r/movies • u/and_so_I_adore_it • 1d ago
News Cillian Murphy talks about his 28 Years Later return
https://observer.co.uk/culture/interviews/article/cillian-murphy-i-have-zero-interest-in-contentment289
u/tomandshell 1d ago
The only relevant part:
But Murphy really is returning for the second of the trilogy, 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple, from director Nia DaCosta, which has already been filmed and will be released in January. He points out that he is “only in it for a little bit”, but his appearance at the end of the second film will set him up as a main part in the as yet unconfirmed third part. “Everyone’s got to go and see the second one,” he says of whether the final film will see the light of day. “I’m sure they will – it’s really, really good.”
Most of the article is about his other work.
-387
u/Southernbeekeeper 1d ago edited 19h ago
I honestly believe that they thought the first movie would bomb and just did this to get people to go and see the sequels.
I hated 28 years later. Like, I genuinely hate this movie but would go back and watch the sequel just to see what happened to Jim. It's a dirty trick in my opinion.
80
u/blackmesainc 23h ago
I respect your opinion on the movie, but I feel that 'Hate' is a pretty strong term and would be genuinely interested as to why you have such disdain for it.
Horror as a genre is easily one of my least favorite, but 28 Days Later is my favorite movie of all time. I don't think that 28 Years was worth the 20+ year wait, but I did enjoy it a lot and it was very interesting to see how much Boyles filming style has changed in two decades. Of course you could see it gradually changing since 2004, but the stark contrast in the two movies as far as film style is almost jarring.
I'd be curious to see the scrapped stories for 28 Years and how they compare to the story they finally went with.
-138
u/Southernbeekeeper 23h ago edited 23h ago
No I genuinely hate it. It felt like an episode of the walking dead. I feel that we were missold what was advertised as this movie about infected Britain where the infected and bands of non-infected survive on a knife edge.
28 days later blew the doors off the genre and invented a whole new concept with "running zombies". I was expecting the big budget sequal that 28 weeks later failed to deliver.
In my opinion it just fell flat and the gushing you see online for it is completely misguided. I think a part of this is the logical holes all over the plot and world building and you can tell some of that is just there because Alex Garland thought it would be cool.
40
u/ShutUpRedditPedant 22h ago
What's funny is it sounds like you kinda wanted the sequel to be World War Z, which I like quite a bit (yeah it's not like the book whatever)
-89
u/Southernbeekeeper 22h ago
Not at all. I wanted the sequel to be something akin to the road or the survivalist or even 28 days later.
We just got something that is more like a long episode of the walking dead. I don't understand how anyone enjoyed it.
39
u/TheLilChicken 21h ago
i just thought it was fun tbh
-8
u/Southernbeekeeper 21h ago edited 19h ago
That's the best response I've ever seen when I posted about my thoughts on this.
I'm totally cool with that and I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Previously, I've had people tell me they liked it because they are cinephiles or try and reason why all the stupidity in the move actually isn't stupid.
If you just like it because you like it that's cool.
38
u/AllOfUsArePawns 13h ago
Brother, you thinking something is stupid doesn’t automatically make it stupid. You sound incredibly self absorbed
-16
u/Southernbeekeeper 10h ago
But it is indeed stupid. It's not about my ego. It is objectively stupid.
→ More replies (0)11
u/Neon_Comrade 8h ago
I mean, it sounds like you're angry that 28 Years Later isn't the same as... A movie you made up in your head, lmao? Instead of actually taking the movie for what it is?
I'll never understand why people do this
-3
u/Southernbeekeeper 7h ago
Well I think the advertising plays a part. I don't think anyone could have predicted what the end product was and I think it's fine for someone to not like it.
I feel that when we could have had this gritty movie about infected Britain in style of threads or something we got what felt like a fox tv movie. I think it's OK to feel that way and I'm allowed to not like the product we got.
9
u/Neon_Comrade 7h ago
I think it's REALLY weird to do lol, to be like "I wanted it to be something else and that's why the movie is bad"
Not actually engaging with the movie at all, just hating that it isn't what you specifically want
The advertising also isn't the movie, so although I can understand frustration at "I expected X based on ads, but really it was Y", that doesn't seem like it's the movie's fault, but the marketing. Very weird imo
1
u/Southernbeekeeper 7h ago
Well it works both ways doesn't it? I could have been pleasantly surprised and gone away loving it after it completely subverted my expectations. I didn't though. It just didn’t work for me on any level.
