28 Years Later Review

28 Years Later reanimates the rage with raw emotion, bold visuals & haunting performances—here’s why it was worth the wait.

As a longtime fan of 28 Days Later (2002) and 28 Weeks Later (2007), I had been waiting decades for the franchise to reanimate once more. When 28 Years Later was teased with Danny Boyle and Alex Garland at the helm, I couldn’t wait to see where they’d take their dark post-apocalyptic masterpiece next. After all, the original was a cultural seismic shift, shaking the horror genre to its core, changing the discourse of zombie-style flicks forever. George A. Romero’s zombies walked, so Boyle and Garland's rage-infected hordes could sprint, forever changing the survival horror genre.

They did it their way with a digital-grit aesthetic, unrelenting tension, and thematic richness that redefined zombie horror. The sequel, though commercially successful, never reached the same introspective heights. But now, 18 years later, this pair reunite, and I was ready for another visceral plunge into their bleak, bone-chilling, brilliant world.

28 Years Later Film Details

Release Date: June 20, 2025

Director: Danny Boyle 

Cast: Jodie Comer (Isla), Aaron Taylor‑Johnson (Jamie), Alfie Williams (Spike), Ralph Fiennes (Dr. Ian Kelson), Jack O’Connell, Edvin Ryding

Run Time: 115 minutes 

Genre: Post-apocalyptic horror/drama

Content Rating: R 

28 Years Later (Spoiler-Free) Plot – “A Child of the Causeway”

The story leaps 28 years forward with all of Britain and the United Kingdom under quarantine, where a self-sustaining island community leads a pseudo-medieval existence. The rage virus has been driven back from continental Europe, where the conclusion of 28 Weeks Later had hinted it had spread as far as France. The film focuses on the journey of a 12-year-old boy named Spike (Alfie Williams), who lives with his ailing mother, Isla (Jodie Comer) and battle-hardened father, Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson).

The scale of 28 Years Later is much more focused on Spike’s family and his small medieval-style community on the northeast coast of England. Boyle even splices in older-style film from medieval movies brilliantly and stylishly contrasting the two ways of life. It’s an interesting way to welcome audiences back into the chaos, and it sets the stage for a broader story.

Into the Heart of Darkness

Spike’s “coming-of-age” hunt takes him and his father across a tide-bound causeway to the infected mainland. Despite pleas from his mother to stay, they venture out into the Rage-infested wilds. The audience is taken on a terrifying ride from Spike’s perspective, we get a look at how things have devolved, and the Rage virus has mutated.

Slower-moving, bloated infected lurk on the ground, where massive, hulking Alpha infected are a constant threat, along with other infected. Society has crumbled, and danger lurks in multiple horrifying forms. What struck me most wasn't the gore; it was Spike’s awakening to this brutal, shattered world. One that he must confront at first with a child-like innocence, and then mature to survive the harsh realities of this new world.

Strong Performances Elevate 28 Years Later

The performances in 28 Years Later are stellar, helping to pull the audience into the dystopian world. Each actor brings emotional weight and psychological depth to a story rooted in trauma, survival, and the bonds of family. Alfie Williams, as the young protagonist Spike, is a revelation.

In what is remarkably his first major screen role, Williams shoulders the emotional core of the film with incredible maturity. He often reminded me of Cillian Murphy in the original 28 Days Later. He captures the full spectrum of adolescence caught in a war-torn world—from wide-eyed curiosity to abject terror, and finally, to a forced, hardened, premature resolve.

 Aaron Taylor-Johnson plays Jamie, Spike’s father, with a compelling mix of stoic masculinity and underlying vulnerability. As a battle-hardened survivor who believes in preparing his son for the worst, Taylor-Johnson adds layers of emotional complexity to Jamie. He’s not just a protector—he’s a man clinging to the illusion of control in a world where none exists.

His dynamic with Williams is deeply affecting, especially when they both venture to the mainland for the first time.

Jodie Comer delivers one of her most haunting and best performances to date as Isla, Spike’s ailing mother. Comer brings heartbreaking fragility to her character but also creates a believable, deep bond with Spike in just a few scenes.

Isla is the emotional anchor of the film, and her character development deepens the story’s exploration of love and loss. Comer delivered an incredible portrayal that was absolutely captivating and cut me to my core.

