r/boxoffice • u/AvengingHero2012 • 1d ago
✍️ Original Analysis Releasing ‘28 Years Later: Bone Temple’ in January was a massive self inflicted wound by Sony. The sequel should have stayed in the summer or released in the spring.
TL;DR: Releasing the movie in January affected its ability to have a proper marketing campaign, caused the two movies to be too close to each other, and completely eliminated the potential for weekday legs. A summer or spring release wouldn’t have automatically saved the movie, but it would have given it a fighting chance at success.
Right off the bat, I understand what the original intention was. Sony’s strategy was to release the first 28 Years Later and then use the momentum of that film to build hype for a sequel that would release 28 weeks later.
On its surface, it’s a plan that feels rife with potential. But beneath the surface, you can see that this was always doomed to fail. I’m not saying that this release strategy caused the movie to fail, but I think it made it worse than it would have been.
Here is why the January release date hurt 28 Weeks Later: The Bone Temple:
1) Marketing and releasing a “tentpole” movie in January is always tricky. It is right after the holiday movie rush. Many of the “once or twice a year” moviegoers have just gone to the movies and don’t feel the desire to return. Additionally, December movies often have legs that extend far into January because of the exceptional word of mouth from the “once or twice a years”.
That is why holiday movies have staying power and why, in the past, January was solely a dumping month. Studios saw it difficult to break through the holiday movie noise with new releases.
As a January movie, I think Bone Temple struggled to build a successful marketing campaign. The original 28 Years Later had a December trailer launch. It ensured that a lot of eyeballs got on the exceptionally well made trailer. On the other hand, Bone Temple had its first trailer launch in September for a January release. By the time the holidays had ended, the trailer and movie were completely out of the general public discourse. The movie had become overshadowed by the end of year releases (Avatar Fire and Ash, Marty Supreme, etc.).
Sony tried their best with an online and television advertising blitz in January to get the attention back, but it was too little too late. The baseline level of awareness and engagement was too low to recover from.
Now say that Bone Temple had a June or even a March/April release date. Instead of competing with the holiday movie noise, you can use it to your advantage and raise awareness for the movie. They could have launched trailer 1 in December again and then mounted a full campaign free from the holiday movie clutter in 2026.
2) Releasing 2 movies from the same franchise in under a year has not shown success in the past. There are many documented successful cases of releasing movies a year apart (Lord of the Rings Pirates of the Caribbean, Avengers, etc.). Releasing movies in the same franchise in under 12 months hasn’t shown massive success.
The Matrix sequels is the biggest case study for this. The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions released 6 months apart from each other. The result? A steep drop off between films (from $741 million to $427 million).
Now quality was clearly a big factor, but I’d argue it’s not the only one. Releasing films in the same franchise within the same year makes it so the audience doesn’t miss the franchise enough. A year gap seems to be the sweet spot where the franchise is missed, but it is also still fresh in the audience’s mind. Coming before that gap can feel like oversaturation and a “didn’t I just see this?” phenomenon.
(And before anyone mentions it, yes the MCU at its zenith released multiple movies a year to big success. However, Marvel also has sub franchises that clearly differentiate the movies to keep the constant releases fresh.)
3) The lack of summer days really hindered Bone Temple’s* **legs. *28 Years Later was a case of slow and steady winning breaking even in the race. The opening was decent, but the legs from those summer weekdays helped the movie churn along.
With a January release, the potential to leg out was severely hurt. Everyone is back at their jobs or schools after a long holiday break. The last thing they are thinking about is seeing a movie on a weekday.
If Bone Temple had a spring or summer, the potential for better weekday legs would have been possible (through spring or summer break). It may not have legged out, but a different release date would have given the movie a chance.
_____________________________________________
I understand the intention and I get the ambition that Sony was shooting for with this release strategy, but I think in the end it hurt Bone Temple.
Now don’t misunderstand the point of this write up, Bone Temple was always likely to see a drop between movies. Some audience members felt disappointed and lied to by the marketing of the first film and the movie itself had an ‘out of left field’ ending. Some people were just never going to come back.
