Joey Magidson
The Sunday Scaries are upon us once again! Yes, as the weekend concludes, most of us feel an oncoming sense of anticipatory dread about the week ahead. Anxiety about work manifests itself into a feeling that’s known as the Sunday Scaries. However, we at Awards Radar are here to combat that, by taking back the name. Now, we want you think about a horror-centric piece on the site when you hear the term. So, let us continue on with another installment of the Awards Radar Sunday Scaries! This time around, we’re talking about the future of a suddenly very alive franchise…
28 Years Later opened in theaters this weekend, taking in some solid money in the process. With some of the best reviews in the franchise so far, what began so modestly with 28 Days Later has now evolved. This new installment, meant as much to be the first film in a new trilogy as opposed to solely the third movie in this series, is something undeniably different than audiences are expecting. Danny Boyle and Alex Garland approached this flick with several ideas, some of which are going to be explored over the next two sequels. I’m here today to tell you that I am seated for those, one of which is already coming our way soon.
As a reminder, this here is what I said about 28 Years Later a few days ago:
Well, this is something different. You’d be forgiven for assuming that 28 Years Later was simply more of the same from the dormant zombie franchise. The genre that Danny Boyle and Alex Garland revolutionized with 28 Days Later already had a solid but fully expected sequel in 28 Weeks Later. Then, we never got the presumed follow up in 28 Months Later. It turns out, in making us wait, Boyle and Garland have been considering ways to do things differently once again. Boy howdy, have they. I have no clue how audiences overall will react to this new installment, which is being presented as the start of a new trilogy, but I’m certainly tickled that this is what they chose to do. Playing it safe? Not in the slightest.
28 Years Later begins one way, but by the end, has gone off in a whole other direction. That might divide audiences, given expectations, but it does lend itself to a fresher feeling than the flick would otherwise have had. Boyle and Garland are following the beat of their own drummer, keeping their own interest level up, which in turn should buoy an adventurous audience member. Come for the blood and gore, to be sure, but stay for the new ideas, as well as the human component, which brings out some real emotional elements by the end.
Much like 28 Days Later, this newest film is less concerned with zombies than it would be if folks other than Boyle and Garland were at the helm. Just look at 28 Weeks Later for proof of that. The sequel is hardly bad, and in fact I liked it a decent amount, but it’s the studio idea of the next installment. 28 Years Later is not that in the slightest, in a way that should fuel interest in what comes after the credits run.
What comes next is 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple early on next year. Nia DaCosta helmed that one, with Garland writing. Boyle and Garland will be back for the finale, assuming it gets made, but decent box office should ensure that happens. The Bone Temple is bringing back a lot of people from this last installment, so it could really bring us to interesting places. I know I’m very curious about the ending of this one, as well as if we’ll see more of Ralph Fiennes‘ fascinating new character.
We’ll see if 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple keeps the momentum going, but I know I’m excited to see where things go. I suspect I’m not alone, either, though feel free to chime in one way or the other. Right now, this franchise has new life and I’m here for it. Hopefully at this point next year we’re waiting for details on what Boyle and Garland have planned…
Stay tuned for another Sunday Scaries installment next week!
Comments
Loading…