28 Years Later — A Review.

24th October, 2025: 28 Years Later.

The Introduction.

There comes a time in a man’s life when he has to do several things.

Eating is generally a good thing, for example.

A wash, every-so-often, doesn’t hurt.

Shopping?

Reading … ?

Those are good: as is going to the toilet.

As and when needed.

The occasional song is nice: I’ve got an Ian Dury tune on the go.

And, every-so-often … ?

A movie.

Right at the moment … ?

I’ve got 28 Years Later sitting in my collection: ready to be watched.

Hopefully?

It will be entertaining.

I’ll let you know by Sunday, 26th October … 

~≈🎥≈~

 

24th October, 2025.

Part One: The Summary.

28 Years Later opens years after the first two films: and opens to show us a small group of children gathered around a TV: watching an old, video-taped, episode of Teletubbies.

Until the children’s carer runs into the room: and tells them to be very quiet, and not to move.

As … ?

The castle the children and their families are trapped in, is being attacked by the Infected: who have swarmed over the UK, since the events of the first film.

As most of the hidden children are killed, one — Jimmy (Rocco Haynes) — manages to flee the castle, and escape to find his father.

Only to see his desperate father overwhelmed … 

~≈🎥≈~

The screen fades to darkness.

We’re then shown a series of intertitles: written slides that tell us of how the Rage Virus hit the UK, but driven from the European continent … and how, in a quarantined Britain, survivors are left to fend for themselves.

A last slide … says simply “28 Years Later”

The darkness lifts, to show us a tattered Saint George’s cross flying over a small village on Lindisfarne.

A village where Spike (Alfie Williams) is being awoken by his father, Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson): in preparation for what Jamie calls Spike’s big day.

As do the rest of the villagers, when the pair head for the village gates, gates that lead to the mainland: a mainland where Jamie will be teaching his nervous son to kill Infected … 

After the pair have seen to Isla (Jodie Comer), Spike’s seriously ill mother …

~≈🎥≈~

25th October, 2025.

Part Two: Thoughts.

So … 

What did I make of 28 Years Later … ?

Of a much delayed sequel … ?

Hmmm … 

As a first point?

The older I get, the more long movies — ones over ninety or so minutes — are something I find harder to cope with.

I’ll be honest, if I may? 

I got roughly halfway through 28 Years Later, last night, when I got bored: and decided enough of a break to boil the kettle, play a game or two, read a brief news article, pour hot water onto a mug with milk and a tea-bag, go to the loo, and then fish the tea-bag out of the mug, made for a distraction.

As did putting the used tea-bag into the bin.

After that was done … I went back to the movie: thinking the old school Intermission was a good idea, and that the film’s producers could have shaved fifteen to twenty minutes off of the film.

As a second point?

I don’t know that the film’s length is the problem.

I think the pacing’s at issue.

Both 28 Days Later, and 28 Years are similar lengths: Days at an hour and fifty-three minutes, Years some two minutes longer.

The original, 28 Days Later?

To me, was something that seemed far better — and faster — paced: it plays out over nearly two hours, but feels like ninety minutes.

Compared to 28 Years Later: a film that played out over two hours, but felt nearer two and a quarter.

Yes, before you ask: Director, Danny Boyle, could have put in a touch more work, there.

~≈🎥≈~

Part Three: The Cast.

There’s possibly more I could say, there: but that’s something for later.

There’s plenty of other things to chew on.

For one thing … ?

The performances.

You’ve heard of Chekhov’s gun, haven’t you … ?

The idea — originally ascribed to Anton Chekhov — that says every plot element has to be used: so if you’re shown a gun or a rifle near the start of a story, it has to be fired, by the end of it.

By or at the main characters, for preferences.

The gun in this film?

Is simply the character of Jimmy: he’s the little boy (Rocco Haynes) at the start of the film: who then crops at the end, played by Jack O’Connell.

O’Connell does his usual sterling job … for the five or so minutes he’s in the film.

The reason for that … ?

Is that — from the little I know — Jimmy will play a big part in 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple: the next film in the series, due for release in 2026.

The ensemble cast were strong.

Superb, in fact: Ralph Fiennes, as the sympathetic Dr Kelson, caught my attention.

He was something to watch: his iodine-covered, seemingly blood-soaked, appearance, contrasting with his compassionate nature, and the kindly way he treats his patients.

There’s no other word but superb, there, I think.

