New Documentary - Portal For Student Posts
Kristin McNaule
Please share your insights and discoveries around New Documentary. Minimum half page about what was screened and discussed in New Documentary class, or bring something new to this discussion. Look forward to your posts.
American Movie - Following the American Dream (by Julien S.)
One of my favourite documentaries is American Movie...it highlights the drive people have to pursue their dreams, even when those dreams are highly idealistic and all but out of reach. Throughout this documentary, Mark Borchardt attempts to become a successful hollywood direction and producer. The film chronicles his struggle to finish his horror movie in order to finance future projects. What is most inspiring and yet saddening, is that despite his shortcomings the main character never ceases to work toward his dream that seems to slip further and further from his grasp.
Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7N2Jz1en4w
This film is not shot particularly well, and some might accuse it of being devoid of any artistic merit, but the strength of the lead character, supported by secondary characters (such as his Uncle Bill, best friend Mike, mother, and father), are what carries this film. I suppose when watching this documentary, it consistently reminds me the importance of having compelling characters, and that they have clearly defined goals. It allows the audience members to look forward in anticipation to his pending success or failure. Furthermore, this film reinforces the old adage that patience is a virtue. It was shot over several years, and I cannot imagine the amount of footage that was shot, that never ended up making it up onto the screen.
Finally, the documentary shows itself to be a precursor to Reality TV. In the film we see Mark fighting with his wife, his problems with alcohol, and the relationships he shares with the rest of his family.
Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7N2Jz1en4w
This film is not shot particularly well, and some might accuse it of being devoid of any artistic merit, but the strength of the lead character, supported by secondary characters (such as his Uncle Bill, best friend Mike, mother, and father), are what carries this film. I suppose when watching this documentary, it consistently reminds me the importance of having compelling characters, and that they have clearly defined goals. It allows the audience members to look forward in anticipation to his pending success or failure. Furthermore, this film reinforces the old adage that patience is a virtue. It was shot over several years, and I cannot imagine the amount of footage that was shot, that never ended up making it up onto the screen.
Finally, the documentary shows itself to be a precursor to Reality TV. In the film we see Mark fighting with his wife, his problems with alcohol, and the relationships he shares with the rest of his family.
King of Kong - The Battle for Supremacy (by Julien S.)
King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters, a 2007 documentary by Seth Gordon, will have you rooting for the underdog, Steve Wiebe, while hoping for the demise of the reigning title-holder, Billy Mitchell.
This documentary follows a middle-age father who, as divulged by his wife, has never been the best or #1 at anything in his life. Steve Wiebe rekindles his love for Donkey Kong when he plugs in his machine in his garage. He ends up achieving the highest score ever reached on Donkey Kong, but in order to claim his title, he must have it approved by the Twin Galaxies, an organization which Billy Mitchell, the perennial champion, has much influence, calling into question the integrity of the judges.
Ultimately, the strength of this film also lies in its characters. They are practically walking stereotypes. You've got the geeky nerds, you've got the underdog, and you've got the villain. The story is analogous to David vs. Goliath, and again, allows audience members to pick sides and root for their favourite competitor. This is a theme that is routinely played up, as gaming so often revolves around competition.
The only thing I am fairly curious about is how (or perhaps, if) they ever received clearance from Nintendo to rebroadcast the images of their games. It seems that getting clearance from a corporation like that would be fairly difficult (despite the obvious benefits of the added publicity to their aging catalog of games).
Finally, the fact that we also see Steve's personal life (with his family), and his professional life (as a teacher), adds some much needed character depth.
This documentary follows a middle-age father who, as divulged by his wife, has never been the best or #1 at anything in his life. Steve Wiebe rekindles his love for Donkey Kong when he plugs in his machine in his garage. He ends up achieving the highest score ever reached on Donkey Kong, but in order to claim his title, he must have it approved by the Twin Galaxies, an organization which Billy Mitchell, the perennial champion, has much influence, calling into question the integrity of the judges.
Ultimately, the strength of this film also lies in its characters. They are practically walking stereotypes. You've got the geeky nerds, you've got the underdog, and you've got the villain. The story is analogous to David vs. Goliath, and again, allows audience members to pick sides and root for their favourite competitor. This is a theme that is routinely played up, as gaming so often revolves around competition.
