The documentary focused solely on the topic of phones, which may have benefited from including multiple related themes. Camerawork in interviews used a medium long shot rather than a tighter medium shot for better focus on interviewees. Message elements were missing important context about interviewees. Editing cuts were too early and abrupt, detracting from smooth storytelling. Archive footage was low quality and potentially copyrighted, risking legal issues. As a single-topic documentary leaving questions unanswered, it did not effectively make or resolve its point for the audience.

1. Preliminary Evaluation

2. Themes
• Throughout the whole documentary there
was only one theme, phones. Perhaps it would
have been better to include multiple themes
related to phones to back up points being
made by the interviewees

3. Camerawork
• In the very first interview the camerawork was
a medium long shot of the interviewee. It
would have been better for it to be a medium
shot as this would make the interviewee take
up more space on the camera therefore
making them easier to focus on. The medium
long shot camera angle was used throughout
the documentary for all interviews

4. MES
• The mes throughout the documentary was off.
For example, in the first interview there was
nothing to say what the interviewee did for a
living. This makes his statement questionable
as he does not look like he knows what he is
talking about.s

5. Editing
• The editing throughout the documentary
consisted of cuts. Most of the time these cuts
where too early which cut off what the
interviewee was saying. This is bad as it makes
the viewer less engaged due to the fact that
the editing is not smooth

6. Archive footage
• The archive footage used in the documentary
was blurry. This takes away from the quality of
the overall documentary which degrades the
audience experence. Also the images used are
not copyright free which causes issues for the
documentary meaning that the owner of the
images can take the documentary off the
internet

7. Type of documentary
• The type of this documentary was single
strand and open. This means that there was
only one topic and there are questions left
unanswered which is bad as the audience
should know the point which was being made
after the documentary.