During the
research, construction and planning stages, I used several different ways to
receive my audience feedback.
For my
planning I needed to obtain several responses to get the gist of what would
appeal to my audience. I collected this
information through ‘Question Pro’ which is an online survey application. I
constructed a survey that consisted of ten questions, all being multiple
choice. Once I created this survey, I exported it through different social
media site such as ‘WhatsApp’ and ‘Facebook’ which was a fast and instant way
of getting responses. Our survey got 51 participates which was a large number
of people to help us understand our demographic. The survey entailed from a range
of different questions particularly on the Slasher genre so see what is
preferred and what isn’t, in order to help with the construction.
At first we
asked questions such as the participant’s age and gender. We wanted to know
what age group we are targeting our trailer to and if the feedback was biased
in term of gender, there was an equal amount of participants both male and
females which told us that there was no need to specify with one gender and
that we needed to construct something that appealed to both genders. We asked
what sub-genre of the horror is the most favourable and the response we got was
that the Slasher genre was the most liked and gothic was least liked. Since
learning that the participants of our survey are young adults, we expected the
Slasher genre would be quite popular amongst that particular age group as the Slasher
genre often have a story that consist of teenagers this makes it very
relatable. We then go on to ask particular things about the Slasher genre such
as the favourable Slasher film, the responses of this question helped us
understand what sort of structure out audience would ideally want. It was
interesting to obtain that out of 8 different Slasher films, Final destination
was the most liked and I know what you did last summer was the least. ‘I know
what you did last summer’ follows the conventions of a Slasher yet does not
film however The structure of final destination is different to the formulaic structure
of a general Slasher film as there was no particular killer or final girl. Two
of the most conventional characters seen in a Slasher film are not made clear
as they would in classic Slasher films. This suggests our audience would rather
want to see us challenge the conventions than abiding by it. Due to this response
we decided to challenge Roland Barthes narrative theory on the semiotic code by
filming some of our footage from the killer’s perspective. As in most Slasher
films, the audience tend to witness the actions from the final girl, and
consume her point of view throughout the film however by challenging this and
putting the audience in the shoes of the killer, increases more tension as they
are forced to be in that position creating a dramatic and also chilling effect.
The survey helped encourage what location we would set our trailer as most
being vouched for the best location to be a neighbourhood, and the least
approved was the abandoned house. By having the majority saying neighbourhood
being the best location suggests they would want a location that you would not
suspect a murder to happen and also somewhere that has relevance to the
audience, causing the audience to confide with our characters in comparison to
the ‘abandoned house’ as a neighbourhood could also clearly state the
equilibrium in terms of Propps narrative Theory. Also the fact that
neighbourhoods are often found being the location that the Slasher is normally
set shows the familiarity to this specific location within the codes and
conventions of a Slasher film. Our chosen release date was due to the responses
we received, as we asked when you would see a Slasher film, the participants
had to pick between four seasons and the most picked winter rather than the summer.
Winter is quite a dull season, and gets dark quite early suggesting it fits with
the dreariness of a horror, Slasher film. Also most people go to the cinema
around this certain season as there aren’t any activities to do in contrast to the
summer. It made sense to release our low budget, independent Slasher film
during the winter as most block buster films are released during the summer. If
our film was released in the summer it would face tough competition. The weapon chosen for our film was based on
our responses as the common responses referred to a weapon with a blade, we
also included weapons that are not sharp such as a gun, baseball bat but these
were the least picked, this response demonstrates how most people identify the Slasher
genre with its weapon as it is often seen to be a blade of some sort, with the
villain ‘slashing’ his victims creating a more sharp and gruesome effect.
Another way I received audience feedback was gathering a
group of people, both male and female with ages that ranged from 15-22 years
old and presenting different templates for my horror magazine and film poster
that I have made. Each templates consisted of different ways that I positioned
the text and different ideas on what the main image could be. Most of the
reactions I received preferred the more conventional ways of how the text was
positioned and also favoured a main image that conveyed more narrative and
presented the Slasher genre clearly.
After constructing the final piece of
our trailer, we wanted to collect feedback so we organised a screening where we
hand our surveys straight after our trailer had been watched and uploaded our
trailer on a social media website called ‘YouTube’ and from there we uploaded
our link to the trailer on several other social media sites, including
Facebook, Snapchat and WhatsApp.
Our screening consisted of 9 contributors and they
had to answer 10 questions which evaluate and seize their initial opinion of
our trailer.
The first two questions asked about what they liked and disliked about the trailer.
