Frustrating story telling ruins a film with a lot of potential

Rating: 3/10 (20 May 2007)

I don't get why some films lack so much in story telling. Why spend millions on actors and special effects, when the story has ridiculous amounts of holes in it? I know that 28 weeks later was never supposed to be an ultra realistic film (it's a zombie flick after all!), but come on... When I'm sitting there trying to convince myself that 'this could have happened for that reason, or that could have happened for this reason', it really takes away from the enjoyment.
Everything seemed to be going great at the start of the film. The setup was really good, the opening scene had a lot of tension and the story was well introduced with the father making his selfish decision.
Everything turned sour when the kids left the secure zone.
I thought there was guards all along the gate, guns all over the place. They were seen leaving and reported immediately, yet it took about 2 hours for them to be regathered?! The mother was discovered to be a carrier, yet there wasn't one guard watching over her, and the father could access her holding room with his caretaker swipe card?! All the civilians were locked into a big room for safety and containment, yet the back door was fairly easily opened up by zombie-dad. Was that his skeleton swipe card (do zombies know what swipe cards are?) again or just dumb luck? I could go on, but I wont. The point is, it's really not that hard to tell a story that makes logical sense. 28 days later was brilliant, and one of the things I most liked about it was that it seemed like that is how real people would react and they are the very real situations they would find themselves in. 28 weeks later took a high-tension unsettling film and delivered a mindless, boring, formulaic action sequel.