28 Years Later Review: A Misfire of a Sequel

Despite being one of the most anticipated films of 2025, 28 Years Later is one of the most disappointing movies of the year.

Then, there’s the trailer featuring an eerie voiceover of Rudyard Kipling’s poem “Boots.” Although it puts my teeth on edge each time I hear the unsettling words spoken and gives me an overwhelming sense of unease, the trailer does exactly what it set out to do: reveals very little about the plot while hinting at a dark, gritty horror narrative.

There’s always some risk involved when returning to a loved franchise years after the first film became a hit. Sequels often fail to deliver what made the original movie so loved, and the magic is never fully recaptured. Unfortunately, 28 Years Later falls victim to this. Though it pains me to write this, despite its stellar cast (Jodie Comer, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, and Ralph Fiennes, to name a few), it’s one of the biggest disappointments of the year.

At the beginning of the film, a brief text overlay informs viewers that the virus has returned to England once again from Europe. The audience is then introduced to a family who are living on an island away from the mainland. Jamie (Taylor-Johnson), Isla (Comer), and their son Spike (Alfie Williams) reside in a community full of other non-infected humans who coexist together peacefully. Jamie and Spike are gathering their belongings as they plan to cross over the water from the island to the mainland once the tide goes out and the pathway connecting the two is exposed. The reason for their visit to the other side is so that Spike can practice shooting some of the infected. Since the events of the last film, those who carry the virus have undergone physical changes, while some have even become more intelligent.

About 20 minutes into the movie, when the father-son duo was roaming around the woods, I started to have huge doubts about whether this story was going to improve. Seeking out the infected seems more like a fun, bonding experience between the two, as opposed to the previous two films, where people fear for their lives even being around such zombies and are often running or hiding from them, knowing the potentially devastating consequences. Due to this strange narrative choice early on, I failed to connect with or care about the fate of these characters. Their actions seemed inconsistent with how one would behave in potentially life-threatening situations and didn’t make much sense, either. Take, for example, a couple of characters who an infected individual hunts down in a hyper-stylized scene that feels more suited to a cheesy coming-of-age feature than one about a world overrun by infected humans wreaking havoc on the earth.

Although there are a few gory moments intended to increase the narrative’s intensity, such occurrences are repetitive and lack any real effectiveness. These movies focus on human survival, yet none of the key reasons that made the first film so impactful feel present here at all. To make matters worse, there’s tonal inconsistency, strange editing choices, and ill-fitting music selections. This installment is so vastly different from the other two movies that halfway through, I had forgotten it was part of the 28 Days Later franchise period.

The trailer for 28 Years Later trailer got me excited, so much so that I was counting the days until the film’s release. However, people will be extremely let down once they realize it paints a picture the movie doesn’t live up to. For a horror movie that seemingly sets such expectations, one might be surprised to learn that the main plot point is more that of a family drama, using horror motifs to explore an emotional conflict. However, due to its uneven storytelling, which seems confused of its own identity, fails to achieve the touching depth it aims for.

Though the film is just shy of two hours, 28 Years Later doesn’t have enough meat on the bones to justify its lengthy runtime, It also can’t compensate for its thin plot and lack of depth. Another issue is the film’s abrupt ending, which concludes with the most random, exaggerated absurdity, bordering on satire.

28 Years Later proves how challenging it can be to return to a franchise much later and create a sequel that pleases the fans. The talent involved feels completely wasted as the story is poorly structured and seems randomly thrown together. For all the possible directions this narrative could have taken, you can’t help but wonder why this is the one the filmmakers landed on.

28 Years Later will be available to watch in U.S. and Canadian theaters, in U.K. and Irish cinemas, and globally in theatres on June 20, 2025.