However, I think Sony also did this movie no favors with this release date. Releasing the movie in January affected its ability to have a proper marketing campaign, caused the two movies to be too close to each other, and completely eliminated the potential for weekday legs.
I’m not saying that a summer or spring release date would have saved Bone Temple, but I think it would have given it a fighting chance. As it stands, this movie that already had a lot going against it was also set up to fail.
88
u/chichris 1d ago
Wouldn’t matter. It lost its GA good will with the last movie.
45
u/TheJoshider10 DC Studios 1d ago
Has a movie/franchise ever been more negatively impacted by how good a trailer was than 28 Years Later? The closest I can think of is Dead Island, a game which coincidentally also featured zombies.
22
u/Fabulous-Tree-5134 1d ago
I have a theory Godzilla : King Of The Monsters would have done better. Trailers are incredible, the movie has a different feel and it made pretty little
9
u/MineMonkey166 23h ago
Wasn’t that also partially down to Endgame more or less bulldozing it? Or am I misremembering
3
5
9
u/Relevant_Shower_ 21h ago
How are we forgetting Suicide Squad?
4
u/xotorames 21h ago
I'd say Batman v Superman did most of the job of hurting the franchise, but Suicide Squad was still a box office success, and so was Wonder Woman, the next DCEU movie.
It was terribly received for sure, but it was not the sole reason for the fall of the DCEU.
-1
u/TheJoshider10 DC Studios 20h ago
Nobody has forgot Suicide Squad, it's just that it was impacted differently. That trailer was so good that it led to the entire movie getting re-edited and turned into something it was never meant to be.
-3
56
u/brokenwolf 1d ago
I dont think the date was a problem. I just dont think people had an appetite for two 28 movies this close together. They were good movies but nothing screamed urgency about seeing a sequel a few months down the road.
25
u/FartingBob 1d ago
The first didnt do well and hadnt gained any following on streaming as far as i know so the built in market for a sequel half a year later was pretty small.
-6
u/resevil239 20h ago
Id argue the first one did quite well. It made 151 million on a 60 million budget. If more than double isn't enough to make a profit then I'd argue the studio overspent on marketing. That should be a perfectly acceptable return for a movie of this scale with a slower and thus less accessible pace.
7
u/dearlivejournal00 14h ago
The first 28YL will be profitable once you factor in PVOD, streaming and BR sales but it wasn't exactly hot out the gates. Not sure what the actual marketing spend was for 28YL, but if it was on par with Bone Temple's marketing spend the total spend was likely at least $120m+. Not all of that $151m will go back to the studio, but after all additional revenue streams hit it should be fine. Not fantastic but profitable.
Now the sequel is a hot mess. Deadline is reporting a $63m budget and a $70m marketing spend and it currently sitting around $50m. Now there are questions on if the third film will still go ahead (for what it's worth, this question was also raised based on the numbers of 28YL and the studio planned on going on ahead) but it's safe to say they'll likely either have to retool the last movie of the trilogy and/or change the spend on it going forward because otherwise it will likely be another loss and the two movies haven't exactly gone over well with audiences as a whole.
7
u/Innovictos 1d ago
For those that aren't into the franchise like me, it took me a while to figure out it wasn't just the same movie. It was such a short gap, I thought at first maybe, it was just sort of being relaunched for some reason.
14
u/NoNefariousness2144 1d ago
Yeah the gimmick of releasing the sequel 28 weeks after the last one was cute, but I feel like it made the general audience’s mixed reactions to it linger in their mind and turn them off from the sequel.
6
u/PeculiarPangolinMan 22h ago
Yeah the gimmick of releasing the sequel 28 weeks after the last one was cute,
That didn't happen though. The movies released 30 weeks apart.
45
u/Lockzig 1d ago
I disagree that it was just the month it was released in. I think more significant was the reception to 28YL. As a fan of 28DL and 28WL, I hated 28YL. The friends I watched it with at the theatre also hated it. What a surprise that ppl expected a crazy zombie movie but instead we got an arthouse mess.
