We were teased, weren't we? When we saw the trailer for 28 Years Later, we thought we saw Cillian Murphy's character from the original installment of the franchise, 28 Days Later. We were excited as Jim was seemingly going to play some kind of part.
The issue was that Jim looked as if he had been infected, and was now a zombie. What happened, and why? We love Jim and while we want to see him come back in the newly planned trilogy, we likely didn't want him to be a zombie.
Spoiler alert: Cillian Murphy's Jim doesn't appear in 28 Years Later, but he will appear in 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple. This is according to what Danny Boyle told Indie Wire recently. Boye couldn't tell fans much but did offer information about Murphy.
The director even said, "(Murphy) is in the second one. I shouldn't give away too much. I'll get killed." (Hopefully, not by a zombie.)
Boyle directed the original flick in the franchise that was released in 2003. He didn't direct the sequel, 28 Weeks Later, which was helmed by Juan Carlos Fresnadillo and released in 2007. Murphy did not appear in that film, either, and it was nowhere near as good as the original.
While Boyle is part of the creative team that will help create the final trilogy, assuming the third film gets greenlit, and he and Murphy have worked together on previous projects, Boyle will not direct 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple. That task will fall to Nia DaCosta.
DaCosta does have some experience working in horror. She helmed 2021's Candyman. She also directed 2023's The Marvels.
As for how Murphy will fit into the next film is anyone's guess. Literally. We know the character of Jim is going to be involved, but will he play the featured role? And if so, how? Will he be one of the infected, which would mean what we saw in the 28 Years Later trailer wasn't just a tease?
Fans of the franchise might also hope the next installment is more enjoyable than the most recent one. Oddly, professional critics love the June release, as it has a score of 88 on Rotten Tomatoes, but fans have given it only a 63. That is what happens, though, when the first film in a series is so beloved. The rest might pale in comparison.
More from FlickSided: