28 years later is a good film? What do spectators think of this suite signed Danny Boyle?

In 2003, Danny Boyle and Alex Garland revolutionized the genre “zombie films” with 28 days later in which Jim (Cillian Murphy) woke up alone in the hospital after the fury virus – which transforms people so of rapid zombies – ravaged London.

A few years later, Ujuan Carlos Fresnadillo delivered the continuation brought by Robert Carlyle, 28 weeks later. It took 22 years to be entitled to a third part. And this third opus will be in 3 acts …

28 years later is indeed the first part of a new trilogy. The second opus entitled The Bone Temple and staged by Nia Dacosta is also released in our rooms on January 14. The third film will be staged by Danny Boyle and will be conditioned at the entrances to the previous opus.

Worn by Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Jodie Comer, Alfie Williams and Ralph Fiennes, 28 years later takes place on the Holy Island peninsula where a community tries to survive. Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) Decides to take his twelve -year -old son, Spike (Alfie Williams), on the continent to teach him the basics of survival and combat. They then realize that the virus has evolved, affecting its victims differently and making certain overpowers.

Despite the danger, the young boy will try to find the trace of a doctor (Ralph Fiennes) who could help Isla, her sick mother (Jodie Comer).

What do the first spectators of the feature film think?

With 369 notes and 75 criticisms, 28 years later has an average spectators note of 3.5 stars out of 5. It is less good than 28 days later noted 3.8 stars and that 28 weeks later which has an average note of 3.6 stars.

Spectators having left a positive opinion appreciate the mastery, the daring approach and the dynamic assembly of Danny Boyle who signs a successful return to the franchise. The story deemed intense and breathless is also noted as well as the emotion that surprised many spectators.

Sony

A successful return

Loïc Bugnon writes: “It was almost 18 years since I was waiting for this return and I am not disappointed! 28 years later is a total success. (…) Danny Boyle made the bold choice to shoot part of the film with iphones 15 in tribute to the first opus, he therefore reconnects with the dark and captivating universe that he created in 2002!

“28 years later” turns out to be relatively effective, the script for the film is coupled with a reflection on nature, family and human condition which we are given a certain rather positive vision. The atmosphere is suspended, tense, palpable and engaging from start to finish. Danny Boyle is getting more than well, the frantic staging works perfectly, with terrifying scenes!

The scenario is complete and intelligent. Still relevant, he is relevant in his subject and his approach. It is also in this kind of film more intimate than Dany Boyle reveals all his art. In the end, the codes of the genre are taken up and treated brilliantly in what is now a nice reference while waiting for the rest! “

Juliette m adds: “This is the film that I was waiting for the most this year and I am not disappointed. The return of Danny Boyle and his infected is a winning return. We find the elements of the first opus there but the film nevertheless manages the film to reinvent itself. It is more a family drama. It's moving and I did not expect it at all! Find!) I can't wait to see the rest! “

Sony

For Léo Petitcolas, it's: “A real cinematographic shock! 28 years later succeeds in rekindling the intensity and anxiety of the first two parts while bringing a new dimension to the universe. The staging is nervous, the tension is constant, and the waterproof message is more current than ever. The performances of the actors are stunning, and visually, it's breathtaking. For fans of the saga and the post-apocalyptic genre. “

Ne0N notes the 4 -star film and comments: “The film will clearly divide, Danny Boyle has let go for the best as the worst. All while respecting and extending what he initiated. An intense, more visceral, crazier, more crazy, more abused, more '' '' film. “

For Ouadou: “Danny Boyle reinvents his mythical film. A scenario where we keep changing your trajectory. A film that does not only speak of infected but madness, end of life.”

The Cinema_Clem notes that the film is divided almost into two parts: “I find that Danny Boyle has a way of surprising the spectator to his own, both in writing and the realization. Here, a turn almost 180* on what we had previously. Zombies are no longer the headliners. The film is centered on the relationships between non-contaminated. It necessarily brings a lot of depth. The impression of having seen two very distinct films: preferred the first part to the second. “

Sony

A scenario already seen?

As for the less positive opinions, some find the scenario disappointing sometimes deeming it inconsistent.

For cool_92 it is : “A disappointment. It is rather a good film in terms of acting, staging, photography. I especially liked the first part. The sequel turns very quickly to zombiesque delirium, which we have often already seen. Danny Boyle and Alex Garland want to be so original that they do not realize that they are in abuse and the Grand-Guignolesc. Forget his scenario and on the coherence of the whole.

Didier M. writes: “I expected a lot of this third “episode” but I came out shared. Shared because there are good ideas, very good actors, top make -up, magnificent landscapes. But history does not take. The scenario is sorely lacking in coherence, the poem boots which, thought I was going to serve as a common thread is completely under exploited, the end of the film is absurd. Too bad because the opening scene was promising. “

Sony

Silbano adds: “Really very disappointed. No tension, another kid hero of history, a vision of 28 years later very very special on the part of the screenwriter … and the scenario let's talk about! Really it's seen and re-in the outline. But what definitely killed me was the serious end … We are really far from the excellent 28 days later. “

Christophe San Miguel says to himself: “TDisappointed “and additions” scenario without tail or head … go your way. And yet I loved the first two. “

In conclusion

In summary, the spectators welcome Danny Boyle's daring return to the staging of 28 years later, the tension, the breathless rhythm and the unexpected emotional dimension of the film. Many find the original, human, intense and visually impactful film, with an inventive staging.

However, several criticisms point to a scenario deemed inconsistent or already seen, a second less successful part, and aesthetic choices too flashy. The average note is 3.5/5, below the previous aspects, clearly dividing between enthusiasts and disappointed.

28 years later is currently to be seen in the cinema.