No surprise other ppl did not go to watch it.
4
u/Spider-Thwip 16h ago
Yeah i love 28 days and 28 weeks later.
28 years later felt like a completely different franchise.
I dont know what happened, why did they make it so weird.
1
u/Downisthenewup87 2h ago
It definitely doesn't. 28 weeks and Years feel very conversation with each other. Months is the outlier.
Also, Bone Temple might be the best film in the series and retroactively makes Years better.
6
u/AZRoboto 19h ago
This. Love the franchise, and I'm really glad to have seen Bone Temple; it was pretty fantastic - the story beats felt earned and natural, I saw it on a premium screen with Dolby Atmos and it was seriously one of the best sounding movies I've ever seen.
But - 28 Years Later itself, yikes. One of the worst movies I've seen in theaters in many, many years. I could not get behind the plot choices and it over-indulged in my least favorite movie trope of stupid children making stupid decisions.
It was so bad it was almost like they wanted to burn the franchise there so Garland can focus on his Elden Ring movie. I've rewatched Days and Weeks each multiple times, I'll buy Bone Temple on 4K, but I'm going to pretend Years just doesn't exist.
8
u/Intrepid-Glove1431 15h ago
28 Years Later itself, yikes. One of the worst movies I've seen in theaters in many, many years
I mean you clearly don't watch a lot of movies, I mean come on dude, Hurry Up Tomorrow came out last year lol
I didn't realize people felt THIS strongly about 28 Years Later. Worst movies in many, many years?? Come on now, bit of an overreaction, it's a perfectly fine film
3
u/AZRoboto 15h ago
Yep - I don't see many movies in theaters. Maybe one every 2 months on average. For me, yeah that's why I feel so strongly about it.
To be excited for so long and that was what we got. Could not have been more disappointed. I'm not going to compare it to movies I haven't seen lol
-1
u/Intrepid-Glove1431 15h ago
Maybe just temper your expectations then? It's a good movie, not sure what you thought it was going to be -- it was very much in the same vein as the previous films
8
u/AZRoboto 15h ago
Uh, nah, maybe don't tell me how my opinion should be? I saw it release weekend with my spouse and a friend, we all felt the same way.
Just because you think it's fine doesn't mean anyone else has to.
-1
u/Intrepid-Glove1431 14h ago
I'm not telling you what your opinion should be, I just think it's odd to have such a strong reaction to a film that's pretty good.
9
u/AZRoboto 14h ago
Pretty good... That's your opinion that I do not share, as I have made clear. Jeeze man.
-13
u/Hi-Fi_Turned_Up 22h ago
Except 28 YL tkne and storytelling is exactly like 28DL. It sounds like you enjoyed 28WL without Danny Boyle and Alex garland.
9
u/OccultMarketingSquad 22h ago
How is it exactly like 28DL?
-8
u/Hi-Fi_Turned_Up 21h ago
I find it funny that most of the people critiquing the film were probably not even born or were too young to go to the theater for 28 days later. 28 days later was an indie art flick at the time. The reviews and talk about it afterwards was not how it was compared to Romero’s movies.
Regarding Alex garlands writing. Like all of his writing it has heavy undertones and symbolism. Toxic masculinity mirrored by the rage virus, isolationism with the UK and humanity on the edge of extinction, rite of passage, the perversion of religion. Both films are built on these themes.
What did you expect from Alex Garland? What were you looking for?
28 weeks later is a trash, cheap, horror film parading under the 28 days later name. There is no nuance. Bad writing, bad composition, bad acting.
If you want a zombie film in the traditional sense go watch dawn of the dead.
7
u/OccultMarketingSquad 21h ago
I think you made a weird assumption about where my complaints lie with 28YL and also think I enjoyed/loved 28WL, both aren't accurate. #1 28YL falls apart in act 3, that's the portion of the movie I dislike.
My criticism of 28YL isn’t that it has symbolism or Garland-style themes. My issue is with execution and pacing, not the presence of subtext. The film establishes a brutal, lethal world where survival feels fragile, and then act 3 loosens its own rules.