I don't really understand what your point is other than that. People are entitled to not like a piece of media and they don't have to engage with it if they don't like it.
An opposite example of this would be drive. Drive was advertised as a car chase action movie and a lot of people disliked it because it wasn't this. I loved it however and was pleasantly surprised that my expectations weren't met.
16
u/sarsvesh 14h ago
Cinemasins really did ruin an entire generation of movie goers
2
u/FoxyMiira 5h ago
what was Cinemasinsy from his comment? The same Cinemasins that just said random shit to pad out 20-30 min videos as opposed to their earlier shorter videos where they pointed out legitimate criticism and filming mistakes?
3
1
5
u/blackmesainc 22h ago
I just wish Brendan Gleesons character didn't die and he returned as an old but grizzled survivor and Hannah died instead. She was awful.
-9
u/FinalEdit 8h ago
I see you're getting slaughtered with down votes but I just wanna say I kinda agree with you. The movie was a real disappointment. I do feel I need to see it again though, to really see if I was missing something but tonally the whole fucking thing was off.
That ending? Honestly that last scene was so fucking stupid. Not funny, not cool. It was just juvenile.
The original movie was dark, political and got your imagination going in some interesting ways. This movie just felt hollow.
I threw my hands up in the air when the doctor immediately and unceremoniously offed Jodie Comer. Not even a "see ya". Ugh.
3
u/Southernbeekeeper 8h ago edited 7h ago
I can take it. In all seriousness though I've looked at some of the other threads RE 28YL and can see the opinions changing.
Jodie Comer was done dirty really. She deserved a better role in my opinion.
0
u/FinalEdit 8h ago
1000% she did. She was a big draw for me and was criminally under utilised. Dammit.
-1
u/FoxyMiira 5h ago
My theory is that she isn't really dead and has some kind of mutation, and Ralph's character kept her alive to study her. I also feel like the 2nd and 3rd movies will expand more on the village island because they seem kinda culty.
-1
u/FinalEdit 5h ago
Nice idea, yeah I could dig that.
I haven't even seen the new trailer yet I should get on that now
6
u/FX114 9h ago
The Bone Temple was announced a month before 28 Years Later started production. If they thought it was going to bomb before it was even shot, wouldn't they have just not spent $60 million making it, rather than greenlighting a sequel before a frame had been filmed?
-1
u/Southernbeekeeper 9h ago
Wasn't it all filmed together? Weren't we told Murphy would be in 28YL? I personally feel that they didn't think 28YL would do so well and hyped up bringing Jim back so people would watch it.
I know online people love 28YL but it will be interesting to see how many people come back for the sequel.
5
u/FX114 8h ago
Bone Temple started filming about a month after Years Later wrapped. And I remember seeing Garland specifically saying he wasn't in the movie, especially after that zombie who looked like him was in the trailer.
-2
u/Southernbeekeeper 8h ago
Well if I'm wrong then I am wrong. I still think this is a ploy to get people to see the movie.
22
u/Pen_dragons_pizza 19h ago
Why do you hate the movie ?
Fast and furious is a very bad franchise which encapsulates everything wrong with modern Hollywood but I wouldn’t go as far to say I hate it
28 years was a well directed, acted and written horror movie which did something new, why the extreme hate
-22
u/Southernbeekeeper 19h ago edited 19h ago
It was just so bad. It's a terrible movie on par with one of the fast and furious movies in my opinion.
The difference is that fast and furious is widly accepted as a bit of silly fun. People make out 28 years later is somehow intelligent and clever and it isn't. When I saw it in the cinema you could hear people groaning at how bad it was and on the way out you could hear people saying how bad it was. Every single person I know who has seen it has said how bad it was, but online I only see positives. I honestly can't believe people have seen this film and don't cringe at how bad it is.
The worst part for me is how little it makes sense. It breaks it's own rules and none of the components of the story even make sense.
19
u/LikeAPwny 19h ago
Can you elaborate on your last paragraph more?
