No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No,

Rating: 1/10 (1 February 2008)

Set during and after the horrific events of its predecessor '28 Days Later', this follow-on film finds another group of survivors besieged and overcome by the infected, with only one man (Carlyle) managing to escape. Weeks later he is reunited with his teenage son and daughter who (fortunately) were on holiday in Spain during the initial outbreak. However, although initially assumed dead, they discover their mother also survived the attack and despite being 'infected', has no symptoms of the rage...
After the minor brilliance of 28 Days Later, 28 Weeks Later is utter garbage, riddled with enough plot holes to sink Cunard's entire fleet! It reminded of Alexander Finbow's awful '24 Hours In London' (2000) in its ineptitude on so many levels. Where do I begin? Given that Carlyle's character's wife had apparently returned from the dead AND the fact that he had an all areas pass, did not someone in the US military perhaps suspect he might use his pass to visit his (completely unguarded) wife?? Once the new outbreak kicks off, when a large number of civilians are placed in a secured area for their own protection, shouldn't someone within the US military have perhaps first checked that the area actually was secure i.e. that the back door was locked? Given that those infected with the rage become blood thirsty, raging zombies with not too much intelligence, how come one of the key infected characters is waiting for our teenage heroes in a pitch dark underground station on the other side of town from the initial new outbreak? Given that the corpse inside the pizza parlour is in an advanced state of decay, how come the pizza in the box on the back of the moped looks pretty fresh? And finally, how come no-one notices that 'teenage' Tammy is being played by a 27 year old woman??
A sorry post-script to Boyle and Garland's first film, and despite the door being left open for a third film, let's hope it never gets made.