the movie! I digress! The last time we see the doctor, he's being stupid. Then we meet the "Howzats"! The "Howzats" are all kinds of stupid, but they're stupid in the fun way. They're the only fun stupid in the movie. There are two good bits in this movie - one is somewhere in the middle and the other is at the end, and that's the only reason it gets a 6/10. Hey! I made a rhyme! Also, yes! I have seen "28 Days Later" and "28 Weeks Later". "28 Days Later" is one of my favorite movies in this genre and "28 Weeks Later" wasn't horrible, but this, this is not those movies. This feels like "Matrix: Resurrections". This feels like the director was told a movie was going to happen with or without him, so he made this. If that ain't what happened, then I don't !@#$ing know, bruh.

Don't believe those reviews that give this movie rating more than 4/10. They are paid reviews. There's no way that any normal, sane person would rate this movie more than 4. I watched 28 Days Later (first one) and 28 Weeks later (2nd one) and they were masterpieces in a zombie movies. They were bril... Don't believe those reviews that give this movie rating more than 4/10. They are paid reviews. There's no way that any normal, sane person would rate this movie more than 4. I watched 28 Days Later (first one) and 28 Weeks later (2nd one) and they were masterpieces in a zombie movies. They were brilliant. I would say, best zombie movies out there. So, I was looking forward for this third one, but trust me, it turns out a huge disappointment. It feels like a bad parody of a zombie movie, more like a joke rather than a serious movie. Let's dive into details: Music: Music is out of place in this movie. Some, stupid music as a background all the time. Visuals: CGI and special effects are truly bad for 2025 movie. It felt like I was watching some very low budget movie. Old footages: Sometimes we get some old movie footages in this movie, I have no idea for what purpose. I think creators also have no idea what they were creating with this abomination of a movie. In short, I watched 30 minutes and then I just simply stopped and deleted this movie from my library. It's that bad! As soon as you start watching it, you will understand why it feels so cheap and low budget, trash movie.

'28 Years Later' delivers a very good flick, I wouldn't rank it too far behind the (albeit superior) original in actuality. I admittedly did think it was going to be more in-your-face unsettling based on a trailer I saw, what with that terrifying (but great!) usage of Rudyard Kipling's "Boo... '28 Years Later' delivers a very good flick, I wouldn't rank it too far behind the (albeit superior) original in actuality. I admittedly did think it was going to be more in-your-face unsettling based on a trailer I saw, what with that terrifying (but great!) usage of Rudyard Kipling's "Boots". All the same, it is still unnerving in a good amount of patches; it's, for me, definitely the closest that these films have come to being scary. These movies always nail their casting, whilst this is compartively the weakest cast they still impress. Ralph Fiennes steals the show, mind. Fiennes is quality, Aaron Taylor-Johnson does bring a strong performance too. Jodie Comer is convincing, while youngster Alfie Williams gives more than what's necessary. Edvin Ryding's part is iffy at first, but by the end I did enjoy him. No complaints with any of 'em. The final scene is absolutely wild, kinda can't believe they went *there*. I did note the similarities to the fixer instantly but thought I was connecting unconnectable dots, but boy was I spot on. I'm fascinated to see where they go with it; good casting, to be fair. Not too long to wait for the January 2026 sequel, it'll be worth a watch no matter what given the above. As for this 2025 release, it sure does look the part visually and it happily gives an entertaining story to boot.

"28 Years Later" is a very different film to its predecessors. This is humanist tale of what it means to inherit a world that's changed but at its core, remains unchanged. Remember, we all live and we all must die. In this sense, the tale of zombies, takes a back seat, as the protagonists have to fa... "28 Years Later" is a very different film to its predecessors. This is humanist tale of what it means to inherit a world that's changed but at its core, remains unchanged. Remember, we all live and we all must die. In this sense, the tale of zombies, takes a back seat, as the protagonists have to face the reality of survival but just as importantly, the need to remain human. To live, love and accept loss. Whilst the first half of this film feels somewhat static (setting the scene but doing little more), the latter half is inexplicably moving, for a film cast in this genre. The chemistry and interplay between Jodie Comer, Alfie Williams and Ralph Fiennes characters, is all too familiar and painfully human, in spite of the post apocalyptic setting. Most especially for those of us, who have experienced the loss, of a parent. What I could not grasp and I feel robbed this film of a measure of its impact, was the weird parkour zombie scene, with what looked liked fashion extra's from a Benetton ad, at the films end. Why? In summary, whilst somewhat uneven, the latter half of this film is excellent, "almost" to the closing credits. Most definitely worth a look.

