Documentary Evaluation

Pre-Production

For this project we were asked to make a documentary in the genre of dystopia. We started by researching the various dystopian themes we could base our documentary on before deciding on famine and disease. We then did some research into the theme when we decided that there was not enough to famine and disease to make a good documentary. Fortunately we had created a contingency plan based around the theme of global warming. We then looked into the different contributors to global warming and how we could create a documentary from those. We agreed, based on this research, that focusing on plastic waste was the best way forward and subsequently created a survey in order to do market research.

From our survey we established that, despite men between the ages of 18-25 being the majority audience for documentaries, it was in fact women of the same age that were more interested in Global Warming. We also discovered that there was a gap in the market for presented documentaries. This research meant that we could tailor our script towards the correct target audience and allowed us to put information in that was more relevant to young people.

My main role in pre production was to write the script, which is something that I've only done once before and which I hadn't previously enjoyed. The previous script I wrote was lacking a lot in detail and just generally not up to the standard required for the project, so with this script I was determined to learn from my mistakes and make a huge improvement. Despite this script needing to be relatively short, I was able to write in plenty of detail about the topic and adhere to the codes and conventions of both documentaries and the dystopian genre. I added plenty of facts and figures in a way in which young people would not lose concentration and I was able to write make those facts seem dystopian without the documentary appearing fictitious. When we questioned the audience after the first screening several people believed the script to be the best part of the documentary.

The rest of the pre production paperwork was also a key reason to the success of this project. Finding an appropriate location to film, through doing location recces, added to the quality of the documentary. We all agreed that, because the documentary was based on plastic in the ocean, we wanted to have a backdrop of water. We also wanted the location to be relatively sparse and bare so as to add to the dystopian feel. The audience felt that, for the most part, the location suited the documentary.

The aspect of pre production that, I feel, was not done well was the story boarding. The storyboards that we created were not very detailed and did not cover every shot. This created a bit of an issue during production as it meant that we spent much longer setting up each shot than we initially wanted. However, this did not effect the overall quality of the film in the end.

In my next project I would like to focus more on storyboards, as I feel they are an extremely important part of the film making process, and I would like to continue improving my script writing skills.

Health & Safety

Risk assessments are vital to the safety of the cast and crew during any production, especially one that is filmed out on location and near water. The risk assessment outlines all potential hazards to the crew such as falling in water or being run over. In one of our locations there was a loose railing next to a river, which could have been catastrophic if the railing collapsed and our presenter fell in. To combat this threat we made sure that the presenter and crew were made aware of the damaged railing and were kept well away from it.

Production

During the production of this documentary I had the role of director, which is something I am very keen to do more of. I feel that the majority of production went well and that the end product resembled the vision that I had for this project. I worked closely with the camera operator, in order to find the best mix of shots that suited the style of the documentary, and with the presenter, by directing him in the best way to convey what he was saying during each segment. I do, however, feel that the film was let down by the presenter not learning his script and therefore having to read off of a piece of paper whilst on camera. I also had to deal with one of the cast members not turning up for the part by finding an alternative, who did very well considering he only had 30 minutes to learn the script.

The documentary was given 7.5/10 rating from the audience after the first screening and a number of people felt that the choice of camera shots and the overall presentation of the film were key contributors to this. However, the audience told us that they wanted that they wanted the documentary to be longer and felt that the audio could have been increased in volume. They also felt that, not only did the presenter need to learn his lines, but he also mumbled too much and that it was quite difficult to understand at times.

For the next project, I would like to spend more time preparing the audio equipment and making sure that the settings and volume levels are correct as audio in all films, but especially documentaries, is vital to the success of the final product. I would also like to work on filming more footage to help increase the length of the film.

Post Production

As director of this film I was quite involved in the post production process despite not being the editor. I worked closely with the editor because I wanted to make sure that my vision for the project was reflected in the final cut. I also helped to choose the stock footage that best reflected the dialogue which, for the most part was well suited. However, there was one clip that I chose, that when compressed, completely lost its quality and let that particular segment down.

The editing overall, however, was extremely well done and several members of the audience (25%), when asked what aspects they enjoyed said that the editing stood out for them. The clips were edited in a way that created a good pace and the use of L and J cuts helped the documentary flow really nicely. The stock footage was also utilised well and the editor managed to get the placement of those clips just right. The majority of the audience also liked the choice of music in the film and they thought that it fitted the theme and dystopian genre really well. The volume levels for the music, I felt, were also really good and helped to convey the message we were trying to get across. We did, however, forget to credit the stock footage that was used in the film and that, in the future, could be a costly mistake. I think that this happened because we rushed the end of the editing process and didn't double check our work. We also didn't colour grade the film, because we ran out of time, and I feel that colour grading it could have added to the dystopian feel even more.

I think that the biggest thing I would focus on in the next project is better planning and time management during this post production period. The majority of our post production issues arose because of a shortage of time and if we had planned it better we would have been able to find better quality stock footage, colour grade it and remember to credit the stock footage.

Media Processes and Skills

At the beginning of this film, I was well versed in most areas of the filmmaking process and so this project was more about practising and improving my skills in each area. For example, improving my knowledge and understanding of the sound equipment was something that I wanted to work on and I now have a much better understanding of how to set this equipment up. That being said, script writing was an aspect of the process that I had very little experience with before. I therefore wanted to spend a lot of time trying to improve my writing abilities and to create a script that could completely change the way the documentary was received. Through this project I feel like I have learned a lot about script writing and I feel confident to write more going forwards.