Midterm 1, Week 2-4 Flashcards
What is a documentary?
A documentary tells a story about real life with claims to truthfulness.
The artistic representation of actuality.
When did documentaries gain traction?
In the 1990’s.
What three traits are paramount to documentaries based on their value?
Truthfulness, accuracy, and trustworthiness.
How do diverse previous career backgrounds help documentary filmmakers in their approach to filmmaking?
Documentaries can be about anything and everything, and often are from diverse perspectives that may not be the most obvious when choosing a subject. With varying career backgrounds, the filmmakers will each have unique experiences in their personal & professional lives that may help them see the diverse perspectives of the subjects they’re filming, while also highlighting any “hidden” or unsuspected perspectives.
How does documentary filmmaking offer creative freedom compared to other genres?
Documentary film doesn’t necessarily have the same limits as other genres. Because documentaries are reliant on real people and real events, i don’t think there’s a full “playbook” per se on how things should be done, allowing for more creative freedom and adaptability. For example, romance movies follow a trope of two people meeting, falling in love, and - usually - a happily ever after.
A speaker in the film Capturing Reality states “Reality is infinitely bizarre and weird.” Why do you think the filmmaker finds reality more compelling than fiction?
Because reality is unpredictable! Plus, with documentaries being based on real people, real events, real scenarios, etc., it adds to the impact the film may have on some people - making them see it from a more personalized perspective.
“It’s not interesting at all. These kind of cases happen everyday,” was the answer when a filmmaker was asked why the murder in Jacksonville, Florida was so intriguing to him. “The real challenge for a filmmaker is to take a story that seems banal and tell it in such a way that it becomes exemplary.”
What impact can the presence of filmmakers & cameras have on subjects?
People often have a persona they put on in front of a camera, wanting to present themselves at their very best. Filming a moment essentially immortalizes the moment. With a large camera crew & lots of technology, it may impact people by making them more nervous to speak openly & freely, or it may nudge people in the direction of either exaggerating for dramatic effect or withholding information to protect themselves and their experiences.
Why does an art form like documentary need to be flexible?
Because it’s unpredictable! You’re filming real people in real situations, and usually, there’s not a script to follow. As a result, anything could happen - quite literally.
Do you think documentary should offer an emotional experience instead of telling people what to think?
I think documentary film should always be an offering of an emotional experience, but I don’t believe that’s always what happens. People inherently want to share their opinions and perspective, and even if one was trying to limit that, I think it would be quite difficult not to have one’s thoughts, feelings, morals, etc. impact the film.
What concerns may arise from “casting” people for documentaries? (Choosing subjects based on how interesting or engaging they are on camera.)
As John Grierson defined documentary as “the artistic representation of reality,” it’s a tricky balance! You want to choose someone you can connect with; building trust is key if you want someone to open up to you! Plus, you want to engage the audience as they watch the film, so you need to consider what makes them fascinating. However, if taken too far, the act of casting people for a documentary may negate the purpose of a documentary all together, making it seem unrealistic & not as trustworthy of a story.
How does the setting or environment of an interview contribute to the truthfulness of a documentary?
If taken out of a natural environment of theirs, the subjects may become presentational and not in their essence, essentially putting up a wall/persona. When filming in a natural environment/location (ie. someone’s living room, kitchen table, backyard, etc.), you don’t want to rearrange things. If you do, you’re destroying the very things you should be filming!
One filmmaker describes the “ecstasy of truth,” suggesting truth in a documentary is more than just presenting facts. What does this mean, and do you agree documentaries should aim for beyond factual accuracy?
To me, the ecstasy of truth refers to the search for something deeper than what is presented at surface level. Facts alone can be quite boring/dry, but searching beyond that is when a story starts to develop that provides viewers with an opportunity to connect and resonate on a personal level.
One filmmaker describes the “ecstasy of truth,” suggesting truth in a documentary is more than just presenting facts. What does this mean, and do you agree documentaries should aim for beyond factual accuracy?
To me, the ecstasy of truth refers to the search for something deeper than what is presented at surface level. Facts alone can be quite boring/dry, but searching beyond that is when a story starts to develop that provides viewers with an opportunity to connect.
The filmmakers talk about making editorial choices, like keeping footage that subjects oppose including. How should documentarians balance their needs with the wishes of those depicted in their films?
As summed up by one of the filmmakers, one of the most important aspects is to protect the subjects being filmed, or you risk breaking that trust for any future endeavours.
How do you feel about the statement that filmmaking, including documentary filmmaking, is inherently subjective, and anyone who claims to tell the absolute truth is “perpetrating a fraud”?
I think it’s nearly impossible to have documentary film be inherently subjective. Everyone has their own set of values, beliefs, and morals, and I don’t think there’s an effective way to limit those and avoid them coming into play when making decision processes on what to film, how to film it, and what to include when editing - whether it be through the selection of footage to use, music to add, angles to film from, etc.
The idea that the Global South (or the ‘Third World’) is often filmed by outsiders raises ethical concerns. How does the power dynamic between filmmakers and their subjects influence the way stories are told, especially in cross-cultural contexts?
How does adversity—the opposition from subjects or other forces—shape the process of documentary filmmaking? Can facing challenges during production improve the final product?
I think you should always anticipate that there will be controversy and adversity, especially when filming a documentary with real people and real stories. By facing challenges during production, it can improve the final product by really challenging the filmmakers to get content that both completes the story being presented and respects the subjects wishes.
Is it ethical for documentary filmmakers to shape reality to serve a specific message or to create their intended effect? What is the right balance between the facts and the filmmakers’ own ideas?
Again, I don’t know if there’s an answer for this. In a perfect world, I don’t think it should be possible for documentaries to shape reality, in the sense that it would require them to have a specific narrative/opinion presented or call to action. However, we are human, and as humans we are susceptible to having our emotions pulled at, our ethics and morals being questions, and our opinions being picked apart. I think when watching documentaries, one has to consider who is filming them and why to be able to form an official standpoint on the events taking place in the film and any preconceived notions they may bring.
Where do all documentary conventions arise from?
The need to convince viewers of the authenticity of what they’re being told.
What are some examples of documentary conventions?
Experts vouch for the truthfulness of analysis; classical music connotes seriousness; long takes appear as unvarnished reality; jerkiness adds to a feeling of urgency and immediacy as if you’re there.
How do economic factors shape conventions??
Documentary film is still a business, and requires filmmakers to retain viewers - often using cost-effective factors like b-roll and stock footage, and minimalistic scenes - while considering costs, funding sources, and market demand.
How do economic factors shape conventions??
Documentary film is still a business, and requires filmmakers to retain viewers - often using cost-effective factors like b-roll and stock footage, and minimalistic scenes - while considering costs, funding sources, and market demand.
Why does Tristan Harris (former design ethicist at Google) say social media is no longer a tool?
Because it has its own goals and pursues them by using psychology against users.
“It’s seducing you. It’s manipulating you. It wants things from you,” Harris explains. “We’ve moved away from having a tools-based technology environment to an abdication and manipulation based technology environment.”
What is an argumentative documentary?
A documentary that aims to present a persuasive argument or viewpoint on a topic.
Aims to stimulate debate, raise awareness, and inspire action.
