Fahrenheit 451 Video Reviews!

Group #1:

Christine Moreno

Cassie Pauley

Johanna Stanley

Julia Matthews

• Meets assignment? (Are all members in the video?) Yes, all members appeared in the video. The group did meet the assignment in many different aspects. They did the interview, with six or more questions each, and it was in the display of a talk show, which met the criteria of the interview part.
• Viewer learns about F451/Characters? Each character was fully described by answering the questions. The characters were on point and I knew which people were which characters. They made it funny so it was nice to get information through having humor. I could tell very clearly which characters were which by the questions that were being asked, and the way that the person answered it in character.
• Entertaining? The video was entertaining, funny, and well put together and thought out so it made it fun to watch. It was also edited very well, which made it more fun to watch. At the end, the credits were like a real movie, with pictures of each person and their name. All of this made it very entertaining to watch, and more interesting.
• Compare/Contrast with own team video. My group’s video did not include a standard interview, like this one. Our group was all over the place, and also included a scene from the movie. I think that the talk show idea was very good, and they made it funny like Jerry Springer, and named it Julia Springer. However, all of the other groups did a talk show, and we did not. So it made our video a bit more unique than all of the others. 
• Anything you wish your team thought of? An interview show, more editing throughout the video. The editing made it more interesting to watch, and if we had done as much editing throughout our video it might have made it more interesting to watch.

Group #2:

Taylor Miller

Lindsey Molander

Lindsey Gatlin

Micheal Kwazney

• Meets assignment? (Are all members in the video?) Yes, all members and characters appeared in the video. The interviewer did not stay behind the camera the whole time, which was good. All of the people appeared in the video for the same amount of time. The also met the other criteria of doing an interview with six questions. This group may have even done more questions than asked for in the assignment.
• Viewer learns about F451/Characters? Each character was clearly displayed, and the information that was given made sense with the characters. This was because when the interviewer asked the questions, all of the questions were answered in character. The interviewer was also in character the whole time.
• Entertaining? It was a funny movie, and fun to watch. But sometimes hard to understand because there was a lot of laughing and goofiness, which made it fun to watch, but hard to understand. All of the characters played their parts well so it was entertaining to see them in character, and pretending to be people from the book.
• Compare/Contrast with own team video. My group’s video was all over the place, and there was a lot going on. This group’s video was in the same setting the whole time, which made it easier to follow along and understand. However with my video, it may have been a little bit more interesting because it was all over the place, instead of just in one setting the entire time.This group did not have a scene from the movie, like my group’s video did.
• Anything you wish your team thought of? An interview show, or a more formal interview. My group did not do a formal interview, whereas this group sat down and had an interview, which may have made it more interesting to the viewers.