Why doesn't this footage look that good --in my opinion?

[AmateurFilmmaker]

Here's the footage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YE5-D7Wzlv4

It was made with the AJA Cion camera and shot in 4k --I think. The people behind the scenes I believe could have done better with it to make it look more filmic/high-quality. Is it the shaky camera movements, low-quality looking set --with equally as low quality blood smeared throughout the set, and awkward Christmas lights as examples of things that negatively stood out on set-- lighting, or camera used itself? Did the people behind this video use the wrong camera in the first place? Shoot it with improper camera settings? Angles? Bad color grading/correction? Framing? My personal opinion is off? What do you think about the video? Could you have done better with the same camera? Worse? Produced content similar to it?

 

[mus]

Annoyingly shaky, but otherwise, the color seemed fine (except for all the different color gradings throughout. those all looked bad.) Also, the super-close-ups were annoying. (one or two of those shots seemed overexposed, not sure if that's what they were going for)

Sure, the set looks cheesy, but I'd chalk most of that up to the unrealistic blood on the walls. It looked like the guy cut his wrists and then doodled with his blood out of boredom.

The lighting on the actor WOULD have looked good if we didn't see that lamp in the bathtub. Overhead lighting would solve that. Those Christmas lights I think add to the drama of the scene, assuming the plot takes place somewhere around Christmas-time.

Plus the actor delivered his lines in a cheesy way.

 

[jax_rox]

The whole thing looks low budget.

There's no particular depth, the shadows are noisy (making me wonder how this scene was exposed), the lamp is way too bright, the grade is meh and it looks like the small space forced them to use wide (and likely cheap) lenses, which is why there isn't much depth. It looks more like super clean 16mm.