• Starring: Jeremy Renner, Robert Carlyle, Rose Byrne
  • Summary: 28 Weeks Later, the follow up to 28 Days Later, picks up six months after the rage virus has annihilated the Mainland Britain. The U.S. Army declares that the war against infection has been won, and that the reconstruction of the country can begin. As the first wave of refugees return, a family is reunited, but one of them unwittingly carries a terrible secret. The virus is not yet dead, and this time, it is more dangerous than ever. (Fox Atomic) Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 31 out of 34
  2. Negative: 0 out of 34
  1. A ferociously entertaining thriller with sympathetic characters, stunning set pieces and pulsating excitement.
  2. 100
    As viscerally compelling as smash-mouth filmmaking gets.
  3. Doesn't match the impact of its predecessor, which both revived and reimagined the zombie-film genre.

See all 34 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Negative: 33 out of 167
  1. LarryB
    10
    No, Conor B., how misleading Metacritic users can be. Are you serious? You're suggesting that a zombie movie is...implausible? Are you kidding me? You're an idiot. Zombie movies aren't supposed to be about realism. They're supposed to be scary and intense, and that's exactly what 28 Weeks Later was. Stick to the more important George Clooney type movies with realistic situations and realistic people. Or, you know, you could just go outside and experience realistic situations yourself, but those aren't that entertaining, are they? And, Harry G., what they hell are you talking about? There were only a few scenes that even used CG.... Most of the people underrating this excellent movie don't even know what the hell they are talking about: they're either enraged that this movie is a sequel (and all sequels MUST suck, it's a traditional POV to take on all sequels) or they're upset over the lack of realism...in a movie about zombies. I'll stick with the critics, thanks. Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  2. Newbie director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo sure knows how to give horror and fun using impeccably preposterous, over-the-top methods. However for "28 Weeks Later", that's how far the film is capable of bringing itself up to. Expand
    • 2 of 2 users said yes
  3. 3
    Sure, zombie movies are not about realism, but does every single character have to be so **** stupid?!!!? They leave everything to chance! no wonder they end up dead, it's so full of mistakes: awful security; the soldiers must be thinking this is a joke, there is no other way. They let two STUPID kids go into the infected zone, those kids are also stupid enough to go near and even touch dead infected bodies! The soldiers don't keep each other informed, they don't secure the infected mother (no permanent surveillance, no cameras, no alarm), the husband just so happens to pass EVERY security guards like it was nothing and stupidly kisses her, which makes ONE infected and no **** soldier is smart enough to shoot him: they go alone, they're not careful, THEY D'ONT EVEN DRAW THEIR WEAPONS!!! They can't even secure the civilians in the SECURITY room because the infected can easily get there by just OPENING THE DOORS!! Then when they get ALL infected and the soldiers have to shoot everybody they use snipers! Not explosives or flamethrowers as they later do, but long-range snipers who take down ONE infected at the time! Then they decide to bomb the whole zone through airborne attack and release toxic gas (which makes the bombs pointless + it destroys all the buildings) actually both are pointless because some infected even managed to survive that! The remaining survivors try to escape the gas be locking themselves up in a car, which shouldn't work because cars are in no way gas-proof, they do cover their mouths with clothes though, and it shouldn't work either otherwise the army wouldn't be using this gas if it didn't penetrate very thin clothes! Afterwards, they get chased by a helicopter and drive into a metro station to escape the bullets (it is commonly known that trained US soldier can't shoot a car from a heli in more than 2 min), but instead of going back up and waiting for the heli to leave, they go deeper into the completely dark station with NO LIGHTS except for ONE night vision scope on the dead soldier's gun and guess what? they get separated in the complete darkness with an infected, but of course no one shoots until someone dies, no one screams "I'm here! HELP!!!" and they leave the gun behind... -_- It's only at this point of the movie that the two kids realize they're immune and that's why it's so important that they live because it did not cross ANYONE's mind to tell them before, which makes me think that the survivors are as brain damaged as the infected... THE END! This movie surely does not deserve a good rating, except for the good acting and makeup, otherwise SXF was sometimes **** music was nice too. In conclusion, if you want to survive a zombie apocalypse, don't watch this movie, and **** run when you see a zombie. To the writers: next time PLEASE don't do something COMPLETELY predictable or stick with the first 15 min of the film that actually looked like 28 days later! Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes

See all 167 User Reviews

Trailers

Related Articles

  1. Ranked: The Best Horror Films Since 2000

    Ranked: The Best Horror Films Since 2000 Image
    Published: October 28, 2010
    From Sam Raimi's "Drag Me to Hell" to more comedic efforts like "Shaun of the Dead," the past decade has seen a number of solid new entries in the horror canon. We run down the 15 best-reviewed horror movies from the past ten years.