GW: FEEDBACK ON VERSION 1

I screened the work to a few friends and family to get some feedback. All this feedback is great and gives me real suggestions for pushing the piece forward. However I have to remember that it was not a true viewing. The videos were watched in sequence from my computer not in the installation environment with all of the artefacts and they were not 100% finished. Also everyone that I screened it to were aware of the intentions of the piece and/or knew people in it so they never saw it unimpeded by all of this baggage. However there were some really good suggestions. As always I was aware of most of these but a sounding board is always really helpful and a few areas were flagged up that I had not considered.

The pieces that I screened to them were these in the order I am planning on.

1: Local TV news piece. 4 mins
2: Online manifesto 1. Introduction and back. 45 secs
3: Online manifesto 2: 2:15 mins
4: Documentary/Interview 11 mins
5: Online manifesto 3. Call for action. 1:45 mins TOTAL: 19:45mins

Below are the issues and questions raised and how I can possibly move the piece forward.

1: The whole entirety of the piece is too long. The current running time is about 20 minutes and everyone felt that this was too long. I am very inclined to agree. It is not good delivering a message that no one will sit though. I think I can trim the news piece a little, look to lose a big chunk of or completely the second manifesto, be more ruthless with the doco and also trim the last manifesto. I think a maximum is 15 minutes is the absolute target.

2: The audience all loved the drama and human aspect of the piece. This they found really interesting and the area that played the strongest. When developing the next version I must make sure that I keep most of is in. It may be interesting to see how I could develop this even further right through to the end possibly after the last manifesto piece too.

3: The TV news piece worked pretty well. All of the audience felt it was an excellent way to give all the background and back story as well as creating a sense of mystery and enigma. I feel that this is working better now that it plays much struggler and the archive footage gives the piece a greater sense of authenticity too, especially the protesting footage and less head shots of Ben. It may be good to update some of the VO though as I now have created the manifesto pieces and add some footage of this with or without sound. I may see if it can be trimmed a little too so it is really low fat.

4: The documentary piece was great in the more dramatic elements but possibly too many facts and data and it was overlong. I agree with the length as it is a clocking in at 12 minutes currently. It also needs an intro at the start to contextualise it which it does not have at the moment. I described this for them but I do not feel it needs the live action into which would make it longer but that this could be done with titles setting the circumstances of the interview out. In terms of content I think that a lot of the global warming facts and figures need to go as these seem to turn audience off. It is a balancing act of having a realist interview that fools audiences but giving them enough info on global warming to sell some of the message. The interview is a bit like a game of chess both men having an agenda and how that plays out. Ben wanting a platform for his cause but myself wanting the scandal, intrigue and corruption and expose storyline. I have to indulge Ben to get to the story and this is done through allowing him to promote his cause. However it is he drama that was interesting the audience so further development needed with more of that and less of the facts and figures. I could also try some archive images over the top to see if that works and gives more interest to the piece. I do like the clarity of it being a one on one interview though and this may detract from that.

3: Possible issues some of the dialogue. The phrases "get mean" , "by any men's necessary" and the call for direct action a d tone of the final manifestos piece a couple felt were too strong. I will have a look at this but the character of Ben is annoyed, feels boxed into a corner and that he needs to resort to more incendiary language.

4: There was confusion over what the piece was actually all about. Question fake news, narrative piece, what is and can an installation in a gallery be, promoting the global warming issue, what is the truth and it being a puzzle. Some felt that these we a little conflicted and there was possibly too much going on in the piece which left them not really knowing what my intentions were. Really my intentions were all of those but I need to work on more clarity as to the hierarchy of these ideologies and messages. However that all said it made them think about a few of these topics especially global warming which is the central theme.

5: The manifesto elements were too preaching and long. They were a little too preachy and the tone did not endear the character or his message to some of the audience. There are currently three and perhaps is is one too many. I did such extensive research that I want to add in all of the information I found and keep what was stripped from the script and just repurpose it for the manifestos. However the audience were switching off a little during these. I feel the first one is necessary as it introduces the character. The last one also offers a call to arms and suggests potential solutions so I feel this needs to stay too. I will see if these can be trimmed though and possibly experiment with adding images and footage over them to give them more visual punch and to illustrate Bens points. On watching it again with an audience I feel the second one is surplus to requirements though and will first try cutting and reducing but it is possibly not earning it's keep currently.

6: The ending needs more punch. The end manifesto was OK but the piece needs a stronger ending. Possibly end on Ben walking out of the doco interview? I like the call to arms of the last manifesto but they have a point. I will experiment with these ideas. Also perhaps there is more of an enigma at the end. Perhaps Ben goes missing again and the screen informs us of this at the end.

7: Sort of working and stays with you if puzzling. The audience all agreed that although they were unsure about some parts and what exactly it was all about that some of it was entertaining and all felt that they had been educated and informed which was the intention. Hypothetically if they saw it in a gallery they would not be sue what it is and would also question the surroundings, is it art, is it real too. Most encouragingly they all said that it stayed with them and would encourage more discussion on all the questions it raised. If they are discussing the piece then they cannot fail to talk about the issue too!