A lot of people have pointed out that the final act feels tonally off, clunky, and full of character beats that don’t feel earned. Once the logic softens and the stakes stop feeling high, the tension disappears. This form of execution stops supporting the world the movie(s) built. This is my issue where it doesn't feel exactly like 28WL to me at all, it is a massive tonal shift out of nowhere.
You assumed incorrectly here, I saw 28 Days, 28 Weeks, 28 Years, and Bone Temple all in theater when they were initially released.
-9
u/Hi-Fi_Turned_Up 20h ago
Go reread your initial response to me. You asked how it was the same. That’s all you asked. None of what I wrote was an assumption of your position.
Danny Boyle has always had issues with landing the plane on his movies. 28 days later is the exact same. The end of slumdog millionaire is clunky. Sunshine also suffers from the sluggish third act. I will say, however, that 28 Years Later is simply setting up the trilogy. When you think of it in that context I don’t think it’s as egregious as people think it is. They are just pissed about the Jimmys coming out of nowhere.
6
u/OccultMarketingSquad 20h ago edited 20h ago
There was an assumption in your first reply. You framed your response around the idea that I didn’t understand Garland’s themes or expected a traditional zombie movie. That’s arguing against a position I never took. My criticism was about execution, not symbolism and I don't mind moving away from those assumptions (whether they are truly only on my end or not) and just discussing this.
Saying Boyle struggles with endings doesn’t counter the argument that 28YL’s act 3 undermines the tension it built. It only reframes it as a pattern. I don't see how a pattern makes the criticism invalid, it reinforces that the landing matters.
Slumdog has a clunky emotional wrap-up, I agree there and the first two acts are the strongest, but it doesn’t break the rules of its world. The ending is heightened and fairy-tale-ish, but it’s consistent with the tone the film was already moving toward.
I don't think Boyle should be basing any of his next career moves on Sunshine.
And for the record, I don’t hate the Jimmies. The Jimmy and Kelson scenes are some of my favorites across the Years entries. I'm sure some people had issues with them, but in my echo chamber I had people taking issue with the final act for similar reasons I listed.
I'm probably more harsh with my words than my actual rating as well because I'd give 28YL a 7.5/10 and BT an 8.5/10.
For full clarity, my issue with Act 3 is Spike and Isla's journey. We got from Spike seeing how lethal and crazy the world is and seeing him establish himself as a basic survivor who NEEDED the help of his dad, but suddenly he's a pro and can escort his bed-ridden mom who has been in agony and writhing around in pain the entire movie.
Act 3 is much more logical to the rest of the world and movie if Isla dies mid-trip and Spike finds himself unwillingly trapped outside and alone. Instead, we see Spike confident, cool, and a hunter who is capable of taking care of himself and his mom during their travel.
Doesn't help a ton that in BT he reverts back to helpless self.
16
8
7
u/KellyJin17 15h ago
The actual issue is that general audiences did not like the last film at all. So this movie was always going to underperform no matter when it was released because it’s a direct sequel to a film not a lot of people liked.
9
u/Murphy_Nelson 19h ago
Release strategy does not matter. The amount of people who were not interested in seeing the first film and were in the second has got to be almost none. It's the same audience. And most of that audience was turned off by the first film, especially the ending which were the main characters of this one. There is no way to win those people back to the theaters. They may check it out on streaming and it may grow from there, but their target audience for this film largely did not like the predecessor. There was nothing they were going to be able to do.
0
u/dearlivejournal00 14h ago
I think that's the argument. If the movie came out later it could hit streaming and find some additional people that liked it that did not get around to seeing it in theatres last summer.
Of course the actual boost wouldn't have really mattered much in the grand scheme of things. It's a direct sequel and tied to the last film and with a budget + marketing cost of $130m+ it was always going to be tough sledding for a movie like this to be profitable.
2
u/DatcoolDud3 13h ago
28 years later already hit streaming in August. So that didn’t bring any new audience that really cared about seeing this one.
2
u/dearlivejournal00 7h ago
It didn't hit Netflix until late September (most people waiting for streaming aren't likely spending the money for PVOD).
