The document summarizes feedback from surveys given to audiences of a short film about dementia. It discusses how the surveys asked about: the audiences' familiarity with film genres and codes; whether characters and settings conformed to stereotypes; how dementia and its effects were portrayed; and whether the film improved from the first to second draft. The surveys provided insights that could help strengthen future drafts, such as cutting unnecessary scenes or revising overly scripted dialogue.

1. Audience Feedback Survey
Another way I gained feedback was through Google Forms. I made a survey and shared it on social media once all my final
products were finished. I didn’t do a survey until after I had completed all my products so that I could put them all in one
survey and ask the audience whether they thought my product has improved from the first draft to what it is now as the final
draft.

2. I got responses from people of a variety of different age groups to see if my film appealed
to more than one target audience, because dementia is a universal condition and can effect
anyone so a target audience for my film is people who know people with dementia.
I asked how often people watched
short films to see if they would have
any pre-existing knowledge of the
codes and conventions of short films.
I had a mixed response but the
majority of people (39.1%) said they
never watch short films, meaning
they probably wont have much of an
idea of what to expect from this form
of media. They also might not know
about things like cinematography and
editing and what is conventional of
these.
Out of the people who answered my survey who do
watch short films, the majority of people watch them
on YouTube. This is because people who make short
films are often independent production companies or
filmmakers and therefore put them on free video
sharing sites like YouTube because it doesn’t cost
them any money, as opposed to making physical
DVD copies of the film.
I also asked how people heard about the film as this may effect people’s responses.
For example if someone heard about the film because someone they know was in it,
then they may be biased towards the film and this may not reflect their true
opinions of the narrative and technical qualities of the film (e.g. cinematography,
editing, mise-en-scene and sound).

3. I thought it was important to ask the audience before they
watched the film what their opinions of the drama and social
realism genre was, as this could effect their responses. For
example, if someone likes drama they are more likely to
appreciate my short film and how people who have
experienced dementia in real life could relate to the film.
However if someone doesn’t like the idea of social realism
then they may feel the film is too dramatic and not
interesting. 8.7% of the people who answered my survey said
they were not sure if they liked the drama genre. This could
mean that they are not sure what the drama genre is or they
are not sure if they like it or not, due to lack of interest or not
watching many TV programmes/short films/feature films of
this genre. This gives my short film the opportunity to be
able to change their minds and show them that the drama
genre is really interesting and important and holds a mirror
up to society. Also, 100% of the respondents said they
thought it was important to use the drama genre to portray
real life and social issues. This lead to me expecting a fairly
positive response towards my film as the audience is mostly
made up of people who enjoy this genre and can appreciate it
for what it is, e.g. how it is true to life and raises awareness
of issues that effect our society.

4. It was important that I got an idea of how much people knew
about dementia/Alzheimer’s before they watched my film.
This is because if they have some knowledge of what
dementia is then they may find the narrative easier to
understand by being able to identify the symptoms that Henry
shows e.g. forgetting to turn the tap off, calling Emily by her
mum’s name, being confused over what time of day it is and
forgetting that his wife has died.

5. In short films there isn’t enough time for character
development, therefore characters often conforms to
stereotypes of their age, gender, ability, religion,
sexuality, race or regional identity. In my short film,
I wanted Henry, Gen and Emily conform to
stereotypes through the clothes which they wear
which is why I asked the actors to dress in certain
ways. Therefore when conducting my survey I asked
the audience who they would expect to wear the
clothes to see if the characters were stereotypical of
the age and gender I had intended them to be. From
my audience survey, I can see that overall the
audience felt that all of the character conformed to
their stereotypical clothing for their age. However
some one person thought that Emily may have been
a pre-teen based on these clothes (before seeing the
film), and another person thought that Henry was a
middle-aged man based on the clothes in the mood
board.

6. Similarly, characters conform to stereotypes in terms of where they live and the mise-
en-scene within their homes. This is why I picked this house as my filming location for
Henry’s because the décor is stereotypical of an older person, for example the patterned
carpets, ornament collection and photos of family members on the walls. In my
audience feedback I asked whether they thought the house was stereotypical of an older
person like Henry, and all but two of them said yes. Also, 100& of respondents said
they would expect to see things like ornaments in the house, which is why I included
an ornament as the conversation starter between Henry and Emily in the living room
flashback. A surround sound system was not something featured in my film, and the
audience agrees they wouldn’t expect to find this in Henry’s house, because it is not a
stereotypical thing for an older person to have. 95% of respondents expected to see a
record player, and this was in scene 7 and scene 8 in the bedroom, however I decided to
cut this scene because it added the least to the narrative out of all of the scenes and it
was the last part of the script I wrote and I wasn’t happy with how it turned out in
comparison to the other scenes. This feedback shows me that the location and mise-en-
scene of my short film conformed to stereotypes to enforce/develop a narrative.

