peer review evaluation

This week, my group went over the peer reviews written by our classmates to asses their feedback and determine if there are any suggestions we'd like to implement into our final cut.

 Peer review #1 (by Johansen Rey):https://johansenrey.blogspot.com/2025/04/title-sequence.html

 My favorite part of this opening sequence is definitely the ending and the editing done while the surgeon rips his face mask. It reveals a man who is clearly disturbed and this is also accomplished by the tilt shot that shows the blood squirting on him. The editing was great and the grey filter on the actor makes him look psychotic. I didn’t really like the lighting, it was very bright but I believe that the lighting should’ve been a bit darker. If the film had included some lowkey lighting to help add to the ominous atmosphere of the scene, it would have been better. The setting would have also been a bit more unsettling and worrisome for the audience. I do think it looked like an opening sequence as the way it ended seemed as if there was going to be some sort of flashback or skip in time into something much darker. This was due to the editing and the static like filter that seems as if a sudden cut into another action might occur. I wasn’t really confused while watching. The sequence of events made sense and not much other than a surgery was taking place. The only suggestion I have is to utilize darker, lowkey lighting to make the opening more suspenseful and match the genre better. I believe the genre was more psychological thriller and it would be aided a lot by darker lighting.

 My evaluation: The review basically explained how the editing really showed what was going on in Dr. Carter's mind; however, darker lighting would have made it even more horrifying. I agree with Johansen's evaluation that darker lighting could have benefitted the horror aspect of the film. As such, our group now plans to use editing techniques and filters to make the surgical scene appear darker, perhaps by using a greyscale filter over the entire scene to emphasize the idea that it's more of a flashback scene. 

 Peer review #2 (by Maya Miller):

 What specific technical elements of the film opening did you like? I really liked the props used for this film. It was super creative and helped convey the story really well. I also liked the use of diegetic sound. A great example of this was the EKG in the background of the surgery. The costumes used were also really great. I loved the surgeon’s costume especially as it made the surgery feel real. What specific technical elements of the film opening did you dislike? I did not like the special effect or camera filter used at the end of the film where the surgeon was sprayed with blood. It was pretty inconsistent with the rest of the film. I also would have liked to get more camera angles and close up shots of what exactly the surgeon was doing. I did not like that the view of the surgery was so limited. This would have made it more interesting and dynamic. Did this look like a movie opener and did it make you want to know what happens next? Explain. I definitely think that this could serve as a movie opener. It is ambiguous enough for more to follow and leaves room for there to be more of a story line. Also, it was only 50 seconds, so I am assuming that there must be more. Was there anything that left you confused? (be specific) What suggestions do you have to make this movie opener better? I would suggest adding music to the film or some other kind of sound. Additionally, the sound of the EKG should be louder. 

 My evaluation: Maya's review mainly talked about our film's good use of props and the setting, which was really realistic, suggesting we get more angles of the surgery and taking out the filter that causes the film to lessen in quality by the end, adding that we should increase the sound of the EKG in the background. Overall, I agree that we could have included more angles of the surgery scene to both allow audiences to see a more in depth view of what was happening and add more time to our introduction; however, it may be too late to film additional scenes now. However, I also agree that the loss of quality filter put on the end of the surgery scene does come out of nowhere, and agree that it should be removed.

 Peer review #3 (by Dunia Castro):

 Technical elements I enjoyed were the props, sounds, and costumes used. The tools used for the surgery, the EKG background sound, and the scrubs all contribute to building the world/environment they are trying to achieve. Technical elements I did not enjoy were the ending camera filter and shot. It felt abrupt and unnecessary to the plot. Considering the clip was very short it did not seem to add anything of value and left you wanting more. I believe this looked like a movie opener and it made the audience want to know what would happen next. The ending camera filter/shot left me confused as to what its purpose was. I was also confused as to why the clip was only 50 seconds as the opener could have used some more runtime. To make this movie opener better I would recommend to elaborate further on the ending of the clip to make it longer. I would also change the setting to make the clip less mundane. Finally, I would elaborate on the filter/shot used at the end of the clip to make sure the audience is not confused. 

My Evaluation: Dunia's review mainly focussed on our good use of mise en scene to set the scene of the surgery, while offering some further suggestions to reduce audience confusion like getting rid of the end filter and changing the setting to make the clip longer and less static. I agree that our run time was very short, and that a change in the setting would definitely help add on to that time and make the film more interesting to ensure the audience doesn't get bored. As previously mentioned, I also agree that we should get rid of that ending filter and plan to do so. 

 Peer Review #4 (by Kaylana Deharde-Payne): 

 I really liked the close-up shot of the protagonist's face at the end when he realizes his patient is dying, and his expression as he takes off his mask. It showed that he didn't care about trying to save his patient, and the fade-out to a blur of the camera footage added intensity to the moment. On the other hand, I didn't like the wide shot and close-up of the protagonist putting on gloves. It felt like it could've been a quick action, but instead, it was drawn out, making it seem like the doctor was taking his time when his patient needed help. Since the film isn't finished yet, maybe that was the intention—to show the protagonist taking forever to put the gloves on. I can't really say if this is an opener or not since the film isn't done, but for now, it feels like one after the patient dies. The only part I was confused about was why it took so long for the guy to put on the gloves, especially in a life-or-death situation. I don't have any other suggestions besides figuring out the glove part, considering the film isn't complete yet.

 My Evaluation: Kaylana's review focussed on the first part of the scene, where the surgeon is putting on his gloves, wondering why it took him so long when the patient was clearly unstable (as indicated by his death at the end of the film). Originally, we meant for this part of the film to purely build tension within the audience; however, I now feel that Kaylana was right and it does feel a little monotonous. Because of that, we plan on taking out the part where Dr. Carter is putting on the second glove, as it really doesn't add much to the scene anyway other than increasing our time, which we don't really want. While we will still keep him taking a few seconds to put on his first glove, I think getting rid of him putting the second one on will benefit the film overall, since we will still get to build tension without making it feel like it's dragging on forever. 

 Peer Review #5 (by Aldana Leguiza):https://aldana-leguiza.blogspot.com/2025/03/peer-reviews.html

 I liked the background sounds that were added which instantly made it clear we were in a hospital. Everything – the stuff they used, the clothes, the sounds, and the talking – showed it was a hospital. The way they used things, even with not much, was clever. The black fades showed time passing, which was good. The different camera shots, like showing the whole body and then a wide view, gave us different looks. And the video got grainier and the colors changed, which hinted the doctor was crazy. The opening was good because it made me want to know more. They could have done a bit more, like use different camera angles or sounds, but the crazy doctor reveal was interesting. My main problem was the ending. The close-up on the doctor’s face felt cheap and funny, not scary. And the blood looked a bit fake.

 My Evaluation: Aldana's review provided a lot of positive feedback as to the variety of our shots and the mise en scene we used, while also suggesting the final shot be edited or changed since it doesn't really convey the emotion we wanted it to. I feel like I agree with most of her assessment, especially since I also felt the ending felt weird and not scary, as she mentioned. I think the removal of the grainy filter will help, since it is currently reducing the quality without serving much of a purpose. I also agree that I wish the blood splatter looked a bit more realistic; however, we didn't have a lot of time to refilm that part, so I don't think there's much we can do about that presently.