The only thing I am fairly curious about is how (or perhaps, if) they ever received clearance from Nintendo to rebroadcast the images of their games. It seems that getting clearance from a corporation like that would be fairly difficult (despite the obvious benefits of the added publicity to their aging catalog of games).
Finally, the fact that we also see Steve's personal life (with his family), and his professional life (as a teacher), adds some much needed character depth.
First Person Documentary as Art (by Helena E.)
Recently I tried to put together a short five-minute documentary in which I was the main character. It was a simple story, but I never found anything more difficult. It is hard enough to edit something you’ve shot, when you lack the distance you need to look at the footage for what it is. But making yourself vulnerable in front of the camera for everybody to see you is even harder. As much as I wanted to be honest, it was hard. It is your image you’re putting out there. How do you tell a story honestly without feeling naked?
This made me think about artists, and how their honesty is what makes what they do valuable. Whether it's music, painting, acting, dance. Making documentaries requires honesty, from the subjects and from you when you're behind the camera. If the subject is you, however, the challenge is bigger, the main goal is to make your documentary a form of art. It takes courage to be honest, to tell the truth in front of a camera. That’s how I realized the power in first person documentaries. And the reason why I admired its creators so much.
This made me think about artists, and how their honesty is what makes what they do valuable. Whether it's music, painting, acting, dance. Making documentaries requires honesty, from the subjects and from you when you're behind the camera. If the subject is you, however, the challenge is bigger, the main goal is to make your documentary a form of art. It takes courage to be honest, to tell the truth in front of a camera. That’s how I realized the power in first person documentaries. And the reason why I admired its creators so much.
My Favorite Doc Director, Allan Winton King (by Tae-eun Kim)
How intimate can filmmakers get with the subject with camera gears? How closely can filmmakers interact with their subjects, look at their mind, and deeply understand them? An amazing documentary filmmaker, Allan King remained the incredible answer for those questions.
Allan Winton King (b. February 6, 1930, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada – d. June 15, 2009, Toronto, Ontario, Canada) is one of Canada’s most influential documentary film directors. Most topics and subject matters of his documentaries were pretty personal, so it requires the participants to allow him to access their most private places at private times. Allan King and his staff went into even the bedroom of the characters, filming their real bed scene. His subjects were crying, sleeping, fighting, kissing and even dying before the camera. They seemed to act as if there was nobody around, even with lots of camera sets and shooting crews right next to them during the long filming period. Above all, they were not actors but ordinary people just like me, and that fact makes the stories much more touching.
In this regard, Allan King must have been a prudent, trustworthy person who treats everybody respectfully. But nonetheless, it is obvious he took considerable amount of time and effort to persuade all the subjects politely to participate in his film. I can imagine him meeting each subject with a tremendous passion, explaining them why it is important and necessary to make the film and how it would impact the human society for the better.
Allan King had lived and worked in Toronto for a long time. He passed away just three years ago, in 2009. It is truly unfortunate that in my lifetime I did not have the chance to meet, talk, or work with him. However he left us lots of great films. Thanks to these legacies, I might be able to connect to his spirit.
Allan King is the exemplary documentarian to me. His works serves as a beautiful example of an ideal observational documentary: that is honest, straightforward, respectful and sometimes very poignant. I dream of producing a great film someday, that will inspire other film directors for the next generation, just like Allan Winton King.
(A few specific examples of his work)
1) His first film – Skid row (1956 / 38min., 16mm, B&W)
2) Warrendale (1967 / 101min., 16mm, B&W)
3) A married Couple (1969 / 96min., 16mm, colour)
4) Who has seen the wind (1977 / 101min., 16mm, colour)
5) Dying at Grace (2003 / 147min., video, colour)
6) Memory for Max, Claire, Ida and Company (2005 / 112min., video, colour)
Allan Winton King (b. February 6, 1930, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada – d. June 15, 2009, Toronto, Ontario, Canada) is one of Canada’s most influential documentary film directors. Most topics and subject matters of his documentaries were pretty personal, so it requires the participants to allow him to access their most private places at private times. Allan King and his staff went into even the bedroom of the characters, filming their real bed scene. His subjects were crying, sleeping, fighting, kissing and even dying before the camera. They seemed to act as if there was nobody around, even with lots of camera sets and shooting crews right next to them during the long filming period. Above all, they were not actors but ordinary people just like me, and that fact makes the stories much more touching.
