THE DEAD TIMES
DEAD ARE COMING...
Guessing the story of 28 Years Later
It's finally happening - after more than 2 decades, writer Alex Garland and director Danny Boyle are returning to terrifying world they forged with the landmark 2002 film 28 Days Later. In 28 Days Later, the British mainland has become overrun with a deadly virus known as "Rage", unwittingly released into the wild by 'do no harm' animal rights activists. The virus didn't kill you, oh no, that would be too kind. Instead, any contact with infected blood would turn the victim, in mere seconds, into a crazed, sprinting "living Zombie" - mercilessly hunting down non-infected in order to do what any virus-carrying host is forced to do, further the spread of the infection. The movie begins after a botched evacuation; most people were already infected when the planes arrived and, those that weren't were hunted down and infected by the Rage-driven monstrosities that now roamed the land. Britain, barring a few scattered survivors, was dead.
Then came a second movie in the franchise, equally as well received as the first. In 28 Weeks Later, the last of the infected had died of starvation; the Rage virus keeps those carrying the disease alive to spread the infection but, with their virus-fuelled minds, these 'hosts' have no desire to stop and feed - eventually they simply 'burn-out', running themselves to death. Work begins re-colonizing mainland Britain, now deemed "safe" by the United Nations, or at least safe enough to allow selected citizens back into the areas of the capitol protected by armed guards. However, as could be expected the virus comes back (I won't spoil how for anyone who has not seen this "must-watch" film) and the military quickly lose control. Britain is, once again, brought to its knees.
In January of 2024, it was announced that the, long-awaited, third movie in the franchise was being made. It is to be called 28 Years Later and, following the cast announcements (including some incredibly talented actors), it was revealed that the movie would release in June 2025. It is also said to kick off a new trilogy of movies in the same universe, all written by Garland but, sadly, only the first directed by the amazing Danny Boyle.
So, with the production schedule seemingly in full-swing and the hype-train ready for departure, let's climb aboard and see if we can guess what the much-anticipated third instalment will bring.
Not the official poster for the film but, could reclamation of a ruined land be the story? It's possible.
1. A retcon of 28 Weeks Later
28 Weeks Later is definitely a sequel to 28 Days Later - it takes place in the same universe and follows the story, almost directly - but there is no denying the fact that it was not written nor directed by the creative team behind the original film - in fact, whether they had any involvement in the sequel at all is unclear. None of the original actors return either. The film also takes a very different approach to the first film; the first, dealing primarily in the corruption of humanity and the idea that the systems put in place to help you (the soldiers) may actually be worse than the things you are running from. The infection and Infected were only ever a backdrop to the main story. This is why I, going against many others (although, crucially, not the director), have never viewed 28 Days Later as a Zombie movie. The sequel, however, changes all that; the focus is now directly on the Infected and the, now returned, infection. There is no twist to the story, no fool-moment that makes you think characters are safe when they aren't - the Infected show up again, chaos ensues as the military uses lethal force to try and maintain control, civilians panic, running without direction, desperate to escape and those Infected spread the virus, creating more Infected exponentially. I'm not saying it's a bad movie, far from it, I'm just not convinced it's really where the original series creators saw the franchise going. It is perfectly possible then that Danny Boyle and Alex Garland will go back to the ending of 28 Days Later and continue from there with 28 Years Later, forgetting 28 Weeks Later ever happened. Personally, I don't think they will do this given the popularity of 28 Weeks Later (many even preferring it over the original) but it is a disturbing trend in Hollywood to 'overwrite' sequels at the moment. Rumours of original lead actor, Cillian Murphy, returning for a part in the third movie could substantiate this possibility. A quote from Alex Garland in 2023 about why, at the time, no third movie had been announced also hints that this may be the future direction of the franchise: "there were things about 28 Weeks that bugged me. I just thought, 'Fuck that. I'd rather try to write a different story in a different world.'".
2. A third outbreak
28 Weeks Later, and even the end of 28 Days Later, established that, after just a few weeks without eating (the virus, once it has taken over someone's mind, won’t let them eat), the Infected starve to death. It therefore makes complete sense that the Infected, after their return in 28 Weeks Later, would have, once again, all died from starvation by the onset of 28 Years Later, assuming the movie does take place 28 years after the initial outbreak anyway. A third outbreak of the Rage virus also makes sense for another reason; viruses constantly mutate as they mix with other viruses and more advanced immune systems - viruses are driven to infect as many as they can and, as they constantly adapt to overcome any obstacle in their way it is extremely difficult to get rid of them, once and for all. Just look at The Black Death for example, people still contract and die from that, it is rare sure, but the threat is still there. Ebola and Covid are other examples of viruses that repeatedly make headlines, cropping up every few years after disappearing from the public eye. However, I very much doubt that 28 Years Later will take this approach for one very simple reason; it is basically just 28 Weeks Later all over again. That's not saying that it would not be a good movie - I just think, with the talent of Alex Garland and Danny Boyle, they will definitely be aiming for something more original than the reintroduction of the exact same Rage virus, yet again.
3. An entirely new virus or evolution of the Rage virus
The original Rage virus could and, given the 28 year time gap, will almost certainly have mutated. This really opens up the playing field into the horrors the mutated virus is possible of creating. It could have jumped species giving Rage infected dogs, rats and other animals. Imagine exotic animals like bears or a troop of chimps from a zoo or, in line with 28 Days Later, an animal testing facility becoming infected with the new Rage and then escaping, causing chaos to those not yet infected by getting into places humans can't. Think of the sheer devastation that could be caused by just a single Infected elephant... Then there is the possibility of different types of Infected. Having multiple types of Zombies is fairly common in Zombie video games but movies have been lagging behind in this front, Zombieland 2 being one of the few examples. Heck, it could even be a different virus altogether - there's nothing to say Boyle and Garland need to bring back Rage - another virus could spring up in its place, with bizarrely different consequences.
