More in-depth film festival coverage than any other website!
Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
Advertisement

Overall Rating
3.57

Awesome: 25%
Worth A Look43.18%
Average: 11.36%
Pretty Bad: 4.55%
Total Crap: 15.91%

7 reviews, 46 user ratings


Latest Reviews

Darkest Hour by Jay Seaver

Shape of Water, The by Jay Seaver

I, Tonya by Rob Gonsalves

Wonder Wheel by Peter Sobczynski

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri by Rob Gonsalves

Swindlers, The by Jay Seaver

Oro (Gold) by Jay Seaver

Disaster Artist, The by Peter Sobczynski

Explosion by Jay Seaver

Lucky (2017) by Rob Gonsalves

subscribe to this feed


28 Weeks Later
[AllPosters.com] Buy posters from this movie
by brianorndorf

"Completely, utterly, monumentally awful."
1 stars

I’m angry with the producers of “28 Weeks Later,” and my rage tops even that of the spastic infected that swarm around the picture like a pack of rabid Olympic sprinters. You see, what was once a thematically arresting, chillingly sparse tale of isolation, claustrophobia, and panic has been turned into an asinine study of shock value and stupefying directorial imprudence. The film isn’t simply bad, it’s a trainwreck.

After surviving a countryside attack from the roaming infected, Don (Robert Carlyle) has found his way back to London, now under quarantine and patrolled by American military forces (including Rose Byrne, Jeremy Renner, and Idris Elba). Reunited with his children, the future looks bright for Don and the citizens of the clean zone, but it’s not long before the virus finds its way into the city, leaving everyone in a panic to escape as the infected start their reign of terror all over again, leaving the military no choice but to exterminate the population.

Danny Boyle’s 2002 film “28 Days Later” was far from a perfect creation, but it was a raw nerve of a feature; experimental with the horror genre and lofty in intention and political subtext. Save for the final act featuring the clichéd crumbling of military might, Boyle’s picture was an endearingly scrappy DV-shot piece of tremble and shock.

“28 Weeks Later” essentially defecates all over Boyle’s ideas to erect its own diseased velocity of genre filmmaking. Director Juan Carlos Frensnadillo made a potent debut with his 2001 oddity “Intacto,” but all that goodwill has been flushed down the toilet with this monstrosity.

To start with, “Weeks” doesn’t bother with a personality of its own, preferring to basically remake “Days,” only this time more money was spent to open up the scope of the story. Fallible military? Infected sprinting around a lonesome London? Interpersonal bonds snapped by the viral party pooper? It’s a striking color of déjà vu, only now the acting is melodramatic and exhaustively subpar, any semblance of logic is torched quickly, and the infected aren’t the only ones with an anger management problem. It seems the production hates everyone as well.

“Weeks” is a violent film, but not an elegant one. It’s missing a vital mood of humanity that informed even the darkest of scenes in Boyle’s film. Frensnadillo is similarly hopeless with the attack sequences, forgoing gorehound opera for barbaric sensory-overload indulgence that reads brightly as amateur hour. Fearful of still moments that might form genuine suspense, the director shakes his camera like it forgot to do the dishes, leaving the audience at a total loss over how to process the punch-drunk, blurred images. Over and over, Frensnadillo covers “Weeks” as though he’s never made a movie before, cheaply (almost comedically) employing moments of sonic jolt to keep the viewer alert and pushing the ferocity of the violence past a comforting point of flesh-stripping endearment; it registers more as sickness.

There’s no love for the material in “Weeks,” and there’s no respect for the apocalyptic potential that defined Boyle’s original picture. The sequel has been crafted to optimize visceral contact rather than cerebral contemplation, and the overall dodgy quality of the film wouldn’t sting nearly as hard if the picture didn’t routinely use child endangerment as safe passage to pushover audience sympathy or steal liberally from literary masterpiece “The Stand” to invent suspense set-pieces. “Weeks” is as artistically bankrupt and thoughtlessly made a movie as can possibly be assembled, and everyone involved in the production should be ashamed of themselves for trying to sneak such rubbish past loyal fans of the original picture.

What really gets my goat is that Fox Atomic (the Cannon Films of the 2000s) is trying to sculpt this story into something it was never intended to be: a franchise.