In this regard, Allan King must have been a prudent, trustworthy person who treats everybody respectfully. But nonetheless, it is obvious he took considerable amount of time and effort to persuade all the subjects politely to participate in his film. I can imagine him meeting each subject with a tremendous passion, explaining them why it is important and necessary to make the film and how it would impact the human society for the better.
Allan King had lived and worked in Toronto for a long time. He passed away just three years ago, in 2009. It is truly unfortunate that in my lifetime I did not have the chance to meet, talk, or work with him. However he left us lots of great films. Thanks to these legacies, I might be able to connect to his spirit.
Allan King is the exemplary documentarian to me. His works serves as a beautiful example of an ideal observational documentary: that is honest, straightforward, respectful and sometimes very poignant. I dream of producing a great film someday, that will inspire other film directors for the next generation, just like Allan Winton King.
(A few specific examples of his work)
1) His first film – Skid row (1956 / 38min., 16mm, B&W)
2) Warrendale (1967 / 101min., 16mm, B&W)
3) A married Couple (1969 / 96min., 16mm, colour)
4) Who has seen the wind (1977 / 101min., 16mm, colour)
5) Dying at Grace (2003 / 147min., video, colour)
6) Memory for Max, Claire, Ida and Company (2005 / 112min., video, colour)
“Dying at Grace”(by Tae-eun Kim)
This documentary, “Dying at Grace” filmed by Allan King, deals with the experience of dying.
Dying at Grace has captivated my attention from the first scene, like most of Allan King’s other works. In the hallway of the Salvation Army Toronto Grace Health Centre, a nurse was dragging a wheeled bed into a room. There was a person who just lost her life, and a few staffs of Toronto Grace put the dead body in a zipper bag and move it to a morgue. It was so sudden and shocking to me, but the people in the screen looked calm, just doing their usual work. Following this scene, the five main characters continuously passed away before my eyes. Allan King filmed the last days of terminal patients; Carmela Nardone, Joyce Bone, Eda Simac, Rick Pollard, and Lloyd Greenway at a palliative care unit. Their dying moments, different but similar in a way, were dissolved throughout the whole 148 minutes. Every scene was quiet, solemn and strong as much as the heavy topic of this film.
One of the main characters, Carmela, reminded me of my grandmother, because her personality seemed similar to my grandmother’s. Carmela who immigrated to Canada from Italy, is a quiet, dignified woman. She never complains. She is frequently surrounded by family and friends, and appears to have made peace with her death. My grandmother died of pancreatic cancer in June of 2011. I remember the ragged and painful breathing of her when she was no longer lucid; I could see her imminent death when I visited Korea last year. And I heard and saw the same breathing several times in this film. For me, this sound is the most crucial to reminiscence of death, so I have once again felt the fear and started wondering about life and death, also about the afterlife by watching this documentary.
Without narration or interviews and even out of soundtrack, the film makes audience to gaze seriously at the fundamental question of life and death, and encourages us to live life more deeply and meaningfully. The camera simply and intimately observes the events of dying as five people come face to face with the doorway through which we all must pass. And the story is just so powerful. I would like to learn the simple, tight camerawork and the stunning storytelling and editing skills of what Allan King calls "actuality dramas". It brings me to watch more and more of his other documentaries.
According to the official information on the website of Allan King Associates, he was working on what was to be his last film “Endings” at the time of his death. For a person who pondered upon death deeply, I wish his last moments were peaceful.
Dying at Grace has captivated my attention from the first scene, like most of Allan King’s other works. In the hallway of the Salvation Army Toronto Grace Health Centre, a nurse was dragging a wheeled bed into a room. There was a person who just lost her life, and a few staffs of Toronto Grace put the dead body in a zipper bag and move it to a morgue. It was so sudden and shocking to me, but the people in the screen looked calm, just doing their usual work. Following this scene, the five main characters continuously passed away before my eyes. Allan King filmed the last days of terminal patients; Carmela Nardone, Joyce Bone, Eda Simac, Rick Pollard, and Lloyd Greenway at a palliative care unit. Their dying moments, different but similar in a way, were dissolved throughout the whole 148 minutes. Every scene was quiet, solemn and strong as much as the heavy topic of this film.
