'28 Days Later' Could Be Back To Infect Theaters One More Time

Danny Boyle's zombie two-fer could still be a trilogy.

Much like the fictionalized virus that turns ordinary citizens into hordes of rage-infected, blood-vomiting zombies, the "28 Days Later" franchise has lain dormant for a long, long time. But, and this is the important part, it's not necessarily dead!

In what is very welcome news for fans of Danny Boyle's 2002 film, IGN reports that a third work in the series -- which included "28 Days Later" and its 2007 sequel, "28 Weeks Later" -- is the subject of "serious conversations" by the three men most likely to make it happen. Screenwriter Alex Garland revealed in an interview that he, Boyle, and producer Andrew MacDonald are definitely discussing a third movie.

"We've just started talking about it seriously," Garland said. "We've got an idea. Danny [Boyle] and [producer] Andrew [Macdonald] and I have been having quite serious conversations about it so it is a possibility. It's complicated. There's a whole bunch of reasons why it's complicated, which are boring so I won't go into, but there's a possibility."

Whatever said "complicated" reasons are, they almost certainly aren't a lack of interest on the part of the series' fanbase, which has been hopefully requesting a new installment going on eight years now. And while we've been let down before (Danny Boyle has always claimed to have an "idea" for a followup, while never going so far as to promise that said idea would ever see the light of day), this report is unique in that it's coming from Garland, who had previously written off the idea of a sequel as impossible due to personal conflicts between the filmmakers.

As for the title of the threequel-to-be, the obvious choice would be "28 Months Later" (although if they keep dithering around like this, it's gonna be more like "28 Years Later," amirite?). What's interesting is that not only did Garland agree, but he mentioned that structuring the series like this would still leave "one more place to go," presumably meaning that "28 Years Later" is not out of the question, either.