The responses ranged their likes
about the trailer from camera shots, music, narrative and effects. They principally liked the use of effects and
the fast montage sequence. We animated our titles as it fuzzed on the screen
and the record button, and night vision fit to look like a hand held camera and
a night vision camera. Also the action within our fast pace montage sequence
consisted of one of our characters being dragged, and strangled which appealed
to our audience as the violence within our trailer made a good fit to the Slasher
genre. Music and narrative was also commented on. They stated how the intensity
was well built as the music gradually built up to the fast pace montage.
Additionally the narrative was easy to pick up on through the use of
non-diegetic sound of our killer voicing over his account and a conversation
between two of our characters. This as an overall response was respectable,
because most of these aspects where features we thoroughly tried to fool
proof.
What they disliked about the
trailer was common amongst the participants as they observed on how the non-diegetic
music was overpowering compared to the dialogue that was seen in the trailer,
making it harder to depict the narrative. This was not the response we expected
so it was worrying as most our narrative was displayed through the use of
dialogue. However when we posted our trailer on YouTube and other social
network sites, this ‘problem’ did not occur, since our trailer was being
watched through smaller devices such as smart phones, laptops and more people
used headphones. However for our screening we used an electronic white board
with not the best speakers resulting in completely muzzling the viewing
pleasure of our participants.
We then questioned how we could have
improved, several said our trailer could have consisted of more gore, including
more blood and generally making it scarier which is fair as the only blood that
is seen is when the killer wipes it off his knife. Others mentioned the camera quality
although there are some points of the trailer where footage was purposely
manipulated to look as if it is the quality of a hand held camera than a DSLR
to distinguish the killer’s perspective. What was also stated from one
participant was the editing was too fast though we followed the conventions of
the pace of a Slasher film as the editing was slow to suggest the equilibrium
and as it progressed to the fast montage sequence the pace quickened between
shots to suggest the disruption this opinion could be due to personal
preference.
Following most of the conventions
of the formulaic style of a Slasher trailer and also researching different
trailers to interpret in our own trailer our partakers were quick to notice
several ways our trailer presents the Slasher genre. On the survey we asked
what are the aspects of the trailer make it a Slasher film. The majority of
responses were the choice of weapon is what reinforced the genre as well as
music, violence and who the villain was.
The responses of the fifth question
was positive as we asked if the sound complimented the shots. Not one
participant said no which was reassuring, this was particularly noticeable
during the fast pace montage sequence as the sound raises in pitch as shots are
cute faster creating an unsettling atmosphere.
Out of poor, okay, good and
excellent, we asked our participants to rate our editing. We had a range of
answers, with one response being ‘Okay’, one being ‘Excellent’ and the rest
giving us a reasonable answer of ‘Good’
for the editing. As a group we thought this was a well sensible judgement
as our trailer was merely an amateur piece, despite getting good responses
there was still room for a lot of improvement to get it at a level to be seen
as professional.
Due to the sound quality and the
non-diegetic music overpowering the speech and dialogue in our trailer, our
respondents found it a little difficult to illustrate the narrative since we
asked if they understood the narrative. However through camera shots, and
editing it was made a little clear. For example the way we contrasted shots
from the killer’s perspective and the final girl’s perspective made it easier
to understand the narrative.
By asking if our contributors would
want to go watch our film after seeing the trailer we thought it would be a way
to find out how effective our trailer is. The responses were varied as some
answered ‘no’ and explained that it was due to the lack of interest in the
genre, some people have preferences such as the horror genre in general does
not appeal to them. Those who said ‘yes’, explained that the effects (the camcorder
and night vision effect) made it precisely tantalising.
Not having vast high-tech equipment did not stop us from
trying to make our trailer look a tad professional however when we asked if our
trailer was on a professional level the responses we got was mostly yes as only
two responses were no. This was a fair response as we were not supplied with a
high quality editing software and cameras yet created something that mimics a
little of that level.
We then asked to rate our trailer overall, out of 10, the
average score was 7. As a group we thought this rating was deserving as there
was always room to improve (the gore, adding more blood and reducing the sound
of the non-diegetic sound so the dialogue could be heard).
An alternative way that we earned feedback was through the
use of social media, uploading our trailer through YouTube and exporting it
through other social media applications by uploading the link, these social
media websites include such as Snapchat, WhatsApp and Facebook. In four days,
we got to 140 views, and 7 likes. Also within the hours of the trailer being
uploaded, we got a comment saying ‘That was a really good trailer J’ , a member of my group posted our
trailer on Facebook receiving 15 likes and comments says ‘well done’ and ‘looks
great’. As we passed our trailer around on WhatsApp and Snapchat, we got
responses that were very positive and resounding.
As a whole, we were pleased at the responses we got
considering the time and effort that was put into our trailer.
No comments:
Post a Comment