28 YEARS LATER (2025) - Trailer

[AndyDursin]

No idea if this is too late to the zombie party, but that's how you do a trailer.

Good on the producers buying the rights back from Disney so they could get this made.

[Paul MacLean]

I wouldn't be too keen with another sequel -- except that with Danny Boyle directing, I'm interested.

And happily this one wasn't shot on a camcorder!

[Monterey Jack]

Reviews are pretty through-the-roof on this.

[AndyDursin]

Theyre kind of all over the place. At least its not going to be boring though apparently!

[Monterey Jack]

-First 98.5%: 9/10

-Last 1.5%: 2/10

Overall Grade: 7.5/10

Imagine Dawn Of The Dead randomly turning into Planet Terror in the last few minutes, and you've got one of the most jarring tone shifts in an otherwise superb belated sequel I can possibly think of. My overall thoughts on the film are very strong, and I do recommend it, but I got to those last two or so minutes, all I could think was --



The ending is going to be VERY divisive, and I'm sure the strong opening box office is gonna go down severely next weekend.

[AndyDursin]

I have to respectfully disagree on the ending. I think it's a case where audiences aren't connecting the dots.

To me (and if I'm wrong then I have the right to change my mind), all I could think was that it was a direct bookend to how the picture started, with the kids watching Teletubbies and the boy getting away. Judging from the insanity of the sequence, that's him (as an adult obviously) and whoever else he rescued making an appearance in front of Spike and the scene was cut to show their (delirious) mental state, having been "raised" in an infected wasteland basically by a boy who knows nothing other than Teletubbies and British TV.

It was goofy and over the top -- maybe it could have been cut differently so some people wouldn't have had that strong a reaction to it, or they could have thrown in an even more obvious visual clue than the cross he had on -- but for me it made sense.

I doubt that will have a big impact on box-office, but obviously some "didn't get it" because some idiot yelled out "what the **** is going on" so everyone could hear him. I nearly tried to explain it to him over the credits. What will cause a drop is that it's a horror movie that has a "cliffhanger' ending because it has another installment coming up in 2026 -- those two elements always cause a decline. (And it also seems this was frontloaded as most horror movies are).

But, overall, I thought it was superb and would go 8/10. The artsy touches and Boyle's aspirations to make something more than just a boring horror show really worked for me -- I liked how the infected are now basically like pissed off cavemen instead of your typical zombie and the interactions between Spike and the naval kid, who knows nothing other than the normal world that still exists outside England, were terrific. The plot also managed to avoid formula elements like the father dying in the early going, and making Ralph Fiennes out to be something more than just the fried old doctor who's managed to survive out in the elements.

Maybe detract a .5 star for the amount of "zombie schlong" in the movie though!

[Monterey Jack]

To me (and if I'm wrong then I have the right to change my mind), all I could think was that it was a direct bookend to how the picture started, with the kids watching Teletubbies and the boy getting away. Judging from the insanity of the sequence, that's him (as an adult obviously) and whoever else he rescued making an appearance in front of Spike and the scene was cut to show their (delirious) mental state, having been "raised" in an infected wasteland basically by a boy who knows nothing other than Teletubbies and British TV.

It was goofy and over the top -- maybe it could have been cut differently so some people wouldn't have had that strong a reaction to it, or they could have thrown in an even more obvious visual clue than the cross he had on -- but for me it made sense.

I mean, I "get" it, intellectually (they even show the lead kid picking up a Power Rangers action figure at the beginning), but it's just jarring, from an emotional/stylistic standpoint, to go from the culmination of Jodie Comer's narrative arc (which authentically had me suppressing tears) to this ending, what, three or four minutes later? Maybe had they held the ending for a mid-credits beat, and ended the film proper with the boy fending off on his own, it would have worked better. I'm looking forward to a second viewing, as, now that I know it's coming, it'll seem less out-of-left-field to me.

I'm just wondering if The Bone Temple will lean into that level of stylized Robert Rodriguez/Edgar Wright It's-Only-A-Movie frippery throughout. I wasn't the only one at my screening who had an audible "What...the hell...?!" reaction to the ending of Years.

[AndyDursin]

It helped me that I knew it was coming, but I detected tonal shifts all throughout the movie. It went from big and lyrical to tense and claustrophobic kind of all the way through, quite effectively as well. I agree maybe a mid-credits beat would've maybe helped but I also think they really want it known there's another one (or two) coming and they need people to show up. Was that the best way to do it? With apparently some kind of shout-out to a disgraced, former British TV host nobody in the U.S. would know? Weird to be sure...but the movie was weird. And quite good too.

Speaking of that, I didn't realize the director of THE MARVELS was on THE BONE TEMPLE, subbing for Boyle, who says he will come back for the finishing film if they make it. I wonder what the break-even point is to make that happen. $200 mil worldwide with a $75 mil budget? I also want to see this one again at home because I get the sense some scenes will play better on a 4K TV than my theater where you could see some pixilation from the iphones they used. The colors were also odd (bright red on Ralph Fiennes, lush greens, etc.) I wonder if that's how they're supposed to be.