The filmmakers behind 28 Years Later have explained its connection to the previous installment’s ending. The original 2002 movie 28 Days Later introduced a rage virus that transformed the majority of the UK’s population into zombie-like disease-spreaders. While the virus had largely burned out by the end of the movie, repopulation efforts in 2007’s 28 Weeks Later saw it spread once more, ending with a sequence of Infected running through Paris. In the upcoming 28 Years Later, while the rage virus has affected the outside world somewhat, it is once more primarily isolated to the UK, which has been quarantined.
In the newest print edition of Empire magazine, they ran an interview about 28 Years Later with Garland, Boyle, and producer Andrew Macdonald. While Garland explained that the new movie is “not in conflict” with 28 Weeks Later, the idea of canon is “not a very Danny Boyle word.” Macdonald says that “Britain has paused,” while Garland explains that the storyline is inspired by Brexit and the feeling of the rest of the world turning its back on the UK. Read their quotes on the movie’s setting, and its connection to 28 Weeks Later, below:
Alex Garland: Covid was not in my mind because it was too recent and too present, but Brexit was. [Especially how the rest of the world began to view the UK.] A sense of the globe just sort of shifting its position. Turning their backs, not really looking in this direction. Not really giving a sнιт [about the UK].
Andrew Macdonald: Nothing is allowed into Britain and nothing is allowed out. Britain has paused.
Alex Garland: [28 Years Later is] not in conflict [with 28 Weeks Later, but] “canon” [is] not a very Danny Boyle word.
Danny Boyle: It’s not mapped out like a scientific formula.
What This Means For 28 Years Later
28 Weeks Later’s Ending Had Less Impact Than It Seems
From what Garland says, it seems that the ending of 28 Weeks Later has not been retconned by the upcoming 2025 horror movie. However, its apocalyptic implications have been greatly reduced in the filmmakers’ attempt to refocus the franchise on the UK. It now seems likely that, in the universe of the 28 Days Later movies, the Infected running through Paris were part of an isolated incident or series of incidents that were quickly eradicated. While the rest of the world probably remains wary, it is seemingly going on as normal – or relatively close to it – around the ravaged UK.
The rage virus made its way across the English Channel when uninfected carrier Andy (Mackintosh Muggleton) was brought over to France in a helicopter along with his older sister Tammy (Imogen Poots).
However, Garland’s comment about Boyle’s approach to canon may further dash hopes that Cillian Murphy’s 28 Days Later character Jim will return in the new movie. While it was previously reported that Murphy – who is an executive producer on the project – would be returning, Macdonald confirmed to Empire that this would not be the case, though the door is still open for Jim’s return in the two movies that will fill out the upcoming 28 Years Later trilogy.
Our Take On The 28 Years Later Setting
It Could Still Tell A Global Story
Ultimately, 28 Years Later being limited to the UK could be the result of budget constraints preventing the movie from being a truly global horror adventure. However, the fact that the filmmakers have clearly considered the global context of the movie could mean that the trilogy will at least hint at what’s going on in the outside world. A stranded helicopter, plane, or boat could also introduce characters with more information about how other countries have handled the rage virus.
Source: Empire
