Plot: Picking up where “28 Days Later” left off, 28 weeks have passed and Britain has been quarantined and destroyed. Now a family is trying to recover as American soldiers have secured the area … or have they? (They haven’t.)
Who’s it for: Fans of the first one, which means you must like zombies, death and this time there are more guns thrown in.
Expectations: I expected to squirm. Zombies are scary, but zombies that can run faster than me are terrifying. And yes, I know they are technically “infected” and not zombies, but still …
Robert Carlyle as Don: The film and Carlyle start off strong, with a very griping scene as Don attempts to escape the infected from a cottage. But after that, Carlyle fades away, and I never understood how he knew and ended up in some of the places late in the film.
Jeremy Renner as Doyle: He’s the one character in the whole film that I was rooting for. Renner plays a soldier who witnesses the carnage and attempts to do something about it.
Rest of cast: It’s always nice to see small TV actors on the big screen, with Idris Elba from “The Wire” and Harold Perrineau from “Lost” making the jump. The kids were good also.
Talking: There isn’t much.
Sights and sounds: On one hand, the special effects were used very well giving London an eerie, desolate look, and when they burn sector one, it’s stunning. But the infected just seem to bite, spit blood, scream and repeat a little too much.
Even though it’s a sequel, “28 Weeks Later” attempts to tackle some new territory. First off, it shows the aftermath of what it would look like to deal with actual zombies (in the form of an infection) ruining a city. Then, the film touches on American soldiers taking over an area with military force (sound familiar?) with hints of Big Brother thrown in. It’s all very ambitious for a zombie flick, but after those two story lines go away, we’re just left with really fast zombies, and of course, the potential for another film.
Overall Grade: 6