I have waited for 18, painful, years since 28 weeks later was released for this sequel. So, as I am sure it is the case with many Zombie movie fans I had expectations very high. The movie is set 28 years after the infection in a, this time completely, quarantined UK and follow a family who lives in ... I have waited for 18, painful, years since 28 weeks later was released for this sequel. So, as I am sure it is the case with many Zombie movie fans I had expectations very high. The movie is set 28 years after the infection in a, this time completely, quarantined UK and follow a family who lives in a secured village. The dad has a scouting job so the main plot of the movie follows what happens after the 12 years-old son is exposed to the outside of the village and the many new evolved types of zombies and people that now plague the country. The movie has good technical quality and the initial sequence with the dad and the child venturing in the open country has the same energy as the first movies, with frenzied zombie pursuits and the feeling you "can't catch a break". However, the director tried too hard to make an artsy movie, with "The Shining"-like visions, excessive soap-opera drama, and even a ridiculous sequence with people jumping around "fighting kung fu" which reminded me of Kung Fu Hustle. Still a good movie worth watching and with a better editing it could have been the great movie we all expected, but the final format is a bit of a disappointment for the fans that waited for so long.

It’s almost thirty years since Cillian Murphy wandered around in his hospital gown; the so-called “rage” virus still shows no sign of abating and with Britain effectively quarantined from Europe there are few outposts untouched by it’s madness. Protected by the tides, the small island of Lin... It’s almost thirty years since Cillian Murphy wandered around in his hospital gown; the so-called “rage” virus still shows no sign of abating and with Britain effectively quarantined from Europe there are few outposts untouched by it’s madness. Protected by the tides, the small island of Lindisfarne is one such bastion and that’s where “Spike” (Alfie Williams) lives with his dad (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and his poorly mum (Jodie Comer). It’s a big day in the place when “Spike” is taken to the mainland by his father to make his first kill. That’s not least because he is barely twelve years old and because he has never seen anything of town nor land as far as the eye can see before. He’s also never seen any of the infected before, either. With this trip being fairly fraught and eventful and with one of his family friends at home telling him of a doctor “Kelson” (Ralph Fiennes) who might be able to help his increasingly disturbed mother, the newly emboldened “Spike” comes up with a daring plan to see if he can help make her better. It’s all pretty standard zombie fayre this film but though there is quite a decent effort from the confident young Williams and Comer does lethally equipped confused well too, the rest of it just lacks much for originality. There’s plenty of action, but there was that in “Shaun of the Dead” (2004) too - and at least that was funny. This is just all a bit intense, with the psycho-babble “up and down again” commentary and some inconsistently incorporated archive from old Robin Hood or Olivier films that seem to suggest something of the recurring nature of history, but also of this plot. Sure, it’s only part one of a trilogy and the iodine-bedecked Fiennes does introduce a little quirky intrigue for what might come next, but I was really quite disappointed with this over-hyped and all too often quite episodic horror, sorry.

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ / "28 Years Later is an imperfect but undeniably bold movie - a worthy addition to the saga. It's more technically polished, features excellent performances, and even if some of its narrative risks don't pay off, the thematic ambition is admirable, despite struggling to br... FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ / "28 Years Later is an imperfect but undeniably bold movie - a worthy addition to the saga. It's more technically polished, features excellent performances, and even if some of its narrative risks don't pay off, the thematic ambition is admirable, despite struggling to bring all of its elements into a cohesive whole. Danny Boyle and Alex Garland are commenting on the state of the modern world - from national identity crises to the ethics of human survival - delivering moments of high intensity, morally relevant questions, and striking visual filmmaking. Though not entirely satisfying, the film leaves us with a firm curiosity about the direct sequel arriving in just a few months." Rating: B

