 |
||
11/07/07 |
  
|
PAIRED EXERCISE # 1 - THE DOCUMENTARY!R.G. VIEW COMM 481: History & Development of the Documentary Film First question is: "Why does the documentary mode of production engage us more in the real world than the fiction feature film does?" The answer is: The story is one reason, the way documentary obscures the blurred boundaries between fiction and non fiction, documenting reality and experimenting with form, showing and telling through narrative and rhetoric. The continuation of this tradition of experimentation is what keeps the documentary alive and current.
Also Grierson's principles of documentary were that cinema's potential for observing life could be exploited in a new art form; that the "original" actor and "original" scene are better guides than their fiction counterparts to interpreting the modern world; and that materials "thus taken from the raw" can be more real than the acted article. Grierson said documentary is "creative treatment of actuality." Also in essays by Dziga Vertov, he argues that documentaries are presenting "life as it is" or "life caught unawares." Vertov believed that the camera, with its varied lenses, shot-counter shot editing, time-lapse, ability to slow motion, stop motion and fast-motion -- could show reality more accurately than the human eye, and he made a film philosophy out of it. Along with that - in time the ability to add and sync sound gave the documentary even more power to show reality in it's truest form. Which is probably why documentaries focus us more on the real world, it tries to show the world in it's truest form - simplicity. Where fiction can take us OUT of the real world with the tricks of cinema and sound, where documentaries try to preserve the reality of the shot and sound to add realism and power to their stories. _______________________________________________________________ Second question is: "Why do our interpretations of documentary films involve ethical issues more than fiction features do?" The answer is: Because usually the documentaries evoke emotion over real issues, whether they be historical issues, political issues, or what is relevant. Documentaries also try to provide "cinematic truth" more so than in fiction. It is more important that the viewer believe what they are watching on screen (even if it is manipulated) since it deals with deeper truth than in a fictional story. Along with that, the fact that documentaries are usually filmed more intimately, with fewer people, less lighting and hand held cameras that reflect the movement and realism also add to the power of documentaries making the interpretations seem more relevant and possibly more ethical as a result.
______________________________________________________________________ Third question is: "What elements in the production of the documentary film give it a voice of it's own? The answer is: Well I guess it depends on each filmmaker and how they use elements of production to achieve their "voice". In some documentaries it may be the visuals or how the visuals were filmed that make the difference. In others it could be the combination of sound and visuals, how they are combined or used against one another. In other movies it could be the story and how the filmmaker uses elements to tell that story. I think the "voice" in documentary is different for every film, each director puts his own mark on the film - whether it be through content, visual style, sonic elements, his use of silence or a cacophony of sound. Also I think the "story" combined with these elements gives the documentary it's strongest "voice."
E. W. VIEW First question is: "Why does the documentary mode of production engage us more in the real world than the fiction feature film does?" The answer is: The documentary mode of production engages us more in the world than the feature file does. For one, feature films are a billion dollar business - they spend a lot of money on production and that makes the feature film not as real as the documentary. Money can be used for special effects or editing, not concentrating only on the story. Where a documentary takes a little money, but can make a lot. Documentaries gives a sense of reality to a production, while blockbuster films can be superficial due to effects and using of green screens, the documentaries are usually real and people have a special interest in preserving the reality of production.
Second question is: "Why do our interpretations of documentary films involve ethical issues more than fiction features do?" The answer is: Because documentaries are based on the public interest, things like war, racism, or people of interest. After 9/11 there was a lot of documentaries based on the event, before and after. Ethical issues are the main reason why most people shoot documentaries because they are able to inform people about the ills of society or raise a red flag about certain topics as Michael Moore does.
Third question is: "What elements in the production of the documentary film give it a voice of it's own? The answer is: Style, content, color, black & white, lighting, lenses, story - so many things can give a documentary a voice of it's own. In the movie "Man With A Movie Camera", there was no narration, just music - things like that can give a documentary a one up on the usual film. With documentaries you can go against the grain, but not break the rules of production. Another thing that gives documentaries their own voice is the fact that when handheld cameras were introduced into the world of film, it gave the average person the ability to do a documentary if the content of the film they were documenting was interesting enough. Some information from the !hype view was gathered at Wikipedia.com, thank you.
|
This site was last updated 10/10/07
Look
at my new online photo album filled with pictures from my vacations,
sporting events, and my family.