28 Years Later (2025)

​“28 Years Later” stars Jodie Comer, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Ralph Fiennes, Jack O’Connell, Alfie Williams, Erin Kellyman, and Edvin Ryding.  Released on June 20, 2025, the film follows a father/son duo as they discover shocking secrets while traveling to the mainland.

The film was directed by Danny Boyle, who also directed films such as “Trainspotting”, “28 Days Later”, “Sunshine”, “Slumdog Millionaire”, and “Yesterday”.  It is the third installment in the “28 Days Later” film series.  We all share a common fear of what might happen if the world were to suddenly come to an end due to various causes.  Some may envision a natural cataclysmic event, while others might imagine a terrifying outbreak that transforms people into mindless, ravenous zombies who tear individuals apart limb from limb.  The early 2000s saw the release of several movies that brought the latter scenario to life, terrorizing moviegoers and revitalizing the zombie horror narrative.  One notable film featured a chilling post-apocalyptic society that’s caused by a highly contagious virus that was accidentally unleashed upon humanity, courtesy of English director Danny Boyle.

“28 Days Later” is regarded as a cult horror classic that captures the atmospheric dread and authentic terror of a societal collapse instigated by the “Rage Virus.”  Despite not being strictly classified as a zombie film, the movie influenced the horror subgenre through its character-driven story and refreshing approach to the swiftly animated corpses.  More importantly, it drew further attention to Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland, the latter who went on to write and direct his own series of stellar projects afterward.  Following the expansion of this infected world through a 2007 sequel and comic books, Boyle and Alex Garland reunite to further explore the decimated society in its later years, reminding audiences of the true terror posed by the zombified individuals.  With the current success of “The Last of Us” and its television adaptation, this seemed like a good opportunity to revisit the film series that sparked this trend two decades ago.  But does this long-awaited continuation deliver the same level of terror we expect from its predecessors?  Let’s find out.

As indicated by the title, the movie’s story takes place twenty-eight years after the Rage Virus escaped from a medical research laboratory, bringing society to a standstill.  The remaining survivors of the virus have recently found solutions to coexist alongside those affected by the disease, which they dubbed “infected”, with one such community residing on a small island.  This quaint, community-filled island in Lindisfarne is linked to the mainland by a heavily fortified causeway, ensuring protection from the infected that ravage the outside world.  One of the island’s survivors is Jamie (Taylor-Johnson), a scavenger striving to raise his family, including his ailing wife, Isla (Comer), and their twelve-year-old son, Spike (Williams).  In a rite of passage, Spike sets out on a mission with Jamie, which has them exploring the outside world for the first time.  Their journey leads them into the perilous depths of the mainland, where they encounter numerous threats at every turn.  Among these dangers is a pack of infected individuals led by an Alpha (Chi Lewis-Parry), who’s said to be stronger and more intelligent than the rest. 

The “28 Days Later” films were released around the time when I was far too young to watch R-rated movies, whether in theaters or at home.  Even after reaching the appropriate age of seventeen, I still overlooked those movies that revived interest in the zombie genre.  That is until “28 Years Later” prompted me to visit its predecessors in preparation for its latest installment.  Admittedly, both “28 Days Later” and “28 Weeks Later” were pretty enjoyable, thanks to their chilling atmospheres, punchy and nightmarish horror aesthetics, and authentic, grainy cinematography.  My only gripes were that the editing and shaky camera movements were extremely disorienting to the point of not seeing specific sequences clearly.  It made sense from a storytelling perspective, as it captured the frantic terror of the fast-moving infected and the chaotic energy of the movies’ presentations, but from a viewer's standpoint, it was pretty irritating for my eyes.  Regardless, they got me prepared for what I should expect from “28 Days Later”, especially with Danny Boyle and Alex Garland returning to helm the long-awaited continuation.

