Film Preview: 28 Years Later (2025)

Film Poster

Page Revisions:

(December 15, 2024) Original
(April 20, 2025) New Trailer (#3)
(April 27, 2025) New Trailer (#4)
(June 15, 2025) New Posters (#4-#16)

Release Date:

June 20, 2025

Synopsis:

From IMDb: “TEMPORARY Plot under wraps. The third film in the “28 Days Later” franchise.”

Poster Rating: C / C+ / C- / C (2) / B / C / C / C (4) / C / B- / C+ / C

SEE ALL POSTERS BELOW
Review: (#1, C) The skull motif is a bit overdone even if it ties into some of the images from the trailer. It also uses the dullest color combos in horror film poster design. Boring. (#2, C+) While the skull concept and the red-black-red scheme is overbearing as always, the use of the skulls to create the hazard symbol is a nice touch. (#3, C-) Reminiscent of the more recent Saw film posters, this effort is creepy but still rather unappealing.

(#4-#5, C) Using the totem of skulls in two different vantage points don’t make for interesting designs in either direction. (#6, B) The empty space to the sides is distracting but only modestly as the central images have an intriguing color palette and layout that make them striking in general but compelling when framed like this. (#7, C) The bloodshot eye motif isn’t particularly compelling with so much empty space and a generic arrangement of zombies walking across a field. The color palette is overused and underwhelming. (#8, C) A flowery skull overwhelmed by a vibrant and overbearing shade of red. The tiny figures at the top of the skull don’t add enough embellishment. (#9-#12) This trio of character posters doesn’t submit much new, taking the field-of-zombies motif and abusing its use with hard-to-make-out character heads and a horrible split screen of color.

(#13, C) Pulling back from the overuse of red comes this black-and-white design with some interesting figures in the lower half with two too-small figures at the top. A slight improvement with worse emptiness on the sides. (#14, B-) Another strong non-English Design, this time Portuguese, does far better utilizing the empty space. The mediocre zombie field silhouettes are less obvious but the actors are more obvious and that helps draw the viewer. The images within the skull’s eye sockets aren’t too hard to make out, nor is the kid’s bow-drawn figure. (#15, C+) An almost abstract skull design that’s comprised of a lot of terrain with indistinct silhouettes strewn across them. It becomes overbearing after a while and picking out the central figures isn’t as easy as it should be. (#16, C) The land bridge being overrun with zombies might speak to the film’s narrative but it’s the overwhelming use of red that washes out most of the good elements of the design.

Trailer Rating: C / B / C+ / C+

SEE ALL TRAILERS BELOW
Review: (#1, C) This teaser is thankfully over quickly but it doesn’t create any genuine interest in waiting to see the full trailer. (#2, B) There’s far more action in this trailer than expected and the aural rhythm of the soundscape helps it remain riveting. There isn’t enough of the plot on display, which might hurt interest in the film but since this is the third film in a well-regarded series of zombie pictures, it might not need more than this.

(#3, C+) The studio is still trying to manage expectations by limiting what information the audience sees. Those familiar with the prior two films are probably already locked in so they don’t care what audiences see in a trailer and while the song and logo construction are interesting by themselves, the effort feels minimal and a bit too gimmicky to be enticing.

(#4, C+) The catchy 50s tune of a prior trailer is kept in a more subdued tone, which diminishes the trailer’s creative energy. There is lots of action but little plot. You might be able to pick out some of it and we can give points for that but these trailers are still coasting on the fumes of the original films’ popularity.