Realness of Documentaries

 Q. How real did you find We Are the Lambeth Boys?   

The film directly was in on the action, but simply observed. There were some scenes that must have been set up, for example where a young lad is playing cricket and shouting to a girl across the field. To be able to capture both him speaking and her response, that must have been pre-planned. However, many of the scenes were real, with the camera person simply recording. The editing of cuts from one place to another also suggests that this may have had pre-planning, as some scenes showed a discussion from two different angles. 

  

  

Q. What do you think detracted from the authenticity of the text?  

The fact that some scenes may have been set up, pre-planned or organized may distract from the authenticity. As well as the fact that the people may have acted differently as they knew they were being recorded, they may not have acted naturally. Other than this, there is little to detract from the authenticity of the text, as the narrator says the girls usually talk while the boys play sports every week, and this can be seen in the video. This then implies that they do the same thing every week, and this, therefore, does not detract from the authenticity. 

 How real did you find Louis and the Nazis? 

Louis and the Nazis was very real, it was not staged as the woman at the start even says something along the lines of “You asked us to be normal as if you weren’t here.” it was also real as the scenes were not overly edited so that things couldn’t be interpreted differently. If the scene had a cut to a close-up of the interviewer’s angry face it would imply that the interviewee was angry, but that shot may have been taken at another time. Instead, the documentary used lots of long scenes to show its realness and geniuses, with only having cuts to change scenes.  

 

What do you think detracted from the authenticity of the text? 

There was little that detracted from the authenticity, as Louis let the people act how they normally would while staying either silent and letting them talk or asking a few questions. However, off-camera, they may have been pre-warned about the questions Louis would ask, or to react a certain way to react to Louis's questions. 

Q. How real did you find Powaqqatsi?   

Some scenes were definitely staged; for example, the scenes with the children smiling at the camera must have been told to do so. However, these children may have just seen the camera and naturally come forward and smiled as they were recorded. The shots were edited to change in time with the music, so the cameraman may have told the person on screen to be doing things for a specific shot. However, in many of the shots with people in, they all seemed to be working and not directly interacting or looking at the camera, so they may not have known it was there. 

  

  

Q. What do you think detracted from the authenticity of the text?  

The fact that some scenes may have been set up, pre-planned, or organized may distract from the authenticity.  
Some scenes showed the workers and people looking at the camera or running alongside it. The most pivotal point that detracts from the authenticity is the scene where several young people smile directly into the camera, indicating that they have been told to do so. Another thing that detracted from the authenticity of the text includes the fact that the people being recorded sometimes did not look at the camera, even when it was up close to them. If a camera was this close to a person, they would naturally look at it. This then implies that the cameraman has told them to either not look or “act natural”. Being told to act natural also detracts from the authenticity, as it means that the cameraman or director has spoken to the subject and told them what to do, even if it was a task they were already doing. It means that the subject of the scene is not doing what they would normally do and acting naturally, despite being told to do so. 
However, some scenes such as two men carrying a man who has fainted up a hill could not have been pre-planned and may have only been captured by chance. 

As well as the fact that the people may have acted differently as they knew they were being recorded, they may not have acted naturally. Other than this, there is little to detract from the authenticity of the text, as the narrator says the girls usually talk while the boys play sports every week, and this can be seen in the video. This then implies that they do the same thing every week, and this, therefore, does not detract from the authenticity. 

Q. How real did you find Workers Leaving the Lumiere Factory?

I found the text to be somewhat real, as when this was filmed, many people worked in factories therefore a video of people leaving a factory is very real. It was also real as people seemed to be acting naturally, laughing, biking home and saying hello to the dogs that were also around. The video was one long shot, meaning that editing could not change the meaning of the video or edit out any points.

Q. What do you think detracted from the authenticity of the text? 

There is quite a lot that detracts from the authenticity of the text. For example, the video was made by The Lumiere Brothers, and the video is about a Lumiere factory. A video being made by a company about their own things detracts from the authenticity as they are unlikely to show their flaws, bad points, or anything that may make them seem inferior to other rival companies. Therefore, they may have told their workers to look happy as they leave the factory. Another thing that detracts from the authenticity is the fact that the workers are not looking at the camera. When this video was filmed, cameras would have been large, with a person having to physically crank the wheel to get the fps spinning. This would have been incredibly difficult to miss due to its size, therefore the fact that no workers are looking directly at the camera implies they have been pre-warned it is there and told not to look. Another thing that detracts from the authenticity could be it may not have been closing time, these people may have been actors told to walk out the doors as if they were workers. It may not have even been closing time, workers may have been told to do this earlier than the time that work finished.

