Since exhibiting my project at the Arnolfini, I received some constructive criticism which I have acknowledged in order to progress my work. I devised some question for the observes, drawing on some key features of my documentary to find out if I am fulfilling my intentions. Such as:
-Is it clear the reason why they left Iran?
-Is it difficult to keep up with the subtitles?
-Do you understand the family relations?
-Is it visually pleasing? Do the interviews go on for too long?
-What themes do you pick up from the storyline?
The general consensus was that it was easy to understand, and people were quite shocked by some of the information given in the interview footage- which I was pleased about as I aimed to evoke that emotion through the methods of surprise. Although some people said that the interviews went on for slightly too long, which I was concerned about. Therefore I will be filtering the interview footage further in order to stay on track with the narrative, in way which is straight to the point. Audio levels seemed to be the most common comment, in terms of needing to balance it as apparently it jumps from quiet to loud consistently throughout the film. I was actually leaving sound and colour correction levels as the final part of my post production process, as I did not want to waste time doing it along the way, if I was going to have to cut things out. I will be adjusting the levels of the sounds and colour at the very final stage of editing. In terms of it being visually pleasing, I received some comments regarding how I decided to split up the interview footage, with clips of relevance to the conversation. Including visual aids to the interview audio to visually stimulate the audiences understanding of the experiences they went through. Furthermore I am extremely pleased with my decision to include found footage in the film, as people responded very well to it and may actually include more as I still feel it lacks variation within some sections of the interviews.
One person picked up on the speed of the subtitles, saying that it was hard to follow both the visuals and read the subtitles due to the pace in which the interviewees are speaking. Unfortunately there is not much I can change about that, but perhaps when I eliminate some footage which isn’t vital to the telling of the story, it will provide more time for people to acknowledge the videos as I will be decreasing the amount of interview time. Lastly, some people were asking questions about the relations of the family. Therefore I think that I will include names and family relations to one another in the initial scene, so that people understand the links.
The audiences age range was quite broad, therefore the feedback I received were from both people of that generation who remember it being reported on the news, along with a younger generation who were unaware of the entire situation. However both responses seemed agree that It was interested insight to an insiders perspective, as although it is a reasonably old event, it is fascinating to view how it still effects people all these years later. I was very pleased with this response as that was my intention, to use my documentary as an outlet which informs and educates the audience about the historical movement has effected the families national identity and how the cultural shift has shaped who they are today.