Documentary: Task 5 – Critically Evaluate the Documentary Idea

PEER FEEDBACK
Before my documentary was finished I had a preview session in lesson where my fellow classmates, and tutor, looked at my documentary. They then gave me their opinion, through the following questions:
Q1. What are the strengths of the documentary?
Q2. What are the weaknesses of the documentary, and what would you possibly change?
Q3. What mode of documentary do you think the production conforms to and why?
Q4. Is the documentary produced to a professional standard? Why do you think this is?
Q5. Who would you say is the target audience of the documentary?
(Below are the Photos of the feedback received by my peers)

DSCN3499

DSCN3500

DSCN3501

DSCN3502

DSCN3503

DSCN3504

I feel that the feed back was fair, and I was fairly pleased by it. Some provided more detailed views, others were more simple. But over all they helped towards the final edit.

SELF EVALUATION
So after many weeks of research, finding footage, and filming my documentary is finally done. (See task 4 for the final edit). Before showing the documentary to others (for feedback) I have done a personal review of the final edit.
My final views are as follows. I think my editing skills weren’t too bad, as the flow of the film followed my timeline to a certain degree. And I feel that it partly gets what my intended aim was across to the viewer.
However I found that there were lots of flaws to it.
Primarily in the sound side of the edit. My voice over was a bit loud in places, and there is a lot of background noises to it – I feel that I should have redone the voice over separately on a zoom mic. And in other places my volume of my used voice should have been turned down in the editing stage. I also feel that my edit flowed nicely until after explaining who Krampus is, and what he does. The film’s ending seems to be rushed, which ruins the film in my opinion.
I think there are also places where I am repeating myself – therefore taking up valuable time where I could have given a longer explanation on my views of Krampus. Another thing that should be changed, was when I first appear on screen in my self interview I needed to add a title saying my name, and who I was. And the final point is that my documentary would improve greatly if I had other people speaking about Krampus.
So in conclusion I feel that my documentary turned out ok, but there is a LOT that could improve it.