3. From the audience feedback that we decided to set up as a
separate document to our film, we found that people
enjoyed our film for it’s mysterious setting and that we
managed to break their expectations on what they
thought was going to happen to the main character.
We learnt that despite thinking that we would not ever
grab the attention of a large audience, we managed to do
so almost instantly to have many people latch on to what
the film really is. The dark drama that it is today, now
showing a powerful message on not to steal anything, as
it would only give bad morals.
4. People seemed to enjoy the film and by creating a survey
we managed to get plenty of people commenting on it.
Most ranged from being very good, to average ratings.
However, when discussing what else could be shown from
a system such as this the idea that I could track a certain
amount of responses but at the same time limiting them to
only 10 questions to gain the audience’s attention without
boring them.
6. The constructive criticism that we received was most
important, this varied from judging the audio, to
judging how the story flowed. It is important to
discuss and discover where exactly people feel our
film is weak. This will allow us to know what we need
to improve in the future of our film.
Not only that but with the responses
that we collected it was shown that
we got international responses from
Europe as well as from outside of
it, therefore already our film is
proving to be very good, and will be
seen by a large amount of people.
7. The criticism that we
received from people
contained information that
commented on how we
made the film. People had
put comments like “It had
a nice atmosphere, the
sound was really well
done. The storyline could
have had some work so it
would be more
understandable”
This is the sort of criticism
that is worth listening
to, especially if we were
going to make another film.
However, as well as
receiving well-constructed
responses, we also got
people who spend a small
amount of time on the
survey, and have not given
us any advice on how to
improve.
9. We learned greatly from our audience feedback, not only by
reading in depth what they had said using scales of 1-5 to allow
them to decide what they want to rate our film.
Normally people chose the higher parts such as five or four, but
it was interesting to know why people chose lower, especially
as the same people felt like they knew what was coming from
the film.
Learning is a key part of making a film as it is only half the battle of finding
out what is to be told in something such as this. When people start to
answer our questions they do not seem to answer in full honesty but I
have learned to accept this and that this critical feedback will ensure that
anything that I wish to do in future will work perfectly.
10. People answered honestly at times
but sometimes we had others that
would comment rudely towards the
survey or spend little time on it hardly
reading the questions that were put
down for them to answer.
We had a lot of participants who did not
understand the film for example in the
question “How well was the main character
developed in underpass?” people answered
with “not really developed” this may have
been truthful to the film as we did not really
introduce the character and instead left
them mysterious.
However with questions like circular
narrative it may have been the case that
they didn’t know what the word
meant, so they just answered randomly.
11. I have learnt that I would need to make a survey that
would allow the participants to understand and give
more honest results as well as spending more time
answering the survey rather than the measly 30
seconds that they had spent answering.
By Elliot Ball
