Danny Boyle is rumoured to be interested in taking on a second sequel to his apocalyptic 28 Days Later.
Currently being pedalled about under the unofficial title 28 Months Later, Dread Central got word from the director himself on the threequel. Asked if he’d produce, Boyle responded: “Actually, I want to direct it.”
The project has been quietly moving around behind the scenes since 2007, with Russia a favoured setting. Though he didn't return for first sequel 28 Weeks Later, Boyle has mentioned in the past that he’d be interested in directing a third flick. Back in 2007, he had this to say:
“It’s to do with Russia actually. It’s to do with that part of the world. Not France. The second film hints that it gets to France eventually, and wipes out the French. But this third idea is actually more to do with Russia, but that’s actually all I can say.”
Three years on, could he be seriously considering it? Boyle’s next project will actually be a theatre production of Frankenstein, while he has a three year contract with Fox Searchlight, of which the upcoming 127 Hours is a part. But after that, he’s more than free enough for another 28 movie.
Source: Dread Central
Do you want a Boyle-directed threequel? Speak below…
In cinemas this week…
Comments
evileyeperry
Oct 12th 2010, 11:19
I would be really interested to see what Danny Boyle could bring to another sequel. The first film was so intense and a great horror film. 28 weeks later in my opinion, was pretty amateurish. I really didn't rate it compared to the original, however, with such a well founded apolcalyptic vision of the future it would be a shame not to revisit the haunting world that's been created.
Alert a moderator
evileyeperry
Oct 12th 2010, 11:22
The first was great but the second was severely lacking. Would love to see another Danny Boyle directed 28...
Alert a moderator
RaveyDaveyGravy
Oct 12th 2010, 12:41
I thought no.2 was really good, not on par with 1 admittedly but good solid stuff. I'd love to see Boyle return for a series closer
Alert a moderator
evileyeperry
Oct 12th 2010, 13:11
It was good until they decided to create a main character out of one of the infected. At that point it decended into ridicule for me.
Alert a moderator
matty2392
Oct 12th 2010, 23:51
great news as i'm watching 28 days later
Alert a moderator
koolerking
Oct 15th 2010, 5:48
I'd love him to do the 3rd. The only good thing about the 2nd movie was the initial scene. That shot of the hordes running after Robert Carlyle was brilliant. Unfortunately after that it became very empty, in a really sense. You never got the sense of the characters being in trouble as they were on an island that had already its infected die and was clean, so there was never a streaming number of infected around every corner that you had in the first one. In fact it arrived at this point because of the script and it should've been obvious from there it wouldn't work. But yes DB directing would be my choice for 3!
Alert a moderator
koolerking
Oct 15th 2010, 5:48
I'd love him to do the 3rd. The only good thing about the 2nd movie was the initial scene. That shot of the hordes running after Robert Carlyle was brilliant. Unfortunately after that it became very empty, in a really sense. You never got the sense of the characters being in trouble as they were on an island that had already its infected die and was clean, so there was never a streaming number of infected around every corner that you had in the first one. In fact it arrived at this point because of the script and it should've been obvious from there it wouldn't work. But yes DB directing would be my choice for 3!
Alert a moderator