A documentary is a film, T.V or radio broadcast which is used to inform on a certain subject. The most common documentary that we see is a news broadcast or the print form a newspaper. Usually interviews are common.
I personally believe that documentaries are used to get a certain point across. To show something in a certain light. Some do not chose sides. Whilst others do.
Expository documentary:
Expository documentaries are made to make an argument. They are the usual documentary format. P The structure is grounded in a series of assertions backed up by evidence. They are presented through verbal commentary from an off screen narrator. While images back this up. The audience is normally addressed and told what is going on throughout the entirety of the documentary.
Examples:
David Attenbourgh's Planet Earth, Alastair Fothergill, 2006 is a great example of Expository documentary. It's uses of David's soothing voice over accompanied, with beautiful cinematography showing us the beauty of Earth allows the audience to sit back and learn things about the World and wild life they probably didn't know. It doesn't need a whole bunch of talking heads to explain what is going on. As David Attenbourgh's voice and what happens on screen accompany each other.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0795176/?ref_=nm_flmg_wr_16
Planet Earth, Alastair Fothergill, 2006
Observational Documentary:
An observational documentary presents a slice of life. The film maker is hidden from the audience. Observational documentaries are more fly on the wall. There is usually no questions asked. It will show subjects interacting with each other naturally. Observational documentaries are not judgmental, they let the audience make up there mind.
Examples:
Gimme Shelter, 1970, Albert Maysles, David Maysles, Charlotte Zwerin is a harrowing documentary about the groups 1969 tour, particularly the tragic concert at Altamont. At the Altamont concert four months after Woodstock The Rolling Stones and Jefferson Airplane held a free concert in which 300,000 came. Organizers of the event put Hell's angels in charge of security. Which didn't end well. The documentary shows what happened on that night. From the violence of the Hell's angels, close ups of drugged up fans and Mick Jagger telling people to calm down. It's observational at its very best. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065780/
Gimme Shelter, 1970, Albert Maysles, David Maysles, Charlotte Zwerin
Interactive documentaries:
The filmmaker is present as a participant and the audience can also take part. Arguments are usually presented in interactive documentaries. Interactive documentaries are often criticised for misinterpreting information however filmmakers say that the way they are made is good even though the fine details aren't always there.
Examples:
Crimewatch, 1984 is a good example of an interactive documentary. With Crimewatch there are multiple documentary formats including performative, however it is still interactive as anyone can ring in on Crimewatch live on air making it so that the presenter, audience on the set and audience at home can all interact at the same time.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0185794/
Reflective documentary:
A reflective documentary is when the film maker wants it to be clear that a documentary is being filmed and wants to break the rules of a documentary. Mockumentary's can be considered reflective as reflective documentaries are often experimental and are very different to other forms of documentaries.
Example:
This is Spinal Tap, Rob Reiner, 1984 is a mockmumentary that challenges the typical documentary format. By using a fictional band (that later became a real band because of the films popularity) the mockumentary satirises common rock band tropes with very dry humour which actually leaves the impression that this feels like an actual documentary.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088258/?ref_=nv_sr_1
Performative documentary:
Performative documentaries highlight the subjective or expressive aspect of the film makers own involvement with a subject to heighten the audience's responsiveness to the subject and to this involvement. These films refect objectivity and they favour emotion instead.
Example:
In Bowling for Coloumbine, Michael Moore, 2002 Michael Moore is prominent throughout the entirety of this documentary. It is made clear that this is a performative documentary throughout. With uses of contrapuntal music with depressing archive footage. Plus animations and audio from the actual shooting. Michael Moore wants to challenge America's gun obsession after the events of the Coloumbine High school shootings. It is a good documentary however my only flaw with it is, through editing and Michael's direction he manipulates peoples views to make the audience view Michael's side of the argument. So Michael is being bias. To some extent it works however it overshadows the interviewees views. Michael Moore was clearly looking for an emotional responce with the documentary. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0310793/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
Bowling for Coloumbine, Michael Moore, 2002
Dramatisations and re enactments:
Dramatisations and re enactments are often used to spark an emotional response with the viewer. It is the closest that the viewer can actually get to the event. A lot of the time these may be pretty close or far off from what actually happened. Also it can be pretty hard to capture something on camera as it happens, especially if your documentary is being made after an event do a dramatisation and re enactment is the closest you are going to get to showing an audience something. Also some dramatisations can show the film makers point of view on the matter. (Even if it is bias).
What is your philosophy as a film maker?
I personally prefer the observational documentary. As with observational documentaries even if you are making it on a controversial subject manner you are a fly on the wall. You're letting the subject/subjects act natural which will get a neutral reaction and you won't be considered bias. I don't want to make something from my point of view as people will disagree with me. I want to make something which can have many people watch it without getting frustrated as everything that is happening isn't staged.
Well done Connor, a detailed and well-researched post.
ReplyDeleteEllie