FEEDBACK SAMPLE
"The Twickenham Murders"
The director of The Twickenham Murders wanted to receive honest feedback for his independent short 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 #3
Age - 21
Gender - Female
Profession - Film and Television Production
Did you like the film?
Not really
Anything you'd like more of?
It would have been nice if perhaps the setting of the story was explored in more depth. The fact that only two characters are seen in what is quite clearly a normal suburban residential neighbourhood is peculiar. Seeing completely empty streets even though there were lots of houses around was strange, and takes away credibility from the world of the story. Seeing how other neighbours reacted to the news, or even a police officer guarding the crime scene would have looked more natural and believable.
Were there any moments/scenes you particularly liked? (Please list and explain)
I really enjoyed the twists and foreshadowment of the film. Especially, with the bottle of pills and the ending where we find out it was Oliver. At first, the we are led to a false accusation towards Clyde due to his sneakers having patches of red on them and his reserved nature, but then at the end, it turns to Oliver. Furthermore, the pills are revealed not to be taken out of overdosing but to be thrown in the bin, which correlates really well to Oliver’s mentality and state and reveals so much through just visuals. I also enjoyed the horror elements applied within the film, especially those commencing in Oliver and Clyde’s house as they brought a lot of suspension and tension. Lastly, I really enjoyed how the narrative was progressed through the radio telling us the news. Keeping us fully aware of what is happening within the neighborhood.
Were there any moments/scenes you particularly disliked, or felt didn't work? (Please list and explain)
Throughout the film, there are numerous cross dissolve transitions. Using this as a recurring trope in the film is a creative decision that the director or editor has chosen to make, which is entirely valid. However, I didn’t understand what is their purpose. They are often carried on for longer than usual, which makes it hard to follow two superimposed images at once. This transition works best when used very scarcely and with a specific intention; for example, to emphasize the passage of time, some character movements or location changes. But when used as frequently as they are used in this film, they become a very big distraction to the audience and also decrease production value because it undermines the hard work from the editor.
Were there any moments you felt annoyed or frustrated by the movie? (Please list and explain)
The radio broadcast reporting on the death of the young man at the beginning of the film seems very scripted and unnatural. It would perhaps be more beneficial to have that segment integrated with another news story, and coming from a source within the screen to make its context more believable. As it stands, it feels like pure exposition without any motivation, which generally is not appreciated among audiences. If only a few sentences were heard, the audience would already understand what was going on, and their viewing experience would be more rewarding because they would be involved in actively engaging with the story, instead of being fed information too easily. Likewise, when he wakes up to another radio broadcast saying that another body was found, it seems hard to believe that someone would wake up to the news at precisely that instant, and without even turning on the radio. Where is the broadcast coming from? Is it intended to be a narration instead of a radio transmission? It would be helpful to see a physical radio so the audience can situate where the sound is coming from.
Were you confused at any given time? (Please list and explain)
– After Oliver’s second encounter with his neighbour, he follows him around the corner of the street. Oliver’s response is then to ‘hide’ behind some bushes. I couldn’t bring myself to understand this scene. If the neighbour was trying to be discreet he obviously did a bad job because Oliver noticed. So then why did Oliver try hiding from him behind a bush, even though it’s very clear to both the character and the audience that the neighbour saw him go into that spot. Why then did the neighbour continue walking as if nothing happened if his intention was perhaps to follow Oliver? This scene, if either filmed in a more creepy and more subtle tone does have potential but at the moment it feels very scripted and quite fake because the characters’ intentions are extremely unclear.
– If the neighbour was the one trespassing on the crime scene, why did he take a photo of Oliver as if appearing to want to incriminate him? I understand where this comes from after seeing the whole film, but when watching for the first time it seems out of place.
How would you rate the following elements? (1 to 5)
Please explain your rating.
The Beginning
4/5
Reason
The shots in the opening scene are very cinematographic and draw you in, immediately creating a compelling character that the audience feels for. However, I felt like they didn’t really tie in with the story as well as originally intended by the filmmaker. It remained unclear to me whether to the character forgot to take his medicine which would explain why he was ‘out of himself’. However, this is never fully explored and instead leaves a big question mark in the audience. That first scene is promising though, but perhaps consider connecting it with the plot more thoroughly so that it becomes an essential part of the the story, instead of just a leading point to start off the film with.
The Ending
5/5
Reason
The big reveal at the end that Oliver is indeed the murderer is very unexpected and intriguing. It was clever to only show the missing scrap of his t-shirt as the big reveal in one of the final scenes from behind it. It showed that even the character himself was taken by surprise; the audience has gone through the same journey as him and has been able to connect with him on a deep level, despite his wrongdoings.
