It’s nothing we’ve not heard before (most recently during Comic-Con); it’s just been a while since it was mentioned. Danny Boyle got to chatting with the hip cats over at MTV’s Movie Blog and revealed that yes, he does have an idea for another film set in his 28 Days Later universe. While most will likely roll their eyes, Boyle is being realistic about it...
“I have an idea for it, [but] I’ve got to present it and see what people think really because it might be silly really.” We certainly don’t want silly, especially after so many people complained that silliness (i.e., the father always finding his kids) is what ruined 28 Weeks Later.
Nothing more was revealed as to what the film may be about or where it’d be set, but given the conclusion of 28 Weeks, we could be looking at a much larger sequel if it does happen. Keep it here for updates!
Got news? Click hereto submit it!
Wonder how much wider the plague will spread in the Dread Central forums!
Submitted by Johnny Butane on Thu, 09/11/2008 - 3:18am.
Yeah cause it's not like a viral infection caused by rage needed suspension of disbelief, right?
Submitted by Fireflyfan on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 11:30am.
Shut the fuck up, Donny. :-P
Submitted by Terminal on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 12:24pm.
Father finding family in "28 Weeks Later" = Shark finding Ellen Brody in "Jaws: The Revenge"... Very, very silly!
Submitted by PelusaMG on Fri, 09/12/2008 - 10:06am.
YES. It undermined the entire rage virus concept. He survived all throughout the movie? Insult my intelligence more.
Submitted by Terminal on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 12:27pm.
Weeks was candy coated crap that held our hands through everything. "Days" may be derivative but it's smarter.
Submitted by Terminal on Thu, 09/11/2008 - 5:32pm.
I think you hit the nail on the head pretty well.
Submitted by RingoJ on Thu, 09/11/2008 - 9:09pm.
You're kidding, right?
Submitted by G.D. on Thu, 09/11/2008 - 6:03pm.
No, but I didn't watch "Weeks" through bouts of hash, so I may be missing a key ingredient to its enjoyment.
Submitted by Terminal on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 12:24pm.
No, he's not kidding. And he's completely right.
WEEKS is awful.
Submitted by Messiahman on Fri, 09/12/2008 - 12:14am.
Wow, now you're kidding too? Seems like an awful long way to go for a really obvious joke...
Submitted by G.D. on Fri, 09/12/2008 - 6:43am.
Days still holds up, but it becomes WAY too derivative of Day of the Dead in the final act. I prefer Weeks.
Submitted by Sirand on Thu, 09/11/2008 - 3:43pm.
Yeah, the soldier stuff in Days really didn't do it for me. Weeks is a much better overall experience I'd say -- although I do still cry every time Frank gets taken out in Days.
Submitted by The Woman In Black on Thu, 09/11/2008 - 3:46pm.
Because it's faster and louder and added nothing to the mythos. It didn't even follow continuity properly, nor did it settle down long enough to tell a story. Days may be derivative in the last thirty minutes, but those thirty minutes are disturbing, horrifying and features incredible direction, while the direction in "Weeks" varied from eye catching to flat. People rely on that argument about "Day of the Dead" derivations, but "Days" took that derivation and made it their own, period. "Weeks" copied the eye gouging scene from "Days" horribly.
Submitted by Terminal on Sat, 09/13/2008 - 12:22pm.
For action, Weeks is #1. For a better movie as a whole, Days has an equal balance of everything.
Submitted by Kryten Syxx on Thu, 09/11/2008 - 3:19pm.
I liked Weeks on par with Days, but I recently watched Weeks again and happened to miss the goofy parts with the goofy father "stalking" bits, and I liked it more than Days.
Submitted by G.D. on Thu, 09/11/2008 - 2:57pm.
The father bit did require a bit of suspension of disbelief, but it didn't ruin 28 Weeks for me.
Submitted by Mephistopheles on Thu, 09/11/2008 - 2:10pm.