’28 Years Later’ Review: Visually Stunning, Narratively Stunted
After over two decades, director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland are back to deliver the latest in zombie terror. Their new film, and the third entry in the series, is 28 Years Later, a harrowing look far into the future when humanity has, for better or worse, adjusted to life amongst the infected. This also marks the first in a new trilogy set during the time period. To put it bluntly, there’s a lot going on with this film, and while visually, it’s a glowing testament to the power of creative filmmaking, narratively, 28 Years Later struggles under the weight of Garland and Boyle trying to decide what kind of film to ultimately make here.
The film opens with the moments shown in earlier trailers: a group of kids try to watch Teletubbies while everything breaks bad just outside of their door. These are the early days of the Rage virus, where there’s still electricity and plenty of people around to consume. This cold open ends with a young boy clutching a crucifix and sprinting away as we flash forward, you guessed it, 28 years later.
We’re then introduced to Spike (Alfie Williams), his rugged dad Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), and his mysteriously ill mom Isla (Jodie Comer). They live on a tiny island with one path connecting them to the mainland. The only catch: that path is covered during high tide. On this very day, Jamie is going to take Spike to the mainland for the first time. At just 12, some villagers are skeptical about Spike’s readiness to traverse the dangerous landscape. But Jamie believes his son is ready. So, armed with a quiver of arrows each and some basic supplies, father and son set off on a journey that’ll change both of their lives forever.
Also Read: ‘Bark’ Review: An Unpredictable Horror Thriller With a Smart Twist
During this journey, we learn that the infected have evolved, with one type being fat, grotesque, slow-moving creatures who quite literally resemble slugs (a deeply fascinating choice) and the other being the skeletal, fast-moving zombies who sprint across fields like nasty gazelles (the visual differences here between zombie types are, again, quite fascinating). There are also Alphas, or more evolved infected, who are more capable of decision-making and planning than their lowly counterparts. The game has changed, and once an Alpha sniffs you out, there’s nothing to do but run.
This first act plays out like a father-son hunting drama as the hardened dad tries to show his son how to survive in a harsh world (similar vibes to the opening of Leigh Whannell’s The Wolfman). But, thanks to Taylor-Johnson’s performance, there’s a softness to this father figure that keeps him fascinating, a tension between his masculinity and his deep love for his family. It’s an expected tension in such a world, defined by violence and survival, but here it feels different, more complicated, than most father-son relationships in the genre.
That’s why the characterization of Jodie Comer’s Isla feels so disappointing. She’s a vessel for male development and pain, a stereotypical Disney-esque tragic figure that serves merely to deliver layers of mommy issues upon our male hero. There’s no real character development for her outside of select moments of confused ramblings and a surprising act of violence that’s never really discussed again. She is merely a mother and a wife, not a person.
Also Read: ‘Man Finds Tape’ Review: Fascinating Found Footage With Too Much Polish [Tribeca 2025]
On paper, a film about a family trying to cope with a mysterious illness almost three decades into a zombie apocalypse is incredibly interesting, and Boyle and Garland accomplish that to a point. Their emotional beats are the film’s strongest moments as humanity seeps through the screen, carried by a stellar cast, especially the young Williams, who is already a star.
In fact, with 28 Years Later, Boyle and Garland deliver perhaps the most post-Brexit horror film to date as English flags burn in the breeze and actual archival footage from previous wars is intercut with scenes of kids training to fight the infected. The women on the island even dress like 1940s housewives in a very obvious depiction of regressive gender expectations post-Rage virus. Just as post-9/11 horror films offered a giant middle finger to how the world reacted to such a terrorist attack, films like 28 Years Later not so subtly exist in defiance of their national government’s increasingly conservative and troubling politics.
But, as the film enters its second half, Boyle and Garland lose sight of the tone they want to strike, veering into almost comical or campy territory at jarring moments that destabilize the viewing experience. If that tone carried throughout the entire film, those choices would feel more intentional. But as the film starts going off the proverbial rails, the filmmakers’ grip on what they’re trying to make slips, resulting in moments that feel better suited for a Zack Snyder reboot.
Also Read: ‘Hell Motel’ Review: Limited Series Entertains But Lacks Guts
The ultimate problem with 28 Years Later is an imbalance between crafting an affecting narrative and preparing the audience for the next two films. There’s so much work being done here to set up those films that the team loses sight of what’s unfolding right in front of them. Building a trilogy within an already existing series is no doubt a daunting task, but overly focusing on what comes next leaves this film full of too many question marks. It also results in big swings that seem out of place. Maybe those moments will factor in later, but currently, with what we have and are presented, 28 Years Later feels like a film that can’t quite decide what it wants.
Despite narrative struggles, though, the film is a visual masterpiece, captured completely on iPhones. Even with a bigger budget and more resources, Boyle and cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle (who also lensed 28 Days Later) still lean into the raw, handheld aesthetic of the original film. They aren’t afraid to let the artifice of the camera show onscreen as zoom-ins stutter and kill sequences are purposefully edited to feel like glitches in reality. Editor Jon Harris is the film’s mad scientist, cutting and crafting a chaotic cinematic experience that makes 28 Years Later, even with its violence, surprisingly dream-like, as if the horrors at hand are mere figments of a child’s imagination.
Also Read: ‘A Useful Ghost’ Review: A Quirky Yet Profound Tale About A Haunted Vacuum Cleaner [Cannes 2025]
When it comes to kills, Boyle and Garland aren’t precious about their characters, though the film is surprisingly light on blood. Instead, the duo prioritizes character beats and skillfully building tension over buckets of blood and viscera. But don’t worry, there’s still plenty of blood to go around (though the biggest kills are blatant references to Predator, which is surprisingly lazy). The sound design, in particular, makes each slaughter, human and infected alike, delightfully repulsive as flesh rips and bones shatter.
While the film’s narrative loses itself in the back half, there’s a terrifying beauty on display here that weasels its way into your heart. It may not be the original 28 Days Later, but 28 Years Later still delivers poignant human stories splattered in brain matter.
-
28 Years Later
Summary
It may not be the original 28 Days Later, but 28 Years Later still delivers poignant human stories splattered in brain matter.
Categorized:Reviews
