28 Years Later is the upcoming sequel to Danny Boyle’s timeless zombie horror, 28 Days Later. Releasing on June 20, the new movie takes place several decades after the original film, following a group of quarantined survivors as they discover unsettling truths about the infected world around them. 28 Years Later has already revealed some major changes from its predecessor, bringing a whole new dimension to the movie that will hopefully elevate it even higher than the first.

Thankfully, this sequel marks the beginning of a highly anticipated trilogy that’s set to release over the next few years. Speaking at a special NYC screening of the first 28 minutes of 28 Years Later, hosted by ScreenRant’s Liam Crowley and supported by Sony Pictures and Regal Cinemas, Boyle offered some exclusive insight into how this sequel will connect with the rest of the upcoming trilogy. While there are still plenty of exciting mysteries to keep audiences invested, his comments have offered a new perspective on what these movies are going to look like.

Danny Boyle Sheds Light On The New 28 Years Later Trilogy’s Structure

The Movies Aren’t Necessarily Direct Continuations

Perhaps the most interesting takeaway from Boyle’s recent comments is that the 28 Years Later trilogy won’t necessarily be three directly connected stories. Instead, the director has teased something much looser and more experimental for his upcoming sequels. The first sequel, Nia DaCosta’s The Bone Collector, is already scheduled to premiere in 2026, while the third has yet to be set. Despite that, though, the full story appears to have already been mapped out. As he explained:

When you make films, it doesn’t matter whether they’re successful or not, they all fade gradually, as they should. They take their place in people’s memories or not; people forget them or just remember them with affection or whatever. But some of them occasionally stick, and the first one just seemed to resonate with people. People used to put on screenings, and they’d ask me to go to Q&As a bit. I’d turn up to the Q&A, and people would be really intense watching the film.

Alex [Garland] and I began talking about, “Should we do something additional to it? Should we add something to it?” We did [have] our original idea, which was sort of what you’d expect, really. It was a “weaponize the virus” type sequel, which is where an agency or a government or a military gets the virus and weaponizes it; that kind of story. Neither of us went for it, really. but then he started talking about this much bigger story.

It’s spread over three films, ultimately, and each film would stand independently. But there’d be a bigger tale to tell, and it would be based in a family, and that these two [points to Aaron and Jodie] would be the origin of the family. So, it’s independent from the first film, but it’s still the same apocalypse 28 years later as it was for Cillian Murphy in the first film and Naomie Harris. But this is 28 years later, and we don’t know what’s happened to them [Jim and Selena]. I’m not allowed to tell you, but these two are more than worthy stand-ins.

What’s interesting about this idea is that while 28 Years Later’s characters will surely be important, it seems like Boyle is framing the post-apocalyptic world itself as the main focus of the trilogy. The concept of each film standing “independently” of the others evokes some kind of anthology storytelling, which brings a huge amount of potential to this franchise. It’s rare that a series wants to expand in this way, with so many other properties instead clinging to the same characters and stories over and over again.

Although 28 Years Later will be a separate story that clearly stands alone from the rest, Boyle clarified that it’s still going to be connected to the original film. His mention of Murphy and Harris backs that up, making it likely that there will be some references to what came before, but also that the new movie will largely stand on its own. Though it’s yet to be seen how well Boyle and Alex Garland manage to accomplish this large-scale storytelling, the level of ambition on display is already a great sign.

Boyle & Garland’s Plan Makes This Trilogy Even More Intriguing

The Second Movie Has Already Been SH๏τ

While a regular trilogy would have been exciting in its own right, there’s something doubly intriguing about Boyle and Garland’s approach to 28 Years Later. Not only does it subvert the typical “legacyquel” formula that has become exhausted in recent years, it also allows each movie to stand on its own merits, meaning audiences don’t necessarily need to watch them all to understand what’s going on. Boyle’s comments seem to explain why it took such a long time for 28 Years Later to get made – it’s a hugely ambitious undertaking, and it ultimately comes from neither filmmaker wanting to take the easy way out.

“We did have our original idea,” Boyle admitted at the NYC screening, “which was sort of what you’d expect, really,” going on to reference the concept of the virus being weaponized. However, both Garland and Boyle quickly realized that this wasn’t interesting enough to sustain a whole new trilogy, and opted for “this much bigger story” instead. This is so much more exciting, proving that 28 Years Later comes from a genuine pᴀssion for this story rather than a halfhearted cash grab.