FEEDBACK SAMPLE
"CHROMOPHOBIA"
The director of Chromophobia wanted to receive honest feedback and get a deeper understanding of how the viewers interpret his film.
You can watch the film below and read a sample of the feedback the filmmaker received below, or you can read the feedback in Excel.
FEEDBACK #9
Age - 36
Gender - Male
Profession - Producer
Did you like the film?
Yes
Anything you'd like more of?
I would have liked a bit more about Dr. Haver’s back story. I also would have liked a little more depth in Arthurs character. We learn that he suffers from Chromophobia and has dillusions about being in his studio but I would have liked a bit more depth in his illness or illusions. There is some much potential within his character that maybe wasn’t able to be fully realized in just 13 minutes.
Were there any moments/scenes you particularly liked? (Please list and explain)
The whole film was beautifully crafted. From the clever and well timed edits. To the shifting from the ward to the studio, within the same sentence of dialogue was very effective in creating a parellel of delusion within the audience. Were we in the studio or was that merely a vision. Was the ward present day or from the past? Many questions and a whole lot of story was communicated in such a short piece.
Were there any moments/scenes you particularly disliked, or felt didn't work? (Please list and explain)
I must say that the opening scene of the Edwin Wilkins suicide was one of the weaker scenes in my view but this was entirely because of the colour of the sheets in this shot was quite off. It looked almost pink and wasn’t consistent with the other two shots that also show blood on the sheets. Luckily this should be a quick fix in the colour grading process but I would certainly make that priority number one. Otherwise the colour treatment was beautiful.
Were there any moments you felt annoyed or frustrated by the movie? (Please list and explain)
I did not have either of those experiences while watching this film.
Were you confused at any given time? (Please list and explain)
I wouldn’t say I was confused but certainly this film could be lost on many who aren’t full engaged and watching for many of the visual cues and visual overlap that happens. To me it felt quite obvious being a fairly visual person and of course the clever use of dissolves and cuts to almost create a jump cut like effect when we went from the sketches to the real life scene was well done and further would serve to guide the audience. I should also note that having watched this film three times I did get a little more out of it each time. I believe that speaks to the depth of the story and the sophisticated subtitles sprinkled throughout.
If this film was going to be expanded into a feature film, what part of the story would interest you to see expanded most? Please explain why.
Great question. I’d love to learn of course more about Arthur but specifically how he uses his art to unpack his mental state. Does he draw these scenes into reality, are they done after the fact? We know with the Wilkins scene that he’s sketching after his death but with the other sketches I’m not quite sure, that is part of the interest and charm of this film is that time doesn’t quite feel linear. I’d also love to expand on what the true relationship is between Arthur and the Dr. I think the “most/least” obvious is that they are related, perhaps siblings and hence why Arthur knew of her mother. What I would have shy’d away from personally was showing the Doctor, standing in front of the noose in the last scene. While I did like this scene I found it removed any uncertainty about Arthurs role in the murders. As after that scene I felt like it confirmed the fact that he was simply compelling people to commit suicide rather than actually killing them. Why not play with that a bit more? Why give it away, it was so cleverly done how we see the noose thrown up over the wooden beam but we don’t see who actually throws it over, but the expression on the Doctors face, to me, felt like she was in some blissful trance and was eager to kill herself. I think her facial expression in this scene ruines the mystique. Once again it confirmed to me “Ah, ok Arthur is making people kill themselves” in such a short film I think it would have been more enticing not to confirm that for the audience. But perhaps I’m giving the general audience too much credit?
How would you explain Arthur's character?
Arthur strikes me a psychotic artist who uses dark mental forces/energy to compel people to kill themselves. Like many psychopath’s he’s clearly highly intelligent, obsessive and dark. While I enjoyed his character and thought the actor who played him was by far the best, I didn’t find him as relatable as he could have been. I would have liked to see a bit more of his humanity shine through, if for no other reason than to make me care about his outcome. He felt too foreign, and often times a bit of a cliché.
How would you explain Arthur's powers and what part of his power would you like to see more of?
As touched upon in a previous answer I believe Arthur uses dark forces, energy and potentially some manifestation through his art to will people into commiting suicide. I would love to see more on this in the full length version. Where did he observe these powers or acquire them from. Perhaps they were initially presented to him for good…
What do you think is happening with Dr. Haver's character?
My hope is that things get interesting and that she actually possesses the same powers as Arthur, that SHE made her mother kill herself rather than the more obvious option of Arthur and her being related…or maybe that isn’t the more obvious. I would find it quite interest if in the full length version we learn that Dr. Haver perhaps has had a past not that unsimilar to Arthurs as far as the powers go and that she’s worked her whole life to try and keep them at bay but then meeting Arthur they somehow begin to crop up again for her. Perhaps they were part of some elite group of childrens who were taught these extraordinary abilities. Perhaps that group had two factions that broke apart one for good and one for evil.
If Arthur's character were a figment of Dr. Haver's psyche and Dr. Haver was actually a patient — would you find this to be a predictable story twist?
Yes, I’d be dissapointed by that plot twist. So many more interesting options to delve into with this!
Is there a direction the story might go that you would suggest would be very unexpected?
Certainly, I’ve listed a handful above.
Any other comments or feelings about the film?
Great work! A beautifully crafted piece and visually looks as good as anything you’d find on Netflix and would rival many Hollywood films! I hope this does get made into a feature length film. It was overall a very thought provoking 13 minutes, well done!