5 Reasons Why 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple Flopped At The Box Office
by Ryan Scott · /FilmThings didn't go according to plan for "28 Years Later: The Bone Temple" at the box office. The latest entry in the long-running horror franchise is intended to be the middle installment in a new trilogy connecting to director Danny Boyle's 2002 classic "28 Days Later." Unfortunately, audiences didn't seem to care all that much about this one, especially when compared to the Boyle-helmed "28 Years Later."
Directed by Nia DaCosta, "The Bone Temple" opened to an estimated $13 million domestically over the weekend. That number is expected to grow to about $15 million when we account for the Monday MLK holiday. Pre-release projections had "The Bone Temple" taking in closer to $20 million, meaning it came in well below tracking. But it gets worse.
Overseas, the horror flick pulled in $16.2 million for an opening weekend just under $30 million, not accounting for Monday grosses. By contrast, "28 Years Later" opened to $30 million domestically and about $60 million globally in 2025, en route to an eventual $151.3 million finish worldwide. Barring a miraculous turnaround, the sequel has virtually no chance of matching its predecessor.
So, what went wrong here? Why didn't audiences show up for the follow-up to a well-liked movie? Did Sony make a miscalculation? We're going to look at the biggest reasons why "28 Years Later: The Bone Temple" flopped on its opening weekend at the box office. Let's get into it.
The ending of 28 Years Later was divisive
One thing that wasn't an issue was the film's reception. Critics were very much on this movie's side, with /Film's Chris Evengelista calling "The Bone Temple" an "exciting" and "gruesome" sequel in his review. It also earned a solid A- CinemaScore from audiences, meaning people who actually paid to see the movie on opening weekend enjoyed it quite a bit.
The problem is that not nearly enough people went to see it, especially for a movie with a budget in the $60 million range. But why? One thing that can't be ignored is the absolutely wild ending to the first "28 Years Later." Love it or hate it, the way that Jimmy Crystal (Jack O'Connell) and his gang were introduced in that film was a divisive choice. It left a bad taste in the mouths of certain, more casual moviegoers, which might have turned them off seeing the sequel.
That's not to say that the ending of the previous movie alone poisoned the well, but it's impossible not to look at that film's decision to wrap up by completely changing its tone and throwing something strange at the wall in light of these early numbers. Even if those who have seen the sequel enjoyed what that ending leads to, there's no question that using that as a cliffhanger and a bridge to what was coming didn't totally pan out. One imagines Danny Boyle and Sony might have reconsidered that decision, with the benefit of hindsight.
Competition is going to kill The Bone Temple
To make matters worse, things are only going to get harder for this movie in the coming weeks. Even if we look at this weekend, competition was an issue. "Avatar: Fire and Ash" topped the charts for a fifth straight weekend with $13.3 million. Meanwhile, in the horror/thriller realm, "The Housemaid" ($8.5 million) and "Primate" ($5 million) proved to be attractive holdover options for prospective ticket buyers.
In the coming weeks, it's only going to get more difficult. For starters, "Return to Silent Hill," based on the much-beloved "Silent Hill 2" video game, is arriving this upcoming weekend. Then, Sam Raimi's "Send Help" will debut to help close out January as another high-profile horror release. Finally, the weekend after that will see the Super Bowl becoming the dominant force in entertainment. That means the direct road ahead is littered with speed bumps that will make it exceedingly difficult for "The Bone Temple" to leg out and save itself after its rough premiere.
Without legs, the situation isn't great. If "The Bone Temple" falls off a cliff in the coming weeks? Sony is going to have to hope for a major over-performance on VOD and streaming to make up the difference. The box office isn't everything, but it's certainly of grave importance when a movie costs as much as this one did to make. There's no two ways about it.
The Bone Temple was too much, too soon
When it was confirmed that filmmaker Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland were returning to the "28" universe, it was the culmination of a very long wait. "28 Weeks Later" came out back in 2007, five years after "28 Days Later." After that, fans had to wait 18 years for "28 Years Later." It was so long, in fact, that the notion of making "28 Months Later" had to go out of the window entirely.
Boyle and Garland had ambitious plans and, from the get-go, this return was envisioned as a trilogy. Sony decided to film the first two installments back-to-back and, rather than hold onto "28 Years Later: The Bone Temple," it elected to release the sequel roughly seven months after the previous entry. Clearly, the studio had hoped to capitalize on the momentum from "28 Years Later." However, that might have backfired, as this seemingly became a case of too much, too soon for certain audiences.
Releasing the first two "28 Years Later" movies so close to one another simply didn't give them time to breathe. There's something to be said for taking a year between installments, even if we're talking about direct sequels. Think "Wicked" and "Wicked: For Good" or "Avengers: Infinity War" and "Avengers: Endgame." Sony putting "The Bone Temple" out as quickly as it did, at the very least, didn't help the cause any.
The 28 Years trilogy was always a big gamble
Part of the reason why horror is so appealing to Hollywood studios, generally speaking, is that it's often a low risk/high reward prospect. Last year's "Sinners" making $368 million worldwide against a $90 million budget is far from the norm. More often, studios are chasing success that more closely mirrors 2025's "The Monkey" ($68 million box office/$11 million budget).
In the case of the "28 Years Later" trilogy, it was an exceptionally big gamble from the very beginning, in no small part because we're looking at $60 million-plus budgets. These are not small movies and they needed to make a lot of money to be profitable. To that end, "28 Years Later" was a success at $151 million globally, but it wasn't a resounding hit relative to its budget. As a result, "The Bone Temple" didn't have a lot of room for error to be considered a win based solely on its theatrical returns.
That's why "The Bone Temple" was one of the biggest box office gambles of 2026, despite the popularity of its immediate predecessor. Sony took a calculated risk here because the studio, relative to its competitors, doesn't have all that many franchises to play with. It was a somewhat desperate and bold gambit that initially paid off, but it also showed its limitations rather quickly. That raises a lot of questions about what comes next.
Sony chose to hide Cillian Murphy's Jim in the marketing
It's hard to call it a spoiler because the filmmakers were so open about it the whole way, but Cillian Murphy made his return as Jim in "28 Years Later: The Bone Temple." While his appearance was brief, it served to tee up the ball for Danny Boyle and Alex Garland's planned third entry in the trilogy. But despite the fact that both of them, as well as Murphy, were open about the fact that he was coming back briefly in this installment, Sony largely hid him from the marketing. The average audience member probably didn't know that was coming.
Given that Murphy is at the height of his career after winning a Best Actor Oscar for his work in "Oppenheimer," a movie that also won Best Picture and was a massive hit, this feels like a grave miscalculation. Granted, plenty of hardcore fans were probably thrilled with the surprise, but from a marketing perspective, Murphy's presence was one of the biggest things this movie had going for it. Not playing that up, despite it being a poorly-kept secret, feels like an oversight.
Sony is reportedly already moving ahead with the third chapter, as "The Bone Temple" left us with a lot of questions and a cliffhanger ending. Be that as it may, another sequel now feels exceptionally risky since this film is at risk of fully bombing at the box office. Might that impact Sony's decision? Is it possible that the third entry won't happen? Or is the hope that Jim's inclusion will encourage more people to check out "The Bone Temple" down the line? Either way, spotlighting him now could've helped the cause in the short term.
"28 Years Later: The Bone Temple" is in theaters now.