Why has there been barely any buzz on this one? A few factors: last year’s first installment turned off a lot of moviegoers who were expecting Danny Boyle to deliver a conventional zombie movie, and on top of that, there is still a review embargo in effect.
The latest projections, according to Deadline, have Nia DaCosta’s “28 Years Later: The Bone Temple” earning $20M over the upcoming four-day MLK holiday weekend. They have the budget at $63M.
Just for comparison, “28 Years Later” opened last June to $30M domestically and ended up with $151.3M worldwide—decent numbers, but low audience scores killed any chance at legs. The film tanked in its second weekend, dropping 70%, and many pointed to those poor audience scores as the culprit for the crash.
Tracking for “The Bone Temple” suggests that the audience the first installment isolated—and lost—might not be back for this sequel. People showed up for a zombie thrill ride and got something moodier, more existential. That was a win for us, but not for the nostalgia-induced crowd. The post–Walking Dead, post-pandemic horror audience wants blood, not meditations on trauma. Sucks for them.
Of course, none of this will interfere with the third installment, which was recently greenlit by Sony Pictures and is set to star Cillian Murphy. It may even shoot later this year.
Sony has been quietly screening “The Bone Temple” since December in what they’ve dubbed “secret screenings,” and reactions have begun to seep online. After a fan screening at AMC Century City in December, responses were very positive, and a few days later Sony gave the go-ahead on that third “28 Years Later” installment. Murphy is in talks to return, Alex Garland is writing the screenplay, and Boyle himself has hinted that he wants to direct the next one.
I’ll chime in with my thoughts on “The Bone Temple,” and the reviews that greet it, once the embargo lifts.