I Rewatched 28 Weeks Later and It Completely Changed My Perspective!

by

Heed this notice: The upcoming article discloses significant plot points from both the 2007 horror film, 28 Weeks Later, and its latest sequel, 28 Years Later. If you haven’t watched these movies yet, avoid reading further to keep yourself from being spoiled. I wouldn’t want you to get upset if a surprise is ruined for you.

Prior to the premiere of the 2025 film titled “28 Years Later,” set in a world devastated by the lethal Rage Virus, I took the time to re-watch its prequels that had been unavailable for streaming or rental until recently – the original groundbreaking release from 2002, “28 Days Later,” and its sequel, “28 Weeks Later.” Initially, much like many others, I considered the first sequel to the realistic “zombie” movie a minor letdown, or perhaps a production some fans prefer to disregard.

Initially dismissing director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo’s sequel “28 Weeks Later” after my initial viewing, I chose to rewatch it via Hulu. To my surprise and delight, I find myself appreciating the film more this time around. It isn’t that I believe the movie is flawless, but I do think it could be worth reconsidering if you haven’t seen it in a while. Let me elaborate…

I Think 28 Weeks Later Is Vastly Underrated

28 Weeks Later unfolds 7 months after the initial outbreak of the Rage Virus in what appears to be a peaceful London. Yet, a single foolish and self-centered act by Don (Robert Carlyle) unwittingly triggers the virus’ resurgence with fury. Although his errors (abandoning his wife during an Infected attack and later kissing her without knowing she was infected) are maddening, they seem plausible to me if you consider human nature.

I found it effortless to accept the film’s portrayal of the virus resurfacing, appreciating not just its thought-provoking perspective on government intervention in turbulent scenarios, but also its harrowing consequences. This encompasses one of the horror genre’s most poignant cinematic deaths: Doyle (Jeremy Renner) perishes tragically while attempting to aid Scarlet (Rose Byrne), Tammy (Imogen Poots), and Andy (Macintosh Muggleton) in their escape, as he is set ablaze.

Admittedly, the unsteady camera work is a bit irritating for me, but when I can make sense of what’s happening, it adds up to some truly thrilling “zombie” movie sequences in my opinion. Furthermore, I’m not alone in finding goosebumps from the climactic scene of hordes of Infected overrunning Paris… which brings me to a concern I have about the sequel to Weeks.

Save on streaming 28 Weeks Later by bundling Hulu

Similar to its prior version, the movie titled “28 Weeks Later” is no longer available in physical format for purchase. To enjoy this film, I advise streaming it on Hulu, which usually costs $9.99 a month for a standard plan with ads. For potential savings, consider combining your account with subscriptions to both Disney+ and Max, resulting in an exceptional value of $16.99 per month, giving you access to three top-notch streaming platforms. Take advantage of this deal here!

I Am A Little Bummed 28 Years Later Squashes What Weeks Was Setting Up

In the lead-up to the release of “28 Years Later“, fans were curious if the events of “Weeks” would still be considered canonical. The new horror film acknowledges the ending of the second chapter but also diverges, as revealed in the opening text. It explains that the Rage Virus affected Continental Europe, including Paris, France, but was quickly contained. After nearly three decades, the rest of the world, except for the island where the sequel is set, has returned to normal. However, I’m left wondering: why, exactly?

Although the story in Years involves characters like Spike (Alfie Williams), Isla (Jodie Comer), and Erik (Edvin Ryding), an iPhone-carrying Swedish NATO soldier, it’s plausible that the film could unfold in a world entirely consumed by the Rage Virus. The movie, penned by Alex Garland and directed by Danny Boyle, already portrays a tight, confined narrative, so its essential elements would still be preserved. A post-apocalyptic film set within one chaotic part of a generally rebuilt world is an unnerving idea, but as a fan of 28 Weeks Later and its dismal ending, I feel that Years could have shown more reverence to its predecessor.

To put it simply, while there’s one minor issue I have with the film “28 Years Later”, I wholeheartedly consider it a masterpiece. In fact, it’s my top pick for the best horror movie of this year, surpassing even “Sinners”. I eagerly anticipate Nia DaCosta’s next installment, “28 Years Later: The Bone Temple”, hoping it will shed light on events between “Weeks” and “Years”. Regardless, I can’t wait for it to give me a good scare.

Read More

2025-06-30 16:07