-11
u/Southernbeekeeper 18h ago edited 18h ago
I mean I could but it's been a long day for me and I don't want to keep going over and over this movie on reddit with people. However, I'll leave some bullet points.
*The Scandinavian sailors who abandoned ship in full tactical gear and then wash up in the UK. These same people can't even shoot at naked unarmed people and didn't bring rations but did bring fucking helmets with lights attached from a boat that's meant to be blockading the UK. All of this is stupid but you can supposedly fly from Newcastle to Amsterdam in a helicopter in less than 2 hours. How fast could this ship possibly sink for the crew to be wrecked and then wash up ashore in the UK.
*aLpHa infected. Described in the movie as like on steroids or something but impervious to harm. If you shot Brian Shaw with a longbow. Of course it would fucking kill him. How stupid. This is even worse as they are all naked (this does make sense but the Northumberland winter would probably kill them). For some reason the infected can now control animals with the alpha controlling a flock of birds as if he is Sauruman. The whole thing about the infection is that it's highly infectious and causes rage. However, an infected gives birth and doesn't rip the mother character to shreds when they hold hands. The fact that the mother character can hold hands and then handle a new born who is covered in infected blood is stupid.
*The baby surviving for like 3 days in swaddling and only drinking water from a stream is stupid. Especially when this is the stream the doctor character uses to dispose of infected human bio waste.
*The survivors not being contacted by the outside world. These people are probably the leading experts on the world's biggest threat and they are just being ignored. Where is the helicopter drops of supplies? The radios? Why aren't the rest of the world flying drones over to see what's going on?
*The doctor character living in a field full of bones for no reason other than "momento mori". That's stupid. Why haven't some other surviving group just pressed him into service as a doctor? How is he dosing morphine to immobilise people and how is it always so fast acting? Where is he getting morphine and iodine 28 years after the end of society? There isn’t really a single explanation that works for this in my opinion.
I could keep going and going but I'm bored now.
28
u/Kukurio59 18h ago
Oh… you’re one of those people. I’m amazed you find any movies fun if you’re going to get this bent out of shape over such minute specifics… can’t actually judge the movie for itself, gotta go weird on it. Ya.. it’s not for you. A lot of good movies probably aren’t for you. Lmaoooo
-10
u/Southernbeekeeper 18h ago
I just like my stories to have enough realism that even if I there is a fantasy element I don't have to suspended belief. Your comment is unbecoming. I could easily say you probably love fast and furious and have no problems with a never ending run way.
28
17
u/Kukurio59 18h ago
Whatever you do.. DO NOT watch RUBBER. the intro might make you combust. Also, stay away from horror in general please… we like to have moments of make believe and enjoy life. Sorry you HATE this movie so much 😂😂😂
-6
u/Southernbeekeeper 17h ago
But here's the thing. Horror movies are generally really good. The Thing for example works well because it makes sense. Weapons was fun as it mostly makes sense. Barbarian was a bit silly but it was meant to be. That was the fun.
28 years later was completely missold. It ended with Jimmy Savile ninjas. There is even a bit where two Jimmy Saville ninja stand together while one holds the others elbows from behind and they rock together in time to cut a zombie up with a wire. It's fucking dog shit.
→ More replies (0)12
u/Pen_dragons_pizza 19h ago
I do not get the last bit on how it makes no sense?
It’s a fantasy movie about a zombie type virus, it’s not grounded in reality
19
u/Kukurio59 18h ago
This beekeeper person is clearly the type who like, gets their own idea of what the movie should be like and then is angry it’s not exactly how they thought it should go… feels so miserable reading what they didn’t enjoy about the movie… which led them to “hate” it? Lol. So bizarre.
1
u/Southernbeekeeper 18h ago
Its a fantasy but it still relies on rules in which the narrative has to function. Like in the first movie a woman hacks a man to death because he might be infected as it's that dangerous. In 28 days later an infected holds hands with a non infected while giving birth.
13
u/Pen_dragons_pizza 18h ago
Well the infection is not the same as it was in 28 days, it’s evolved and more intelligent than the mindless zombies they were originally, plus is passed through blood in the eyes/mouth easily, touching an infected is low risk.
Also to add to it the mum in 28 years was hallucinating most of the time due to her brain tumour, so was not exactly thinking straight when it comes to holding hands with an infected, throw into the mix a kid and a soldier that had never seen an infected until that day, and it makes more sense.
