Thanks for listening, really appreciate it!
To be honest, I almost feel the same way as you. The main reason I think it's acceptable (and why it got the OK from the director) is because it "sounds nice". That's not much good for me personally, however, because this could easily just be stock music. Maybe that's too harsh. I dunno.
As for using i and VI, I initially did that just to sketch out the cue. Then, when listening with the dialogue, I couldn't find anywhere it could change. Like you said, "it's hard to get a sense that something is growing." I think that's the problem I found with the dialogue. It started with a certain sadness, then moved to the older woman snapping, then coming back to apologise over and over again, before a final "I'm sorry, let's go back"-kind of line. Maybe I'm making excuses here, though. Surely I can do something better than this. I'm glad you've made me think about it further.
The Picardy cadence — the only real "interesting" part of this. I used this on an earlier scene as well (attached that)... Listening back it felt like it worked better in that cue, maybe because it just went from i to I, rather than VI to I. It definitely sounds a lot more awkward in this piece. However, if I go VI > bVII > I it sounds so predictable. Also the other cue did a loop of IV > i, making it easier to resolve to the E major (maybe?). Anyway I'm just thinking out loud...
Again, really appreciate the feedback. Love hearing stuff like this, it makes me think about what I'm doing a lot more deeply.