28 Years Later: The Bone Temple - Critical Darling or Box Office Dud?

A Fractured Return for an Iconic Franchise

The iconic rage-infected world of ‘28 Days Later’ has returned with its latest installment, ‘28 Years Later: The Bone Temple’, and it has immediately sparked a firestorm of debate. Directed by Nia DaCosta and penned by original writer Alex Garland, the film was intended to be the second chapter in a new trilogy. However, despite high critical praise, its underwhelming box office numbers and divisive narrative have left audiences—and the studio—at a crossroads.

The Box Office Plague

Financially, ‘The Bone Temple’ has struggled to infect the market. The film opened in the U.S. on January 16, 2026, to a disappointing $15 million over the four-day MLK Jr. holiday weekend. This figure is a significant step down from its 2025 predecessor, ‘28 Years Later,’ which debuted at $30 million.

With a production budget of approximately $63 million, the worldwide gross of just $47 million as of early January is cause for concern. Projections indicating a steep 66% drop in its second weekend suggest the film appealed primarily to the hardcore fanbase, failing to capture a broader audience.

Critics vs. Audiences: A Tale of Two Receptions

The most fascinating aspect of ‘The Bone Temple’s’ release is the stark contrast between its critical and audience reception. The film boasts an impressive 93% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, with many critics hailing it as one of the best in the franchise. It’s been praised for its thematic depth, raw energy, and the powerful performances of Ralph Fiennes and Jack O’Connell, with some calling it a “triumphant continuation of the iconic horror saga.”

However, this acclaim hasn’t fully translated to general moviegoers. Much like its predecessor, there appears to be a disconnect, with audiences pointing to narrative choices that strain credulity.

Points of Contention

The core of the debate centers on the film’s creative direction:

• Shift in Focus: The film largely sidelines the iconic infected to explore human conflict, specifically a violent cult led by the antagonist Sir Lord Jimmy Crystal. While some praise this as a bold evolution, others miss the traditional zombie-horror tension.
• The ‘Cure’ Controversy: A major point of criticism is a seemingly convenient cure for the rage virus developed by a single scientist, a plot point many viewers found illogical.
• Ambiguous Ending: Director Nia DaCosta has defended the film’s ambiguous conclusion, noting the ‘cured’ individual is “not fully cured.” This intellectual ambiguity has been celebrated by some as thought-provoking but has frustrated viewers seeking clearer resolutions.

The Future of the Trilogy Hangs in the Balance

‘The Bone Temple’ was filmed back-to-back with ‘28 Years Later,’ and Sony had reportedly greenlit the third and final installment in December 2025, with original director Danny Boyle expressing interest in returning. However, the poor financial performance of this middle chapter has cast serious doubt on the trilogy’s future. The studio now faces a difficult decision: trust the critical acclaim and complete the story, or cut its losses in the face of audience apathy?

Conclusion: A Bold but Divisive Chapter

‘28 Years Later: The Bone Temple’ is an ambitious, thematically rich film that bravely attempts to evolve its own genre. It has succeeded in winning over critics but has stumbled at the box office, alienating a portion of the audience with its narrative shifts and logical leaps. Whether it will be remembered as a misunderstood masterpiece or a franchise misstep remains to be seen, but its polarizing reception has undeniably made it one of the most talked-about films of early 2026.