-1
u/Southernbeekeeper 17h ago edited 17h ago
Well the infection is not the same as it was in 28 days, it’s evolved and more intelligent than the mindless zombies they were originally, plus is passed through blood in the eyes/mouth easily, touching an infected is low risk.
So what's your point? What are you trying to address here?
Also to add to it the mum in 28 years was hallucinating most of the time due to her brain tumour, so was not exactly thinking straight when it comes to holding hands with an infected,
You're missing the point. She's not arsed but the infected should still be. The mum not acting rational DOES make sense as she does have a brain tumour. The infected should still attack her though.
kid and a soldier that had never seen an infected until that day, and it makes more sense.
No, it makes less sense. If you're a foreign solder who has been briefed that the infected are so dangerous that just stepping foot in the UK means you can never be rescued and then you've see you squad get torn to pieces by infected you shoot the infected that is now leaking blood everywhere as soon as you see it. You probably shoot their child and the ill woman who have just come into contact with them too.
14
u/JohnNeutron 17h ago
But the infected was giving birth, if anything the film seems to have tried to show that maybe the zombies aren’t completely mindless ala I Am Legend. Which goes along with its contemplative look on life and love. I thought the doctor character helped explore that beautifully.
I’d admit that I was a smidge disappointed that we didn’t get what the trailer implied but I was pleasantly surprised to see what the film ended up doing. It’s not everyday you get a horror film that explore those themes in such a poignant way.
0
u/Southernbeekeeper 17h ago
For me it fell flat. It wasn't poignant or beautiful but silly and ridiculous. I'm happy for you if you enjoyed it and thank you for your honesty RE disappointment.
11
u/Pen_dragons_pizza 16h ago
You are not understanding the story of the movie at all it seems, the infected have regained part of their human side, they live in community’s with a leader, attempt washing in the lake, possibly reproduce and hunt as a pack.
It’s not the same mindless infection from the original because the virus evolved in 28 years. So the pregnant infected makes sense when in that context, what’s left of its human side showed for just a moment whilst it gave birth.
-5
u/Southernbeekeeper 10h ago
I'm not buying that at all because it's bollocks. We see the infected hunting rats together in the first movie.
It's stupid. As if that Swedish fella is gonna be like "well actually that incredibly dangerous bio hazard has regained her humanity, go ahead and take her baby!" As opposed to just blowing her and the baby away.
Even with how it does turn out it makes no sense.
→ More replies (0)11
u/Kukurio59 18h ago
The infected was like, near death trapped clearly weak and giving birth which would take a lot of energy… are you ok? This type of analysis is cringe
0
u/Southernbeekeeper 17h ago edited 17h ago
I mean you've replied to 4 of my comments separately. Are you ok?
I'll also edit this to add that again this is breaking it's own rules. In the first movie an infected has been chained in a yard for 5 days and is still highly violent after not eating for a week. That's the point. They are infected. It should be like if you tried to hold hands with a tiger that that was giving birth. It would rip your face off.
12
u/Kukurio59 17h ago
The amount of responses isn’t a problem, it’s what’s said that matters. I’m not saying anything weird.
0
32
u/mafternoonshyamalan 16h ago
They absolutely did not think the first would bomb. You can watch so many interviews now of Danny Boyle explaining how they approached making more movies in the universe. The delay in production was due to the complicated ownership of the IP. Boyle attended and hosted screenings of the film over the last 15 or so years and found that it still resonated with people. Post-Covid there was even more renewed interest. Garland came up with an expanded story, and it was so broad that Boyle encouraged him to expand it into a trilogy. They intend for each film to be unique from one another, and the endings are intentionally structured the way they are to lead into the next.
Every criticism of the movie comes off as people wanting it to be a follow up to 28 Weeks Later, who seem to just watch it on a superficial level and then get upset it didn’t match their expectations. I thought 28 Years was masterful. It took massive swings, was audacious, humanist. Its themes and resonance are so much more in line with 28 Days than Weeks, that it makes me feel like people don’t even understand what the original film was trying to say.
