Danny Boyle to Direct 28 Months Later?

With the release of 28 Weeks Later still a month off, we’ve already started to hear about the possibility of a second sequel. While doing press for his upcoming movie Sunshine, Danny Boyle has reportedly been letting it slip that there are tentative plans for another installment in the zombie franchise. I guess as long as the virus can survive in one person (and as long as the movies continue to make money), there’s always that possibility it could mutate and spread somewhere else, right?

Now the interesting thing is that according to a scooper at Ain’t It Cool News, Boyle did some second unit directing on 28 Weeks Later, and had so much fun that he’s “seriously considering” returning to do the next one himself again. Wow, that’s pretty cool. Not only does it get me excited about the possibility of a third movie, but it kind of makes me more interested in seeing the second one now as well. There’s no word on an official title for the potential follow-up, but the logical choice that everyone has adopted is 28 Months Later. The thing is, that’s over 2 years. Seems like a long time for a virus that can infect someone in seconds!

  • Wesley Villanueva

    affs e não vai lançar o “Extermínio 03″ não é… Todos nós fãs do filme queremos a continuação,pós estamos muito ansiosos,pra saber o que irá acontecer no três,por favor,faça o 3 eu lhi peço para que o senhor dê continuidade ao filme “Extermínio 03″

  • Markus Allen

    Just in cast there is a ‘slight’ possibility that director Danny Boyle will read this, I would like to make a plea, to bring this last film out, and perhaps make a few suggestions on what ‘could’ be seen in the third installment.
    As we have seen so far, ’28 Days Later’ showed us a quick acting virus that causes near-instantaneous infection, as the virus no doubt attacks the brain, nearly wiping almost ‘all’ memory except for the basic, aggressive ‘animal’ instincts, but the overall survival skills are nearly gone, which is why we see some of them starve to death by the end of the first film. So how could there still be infected 28 ‘months’ later? Two scenarios (maybe both, or maybe more) could be approached for the story of the third film;

    1) Infected start to show some basic intelligence-
    For the infected, everything that made up their personal lives (friends, work, marriage, watching football games) is all now. All that is there, at first, is only the aggressive ‘violent’ nature. But, as time passes, and as it seems they don’t attack other infected, the internal instinct of preservation kicks in, and tiny fragments of basic things from their post infection come to the surface. If they see a can of food, they will instinctively ‘know’ what it is, and at first, try to bang and rip it open. Maybe, they ‘remember’ a can opener, and show that they know how to use simple tools in a primitive way, and ‘that’ would explain how they have survived so long….that ‘maybe’, if they don’t starve to death, the infection itself ‘might’ die out, and everyone would return to normal. Of course, the infection is what ‘might’ be keeping people ‘alive’, out of that basic animal instinct to live. ‘If’ they return to normal ‘starving’, then they would most surely die afterwards.

    2) The virus mutates, causing reanimation of the infected ‘dead’-
    This would take the story from a virus ‘infection’, to a ‘Return Of The Living Dead’ zombie (not Romero’s story), as the body is completely reanimated by the mutated virus. This scenario in itself ‘could’ go two ways. It would extend the story to more films, as the world undead population seems more to be never ending. You ‘could’ have more survivors, who only exist to fight for that one extra moment of life, who just ‘might’ outlast it all and rebuild. Or, you set the story around the very last normal, uninfected survivors, as the series ends with no left…the last survivor dies, as the audience is left wondering…..did they turn, or was that person fortunate to just ‘die’ at the end (like what happened on the TV series ‘Dead Set). If every single person on earth is now the ‘un-dead’, then that’s it, end of story, roll the credits….the end.

    Number 1 would be more of a way to possibly keep the story ‘alive’, as oppose to number 2. I will take a guess, that after a third film, Danny Boyle will want to close/end this particular story, so that there is no more need for future films. Number ‘2’ would possibly be the ‘best’ way to do just that.

  • Insaneindamembwane

    What Danny could do is pick up the movie 28 months later and have a facility where research is being done on the infected. One of the infected is one of the researchers daughters. Doctor injects daughter with serum and she is cured. Leaves facility and is in general population. Next scene one of the few researchers are looking through microscope and notices that the cure serum has been taken over by the virus only days later. Virus was in say “Hibernation”. Researcher frantically trying to reach doctor to let him know his daughter is still infected and needs another dose of the serum. Next scene? Researchers daughter hovering above him as virus returns and she spreads to him. Virus is loose again. Just an idea.