Expository documentary

•      Disembodied and authoritative voiceover which directly addresses the audience on what is happening in the accompanying images (giving meaning to the images – not opinion)

•      Facts and arguments are provided by the voiceover which also provides ‘captions’ for the images

•      A series of images (which are descriptive/informative) are used to compliment the voiceover

•      The effect of the expository documentary is (predominantly) one of objectivity, of direct and transparent representation.

 

Observational documentary

•      Unobtrusive construction and depictions – presents a slice of life

•      Non-intervention of the filmmaker – they are an uninvolved bystander

•      The filmmaker/director is hidden from the audience

•      More centred on what is not contained, e.g., commentary, intertitles, interviews etc. • Presents a transparent record of an event and is neutral/non-judgemental

•      Audiences decide what to think/decode from the text.

 

Interactive documentary

•      The filmmaker’s presence is evident – they are a participant

•      There is interaction between interviewees, the presenter and also the audience

•      Arguments (agendas) are usually presented

•      Manipulation of the text through editing is more evident

•      Sometimes criticised for ‘misrepresentation’ and ‘manipulation’ but defended by filmmakers due to the projected image being more important than fine details.

 

Reflexive documentary

•      The filmmaker attempts to expose the conventions of documentary to the audience

•      The construction of documentary texts are exposed and also experimented with

•      The documentary text will consist of shots that have captured ‘everyday life’ but they are then used as bricks which can make vastly different/experimental films.

 

Performative documentary

•      Represents the world indirectly and emphasis is on presentation rather than content

•      Use of re-enactments, exaggerated camera positions and soundtracks help to submerge the audience into the diegesis

•      Aims to present the subject matter in a subjective, expressive, stylised, evocative and visceral manner.

 

A documentary film or documentary is a non-fictional motion-picture intended to "document reality, primarily for the purposes of instruction, education or maintaining a historical record". (Documentary film, 2018) Bill Nichols has characterized the documentary in terms of "a filmmaking practice, a cinematic tradition, and mode of audience reception that remains a practice without clear boundaries" (Nichols, 1998)

 

Expository documentaries set up a specific point of view or argument about a subject and a narrator often speaks directly to the viewer. It emphasises the relationship between the images presented on-screen and offering verbal commentary.

There are three main key features to an expository documentary:

1.       Omniscient voice-over (also known as a “voice of God” narration.) It is used to explain key visuals to the audience and conveys information, but does not speak of personal accounts or subjective experiences.  

2.       A “right” answer. Expository documentaries dare not meant to be subjective. They are made to make the audience to feel a certain way about the content they are seeing.

3.       Evidentiary editing. Expository filmmakers use images as a means to support their claims. Images on-screen are usually explained or supported by captions or commentary. This is commonly seen in news broadcasts.

An example of an expository documentary is The Blue Planet (2001). (Blue Planet, 2001).
Blue Planet is a narrated documentary that guides people through life underwater, narrated by Sir David Attenborough.

Another example is March of the penguins (March of the Penguins, 2005). This French film won an Oscar, as well as 22 other awards and 15 nominations. The English version is narrated by Moragn Freeman. The documentaries explore penguin’s migration through an hour episode of beautiful cinematography. (staff, 2020)

 

 

There are 5 features of an observational documentary:

1.       Realism and immediacy: Observational cinema aims to tell true stories. To promote a feeling of realism, an observational documentary follows people or events in real-time, often detailing daily life. The film team follows the action spontaneously to achieve this.

2.       Handheld shots: Using handheld shots to follow subjects or scenes that would otherwise be impossible to follow, however it does mean that some important information such as facial expressions may be missed, either on purpose due to the cameraman’s bias or simply because people are talking at once and cannot be fitted into the same shot.

3.       Long takes: Since filmmakers are following action as it takes place, observational documentaries often employ long takes without any editing to further enhance the realism and immerse viewers in the scene. This means any editing cannot change any opinions, information or be biased.

4.       Little to no voice-over: Since observational documentary filmmakers are interested in objectivity more than a clear message, they let their footage speak the loudest.

5.       No re-enactments: While other documentary forms employ actors re-enacting scenes that the camera didn’t capture, an observational documentary rejects this method as shattering the realism of the film. (staff, 2020)

An example of an observational or “fly-on-the-wall” documentary is Powaqqatsi. (Powaqqatsi, 1988) It is an exploration of developing nations and the effect that the transition to Western-Style modernisation has had on them.