The studio wants to milk this puppy for every last dollar it can squeeze out of it, leaving the ending open here for further infected adventures, now with sights set on expanding the action into the rest of Europe. It’s a sickening turn of events in an appallingly imbecilic feature film. If there’s any justice in Hollywood, the rage should halt here.

link directly to this review at http://www.efilmcritic.com/review.php?movie=16126&reviewer=404
originally posted: 05/11/07 21:00:00
[printer] printer-friendly format  

User Comments

10/06/11 David Hollingsworth One of the better than average sequels 5 stars
1/15/09 FrankNFurter Outrageously violent,disturbing shock-fest.Like Dawn of the Dead for the new millenium! 5 stars
1/15/09 Peter North 5 boner salute......all that blood got my member cranking!!! 5 stars
11/26/08 Leo T utter crap 1 stars
10/21/08 David Hollands Light years ahead of the boring, pretentious, and stupid original. 5 stars
9/24/08 PAUL SHORTT EVEN FOR A ZOMBIE GHOUL FILM, ITS IDIOCY IS BEYOND THE PALE 1 stars
8/31/08 AnnieG Average for a sequel, but not much of a horror flick. 3 stars
8/26/08 Stevo Just one thing; WHY does the director seem to think we British can't look after ourselves? 1 stars
6/06/08 Jessay Too many plotholes, not nearly as good as the original. 2 stars
4/17/08 David There are NO zombies in this movie! Zombies are corpses. 5 stars
2/09/08 Vercious This is crap compared to the first one. Some of it was tolerable though. 2 stars
1/26/08 matthew Some decent thrills and good acting by Carlyle. script is lousy and the rest of cast wooden 3 stars
1/13/08 T -dawg 1st was way better 2 stars
1/10/08 Ethan Reeser That movie sucked 28 weeks from sunday. 1 stars
11/12/07 Alec Predictable, but still pretty good. 4 stars
10/30/07 Beau this was awesome!! it was a great action packed thriller, highly entertaining!! 4 stars
10/14/07 David Pollastrini better than the original! 5 stars
10/13/07 Carlos This mpvie was ok 1st was way better 3 stars
10/11/07 Vagile Part 3 please. 5 stars
9/10/07 966 Not as good as the 1st but GOOD!!! Love the musical score, who did it? 4 stars
8/13/07 lyna ok i dont understand the ending yo but it was good 5 stars
7/03/07 William Goss A worthy sequel that's thrilling in its own right. 4 stars
7/02/07 Tanya g Excellent movie I enjoyed this just as much as the first one 5 stars
6/26/07 Johnnathan love tha movie, 28 weeks rocks! nuff said 5 stars
6/15/07 Anthony G 100% better than the first piece of garbage. 4 stars
5/29/07 Mike My favorite movie,The musical score,brilliant. 5 stars
5/29/07 damalc almost as good as the original 4 stars
5/23/07 Cammo Hell of a Film !!! 4 stars
5/21/07 finc Wasn't that great, tension on par but that was it 3 stars
5/19/07 Joseph Don't waste your time and money watching this one. 1 stars
5/17/07 prince This movie is in my top 3 best horror movies 5 stars
5/17/07 Austin Wertman sucked 1 stars
5/17/07 Marlena Not quite as good as the first. But worth seeing once. 4 stars
5/17/07 Childe Roland Starts out very well, ends up being irritatingly awful. Good gore, but that's about it. 2 stars
5/16/07 Dave Days was better 1 stars
5/15/07 Blizz Yeah, movieman is stupid. 4 stars
5/14/07 Matt Awesome By far one of the best horror movies in a while!!!! 5 stars
5/14/07 Sista Ironside brianorndorf is a moron, this is a FILM not a "movie", fantastic! 4 stars
5/13/07 Wesley Eddings Easily one of my favorite horror movies ever. 5 stars
5/13/07 Jefenator More sensational than "Days" but it maintains most of the cool bleakness. 4 stars
5/13/07 danny I love it 5 stars
5/13/07 Charone "The Stand," a literary masterpiece?!?!?! That voids your entire review, brian.. 4 stars
5/12/07 Ole Man Bourbon Entertaining but often nonsensical 4 stars
5/12/07 MP Bartley A relentless, tense, desolate nightmare. This is how the world will end: screaming..... 4 stars
5/12/07 Adrian I love me some zombies. 5 stars
5/11/07 Dan boring... 1 stars
IF YOU'VE SEEN THIS FILM, RATE IT!
Note: Duplicate, 'planted,' or other obviously improper comments
will be deleted at our discretion. So don't bother posting 'em. Thanks!
Your Name:
Your Comments:
Your Location: (state/province/country)
Your Rating:


Discuss this movie in our forum

USA
  11-May-2007 (R)
  DVD: 09-Oct-2007

UK
  11-May-2007

Australia
  10-May-2007




Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
eFilmCritic.com: Australia's Largest Movie Review Database.
Privacy Policy | HBS Inc. | |   

All data and site design copyright 1997-2017, HBS Entertainment, Inc.
Search for
reviews features movie title writer/director/cast