The Music
2/5
Reason
The music was entirely taken from a horror soundtrack and while this is appropriate to the genre, it has now become an overused trope that has lost some of its meaning and purpose. The suspenseful music does help set the scene, but in this film, it is used quite often and it’s very noticeable when it begins and stops. Perhaps consider integrating it more with the plot and using it more sparingly so that its effect is heightened when it does come on. It also felt as if it was almost the same song on repeat. It would perhaps be beneficial to have quite distinct songs throughout the acts to distinguish between the different moments in the story and set them apart more easily.
The Pace
4/5
Reason
The pace is quite quick and involving, while still giving the audience enough space to breathe. However, the dialogue between the characters and the monologue from the radio host dragged down the pace by slowing the scenes and breaking away from the suspenseful mood. But overall, the film has a nice pace. It could have perhaps been condensed to around 10 minutes by keeping only the moments in scenes where the tensions are really high. This would in turn have kept the audience more engaged and more hooked throughout the story.
The Story
4/5
Reason
– This is a very interesting premise, but it does have a could of loopholes that can be fixed, if the filmmaker intends to.
– The fact that the third time the radio broadcasts the news, we receive the unexpected news that the case is now closed is very interesting. It breaks audience’s expectations and makes us even more intrigued to find out what Oliver’s next course of action will be regarding his neighbour now that the tables have turned.
– I would have liked to see from the beginning some sort of indication of why Oliver is so fixated in this crime. Does he have a personal connection with the victim? Why is he so involved in this seemingly random incident? And most importantly, I found questioning why he was the most appropriate person for the job; he doesn’t necessarily look the part of a mad detective thirsty for the truth. There is nothing in his surroundings (his bedroom, his desk, even his browser tabs only show him looking up the definition of ‘drowning’ on Wikipedia) that support his character goal of finding out what happened. This consequently diminishes his character’s credibility as the audience may see him as just another normal guy with no particular reason for being so fixated in this murder.
The Drama
4/5
Reason
Because of the nature of the story, the dramatic elements are present and well evidenced. From the very beginning, we can feel the tension surrounding Oliver and we quickly connect with him. The fact that he has dodgy encounters with his neighbour also elevates the tension and involved other characters in the actions, making the story more well-rounded. Overall, the film is very dramatic, especially considering its genre, which it perfectly conforms to.
The Characters
3/5
Reason
– I didn’t quite understand the relationship between the young detective Oliver and the guy he encounters in his neighbourhood. It’s clear that they know each other, but they aren’t nearly as nice enough to be portrayed as friends. This made me question why the neighbour asked if he liked his shoes, which then clearly becomes a clue that will surface again later on the film. However, the effect this has is that it seems very fabricated and very clearly supposed to be flagged as a clue that the director wanted to draw attention to. Consider playing out this scene, but slightly editing the dialogue so that the shoes become almost a dismissed topic. It is a peculiar subject to bring up during a twenty second interaction so the audience is bound to pay attention to it anyway, it doesn’t have to be bluntly exposed to them. This diminishes the mystery and makes it too easy for the audience to guess future events in the story.
– However, I did find the relationship between the two boys quite intriguing. From a very interaction between them, we can already infer that they share some sort of secret knowledge about the murder and that they stand on different pages because the main character refused to shake his neighbour’s hand. This is a very powerful gesture and displays character exposition very cleverly while also advancing the plot at a good pace.
– Because the relationship between the two characters is the only interaction we see throughout the whole film, it would have been nice for that to have been developed in a little bit more detail. By the end, I still couldn’t quite understand their relation apart from them being neighbours. Even if the audience doesn’t see their back story on screen, it is still useful to work those things out behind camera so that their relationship comes across more easily in front of the camera.
Any other comments or feelings about the film?
– Around 00:45 there is a very noticeable warp effect that feels very misplaced. Was this intentional? It evokes quite a strong disorientating and almost dream-like feeling in the audience with no clear explanation why. The shot only shows the park’s entrance sign, so a clear, static establishing shot would have probably been more effective.
– As this film comes across as very dark and tackles a heavy subject, the bright sunlight doesn’t necessarily pair well with its themes. Consider editing this in a software (which can be achieved quite easily) to create a more sombre look and tone down the brightness of the overall film. I would also recommend creating a distinct colour grade for the film as it could emphasise even more the mood of the film, especially considering its genre.
– Around minute 4:50, if it’s the middle of the night, why are all the lights in his house on? Was this intentional to show that someone had broken in? If so, why is he not more concerned? And if this wasn’t intention, it’s somewhat hard to believe that a grown man would sleep with all the lights in his house on.