As far as sequels go; it's impressive. Just don't expect anything too groundbreaking given the state of horror films these days.

Rating: 7/10 (16 May 2007)

Five years after one of the most original horror films, arguably ever, was made; 28 Weeks Later does things most sequels don't do and that's manage to hold its own when compared to the first film. It does this through a series of conventions that hit and miss the mark.
Some things I was happy with, others I was not so impressed with. I was pleased that the basics were kept intact. Often a new director means new ideas or taking existing ones and messing around with them. Director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, from Spain, hadn't had much work before he did this film but he'll get the jobs he probably deserves now. Fresnadillo has kept everything that made 'the infected' as creepy as they were in 28 Days Later as well as giving us a refreshing, 'return to the scene of the crime' feel as London gets an attempt at re-population now that Britain has become one massive ghost town. The empty shots of London have been recycled and have once again, worked very effectively; only this time with CGI being put to good use for a change.
28 Days Later is one of my favourite films and reasons for this include its atmosphere and its look. Although the idea of shooting on DV right up until the final scenes have been banished; 28 Weeks Later still manages to retain that eerie, dark and noticeably un-easy look its predecessor also had. This is put across using a string of close ups in numerous scenes, lingering camera work, delaying the inevitable to the point of minor frustration and actually having a scene in total pitch black to the characters that we can only witness through a night vision lens in the point-of-view format.
What also works is the way the film builds up the character of Don (Robert Carlyle) and his family, giving off a feeling of family ties/familiarity before completely changing suit and going with the kids and the survivors once the initial incident happens. This is quite similar to Hitchcock's tactic he used in Psycho (1960) when the character of Marion Crane was built up to the point the film centred around her; before changing its drive and going down a different route.
What I didn't like too much was the way the film has that oddly familiar feeling that most other modern day horrors have. Yes, it's a sequel to 28 Days Later which immediately gives it 'cred'. but the use of over the top (and extremely unnecessary) gore as well as the fast paced, all action second third the film threatened to succumb to was disappointing as most modern day horror films often give in to the temptation of having style over content. Some of the scenes I'm referring to are: when a sniper is pinning them down in the streets (when he should have been air evacuated minutes earlier) and when a certain character becomes infected and acts in an ultra-violent manner towards someone else yet when another character sees him at the end of a street later on; he doesn't run to attack them (like someone infected should do) but merely disappears. These things aren't ghosts; they're as close to zombies as you can get and can't vanish out of thin air.
What's also disappointing is it doesn't seem to take itself too seriously at times. Some scenes have flaws behind them and merely act as excuses for action (the sniper scene like I said and the fact the boy near the beginning states he was being chased yet nobody thought the infected would eventually arrive, thus attacking the place they were holed up in) which is a shame as in 28 Days Later; each action and event the characters did on their seemingly endless journey nearly always had a problem that had to be dealt with.
Also, the new Wembley stadium pops up in a painfully obvious attempt to identify some modern day iconography. In ten years no one will probably care or even notice but the clue is in the title, Mr. Screenwriter: '28 Weeks Later'; the film is still taking place in 2002 or 2003. The scene in Wembley was unnecessary as it could've happened in any open space or park; I mean, come on; even the goal posts were set up and ready! On the whole, 28 Weeks Later is a good film that provides scares, thrills and some excellent cinematography. Just don't be too put off by the flaws and frustrations.