4. Full-on Zombie apocalypse survival
So, after 28 years of the Rage virus (assuming a gradual spread of the virus - the Infected pushing the virus into new areas, the survivors manage to hold them back for a time, only to crumble and the Infected to push the virus forward yet again), the world will be in a bad way... a really, really bad way. In 28 Days Later we learn that the Infected rose and took down the entirety of mainland Britain in under 28 days - a pretty amazing feat. Imagining the same thing happens after the resurgence in 28 Weeks Later, things are not looking good for Britain, even considering the sparser population following its brief period of recolonisation. In addition to that though, the Infected - previously being isolated to the British island, have now managed to break quarantine, moving into northern France and Paris. One can only guess what happens next but, taking into account the lethal nature of the Infected and the amazing speed in which they took down Britain, the majority of eastern continents - Africa, Asia and the rest of Europe - are going to fall too. It is entirely possible that Boyle's movie takes place in this war-ravaged world where, outside of North and South America, very few people are left alive. Perhaps there is even no one left alive at all, Rage running unimpeded through the land, leaving a truly unknown environment for those to attempt exploration and re-settlement (there would be no Rage virus anymore as there is no one left to infect, unless it mutated of course, possibly surviving in plants or by being able to keep "hosts" alive indefinitely, endlessly roaming the empty wastelands, unable to die, in constant, unending pain). Nature would be reclaiming the land, buildings crumble and decay, food is extremely scarce and, very likely, toxic - it is an astonishingly bleak movie and I, honestly, cannot see how the world could return to anything like normality after such a devastating blow.
The trequel film could be set in a Hellish, devastated world that no one is ready for, devoid of life, kindness and hope.
5. A The Last of Us style journey
The first movie in the franchise, 28 Days Later, was not a Zombie movie in my opinion - it had Zombies, living Zombies, "Infected", people who contracted a disease and exhibited Zombie-like behaviour, yes, but they were far from the main focus. They set the scene, dressed the world, but the main antagonists were, without doubt, the corrupt soldiers. Remember how the recent TV adaption of hit PS5 Zombie game franchise The Last of Us made a splash in the world of media by having a supremely talented development team produce, what resulted in, a fairly spectacular show, soon to get a sequel series? Well, considering the setting is virtually identical (the The Last of Us game taking place 20 years after a Zombie virus overran the world) and the franchise's heavy focus on story and human drama rather than slavering ghouls, Boyle may well take inspiration from this for 28 Years Later. Taking the example of the British Island having fallen to the Infected and almost all life there having died (or becoming infected by the Rage virus), those left alive are going to be grouped together in protected, shanty towns - just like in The Last of Us. It is possible that someone who carries a cure for those infected with Rage in their blood is found in either Northern France or Southern Britain and must, accompanied by a band of rough talking soldier types, journey across an infected Britain towards a less well-populated, and therefore safer, area in the North of Scotland - in a similar manner to Joel and Ellie's journey across America in The Last of Us. I think this would be where the similarities with the game end, however. That town in Scotland, it knows about the supposed cure, it has seen the so-called 'immunity' we saw in 28 Weeks Later, it does not want a cure, the Infection is a weapon, other countries have seen what happens when even one Infected is released in a populated area, how quickly Britain fell, the Americans tried to liberate the island once before and the infection came back, losing them resources in the process, even making matters worse by spreading the infection into Northern Europe, there is no point in trying again, simply repeating the same steps with this new "cure" and expecting different results is insanity. In the right hands, or even in the wrong hands, the Rage virus is far more valuable alive than dead. Drop even a single Infected behind enemy lines in a warzone and, boom, you've won the war - all that's left is to wait for the virus to 'burn-out', consuming all available hosts. Or, take it the other way, give the new "cure" to an allied country and their enemies will live in fear of those who can survive an attack from Infected soldiers, even walk alongside them in battle. No, if whoever is left up in Scotland has communication with the outside world (which is likely), they won't see the Rage virus as a poison to be eradicated at all costs, they'll see it as their meal-ticket, the way Britain can become the super-power it dreamt of being: "whoever controls the infection, controls the world".
Conclusion
While Danny Boyle and Alex Garland appear to have an open slate for what direction they will take for 28 Years Later, there are actually only a handful of ways forward for a convincing sequel. Basically, there are only two scenarios; either the Rage virus and Infected have survived since the events of 28 Weeks Later, seeing civilization mostly crumbled after 28 years of relentless onslaught, or the Rage virus has gone into hiding again, coming back in mutated form (potentially, for the first time if the events of 28 Weeks Later are retconned). In either case, and it could be moulded to fit both scenarios, I think the idea posed by "A The Last of Us style journey" is the most likely way ahead; it provides tension with viewers knowing the events of the original movie, thinking the soldier types providing cover on the epic journey Northward will eventually be corrupt though, actually, never are. It's the Scottish outpost and their leaders who are corrupt - mirroring the events of the first film by again showing that those who are meant to help us, can actually be worse than the main threat. It also opens plenty of avenues for continuation into a trilogy.
Whatever way the third movie goes, the franchise that rekindled the failing Zombie-genre is back, and that is very, very good news indeed.
DESCRIPTION:
It is finally happening - the third instalment of the 28 Days Later franchise is officially on the way. What will happen? Where is it set? Will we finally see what happened after the tantalising teaser at the end of 28 Weeks Later, were the Infected escaped the British mainland and entered, the previously virus-free, Paris? In this article I'll examine all possible directions the trequel movie could go and come to a conclusion on what I think we'll likely see.
CATEGORY:
Random
WRITTEN BY:
DATE UPLOADED:
07/07/2024