Given the popularity of the films, especially when considering the COVID-19 pandemic, “28 Years Later” had a significant task in reintroducing the franchise’s concept to both devoted fans and newcomers.  It had to preserve the cinematic elements that propelled its predecessors to success, such as the kinetic storytelling and horror vibes, while avoiding the conventional “gore over substance” approach often seen in the genre.  This raises the question of how Boyle and Garland would tackle this formidable task.  The simple answer is to put more emphasis on the “substance”.  “28 Years Later” takes a daring approach by using its post-apocalyptic backdrop to tell a dramatic and grounded tale about a family venturing into the unknown.  While it retains the kinetic zombie violence and the anxiety-driven, hallucinogenic vibes of its predecessors, the film’s central narrative focus is its profoundly deep reflection of the characters’ fear regarding the unknown amid its post-apocalyptic landscape.  At the core of this narrative is the family’s son, Spike, who embarks on a coming-of-age journey that reshapes his perspective on the outside world and even his relationship with his parents.

I couldn’t say much else about it since it may contain spoilers, but if you watched it yourself, you might understand why the film chose that route.  That being said, this direction would likely depend on audiences’ recent expectations toward the “zombie genre”.  If they go to see it just for the gore and kinetically-charged action, I can see them enjoying what was given.  However, it might not be enough to quench all their thirsts, as they must endure the character-driven scenes to see more of the carnage.  So, it’s understandable why some people may not enjoy “28 Years Later” when they view it as a typical zombie gore-fest.  But it’s also the reason why it stands out as one of the better post-apocalyptic horror films of the decade.  I expected to enjoy “28 Years Later” as much as I did with its predecessors, particularly in terms of tone and energetic violence.  However, to my surprise, this film managed to surpass the first two movies by seamlessly combining anxiety-inducing thrills with a poignant and visually beautiful story filled with heartbreak and emptiness.

Alex Garland is no stranger to weaving challenging narratives into their conventional genre antics, whether he’s directing, writing, or both, delivering experiences that resonate on a deeper level.  “28 Days Later” was no exception, as it catapulted him to success with his political allegory on disease outbreaks.  More importantly, it laid the groundwork for his thematic approach to storytelling.  “28 Years Later” has Garland revisiting familiar territory but with a fresh perspective.  This new installment has him shifting his focus from modern political themes to a poignant family drama set against the backdrop of its desolate, post-apocalyptic world.  This narrative choice yielded a well-written and daringly executed script that showcases Garland’s ability to craft insightful storytelling that subverts many of the conventional genre expectations.  He expertly balanced its mature themes of anxiety, coming of age, and death with the thrilling elements of traditional zombie action.  

What truly sets “28 Years Later” apart from its predecessors is its unexpected emotional depth.  Much like “A Quiet Place”, another post-apocalyptic horror film that centers on a family dynamic, Alex Garland elicits a surprising range of emotions that were effectively genuine, particularly sadness.  I actually found myself crying my eyes out during the one scene involving Spike and her mother, Isla.  This is due to the convincing family dynamic in “28 Years Later,” which was initially heartfelt before it slowly deteriorated because of the characters’s actions, mainly Jamie's.  This led to that scene that punched me in the gut instantly on an emotional level.  Despite an abrupt and off-putting conclusion that threatened to derail the experience, the screenplay reinforced Alex Garland’s reputation for bold, thematic storytelling, which adeptly navigated beyond the expected tropes seen in the genre.  This is the film that pushed the narrative boundaries and challenged audiences to reevaluate their perspectives on the source material on a deeper level.  The narrative choices in “28 Days Later” may not impress everyone, but they effectively showcase Garland’s narrative prowess and underscore his ability to infuse genre elements with profound emotional resonance.