7. When I was conducting my planning and research, it was really important to me that I portrayed Henry’s dementia in the right way as well as they way it
effected Gen and Emily. Therefore in my audience feedback before I asked how they would describe people like Henry (who have
dementia/Alzheimer’s) and people like Emily and Gen, those caring for them. I found that the majority of the people who answered my survey felt that
someone with dementia would be the way I wanted Henry to be portrayed on screen – vulnerable, lonely, confused, hard to communicate with, and
isolated. Only 39% thought that someone with dementia would be aggressive, I expected this response because in my dementia research I found that this
is a less commonly known symptom of dementia, and this is why in the conservatory scene I wrote Henry as being so distressed that he raised his voice
and snapped at Gen (“I’m quite capable of making my own tea”), I used a medium close up of Henry to draw attention to his emotions, as this raises
awareness of the fact that aggression is also a symptom of dementia. Similarly the audience felt that someone caring or someone with dementia may feel
the ways I wanted Gen and Emily to be presented on screen. Particularly 95% of respondents felt that they would feel like they were losing someone, and
I believe that this was evident in how as Emily walked through the house in the presented day as the flashbacks got worse she saw the decline of her
Grandad’s health and felt powerless and as if she had lost him.

8. Draft 1 Feedback
This feedback showed me that people
thought that my film was conventional and
that it was a good starting point for my
film, because it portrayed the effects of
dementia in an accurate way.
I gathered this feedback at the end of my production once the final draft was done, as I wanted to see whether the audience thought my film had improved from the
first draft to the last. However, I think it would’ve been beneficial if I had also conducted surveys like this as I went along for each draft so that I could make
changes to my film if the audience didn’t like certain things.

9. Draft 1 Feedback
Then I gave the audience the opportunity to leave longer
responses about what they felt they liked the most about the
first draft. Their positive feedback included key elements of
filmmaking such as editing and sound, as well as how the
narrative was relatable and engaging.

10. I then got comments about what the audience wanted to change about the first draft. I got several comments saying that they would want the film to
be finished/made longer, which is understandable because my first draft did finish rather abruptly having not finished editing past scene six. Also
someone said that the language felt a bit scripted/fake. A lot of the language I used was inspired by the scripting of drama tv programmes and films
which I have seen in the past and therefore felt was conventional to use. However, had I done this feedback at the time of my first draft being
published, I could’ve contacted the respondent and asked for some more details of what parts they found the most fake, then if I felt necessary I
could’ve re-filmed these sections. I could’ve also asked the other audience member what they found strange about the scene with Henry and Emily
in the bathroom, as I’m not sure what they found strange about it. Overall I found this a good insight into what people thought of my first draft,
however it would’ve been a lot more useful if I had made a separate feedback form for draft one when I published it so I could’ve made the changes
the audience wanted in future drafts and my final product (for example like I did with my focus group when they told me which scene should be cut
to make the film shorter.)
Draft 1 Feedback

11. Draft 2 Feedback
The purpose of my audience feedback survey was to see if the audience felt that my product had improved as the production process
progressed, which is why I asked them these questions about the second draft. 39% of the audience said my short film had improved a lot
since the first draft, and 100% felt that the characters conformed to stereotypes and liked the non-diegetic music. It is good that they saw
these things as conventional because it means that it is what they expected to see and this means my film will conform to a wider audience
within my target market because if something is conventional it appeals to the audience because of the familiarity to existing media texts.

12. Draft 2 Feedback Overall it seems that the audience
enjoyed the second draft a lot more
than the first, however they still felt it
needed an ending. When I got
feedback from my teacher and friends
at this stage of the production, they
also felt it still needed an impactful
ending, which is why I added scene
12 and 13. Also, someone has again
mentioned to make the flashbacks
happier to contract to the present day.
However, the purpose of my narrative
was so show Emily going through the
house and reliving the deterioration
of her Grandad’s health, so maybe
this wasn’t clear enough in the
narrative, or the audience felt the film
was too sad. But the reason my film
had a sombre atmosphere was
because this it is conventional of the
drama genre for storylines to be tense
and dramatic, and I also wanted this
to be what encouraged people to talk
about dementia so they can talk to
anyone they think is struggling and
not wait until it is too late like Gen
and Emily, who were in denial for a
long time.

