For example, why would "lock down" equal locking all the people in a big warehouse. And honestly - the zombie can just push the door open? Not much of a lock down. And how did zombie get out of the room in which he was zombieified in the first place? Was he able to use his key card? And what are the odds that Andy would miraculously end up hiding in the very room his sister and Rose Byrne are hiding in? And that Rose Bryne could out run zombies with a bullet wound in her leg? And on what planet would you descend into a pitch black tube station while trying to avoid zombies? Whatever. These are dumb questions because the answer is "It's a horror movie, stupid. Shut up."
That's what bothers me though. The first one is so much more than its genre. It's realistic, first of all, and the characters make decisions that are plausible. Yes, maybe the taxi driver wouldn't go through the tunnel because zombies might be in there but if its the fastest route, he might. Especially if he doesn't know he's in a zombie movie. I'll watch 28 Days Later sometime soon and gush about its brilliance.
I like the kids in 28 Weeks Later and I love Robert Carlyle for always. Sometimes, the cinematography is beautiful (it has that in common with the original). And I think the ending is creepy and realistically what would happen should a person exist who is immune themselves but also a carrier. It was clever of the 28 team to come up with a way to get the virus outside of England. That being said, I prefer the hopeful ending of the first and chose to just pretend the second didn't really happen.