As for Danny Boyle, he tapped into his usual directorial strengths to deliver another high-octane roller coaster filled with tension, blood, and awe.  If you’ve seen the predecessors, you’ll know what Boyle is capable of for “28 Years Later”.  The energetic, hallucinogenic vibes of its cinematography, coupled with snappy editing and a pace that’s as relentless as the infected themselves, all serve to evoke a sense of chaos and nightmare-inducing dread, perfectly capturing the essence of the Rage Virus.  Those elements were the reasons I didn’t enjoy the predecessors as much as everyone else, but for “28 Years Later”, it seemed that Boyle had taken those issues to heart, refining his approach while maintaining the disarray that defines his directorial vision.  The editing techniques provided the proper consistency and uniqueness to complement its chaotic nature, especially with the Matrix-style kills and heart-pounding tension.  The camera movements also had a snappiness that felt deliberate and controlled rather than disorienting.  

Visually, this is perhaps the most striking installment in the franchise, thanks in large part to Anthony Dod Mantle’s riveting cinematography.  Utilizing small digital cameras, including an iPhone 15 Max, Mantle harkened back to the innovative filming techniques of “28 Days Later,” where he employed a Canon XL-1 digital camcorder to capture the isolated backgrounds with its grainy, home-movie-esque presentation.  The result is a presentation that feels both modern and nostalgically connected to the franchise’s roots.  Boyle also didn’t shy away from his dramatic side, weaving in moments of sincere, heart-wrenching emotion that provided a poignant counterpart to the film’s horror elements.  The seamless blend of thrilling horror and heartbreaking drama, executed with Boyle’s finesse, ensured that “28 Years Later” not only captivates but also moves its audience, reaffirming that his creative spark remains undiminished.

The cast also did a great job conveying the humanity and anxiety of the film’s characters with remarkable authenticity.  However, the real star of the film is Alfie Williams in his first major screen role.  With Spike being the central protagonist of the story, Williams faced the challenges of standing out among its slew of famous actors regarding his role as a coming-of-age son confronting an uncertain world.  Fortunately, he managed to pull through with a performance that brilliantly highlights Spike’s raw emotions and personal growth with a sincerity that captivates from his first scene to the last.  This is another first-time performance by a young actor that hints at a promising future in acting, assuming Williams’ performance is enough to help him land more roles.  Jodie Comer also delivered another outstanding performance, arguably the most emotional of her career.  Her take on Spike’s ill mother illuminated the warmth and depth of her relationship with Spike, capturing the bittersweet nature of her character’s depressing arc.  This role added another impressive chapter to Comer’s winning streak, which began with her breakthrough performance in “Killing Eve”.  Aaron Taylor-Johnson also delivered a worthy performance as the complex Jamie, redeeming himself after his role in “Kraven the Hunter.”  His nuanced performance added layers to this seemingly loving father, contributing to the film’s narrative woes.  Ralph Fiennes brought a compelling spark to his cinematic presence as Dr. Ian Kelson, one of the outbreak’s survivors, further solidifying his status as a formidable actor.

Overall, “28 Years Later” embodies the kinetic terror and urgency of the post-apocalyptic unknown while offering a compelling and surprisingly poignant core beneath its infected mayhem.  Its approach, favoring a sorrowful family drama set in a zombie-infested landscape over a traditional scare-fest filled with over-the-top gore, is quite bold enough to challenge general moviegoers’ expectations, especially fans of the first two films.  While it may not impress everyone seeking a traditional, fast-paced, and violent experience in the realm of zombie horror, it’ll likely appease those seeking a narrative worth investing in amid the chaos, maybe even surprise them as it did for me.  As someone who enjoyed its predecessors for what they were, I was pretty darn surprised at how “28 Years Later” surpassed my own expectations.  “28 Years Later” packs enough story and bloody carnage through its fantastic cast, Boyle’s uniquely energetic vision, and Alex Garland’s screenplay to reignite interest in the horror franchise and its future, especially with the upcoming release of “The Bone Temple” next year, which will continue the film’s narrative.  I would even say that this is the best installment I’ve seen in the film series, in my eyes.  If you like Danny Boyle’s other films, especially the “28 Days Later” installments, it’s definitely worth checking out, but be sure to keep your expectations low, as it offers more than what the trailers suggest.

A