By Princess Haynee B. Pangcatan
MSU Intern
TWENTY-EIGHT Years Later had big shoes to fill. As the third film in a legacy that began with the gritty brilliance of 28 Days Later, expectations were naturally high. And while it delivers a few solid punches, especially in the first half, it ultimately limps to the finish line — a curious mix of tonal shifts, missed potential, and scattered brilliance.
The opening act is genuinely engaging. The world-building feels tight, there’s tension in the air, and surprisingly, some really funny moments land well — a welcome, if unexpected, addition to the grim universe.
The humor doesn’t always mesh with the series' traditional bleakness, but in the first half, it works.
However, as the story moves forward, the pacing gets uneven. The tension begins to fizzle, and plot threads that seem promising are either dropped or rushed. The characters — some of whom start strong — begin to feel like passengers rather than drivers of the narrative.
It’s not that the second half is bad, but compared to the gripping, raw momentum of 28 Days Later, it definitely feels like a downgrade.
That said, one constant triumph is Danny Boyle’s direction. His signature energy, kinetic camera work, and ability to build atmosphere are all here. If anything, it’s his direction that elevates several weaker moments and keeps the film from falling flat entirely.
Overall, 28 Years Later isn’t a disaster — far from it. It has its moments, especially early on, and the direction deserves kudos. But compared to its predecessors, especially the masterful 28 Days Later, it falls short.
Fans may enjoy the nostalgia and a few clever sequences, but this return to the infected world doesn't quite bite as hard as it should.
Running time: 1hr, 15 mins
Rate: 6.5 of 10
