Script: Draft Two, Target Audience Research
Three people took a digital questionnaire on my script, asking nothing but eight qualitative questions. I
asked people with a history of reliability, so as to ensure that answers received were not too vague, and
in addition asked them to elaborate on their answers.
1. Looking at the script, could you understand everything that was happening in it?
This question was to establish whether there was any problems with the writing itself, which
made the script hard to understand. Two responses commented that language was used
simplistically, which helped make the script visual and easy to understand. The other said a
similar thing, saying that because everything was clearly expressed, it was easy to understand.
2. Could you then describe what happened in the beginning, the middle and the end?
This was to prove that participants were truthfully answering the first question. All narratives
essentially have a beginning, middle and end structure, so this question was to help identify
whether or not they picked up on it. All responses answered as such: beginning: Derek and is
packing the suitcase, middle, the social worker knocks on the door, the end, the social worker
confronts them upstairs and then leaves.
3. Do you think the writing effectively used conventions of scripts? Where particularly is this
evident, or not so evident?
Now that I had asked them to asses the clarity of the script, I wanted them to evaluate the
quality of the writing in proxemics to typical film scripts. One participant stated that the writing
was very forthright, very bare which was similar to other scripts theyd read, and said that this
was particularly evident in the opening Bedroom is almost empty, where the language is very
spare. Another participant agreed with them, saying that conventions of scripts can be seen
well through the sparseness of the writing, and while the final participant partially agreed with
this statement too, they also commented that the writing was at times too short and that
actually it needed more description, given that the script was only around two and a half pages
long. I will work on this in my next draft.
4. Was it clear who the protagonist was? Who was he? What made you think this?
Another question to affirm whether or not there was a problem in the script. All said that Derek
was the protagonist, the older brother, as he had the most screen time and he is the character
on whom the action is consistently focused throughout. This was correct.
5. Do you think there is too much dialogue? Where abouts? Why?
Responses were unanimous in their assessment that indeed there was too much dialogue. All
responses said that this was mainly during the exchange between the social worker and the
protagonist. It seems a little longwinded said one response, with another saying that it drove
the narrative on rather than the action which is a big issue when considering that short film
scripts need action to drive along the narrative. I therefore need to cut down the dialogue and
instead express much of the events in the script visually.
6. Did the script have a consistent tone throughout? What was that tone?
Responses generally focused around there being a consistent tone of sadness and pathos,
which is what I was attempting. One participant commented that if the script were lengthened,
then the tone would be more apparent, which is all the more reason to lengthen the script a bit.
7. What kinds of themes came out at you when you read the script?
The emphasis again was on whether my audience picked up what I wanted them to pick up.
Themes at time varied from what I intended: entrapment, separation etc, to perhaps more
sentimental interpretations: stay close to your family, said one response. I suppose this is not a
major issue, especially when considering they are in a similar area to my themes I intended, and
you cannot blame someone for giving their own interpretations.
8. What do you think about the ending? Was it too abrupt? How could it be developed to reach a
more recognisable pause?
Responses saw the reaction of the social worker as unrealistic, and therefore the resolution was
unrealistic. This is hugely important, as I need my film to feel like a proper narrative, given its
length. Responses for improvement were useful. One wrote you could make the social worker
go away more forcefully, an idea I am somewhat taken with, and will probably use in my next
draft. Another response said that they were unsure as to the events that could bring about this
pause, but perhaps it would be an idea to bring the film into a new act, of sorts, following the
scene that has just occurred in the narrative.