Aaron Taylor-Johnson as the emotionally cold father, Jamie? 

Was just as striking.

The real stars of the show … ?

As far as I’m concerned the stars were Comer as the cancer-ridden Isla … and Alfie Williams as Spike.

Williams put in a performance both world-weary, scared, decisive, innocent and wise rolled up into one hell of a package.

I can only hope he gets a good career off the back of this performance.

~≈🎥≈~

Part Four: World Building.

Something else that struck me … ?

Was the world building.

I always think competently done world-building is a must for any story: whether that’s a film, a book, a TV show or a radio-show.

From the little I know?

The Marvel movies are extensive, Tolkien’s Middle Earth and Pratchett’s Discworld are both well developed, EastEnders reasonably coherent, the Star Trek franchise, and the Whoniverse, are reasonably well developed, if a little contradictory.

And Radio 4’s The Archers?

Has an entire back office dedicated to the show’s history and continuity.

So world building’s important: both for long term success, and in order for a story to be convincing.

“Does this apply, here,” Paul, I hear you say?

Yes: it does.

28 Years Later has to follow the pre-established rules from the earlier films: and does so, well.

The rage virus is spread by blood from the Infected: so, as a logical consequence of this, mainland Britain has been isolated from disease-free Europe.

The island community Spike, Jamie and Isla, are part is equally as isolated: the villagers can only get to and from the mainland via a causeway that’s exposed only at low tide.

And, whilst the Infected are equally as isolated, they’ve had logical changes: there’s ‘fat ones’ who move slowly, emaciated ‘fast ones’, and an Alpha, a dominant male called Samson (Chi Lewis-Parry).

Who has a habit of ripping the heads off of his victims.

Heads … with the spinal columns still attached.

Even given that, we know Dr Kelson can stop Samson in his tracks: so?

Samson is something to be wary of: but not shocking.

Especially given 28 Years Later is a horror film: we expect gore from a horror film.

No … the thing I found shocking?

Was that one of the Infected is pregnant … 

~≈🎥≈~

Part Five: The Environment.

There are other things mixed into the film’s world building.

I’ve mentioned that Spike’s village is on an island off Britain’s north-east coast: and can only be reached at low tide.

Its name is never spoken in the film.

But you see references — in posters and banners the villagers have in communal buildings — to the Holy Island mission.

I almost immediately recognised the place as Lindisfarne: possibly one of the holiest sites in the country, as it’s housed some sort of Christian community since the seventh century.

It — like the rest of the settings used — looks utterly wild, and utterly beautiful.

Even with the digital enhancement Boyle’s production crew, the scenery is gorgeous.

Additionally?

Having our main characters home, there?

Makes sense in the context of the story.

The villagers are there, have isolated themselves, to keep themselves safe.

Whether that’s from the Infected?

Or from the likes of Dr Kelson, the ‘normal’, uninfected, humans on the mainland, humans who may be able to help?

Is a whole other matter … 

~≈🎥≈~

Part Six: And Finally.

So … with all that out of the way … ?

What DID I make of 28 Years Later … ?

It has to be said: 28 Years Later is a very well made film.

The acting — from Comer, Fiennes and  young Alfie Williams in particular— is extremely well done.

The effects … ?

And CGI inserts?

Are extremely good: acting to enhance the gorgeous scenery of north eastern England, rather that hide it.

It’s a well written story, that’s well acted and well told.

My only concerns?

Are two-fold.

One … ?

The infected have been changed, somewhat.

If I recall the extras that came with the original film, the Infected were filmed on digital cameras set to a slower frame rate: so that, when the footage was edited into the finished film and played a normal speed, the Infected would look as though they were moving faster than an uninfected human.

That doesn’t seem to have been done in this film.

The only other thing … ?

Was something I’ve mentioned already: the pace of the thing.

Yes: I’m getting older, grumpier and less patient, so would prefer a shorter film.

Or, at least, a better paced one.

Those complaints out of the way?

28 Years Later is still a very good film: and one that’s got me interested in watching the sequel.

~≈🎥≈~

Part Six: Thank You and Goodnight.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is where I’m going to leave things.

You have my thanks for reading this: and — or! — for watching the video version of this review.

Before I go?

I will ask you to subscribe to my YouTube channel, and follow this blog, as well.

I publish an online quiz called Daily Teaser: and I’m planning more film and TV reviews.

Keep your eyes peeled, folks: I’ll see you next time.

28 Years Later.

★★★☆