Ralph Fiennes, owns his role of Dr. Ian Kelson, a survivor living amidst a chilling monument, or a Memento Mori. His performance straddles the line between madness and philosophy, injecting the film with a cerebral menace that throws the audience a curveball.

Together, this cast forms an emotionally resonant ensemble—mature, empathetic, and unforgettable. Each performance feels lived-in, refusing genre clichés in favour of raw, character-driven storytelling. Their collective work elevates 28 Years Later beyond the expected post-apocalyptic fare, transforming it into a profoundly human portrait of survival amidst collapse. It's the rare genre film where the characters aren’t just vehicles for terror—they’re reflections of our fears, hopes, and resilience.

The casting has the incredible depth needed to carry the “Days Later” franchise into the future, and I can’t wait to see how they follow up these performances in the next film, 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple.

Direction & Visuals: The Raw Lens of Survival

Visually, the film is an absolute triumph. Cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle returns with an experimental edge, capturing much of the film using iPhone 15 Pro Max devices to stunning effect. The result is an aesthetic that feels raw, intimate, and frenetically chaotic. One particularly jarring sequence—shot in eerie crimson-tinted POV—shows a pack of infected tearing into a deer carcass.

It’s visceral, unexpected, and deeply unsettling.

I was surprised by how easily the film could still disturb me after all these years. The cinematography oscillates between shaky handheld close-ups, incredibly framed shots to sweeping, desolate vistas of a decayed, overgrown British countryside.

One standout technique involves a 20-iPhone camera rig used to create a modernized, 360-degree “poor man’s bullet time,” as Boyle refers to it. This was used to capture kill shots and the infected with bone-rattling intensity. There were times when it was overused in back-to-back shots, but overall, it contributed to the unique visual style the franchise is known for. It’s a bold, cinematic evolution—merging cutting-edge technology with haunting, impressionistic storytelling to deliver a film that’s as beautiful as it is brutal.

Final Thoughts on 28 Years Later: A Haunting Rebirth

28 Years Later is neither a conventional horror film nor a straightforward sequel; it’s a bold reinvention that dares to exchange jump scares for emotional excavation. Danny Boyle and Alex Garland have crafted something more metaphysical than monstrous: a story about loss, legacy, and the long emotional aftershocks of survival. It’s a film that finds meaning in ritual and grief, portraying the apocalypse not as a singular cataclysm but as a generational condition.

That said, the film isn’t without its flaws. It raises more questions than it answers, particularly around the virus’s mutated forms and the broader state of the world beyond Britain. As the first entry in a planned trilogy, it feels at times like a prologue—emotionally impactful, yes, but also leaves a lot of narrative threads dangling.

The final act of the film will likely be incredibly divisive – it’s weird and wild.  

In the last five minutes of the movie, especially, the tone swerves dramatically. It veers into territory that feels more surreal and stylized than the grounded emotional journey that precedes it. While it’s designed to set the stage for the next installment, the shift is abrupt enough to leave a jarring aftertaste that I didn’t love, but it got the wheels turning in my mind.

Yet despite its bizarre tonal shifts and uneven structure, 28 Years Later lingers in my mind almost 24 hours after my initial screening. I can’t help but think about it. Its emotional resonance, anchored by phenomenal performances and groundbreaking visuals, overshadows its structural shortcomings.

Boyle and Garland have delivered something rare: a horror film that aches, contemplates, and provokes. 28 Years Later is a haunting rebirth—slightly flawed, completely fearless, and fiercely unforgettable.

Verdict on 28 Years Later

28 Years Later is a hauntingly beautiful, emotional and stylistic leap forward for the franchise—grotesque yet heartfelt, risky yet unforgettable. 9/10

About the Author - Matthew "Dapper Tux" Rondina

Matthew has been involved in all things gaming since the 8-bit era. He is a video game and tech industry veteran who has been passionate about technology and gaming for over 20 years. In addition to being the Managing Editor of dappertux.com, he has bylines with Best Buy, Cineplex Entertainment, Mobile Syrup and Walmart. Follow Matthew’s gaming + tech adventures on multiple social platforms with the handle @dapper_tux via X, Instagram, Threads, TikTok, and join in on the fun!

 dappertux.com uses affiliate links to provide a way for this website to earn advertising income. The blog may earn a referral commission on purchases made via these links.