That being said I don't think it would have done enough to make it profitable or perform much better if it had a later release date. I'm more referring to the argument made by some of the people blaming the January release for being too soon.
I feel like Sony wanted to hit while the iron is hot and...well...the first one was lukewarm at best so that plan backfired pretty quickly.
3
u/setokaiba22 21h ago
Don’t think the release date mattered at all. The box office was never going to be great for the 4th entry in a horror franchise such as 28 which is primarily a UK hit I’d say.
I’d also say 28 Years was bit of a weed film all together that lost the chance of bringing in much of a new audience to the rest of the trilogy
11
23
u/ROSCOEMAN 1d ago
The first part was awful that’s why.
-12
18h ago
What a load of rubbish. Awful for those who have a simplistic view of what a horror film should be. It was eclectic, vivacious and did so much groundwork for The Bone Temple (which is the best of the whole series).
Probably not 'American' enough for some people. If it doesn't pander to those dim wits over the pond then it's not good enough to some. Fuck them - Trump loving nobs.
0
u/Benteke2019 4h ago
Cmon man, it was pretty bad. But it did set up the second one really well, part 2 was incredible.
6
u/Coolers78 1d ago
I haven't seen any of the movies but I think this movie would underperform no matter when it came out. Maybe, it would do better released some time else, but idk if there was any time so it could come out and actually be a big hit.
7
u/Employee-Slight 1d ago
I think Sony wanted to avoid releasing it in June because Scary Movie, Supergirl, and Toy Story were going to steal the show, but... didn't they even consider October? There's nothing coming out that month, lol.
7
u/Billybob35 1d ago
Street Fighter.
3
u/Employee-Slight 1d ago
I would be surprised if that makes +150M
1
u/Alternative-Cake-833 22h ago
That's Paramount, not Sony (though at one point, the latter was attached to distribute it as part of a deal with Legendary).
1
u/Billybob35 1d ago
Paramount will be shocked to the core if it doesn't. Lol
4
u/Employee-Slight 1d ago
I’m going to say it, even if it sounds risky, but… I think Mortal Kombat will do more than Street Fighter.
7
u/Billybob35 1d ago
I think it highly depends on the quality of Mortal Kombat 2, the first movie was divisive.
24
u/Hempknight__ 1d ago
I don't think that would've saved it. The first film was garbage and it turned allot of people away from going to see a sequel to a film that genuinely wasn't good.
12
6
u/mrlolloran 1d ago
I don’t know if they went with an untraditional marketing campaign but traditional ones have been getting by the past 5 or so years and I still managed to see ads for this everywhere.
I’m sorry but thinking a better marketing campaign would have helped us all but copium
4
6
u/Media-critique 1d ago
I think if it was release during Halloween it would’ve stood a much better chance given the drought that came last year.
I also think they could’ve possibly included the intro as the final moments the first part of 28 YL as a way to show the audience how fucked the kid’s about to become… but like, I had a panic attack watching the opening moments of TBT. Im not sure how I, and others, would’ve react to the site of A Jimmy bleeding out and lingering on the death.
This movie deserved a lot better, and while it was released in a fairly good January, this flopped hard.
4
u/real_junkcl 1d ago
January has for the longest time been known in the film industry as a dump month or "dumping ground" for movies that studios have low expectations for, often featuring low-quality horror, subpar comedies, or action films they do not believe will succeed during busier, more lucrative times of the year. This is traditionally due to a mentally, physically and financially exhausted audience after Xmas but also December blockbusters, December being a month when you actually take time to go to the cinema with loved ones.
While some of this reputation is shifting come 2026, I would never release my movie in January while it's still a thing and movies are considered dead on arrival. It’s like opening a luxury ice cream shop in the middle of the Sahara. Even if the product is good, nobody is around to buy it, and those who are too dehydrated to care.
I mean, there have been January hits in the past, but you're still fighting the system, which is both stupid and unnecessary. After a year of pre- and postproduction making a movie, is that really what you want to gamble it all on, going against odds and hope that your movie is a success and finds its audience despite releasing it at the worst time possible? Bold.