***SPOILERS/STORY SUMMARY REVIEW*** What I will say about this movie is it's not all bad. This first half was really good, with an opening that was reminiscent of 28 Weeks Later. Afterwards though, it cuts to completely different characters for basically the rest of the film. Which would be fine and... ***SPOILERS/STORY SUMMARY REVIEW*** What I will say about this movie is it's not all bad. This first half was really good, with an opening that was reminiscent of 28 Weeks Later. Afterwards though, it cuts to completely different characters for basically the rest of the film. Which would be fine and all, just showing a snippet of how the infection was 28 years before the start of the movie, but it does a weird call back in the ending scene that feels extremely out of place compared to the rest of the film. Aside from that, the first half is really good and the tension of survival of a father and son feels heavy and suspenseful, especially with the addition of a new type of infected: the alpha. This new infected is basically a 'roided up super infected that is both smarter and stronger than normal ones. It's only after making it back to the safe village does the movie noticeably change mood to a more coming of age feeling movie, oddly reminding me a bit of Stand By Me. It's at this point, my enjoyment of this movie kinda began to fall. This latter half just ends up with the boy and his mom going out to find a doctor. The whole trip, it kinda feels like things just happen. And sure, the second half is about accepting death, but it feels so paved over when the boy has a more violent reaction to his dad cheating than the guy who actually kills. It feels so jarring when that scene happens cause it doesn't really fit how the character acted beforehand. After all is said and done, boy stays outside of the safe village and wanders where it ends in a bizarre scene of him running into a pack of survivors which one turns out to be the kid from the opening scene. It's so weird cause it a group of 5 who at first I mistook as a gang of grannies doing par-core and brutalizing some runner infected all while some trash metal was playing in the background. I did get a laugh at the fact that I wasn't the only one in the theater wondering what the hell was going on when that scene started. TLDR: Movie is good and really suspenseful up until they return to base in witch it turns more into a bad attempt of a coming of age story that finishes off with a power rangers type end scene. This whole movie reminds me of what happened with Longlegs. Advertising made the movie seem like a much different movie vs the actual viewing experience. Don't know how the next to films are gonna be like (if they even release), but seeing how much this first film feels like a filler movie doesn't give me much hope that they'll be good....

**A beautiful film with a handful of odd choices.** I was hesitant going into this film. On one hand, it was a mainstream zombie film with a big budget and a competent crew. But on the other hand, it was in a franchise I have never loved, and it was the start of a new trilogy. So, while I was confid... **A beautiful film with a handful of odd choices.** I was hesitant going into this film. On one hand, it was a mainstream zombie film with a big budget and a competent crew. But on the other hand, it was in a franchise I have never loved, and it was the start of a new trilogy. So, while I was confident that it would be a solid movie, I did not know if it would work for me personally or if it would feel like it could stand on its own. I walked out of the theater satisfied with the film. And in the day since, I have grown even more positive on it and am giving it a **9 out of 10**. I think the part that will surprise people the most is the emotional weight that the film carries. And it all comes from the great set of characters and their relationships. There is a lot of heart and even some great humor to get you invested. This elevates the film above being just another fun zombie movie. But let's talk about the zombies/infected. There are a couple new ideas introduced with them in this that I really dig. They are more monstrous than ever, but they are also showing more humanity than ever. The action and kills are a lot of fun. Everything is as fast and terrifying as usual with this franchise. So, the action is mostly fantastic. I say 'mostly' because there are a couple of editing choices that I think distract from the action more than they enhance it. I can say the same for a handful of other points in the film. They chose to insert flashes of other footage at times. One of the times I loved it. One of the times it was weird and actually felt like a trailer for the movie. And another time, it was just very confusing. (I still don't know the meaning of it) Those are a couple of the times where the style didn't fully work. But for 95% of the film, it does! This film has a look that is so unique. **It feels both calm and like a nightmare at the same time!** I don't know how they did it. If you have seen the awesome trailer, you get a feel for the style of the film. It does not disappoint. Then, there is a scene at the end that sets up the future of the trilogy. This scene has a style and a tone that is like nothing else in the movie. Truly a WTF moment for the audience. It was bold, and it did not work for me. But since it was just a tease to the future films and not integral to this one, I am willing to forgive it. Because before that, we got an actual ending to the film that was emotionally satisfying. This film has no problem standing on its own. Sure, you are left with more to explore, and certain character arcs are left unfinished. But go in knowing it is a trilogy (and that the next one is coming as soon as this January), and these things hopefully won't bother you. - All in all, **I'm a happy zombie fan! :D**

Just a wealth of stupid, moronic, and ill-advised ideas. The film starts out with a fairly strong intro, but the central character here doesn't have any impact on the rest of the film, so it feels wasted. It switches plots halfway through after a strong start, inexplicably. I assume the new evolved ... Just a wealth of stupid, moronic, and ill-advised ideas. The film starts out with a fairly strong intro, but the central character here doesn't have any impact on the rest of the film, so it feels wasted. It switches plots halfway through after a strong start, inexplicably. I assume the new evolved infected were meant to be scary. I found them to be unintentionally hilarious in several scenes, and if you watch this film you'll understand why. The later portions of the film are just as nonsensical, but in short, it gets more and more absurd as it progresses. Wait to see it on streaming.