One of the main characters, Carmela, reminded me of my grandmother, because her personality seemed similar to my grandmother’s. Carmela who immigrated to Canada from Italy, is a quiet, dignified woman. She never complains. She is frequently surrounded by family and friends, and appears to have made peace with her death. My grandmother died of pancreatic cancer in June of 2011. I remember the ragged and painful breathing of her when she was no longer lucid; I could see her imminent death when I visited Korea last year. And I heard and saw the same breathing several times in this film. For me, this sound is the most crucial to reminiscence of death, so I have once again felt the fear and started wondering about life and death, also about the afterlife by watching this documentary.
Without narration or interviews and even out of soundtrack, the film makes audience to gaze seriously at the fundamental question of life and death, and encourages us to live life more deeply and meaningfully. The camera simply and intimately observes the events of dying as five people come face to face with the doorway through which we all must pass. And the story is just so powerful. I would like to learn the simple, tight camerawork and the stunning storytelling and editing skills of what Allan King calls "actuality dramas". It brings me to watch more and more of his other documentaries.
According to the official information on the website of Allan King Associates, he was working on what was to be his last film “Endings” at the time of his death. For a person who pondered upon death deeply, I wish his last moments were peaceful.
The Interrotron (by Helena E.)
The first time I saw a documentary by Errol Morris I didn’t know who he was. It was a man talking directly to the camera about his obsessions on his show “First Person”, and as the interview progressed I was aware that I was watching one of the most fascinating people I had ever come across with in my life. The best part was the power in its simplicity: a plain blue background and a few old videos playing every now and then to show what the subject was talking about. The second one I watched turned out to be the exact same thing. Characters so fascinating that you couldn’t believe were taken out of among people you would see in every-day life.
And that’s when I realized that what made his stories interesting were not only the characters, but mostly the fact that someone else had been able to see something in them that made them fascinating. And that in the end, something fascinating could be seen in anyone, while at the same time seeing it required a special skill. Also, the power of his interviews came from the sensation that the subject was talking directly at you, even if you could hear Morris’s voice in the background. And that’s when the skill he has to see what’s special on anyone became even more powerful in my eyes: he had invented a machine, the Interrotron, that would make the subjects look at the camera while looking at him at the same time.
Here's an interesting interview with him. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzPoIOQLFb0
And that’s when I realized that what made his stories interesting were not only the characters, but mostly the fact that someone else had been able to see something in them that made them fascinating. And that in the end, something fascinating could be seen in anyone, while at the same time seeing it required a special skill. Also, the power of his interviews came from the sensation that the subject was talking directly at you, even if you could hear Morris’s voice in the background. And that’s when the skill he has to see what’s special on anyone became even more powerful in my eyes: he had invented a machine, the Interrotron, that would make the subjects look at the camera while looking at him at the same time.
Here's an interesting interview with him. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzPoIOQLFb0
Michael Moore, “Fahrenheit 911” (by Tae-eun Kim)
Is it right for a documentarian to devise a film which the main interest of producing it lies entirely on commercial success? After seeing Michael Moore’s “Fahrenheit 911”, I asked myself this question as an amateur documentarian.
Moore has a very good sense of catching what kind of issue is hot and fresh on the market, and has a natural talent in blending the topic with politics and ideologies. He knows well how to attract the audiences’ attention using music and jokes. No one will deny the fact that he is an excellent story-teller. Of course in our society based on capitalism, the success of the documentary is of important matter. Commercially successful documentary directly relates to popular documentary. What importance does a documentary have if it the public is not aware of its existence? I do think that it is worthwhile to produce a film geared towards the popularity of it, but only if it contains the spirit of a documentarian. However, if a film resorts to a superficial commercial trick, or compromises its integrity with falsehood and forgery, that film is no longer worthy of being called a documentary.