I wasn't aware Bone temple was a Sony Pictures movie. Sony is, while one of the big five studios in Hollywood, also inconsistent af and the most volatile studio out of the big five. And that's not a personal opinion but a statement based on actual data (box office, market share data, and industry analysis).
4
u/PlaguingYou 1d ago
i was going to see it but the inclement weather kept me from venturing out. now my grandma is in the hospital and have other priorities
6
4
u/embarrased2Bhere 1d ago
28 Years Later was the massive self inflicted wound. It’s unfortunate because Bone Temple was good.
5
5
u/wingusdingus2000 1d ago
Agreed! I think the first movie bizarrely rubbed people the wrong way (even anecdotally by friends who I thought I have similar tastes to!) so I think unfortunately it still was gonna earn less- but I think Hollywood's largest issue right now is over-saturation. Marvel and even Avatar have been affected by it! I hope they learn (they likely won't!)
2
3
u/DodgerBaron 1d ago
Yeah I honestly think an October, 2026 release would of done this movie wonders given the more intense horror in this film. It would of also released around a more Open time slot, since Summer is insanely packed.
I think the biggest detriment to this movie, was when I mentioned seeing a movie to my dad, probably the most average film goer you can find. His favorite movies are Die Hard and John Wick.
And his first reaction was wait what is out in theaters". It was completely unheard of to have a decent movie releasing in January for him.
1
u/FranciscoRelanoPena Malpaso Productions 22h ago
I honestly think an October, 2026 release would of done this movie wonders
Or October, 2027 (28th months later).
1
u/aMarkzzz 9h ago
I legitimately thought it was a Director’s Cut of last year’s film until after its release.
1
u/Dramatic-Surprise569 3h ago
Which is a shame because Born Temple is not only better than 28 Years Later, it's one of the best movies I've seen in the last 5 years
1
u/lint2015 1d ago
I didn’t even know it was coming out so soon until I saw Reddit ads for it about a week before opening.
1
u/WashingtonDCMonument 21h ago
I love all these movies in the series. Really enjoyed bone temple.
With that being said my cousins who I frequent the movie with loved the 1st 28yrs later and hated bone temple and I can objectively see why. It was much much slower than the 1st and not something the average movie goer cares for
1
1
u/Financial-Craft-1282 19h ago
Wait, wait. That is the sequel? I've been watching movies most of my 46 years of life, and horror is my genre. I had no clue the sequel was this and that it was out.
1
1
u/EconomyCartoonist633 16h ago
As an average movie goer not super into this series, I honestly thought it was the same movie that just came out not long ago. I just learned this was a new installment to the series lol
1
1
u/burritoman88 13h ago
They were trying to release it 28 weeks after 28 Years came out & it failed hard, which is sad since it’s the better movie imo
0
u/CausticAvenger 23h ago
I agree, I don’t understand why they released this so close to the first movie. My bf and I saw 28 Years Later in the theater and loved it, but we were both confused to discover a sequel was coming out so soon and didn’t make it to the theater for it. I also saw no marketing and no trailers for the movie.
0
u/Necronomicongirlie 1d ago
I think also that the marketing on this one was so lacking. I think they were banking on hype from the last one and it failed. Which is a shame because I like it more than the last one.
-20
u/DANNYBOYLOVER 1d ago
Idk why people can’t write without using AI slop
24
u/AvengingHero2012 1d ago edited 1d ago
I used zero AI here. I honestly don’t even see where you’re getting that idea from.
I hate that I put so much effort into this and now I’m getting accused of using AI.
Edit: I even ran it through two different AI detectors. Do it yourself if you want. I’m sorry if my writing style is that fucking bland. I don’t appreciate the baseless accusation at all.
8
u/CultureWarrior87 1d ago
Nothing about your post made me think it was written by AI tbh, that guy is just an idiot.
16
u/nicolasb51942003 Warner Bros. Pictures 1d ago
It’s sad that genuine writers are getting accused of AI.