There is no voice-over, instead music plays over slow-mo shots of people living their daily lives.

 

There are 5 main features to an interactive, web or media documentary, they are:

1.       The filmmaker is an evident participant, usually on screen,

2.       There is a clear interaction between interviewees, the presenter and the audience,

3.       Arguments are usually presented,

4.       Manipulated though editing is very common,

It is regularly criticised for “misinterpretation” because of this. (staff, 2020)

There are also three different levels of interactivity:

1.       The interactivity is either semi-closed (the user can browse but not change the content),

2.       semi-open (the user can participate but not change the structure of the interactive documentary),

3.       completely open (the user and the interactive documentary constantly change and adapt to each other). (Leeuw, n.d.)

 

The reflexive documentary does not attempt to provoke intense emotional responses from the audience but encourages thoughtful consideration of the material. (staff, 2020)
There are 2 main features to a reflexive documentary:

1.       They show involvement of the filmmaker, (and usually make the cameraman and camera) part of the film

2.       Presents questions and approaches topics with uncertainty, presenting a version of truth within a non-fiction format.

An example of a reflexive documentary includes many of Louis Theroux’s. An example of a reflective documentary he has made is the series “Louis Theroux’s Weird Weekends” (Louis Theroux's Weird Weekends, 1998-2000). The series was nominated for - and won a BAFTA.

His series explore topics that are made to create arguments; such as visiting white people in South Africa who are refusing to accept Apartheid's end.

 

Performative documentary films focus on the filmmakers’ involvement with their subject, using their personal experience or relationship with the subject to explore larger, subjective truths about politics, history, or groups of people. They have ** key features:

1.       This non-fiction film style often emphasizes the filmmaker’s involvement,

2.       They appear as the centrepiece of the film, driving the action

3.       The filmmaker uses their own feelings and experiences to obtain an emotional response from the audience and drive forward their film’s agenda,

An example of a performative documentary is Fahrenheit 9/11.
Michael Moore constructs a narrative using outrage and horror to evoke a strong emotional response from his viewers. He often appears on-screen giving “man on the street” style interviews to subjects, crafting his own interpretation of how the war in Iraq unfolded and America’s response to it. (Film 101: Understanding Performative Documentary Mode, 2021)

 

My personal favourite format of documentaries is expository documentaries. This is because I like looking at all the different images and videos while having some form of narration adding more detail. Nature documentaries typically fit into this format, which I enjoy watching as they are “simple watching” and do not require much focus.
The format that present information in the most unbiased and objective way is a reflexive documentary. That is because it has long shots that cannot be misinterpreted or edited in anyway, it also shows peoples natural responses to questions. It is also the most unbiased format to present information as it presents questions and approaches topics with uncertainty, presenting a version of truth within a non-fiction format.
Depending on the format, documentary producers do have a contract with the viewer to remain honest, unbiased and give accurate information. For example, nature documentaries must remain purely factual so that false information isn’t being advertised. However, expository documentaries, such as Louis Theroux Meets the Nazis must show different opinions in order to show different views and spark debates. This means inaccurate information may be said, however, to make sure the public is aware of this and does not take what is said as gospel; warnings should be given at the start saying that all information may not be entirely accurate.

 

References

Blue Planet. (2001). Retrieved from IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0296310/

Documentary film. (2018, April 25). Retrieved from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_film#cite_note-1

Film 101: Understanding Performative Documentary Mode. (2021, June 28th). Retrieved from MmasterClass Articles: https://www.masterclass.com/articles/understanding-performative-documentary-mode#4-examples-of-performative-documentaries

Leeuw, I. d. (n.d.). The 6 Most Innovative Interactive Web Documentaries. Retrieved from VICE: https://www.vice.com/en/article/xyvmyd/the-6-most-innovative-interactive-web-documentaries

Louis Theroux's Weird Weekends. (1998-2000). Retrieved from IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0217229/

March of the Penguins. (2005). Retrieved from IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0428803/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Nichols, B. (1998). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_film#cite_note-2

Powaqqatsi. (1988). Retrieved from imdb: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095895/

staff, M. (2020, November 8th). Film 101: Understanding Expository Documentary Mode. Retrieved from MasterClass staff: https://www.masterclass.com/articles/understanding-expository-documentary-mode#:~:text=Expository%20documentaries%20set%20up%20a,screen%20and%20offering%20verbal%20commentary.