13. Final Draft Feedback
From my feedback during post-production, I knew that my film created a strong
emotional response from the audience. However now that the film was completely
finished I wanted to see if that was still the case. From my results I can see that my
film was emotionally impacting, with 95% saying the film made them sad. However
I am mostly interested in the fact that a large percentage of the audience said my
film made them feel thoughtful and worried about someone they know, as this
shows that I fulfilled the purpose of my film which was to raise awareness of
dementia and get people talking, which is hopefully what will happen if my film has
made someone feel that someone they know may have dementia. Supporting this,
73% said that the film gave them an insight into what it is like to care for someone
with dementia, and this was something I wanted to get across in my film because in
my research it was recommended to me to focus the narrative more on the family as
a whole rather than just Henry, as this would give my film a unique quality to the
narrative which isn’t explored a lot in the media.

14. Final Draft Feedback
I then included rating scale questions
about the editing, writing, sound,
acting, cinematography and mise-en-
scene in the film. From this I could see
that in general people enjoyed watching
my short film and thought it was well
made and well put together.

15. Final Draft Feedback – Overall Thoughts
Feedback about the final outcome of my short film is
important because it showed me that the audience felt that
my product appealed to them and they found it interested
and engaging to watch. It also made them think about
dementia, which is what I wanted my short film to do.

16. Final Draft Feedback – Overall Thoughts
One of my comments said that they would like the ending to be changes
because it makes you wonder what happened to Henry. The reason I left
it on a cliff-hanger is because they are sometimes used in short films,
for example ‘The Silent Child’ (2017, dir. Chris Overton) ends on a
cliff-hanger where the audience is desperate to know what happens to
Libby, which is then – like my film – followed by statistics about the
deaf child (which is what the film is about). This keeps the audience on
the edge of their seat right until the very end by building up the tension
and then instead of revealing the ending, gives them facts and figures
which stick in their mind and make them reflect on the narrative they
have just seen unfold. This is the effect I wanted my short film to have,
because it leaves the audience wondering what happens to Henry,
however the respondent didn’t like this, either because they don’t not
know or because it is jus an convention of short films that doesn’t
appeal to them personally. From this I have learnt that it is hard to
please everyone however in general doing what is conventional of genre
and form leads to positive feedback from the majority of the target
audience.

17. Ancillary Text 1 Feedback Most of the people who answered my survey said they liked my poster. Someone did say
that they would’ve preferred it portrait. The reason I didn’t make my poster portrait is
because landscape images are more commonly used on social media and this is where I
distributed my poster in order for people to watch the short film on YouTube. I did try
making a portrait alternative design however I didn’t like the outcome as the image I used
only included Henry, and my film is very much about the whole family’s battle with
dementia. If I could do things differently I would use one of the portrait images I took of the
whole family in the conservatory scene (like the one I used in the double-page spread) and
try making a portrait poster too.
With the amount of posts filling social media feeds, it is
important that a poster can really stand out on the page and
make someone stop scrolling to watch the film or share the link.
Most of the people who filled out my survey said the poster
would make them want to see the film, however a significant
percentage said it maybe would so if I was conducting this
survey when I was still in the production of my poster I
could’ve contacted them to see what they would change.
It is important that there is synergy between my short film and
poster so that the poster can be used to promote the film and so the
products are recognisable as being part of the same package. For
my poster I used an image from a scene in my short film to create
synergy and used the same font and style for the title of my film
and the title on my poster, and overall the majority of the audience
felt that there was synergy between the products.
Alternative Poster Design

18. Ancillary Text 1 Feedback
The majority of people said they would expect to see the poster on social media, which is good because this is a conventional
way of distribution for independent film companies and filmmakers as opposed to paying for magazine advertisements or
billboards. The audience also recognised the purpose of the social media links was because of the proliferation of digital
technology such as smartphones and tablets, meaning if the audience like the film they will be inclined to share the poster or
YouTube link or social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram for their friends and family to see.

19. Ancillary Text 2 Feedback
I also received
feedback about
my double-page
spread as I
wanted to find
out whether it
was a good
supporting text
to my short film.

20. Ancillary Feedback – Overall
Overall my audience felt that all three products worked
together and that there was a synergy between the products.