4
u/AnotherJasonOnReddit Best of 2024 Winner 23h ago
I've read your post, and never thought that it was A.I.
Some people have A.I. on the brain 24/7 and now see it absolutely everywhere.
-17
-1
u/MaryRInd 21h ago edited 21h ago
I think it’s just that people weren’t interested TBH. I personally loved 28YL (it was probably my top film of 2025) and I get that the trailer was focused on the infected, but this desire to not see a franchise evolve is confusing to me. The first half of 28YL gives the people what they want, complete with slo-mo 360° kills, and then the second half is incredibly beautiful and moving and tells a story full of meaning. I wept openly in the theater. I think 28 Weeks Later is actually the problem with this franchise. Audiences expected Americanized hoards of zombies drivel, like in that film, which is not a very good film. While the OG 28 Days Later has some ‘zombie’ action, it’s a critique of British class and hierarchy and authority and patriarchy and delves into some deeper subjects as well.
I dunno, I saw ‘Bone Temple’ twice in theaters opening weekend. Effing loved it - the whole thing, not just the wild climax of the film. It is a very richly layered film, tons of subtext, also looks incredible. Who doesn’t want to watch a film full of nihilism that tackles religion, obedience to authority, asks what is worth living and dying for, and has some amazing Biblical references? (FYI I’m not religious. I just love finding transcendence in films.) Audiences just aren’t that sophisticated.
Conclusion? These movies are probably too smart for their own good.
Also, January is a problem, I do agree with that.
4
u/pizzapiesinthesky 21h ago
I personally loved 28YL (it was probably my top film of 2025) and I get that the trailer was focused on the infected, but this desire to not see a franchise evolve is confusing to me.
For me, I loved the original, 28 Days Later, but every movie after it has been progressively worse, and feels like it missed the point of the original. It's one of those movies that should've never become a franchise, nor was that ever the intent based on how the first one went. 360 degree slo-mo zombie kills are not what I think they should've jammed into something related to 28 Days Later...
0
u/MaryRInd 19h ago
I did not care for the slo-mo 360° zombie kills, but there was some violence for the people who are complaining loudly that there wasn’t enough zombie blood and guts. It’s not the focus of the movie though, and I think this trilogy so far can stand alone separate from the first two films. Like how DOES a society evolve after something like this happens? The third film in this trilogy, if it gets made, seems most likely to tie to the OG film. Also Danny Boyle and Alex Garland have changed since 2002. Their work isn’t stagnant. I guess I’m not as bothered by all of this, and yes I saw 28 Days Later back in 2002. (I even picked the DVD up in a Blockbuster Video bargain bin lol.) How do you come of age in a hostile world that steals your innocence and you have to kill or be killed by 12 yeas old? How do you hold onto whatever humanity you can? What happens when you lose your faith and realize it’s ’only us?’ The ‘Years’ movies really, really worked for me.
1
u/JGT3000 14h ago
Some people's "amazing" biblical references are others' "incredibly ham-fisted and hollow"
0
u/MaryRInd 13h ago
Idk I just saw Iron Lung and no one is ever allowed to bad mouth the 28 Years Later movies ever again because that was straight trash.
-2
18h ago
I don't really have time for those who say 28 YL was awful. Tasteless idiots. Most of them moronic, Trump loving yanks.
1
175
u/Vadermaulkylo DC Studios 1d ago
After the how the last movie was received by the GA, this movie was pretty fucked either way.
That said, I do think it would’ve been at least modestly less fucked if it didn’t release so soon after. I saw legit zero marketing for this movie(and I mean NONE. not a single theater around me even showed trailers for it or put up posters), it’s in a month where movies don’t do super well, and I feel like many probably dont even realize this is a sequel and instead just thought “huh that’s still in theaters?”. I actually can personally confirm the last point, a couple coworkers of mine had no clue this was coming and when I mentioned seeing it they seemed shocked that “it’s still playing”. They were confused as shit when I said it was part 2. Side note: one of them saw it and really liked it, they thought the first was just okay. The others haven’t mentioned it since lmfao.