My thought is that a documentary is something that recalls a part of history weaver it being a persons story or an affect like the war or even just school children waling to school. A documentary is something that shows a part of real live from different aspects. Documents are important as they show people different elements of the world and tell different story's just like a school a documentary can teach people things that they may not of even thought of learning about. I believe that the most true type of documentary is an expository document. But all documentary's are never 100% true and factual as the film marker has the final shout on what shots they show to the audience. I believe documentary's are very important into days world as they can open peoples eyes to different things that are going on into the world and can also be a sore of educating people.
Interactive documentaries
An interactive document is a documentary where the film marker is present and participates in the documentary. There is an interaction between interviewees, the filmmaker and the audience. In interactive documentary arguments are presented to the audience. The arguments that are shown are manipulated thought the text of the documentary and the editing. Interactive documentary's can be criticised for 'misrepresentation' and 'manipulation' as the film marker can shape the documentary to come across how that what the audience to see it.
An interactive documentary I watch and have chose to evaluate on the 1995 documentary High on crack street by Richard Farrell, Maryann DeLeo and Jon Alpert. High on crack stress is based in 30 miles northwest of Boston in the city of Lowell, Massachusetts. The filmmakers follow around three people: Boo Boo, Brenda, and former professional boxer Dicky Eklund in their day to day lives. Their day to days life's consist of getting high on crack. The film markers follow how they get there drugs, how it effects there family, there health and over all just there lives.
High on crack stress the filmmakers are presenting there evidence this mean they are involved in the documentary. In this documentary they are following these people in there day to day life but also interacting by interview and even interacting in peoples life's. The film makers are documenting something in the present day that does effect people al around the work. High on crack stress is a sensitive documentary that shows that audience how drug addiction can take over peoples live and how it can effect that person and the people around them. The fact this documentary is an interactive documentary makes it more effective as the film makers are the like audience interacting and showing something that people will not of wanted to acknowledged or even know or had any experience in drug addiction. The most smoking part of this documentary is when one of the filmmaker blocks a lighter from the wind to help a pregnant women smoke crack. The film maker does this to show that audience that whatever he did this or not she still would of smoked it and there is nothing that he can do to help her. The film marker by doing this is showing that harsh truth of these peoples life's at the end of the day a documentary is trying to show something that it real.
The filmmakers makes interview the three main people and the over people that are involved in the main characters life's. They do this to get different arguments across the argument like why these people don't try and stop and why they go into drugs in the first place. By the film markers interview people question they think will the audience and they want to here this guides the document to there argument. The films makers argument is why don't these people stop doing drugs and why do they get help. And the whole documentary is edited the way the filmmakers what it to be to show a certain argument. High on crake stress was edited over 18 months and only certain parts of these 18 months have been shown in the documentary. The argument is that drug abuse is a bad thing and the negative sides of drugs abuse as the people who are interactive (the filmmakers) have the few that is being shown in the documentary.
High on crack is a very sensitive documentary but do I believe it presents the truth? I believe it does show some truth as the things in the documentary as they have been shot as the events are happening and then later edited. High on crake street does present the real life of these people and how it effect the people around them and all the emotion and events are real. This documentary was filmed over 18 weeks but the documentary it's self is only 60 minutes. This part tell me that the documentary does show real life but only the bits that the film marker wanted to show this makes the documentary sort of edited for audience purposed.Observational documentary
An observational documentary presents a slice of life the film marker is just a bystander/ hidden away from the audience. It is more cantered on what is not contained, e.g, commentary, interties, interviews etc. It presents a rescored of an event that is natural/ non-judgemental and the record it presents give the audience the freedom to decide what to think about the text.
knuckles is and documentary on bare knuckle fighting with in the gipsy community. This documentary presents a slice of life, whats it's like to be in this community and the world of bare knuckle fighting. The filmmaker is hidden from the camera meeting no interviews and shows the events as they happen. With there being no filmmaker the audience gets to decide that to think about all the events. IN the documentary there are clips form the police showing negative things and the people them self's saying positive things. There is not a someone to ask them question who as one practical view on things.
I believe this documtary shows real life as the camera is following real people with really stories filming real event. The only this is that people could be acting for the camera and showing off but with knuckles getting news stores and police views on knuckling fighting is definably show that audience that this is a really thing that happens.
Reflexive documentary
The filmmaker is trying to expose the conventions of a documentary to the audience this is exposed and experimented with. A reflective documentary consist of shots that capture 'everyday life' but can then be shaped and formed how the filmmaker wants. A man with a camera is an 1929 silent documentary with no story and no actors. I have decided to choose this documartey as it is very different and I believe it doesn't count of a documentary as such. Over reflexive documentary's are more real then overs but the man with a camera I believe doesn't show real life. Onew good thing about this documatary as it does slightly so a slice of history as this film os very old and it show us that the people in that date you wear, dress, do and how the streets use to look.
A man with a camera is just filming different shots and different this that do relate but we don't know as an audience if these shot have been set up and the people in them been told what to do. The documtary is trying to show everyday life but in it own way. I believe this documtary doesn't show a presentation of the truth thought it weird theme, shot and over all no story line.
Performative documentary
A preformative documentary reflects the world indirectly and focuses on presentation of the documentary rather then contents. The use of many different devised such as camera positions, soundtrack and text this is to help submerge the audience into the dieresis. The documentary aims to present a sensitive subject matter in a visceral manner.
The example I choose for a performativity documentary is the documentary is The hunting ground. The hunting group is about is a about a cause of sexual assault at an American university and how the crimes where trying to be coved up.
The hunting group is a documentary on a very sensitive topic but the documentary is made in a way that the presentation is more then the content. As the people talk about there things that happed to them between this is scene where people have acted out what the person is talking about. These little clips are suppose to show the effects as of they were happening there and then. The hunting group has been edited so that it make the documentary more thrilling and existing to watch form the range of different shots to the music. Unlike over documtaries this documtary this documentary has not just been filmed as it is happening it has made clips just like a film would using special effect and lighting to make the over all effect of the doumarty more dramatic.
I believe this document does show a very real effect and the people talking and there stories are real the only thing that isn't is the reancaments. The reancments I believe has been added in to show how shocking these events are but also to make the subject expressive and sensitive.
Expository documentaries
Expository documents include disembodied and authoritative voice over which directly addresses the audience on what is happening in the accompanying images. (giving meaning to images- not opinion). Facts and arguments are provided by the voice over which also provides 'captions' for the images. A series of images (which are descriptive/information) are used to compliment the voice over. The effect of the expository documentary is (predominantly) one of objectivity, of direct and transparent representation.
The exploratory documtaries I chose where the David Attenborough planet earth. These documtayrs are very famous for the voice over of David. David accompanies what is happening the images show he also directly speaks to the audience.
Plant earth is one of the most famous expository documtaries. An expository documtayr to me is one that shows a slice of real life. The image s that are show are all real there is no human in plant earth that could guide away form the 100% truth. It ortents the truth of our worked the voice over is just something to accompany the images and make them more interesting but everything the voice over is saying is acuret and factual.
Conclusion
In my conclusion as a film makers I do believe a documtary has to show real life and has to be a real and factual as possible. In a way every documtary is not 100% true full but I believe that a documentary cant lie or be not based on fact as that is lying to an audience. Also as a filmmaker I can see why documaratys add things in and make a documtary more interesting because they want people to watch them. Different documataires deal with different things also didn't filmmakers have different view and ideas.
No comments:
Post a Comment