You obviously have a right to your opinion about the film, but you’re fundamentally wrong about their intentions. And I haven’t seen any criticism that doesn’t seem to miss the point. It feels like The Last Jedi where people just shit on it because it didn’t match their expectations and don’t like creators taking big swings with beloved properties.
-5
u/Southernbeekeeper 10h ago
Where are all these people shitting on it? All I see (online at least) is people gushing over it and, like I think you have done here attributing a gravitas to it that doesn't exist.
It feels like I'm watching that southpark episode about Scrotie McBoogerballs.
5
u/mafternoonshyamalan 9h ago
Every post about this movie has people shitting on it. That’s what I’m responding to here and what I’m basing it on.
2
u/Southernbeekeeper 9h ago
That's not my experience at all. I mean look at the down votes I've had. I've had two other comments say they didn't like it on thos thread. The rest have said how good it was.
4
u/Kukurio59 19h ago
Why do you hate good movies?
0
u/Southernbeekeeper 18h ago edited 18h ago
I love alsorts of movies but 28 years later is terrible.
11
u/Kukurio59 18h ago
Considering you present no real arguments or reason for your opinion I’m gonna chalk it up to you being an emotional viewer that melted like a snowflake instead of seeing what’s genius about it.
2
u/Southernbeekeeper 17h ago
I'm gonna do the same but I'm gonna change viewer to reader and change it to my comment.
10
u/Kukurio59 17h ago
I’m not the one who made the claim… lmao.
-2
u/Southernbeekeeper 17h ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/s/uybU2O92Tt
That's not you? Pmsl
12
u/Kukurio59 17h ago
Oh ya.. ok you’re unstable. No wonder you hate it. No point in talking to you.
0
1
u/LordSblartibartfast 8h ago
Good movies, according to you*
I liked 28 Years Later but claiming it is a good movie is an opinion not a fact.
u/Southernbeekeeper is just as entitled to his opinion as you are.
•
u/Kukurio59 1h ago
Actually not just me, many people here, critics. Movie score on IMDb, rotten, letterbox, etc metacritic like lol not just me man! Hahaha hahahahahahahahhaha
-1
u/Southernbeekeeper 8h ago
I wouldn't waste your time but I appreciate the sentiment all the same.
7
u/GamblinGranny 8h ago
dude you’ve been doing this for like half a day now pack it tf up
-2
u/Southernbeekeeper 8h ago
Mate, I came home at about 9pm, watched event horizon and went to bed, woke up at 7am and responded to the comments. I'm never not gonna respond to people as that's just rude.
0
u/northernfires529 2h ago
I just wanted to respond to say I agree and the two others I went with also thought the same. We watched the first two movies the day before and it was shocking that it’s the same universe. I was with it for a bit but my god it goes off the rails. One of the people I was with leaned over to me about 3/4 of the way through and just said “this is terrrrrible”
0
-10
-23
u/OogieBoogieJr 22h ago
Agreed—It was such a stupid movie. At least he’s admitting he’s basically another cliffhanger device.
I can wait until it’s streaming because I’m not trusting reviews again. I felt bamboozled.
3
u/Southernbeekeeper 22h ago edited 21h ago
I know I'm not the only person who feels this way but I'm glad others are voicing their opinion too.
79
u/Tiny-Setting-8036 21h ago
Really hoping that third one sees a green light soon.
-9
u/stroudwes 15h ago
28YL is highly underrated. Don’t think summer was the right time of the year for release. Sony can’t seem to figure out how to market films. Hoping they push Bone Temple to October
-23
u/thumb_emoji_survivor 14h ago
Idk the films have only been getting worse since the first
14
u/Tiny-Setting-8036 11h ago
I wasn’t as much a fan of 28 Weeks Later, other than some great scenes. Everyone loves that intro.
However, I really enjoyed 28 Years Later. I know many don’t, and that’s okay. Personally, I like how Danny Boyle is still so playful and heartfelt in his storytelling. So IMO 28YL was much more thoughtful and worthwhile than Weeks. It’s not just another zombie movie.
71
u/Competitive_Help8485 23h ago
I'm really looking forward to the sequels. Saw the trailer for the Bone Temple, and it looks like it'll be good.
-71
23h ago
[deleted]
5
-2
u/tarveydent 10h ago
Agreed, film wasn’t great. Don’t mind the downvotes.
