28 days later; Review

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gV6CXPVA_t4&feature=related
The use of actual footage of riots, foreshadows anarchy and how the narrative will have similar features to a anarchic environment. Unlike my opening sequence 28 days later tells the audience what's happened to cause the decline in human life and caused the infection to spread, whereas mine doesn't reveal to the viewer why or how the character John has woke up on the beach and there's no other signs of life, so it leaves him to investigate. Jim (the main character in 28 days later) wakes from a coma to a "empty" London scene unknowing that there's infected people in the city, he walks around the city looking for people, shouting "hello" in confusion, which John also repeats.

 My character, John, wakes up without any indication of wheter he fell asleep there or just woke up there, so it raises many questions to the audience so they'll want to watch the narrative as it develops and see if any of their questions get answered. In 28 days later it shows Jim walking around London, in my film opening John is walking around the beach, for the type of film I am making it's not needed to be on such a grand scale like 28 days later as it's about John's personal struggle, not about the devestation of the country, also with it being on a beach it adds to the possibility of it being almost anywhere, so it will effect a wider audience but later in the narrative I would've made it distinctly british, with a full british cast and a british town would be a main setting for the film. Jim finds Human bodies at the end of the opening scene, John doesn't find anyone during the opening so it leaves more questions for the viewer and it also doesn't start with an equlibirem so it doesn't follow a typical narrative structure.