Group: Class feedback from screening

• We screened our film opening to our peers in class, and handed out questinaires concerning the content of our project, for which our fellow students could reply to give us feedback. The questions covered aspects such as music/soundtrack, speical effects, camerawork, character exposition, narrative, the audience's favourite aspects and what could be improved. We handed out eight questionaires and recieved eight back, all filled out, this would allow us to optimise our final touches.
• The first question was about how appropriate the music/soundtrack was, and the questionaire offered the options perfect, accepetable, could be better or poor. Of the eight surveys, five people said that the music is perfect, while the other three said it was acceptable, from this, we concluded that the we were happy with this aspect of the production, and would therefore not need to change it.
• For the second question, the survey asked people to rate the quality of the speical effects (the bullet shell, the fake blood etc.) on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being the worst and 10 being the best. The average score came out as 8.75 which would be rounded up to 9. We were extremely happy with this result, and thus decided not to change any aspecrts of the special effects.
• The third question was about the use of camerawork, people were asked to rate the camera techniques on whether they were professional, satisfactory, below average or poor. 100% of people who filled out our survey said that the camera work was professional, and we were captivated with this response.
• People were then asked to rate the characters on a scale of 1-10 (again with 1 being the worst and ten the best). The average score was 7.75 which we were satisfied with, but we did think that if we were to go through this process again, we could of paid more attention to illustrating the charcter exposition.
• The next question was about how easy the narrative was to comprehend and follow from the point of view of the audience. The options were: very easy, easy, hard or very hard. 2 people said very easy, 5 said easy and one person said hard. Again, we were pretty happy with this outcome and felt no need to change anything in this aspect.
• The next question allowed the audience to rate different aspects, firstly it was whether the character was mysterious or obvious, with 1 being mysterious and 5 being more obvious. The average result to this was 1.75, we were happy with this, as it meant that the murderer was closer to being mysterious which was what we were aiming for. Next was whether the murderer was more unusual or average, with the average result being 2.25, meaning that the antagonist was close to the center of the spectrum, which wasn't very helpful, but at least we learnt that perhaps the characters persona was not conveyed as strongly as it could of been. Lastly, was whether the antagonist was more sane or insane, with the average result being 3.25 meaning that the audience viewed the murderer as insane, which was definately one of the main concepts that we wanted to illustrate.
• The seventh question was an open question concerning the audience's favourite aspects of our production, generally we found that the most common favourited aspects were the motage editing style, the use of special effects and camera techniques as well as the general quality.
• Finally, people were asked which aspect of our production they thought could be improved. The most common answers for this question were that the victim's sins were not conveyed strongly enough, again this could be a problem with how well we conveyed the character exposition. Some people also said that the production was possibly too long, from this we learnt that if we were to go through this entire process again, we could ensure that the film does include a variety of different aspects.