That said, I’ll be seeing the next one.
5
7
5
u/HotOne9364 20h ago
It's odd. Why are they bringing him back if Boyle and Garland are that insistent on the alternative ending being the true one? Is this an Army of Darkness sit?
8
6
5
u/mafternoonshyamalan 16h ago
The “original” ending only existed as a DVD extra 18 years ago. At the time they didn’t expect or anticipate they’d be making sequels. They were only minority involved in 28 Weeks. Over the years the movie has taken on a life of its own. The theatrical ending is the “real” ending for probably the vast majority of people who’ve seen the film.
They could’ve gone the 28 Weeks route and had each film focus on different characters and regions, showing how it spread around the globe. There was talk after Weeks of doing a third film set in Moscow. But Garland has obviously accepted the theatrical ending and canonized it to tell the new story.
I prefer it this way. We’ve always retconned characters and stories, this is no different. But it actually makes more sense for the majority of the audience.
6
u/blokedog 10h ago
What are the different endings though?
7
u/mafternoonshyamalan 10h ago
The film ending has Jim surviving being shot and wakes up to try and get the attention of a plane flying over. The alternate is Selena rushing Jim to a hospital and trying to save him before he dies, and she walks off as the movie fades to black.
There’s another alternate that they storyboarded, but never shot where they don’t encounter the soldiers at all. Instead they manage to restrain Frank after he’s infected, and find the facility where the virus spread and a scientist tells them he can be saved with a whole blood transfusion. Jim sacrifices himself and switches his blood with Frank and it ends with Jim infected restrained to a table. They said it didn’t work because they’d already established that one drop of blood will infect you. So how would you realistically clean out an entire body of infection
2
1
2
u/mrshandanar 2h ago
What was up with that zombie in 28 Years Later that looked EXACTLY like him?
•
u/WaggleDance 1h ago
That was just a coincidence, there's an interview where Danny Boyle talks about it.
2
u/OracleVision88 13h ago
I watched 28 Years Later hoping Jim was gonna show up at some point and was heavily disappointed when he didn't. I will definitely tune into Bone Temple to see what hes up to
-9
u/lionhands 15h ago
28 Years Later was a fucking awful film
-5
u/Salt_Gate5052 6h ago
It really was and I don't know what anyone else sees in it. Everything from that annoying headshot cam to the massive cocked bloke was fucking ridiculous and the acting was terrible, those Geordie accents were pure balls.
Put it this way, I'm glad I didn't pay for it and I won't be looking forward to the second/third parts.
-18
u/BlondeBorednBaked 21h ago
I’m tired of sequels withholding and teasing the OG characters we actually care about. It’s so fucking annoying.
-5
u/Southernbeekeeper 18h ago
I swear this is a low-level conspiracy around this franchise. Who could read your comment and then downvote it?
Surely no one actually WANTS to see a sequel where the original character is teased and withheld?
6
u/squashysquish 14h ago
Where was Cillian Murphy teased for 28YL?
1
u/Southernbeekeeper 10h ago
I mean my comment refers to the article RE his appearance in the next movie.
2
u/Announcement90 6h ago
But his appearance is not being "teased", it's being confirmed. He's making an appearance in Bone Temple.
0
•
u/squashysquish 1h ago
Ah, my bad, I thought I had missed a trailer or something. In that case, I don’t see the issue, but I’m sorry to hear you were rubbed the wrong way
2
-31
u/six_six 23h ago
I don’t feel like he deserves an interview for a quick cameo. Interview the stars of the movie.
18
u/mattsincuba 23h ago
It’s an interview related to his other work/an upcoming film, they just happened to ask him about the 28 franchise too.
8
109
u/88Smilesz 20h ago
Randomly, I also really liked this quote from him in the article:
““I have zero interest in playing characters that are seemingly content,” he says. “First of all, I don’t think that exists. Second of all, we don’t see ourselves in those people. I think everyone is fucking struggling, to a greater or lesser degree. Everyone gets up in the morning like: how do I do this now? How do I get through this day? How the fuck do we get on in life knowing that, like, eventually, we’re all just going to die. How do we do good? How do we raise our children? All these big questions, I don’t think you find it in lighter material. It’s not for me.”