One big question that’s going to keep coming up as people begin to see Danny Boyle and Alex Garland‘s anticipated sequel, 28 Years Later, is about how the 2007 sequel, 28 Weeks Later, fits into the mix. After the duo’s 28 Days Later was a respectable worldwide hit in 2003, helping to bring zombies back into vogue long before The Walking Dead, Spanish filmmaker Juan Carlos Fresnadillo took the reins of the franchise while Boyle and Garland went on to make the sci-fi thriller, Sunshine, with Cillian Murphy. They remained on 28 Weeks Later as executive producers, and the sequel only made slightly less than the original movie.
Notably, that sequel starred Robert Carlyle, who starred as the unhinged Franko role in Boyle‘s earlier hit, Trainspotting, joined by Rose Byrne, who hadn’t quite broken out with Insidious and Bridesmaids just yet, and Jeremy Renner, ahead of his own breakout with the Oscar-winning The Hurt Locker. Reviews for 28 Weeks Later were slightly more subdued, as was the audience reaction. Since Boyle and Garland are now returning to a world infected by the Rage Virus, the director is being asked more about their decision not to make a direct sequel themselves after 28 Days Later was such a hit.
Why Did Boyle and Garland Opt Out of Making ’28 Weeks Later’?
In a recent interview with Collider, Boyle spoke more about the decision for him and Garland to not make a sequel after 28 Days Later, but instead, to head into space for what would become a popular cult hit in its own right. Part of what factored into that decision was the direction the sequel would be taking. “What was unique about the first film and was the best choice we ever made about it was that it featured entirely British. It was just that land,” Boyle told interviewer Mike Ryan. “It was extraordinary thinking about something that powerful breaking out in that particular space, and it had to be dealt with by the inhabitants of that land. And we decided to concentrate on that. There’s nothing wrong with 28 Weeks Later. We just decided not to follow those story elements.”
In fact, Garland had an idea for a sequel following 28 Days Later, which would have been a very different movie from 28 Weeks Later, as Boyle explained. “Alex originally wrote a script that was more a traditional sequel. Like a “weaponize the virus” type idea. You know, the military, or the government, or a corporation weaponizes the virus. Classic Alien-type idea, where you keep the thing going by doing that. We just didn’t want to do that. There was something fresher we could tackle.” That led to Garland and Boyle making Sunshine together, and that’s still one of the more original space thrillers of this century so far, even if, at the time, the movie bombed in the United States.
What Were Some of the Elements from ’28 Weeks Later’ That Were Ignored?
One of 28 Weeks Later’s bigger additions to the canon was that it introduced the idea that there might be people with a natural genetic immunity to the Rage Virus, which could be used to find a cure. That concept would mean that no matter when or where someone comes in contact with the Rage-infected, they wouldn’t have to worry about transforming themselves. This decision immediately removes some of the stakes introduced in the first movie, where anyone could become a raging beast by making just one wrong move. “We decided to base this [new] trilogy being inspired by the first film … in terms of the definition of the virus, its behavior, and reactions to it,” Boyle added when asked about that particular element introduced in 28 Weeks Later. It’s smart thinking, since the idea of such an immunity or a cure would make the foray by Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s character with his teen son onto the mainland in 28 Years Later not nearly as dangerous or exciting. Essentially, it could be seen as a cop-out.
At the end of 28 Weeks Later, the Rage Virus has expanded to the European “mainland,” as we see a crowd of zombies run by the Eiffel Tower, which would potentially make any sequel to 28 Weeks Later a much bigger (and more expensive) third movie. Instead, the original filmmakers decided to bring things back to where they started, England, and to show not only how the Rage Virus has evolved while running rampant, but also how the country itself has changed after 28 years. As Boyle mentioned, “It’s a bold choice we decided to declare up front [in 28 Years Later] by saying the Rage Virus was driven back from mainland Europe.”
’28 Years Later’ Shouldn’t Be Held Back by the Past
In the time since the duo last worked together, Garland has become a reputable and award-winning science fiction filmmaker in his own right with films like Ex Machina and Civil War, so the two filmmakers with Garland‘s new instincts should make 28 Years Later a stronger movie by omitting aspects from its predecessor. For that reason alone, it’s probably for the best that 28 Weeks Later is no longer in the mix, because to some, that sequel was seen as a money-driven sequel that was trying to turn Boyle and Garland’s original movie into a bigger franchise — which it has now become, except it’s back in the firm hands of Boyle and Garland.
28 Weeks Later fans will just have to wait slightly longer to see if Boyle and Garland‘s decision to omit those elements from their latest foray into the world of the Rage Virus was the right decision. There are plenty of other avenues that can be explored, but from what we’ve learned so far, 28 Weeks Later might not be mandatory viewing before watching 28 Years Later, which is also a smart move. As we saw with the recent success of the newer Scream movies, this new planned trilogy will have to work as a standalone without a reliance on exposition about previous installments. Keeping things simple might be key to the success of this new trilogy. 28 Years Later is likely to be seen as a similar “legacy sequel” as Scream, but it will probably attract more viewers by focusing on its new characters without expecting everyone to have watched the two prior films.
28 Years Later rages into theaters on June 20.
via Collider