c

1. Evaluation
Jesse Lapworth

2. Production Process Evaluation

3. Research
I think my research was very useful. Especially as I was making a film that spoofed
some of the conventions used by the real crime genre, that I looked at. So my
research of existing products was essential and had an absolutely huge impact on
my final project. Informing the way I filmed it and the story beats I used. Hopefully
helping me to understand why they are successful and helping me to hold a
mirror to all of the tropes used and why the shows may not be as real as they first
appear.
However I felt my audience research did not go as well, I did not get as many
responses as I had thought I might and I feel as though my questions did not really
serve their purpose that well. The research did tell me that my movie had the
basis of a good idea but it didn’t really help me execute this. I think I maybe
should have asked more about what they wanted my film to do rather than what
may get them initially interested. This may have involved asking about some of my
initial ideas and gauging the response to them. Allowing me to better tailor my
product.
But getting to learn the genre was the most important part of helping me plan for
my project.

4. Planning
The planning I did for this project involved trying to collect my ideas together
to make a cohesive project. Usually when I plan I like to get down all the ideas
I have for my project and then make sure I can sort through them in order to
get the best ones to help my project. I feel as though I have slowly been
improving at this skill. I defiantly had a lot of ideas for my project this time,
but I felt as though I managed to sort through them in order to group
together the ones that made for the best film I could make. Creating a
timeline for my story and the characters involved definitely helped this as it
helped me place what happened when and allowed me to have a clear vision
of the films universe.
Another crucial element was the fact that I composed a list of shots that I felt
as though I needed. These were not all used in the final piece but they
allowed me to have enough work to edit with and not to waste time on too
many reshoots.
I think that even though I have

5. Time Management

6. Technical/Aesthetic Qualities
The image here is a sit down interview. A very big aspect of a doc/mockumentary. I tried to
centralise the character in the middle of the frame, creating a nice symmetrical shot, whilst
trying to make sure these shots are not so long the audience loses visual interest.
Shots like these have been
used in nearly all of the
true crime shows I have
seen. And like those shows
I tried to put the character
in an environment/setting
they may find themselves
in everyday.
I considered having the
character doing
something during the shot
but I think this may have
been too distracting to the
audience. I believe the
way I chose to film it
allowed the audience to
focus on the content of
the speech.
I believe the symmetrical nature of this shot makes it look aesthetically
pleasing however a more interesting or vibrant background may have
improved this and the other sit down interviews.

7. Technical/Aesthetic Qualities
In this shot I decided to hide the characters identity. I thought this not only added some
variety to the sit down interview shots but also allowed a visual aspect of the film to show
off a characters personality. Helping to show that this charter does not want to appear in
this documentary and it also helps to show off that some if not all the characters are really not
sure about this documentary, as well as adding an extra layer of mystery.
In order to achieve this effect I used the effects in adobe premiere
to create the blur and mask the voice. I feel as though these work
well on a technical level.

8. Technical/Aesthetic Qualities
This is a tracking shot that I did for my opening title sequence. I did this by
filming with my camera whilst riding a bike.
I think this creates a really nice establishing shot for my
film and is really nicely framed with shot almost cut in
half with the sky and the field of wheat. It also matches
similar shots used for Making of A Murderer’s opening.
It sets up the
rural setting of
the piece. No
bustling city
life, just a quiet
village.
As I did it on a bike
however it is a
little shaky and is
not as level at all
points in time as I
would like.

9. Technical/Aesthetic Qualities
For a lot of my film I used still images. This is used by a lot media in this
genre. It is because this is how evidence is usually preserved and often
is the only way to look back at events before the documentary was in
production.
It can begin to
look stale after
time. I feel as
though maybe I
could have
zoomed in on
images at certain
times to help keep
the viewer
engaged.
Here I used a
snapchat photo in
order to fit in with
the story and
world. It also helps
change up the
visuals a little.
Although may
quickly make the
film dated. But at
the same time is
relatable to my
audience.

10. Audience Appeal
I tried to appeal to my target by undercutting the genre conventions
found in true crime pieces. This is very popular amongst people of the
demographic I am aiming at, young adult, with shows like American
Vandal, Rick and Morty and It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia. All of these
products gain some comedy from this method.
I also attempted to keep it fast paced so that the audience does not lose
interest, which I think is a concern, especially with so many now watching
on phones.
However I feel as though I often just went for ideas that I felt were good
and maybe not what the audience may like. So I am not sure as to how
they will respond to this.
I also feel as though that the fact that I worked with such a small sample
size for my questionnaire that my results cant really help draw any
conclusions about my target audience, and one odd answer will have
thrown my results completely off kilter.

11. Peer
Feedback

12. Feedback 1
• What did you like about the product?
Well I like the mystery in it. It made me want me to watch more and
find out who did it. I also like some of the lines, I thought they were
funny.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
I thought maybe it could go a little more into what actually happened on the day,
sort of at what time. Just so I knew what everything meant.

13. Feedback 2
• What did you like about the product?
– I thought that it was well shot, I liked the intro very
much. I enjoyed the ambiguity over the case and who
did it, very good.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
– I however did not find it that funny. It maybe needed
some more jokes. Visual humour maybe.

14. Peer Feedback Summary
• What do you agree with from your peer
feedback?
– That possibly things could have been explained a
little better, the context of everything. But I do like
the sense of who dun it, I think this works well
and keeps you engaged with the piece.
• What do you disagree with from your peer
feedback?
– I like that it isn’t a comedy.