So then, what is ‘Fahrenheit 911’ like? This piece is heavily political, thus its purpose deviates from the core values of a documentary. Simply put, it seems that the film is evaluated on its political opinion rather than being evaluated as a documentary itself. In other words, the film is under the impression that it is trying to gain the audience’s favor by emphasizing that it opposes Bush and asserting liberalism. Produced to gain ground among anti-war intellectuals, using politics as a sales commodity, this film is just a commercial documentary. Although this film did enlighten many people to terrorism and war, I am skeptical as to whether Moore really tried to convey an impartial, truthful message about the 911 case and the Islamic world in the film.
I believe that using documentary as a tool to deceivingly present one’s political stance and opinion is considerably dangerous. Unyielding will to stay truthful until the end, listening carefully to the voices of the minority, courage to include the interviews from people who have different opinion from myself, these are what is really expected of documentarians. Documentarians of this nature are bound to create a brilliant documentary full of humanity, regardless of its topic.
I dare dream of producing a well-made documentary, one that is unlike Moore’s, touching peoples’ hearts with just the genuine intent of the film, and at the same time be successful and popular.
Moore has a very good sense of catching what kind of issue is hot and fresh on the market, and has a natural talent in blending the topic with politics and ideologies. He knows well how to attract the audiences’ attention using music and jokes. No one will deny the fact that he is an excellent story-teller. Of course in our society based on capitalism, the success of the documentary is of important matter. Commercially successful documentary directly relates to popular documentary. What importance does a documentary have if it the public is not aware of its existence? I do think that it is worthwhile to produce a film geared towards the popularity of it, but only if it contains the spirit of a documentarian. However, if a film resorts to a superficial commercial trick, or compromises its integrity with falsehood and forgery, that film is no longer worthy of being called a documentary.
So then, what is ‘Fahrenheit 911’ like? This piece is heavily political, thus its purpose deviates from the core values of a documentary. Simply put, it seems that the film is evaluated on its political opinion rather than being evaluated as a documentary itself. In other words, the film is under the impression that it is trying to gain the audience’s favor by emphasizing that it opposes Bush and asserting liberalism. Produced to gain ground among anti-war intellectuals, using politics as a sales commodity, this film is just a commercial documentary. Although this film did enlighten many people to terrorism and war, I am skeptical as to whether Moore really tried to convey an impartial, truthful message about the 911 case and the Islamic world in the film.
I believe that using documentary as a tool to deceivingly present one’s political stance and opinion is considerably dangerous. Unyielding will to stay truthful until the end, listening carefully to the voices of the minority, courage to include the interviews from people who have different opinion from myself, these are what is really expected of documentarians. Documentarians of this nature are bound to create a brilliant documentary full of humanity, regardless of its topic.
I dare dream of producing a well-made documentary, one that is unlike Moore’s, touching peoples’ hearts with just the genuine intent of the film, and at the same time be successful and popular.
My Architect—A Son's Journey by Carol Collins
How accidental our existences are, really, and full of influence by circumstance.
—L. I. K.
My legacy is my wife and kids, not my films.
—W. A.
I recently watched the 2003 documentary film, My Architect: A Son’s Journey, by Nathaniel Kahn. It is a story of Nathaniel’s search to know the hidden heart of his father, Louis I. Kahn, an American architect.
Similar to the story I am currently developing, My Architect is a powerful and touching film about a son’s quest to understand his father, a legendary architect. Nathaniel reveals this story by travelling the world, visiting his father’s buildings and interviewing many people who knew Louis. Some of the many people Nathaniel interviewed included his mother, his half-sisters, many of his father’s former business associates and even taxi drivers.
I felt deep empathy for Nathaniel for having basically grown up with an absent father; I also felt empathetic and sad for his mother. It seems to me that she ‘settled’ for this so-called relationship that she had with Nathaniel’s father, Louis, because of her deep feelings for him. A relationship with a man who, in effect, called the shots by showing up whenever it was convenient to him hit close to home as his pattern echoed the life style of my father.
After my parents’ separation, my father would show up spontaneously and leave whenever he felt like it. It saddens me to think this now, to view him in this way . . . but upon reflection it was as though our family home was like a hotel to him. Thus I can only imagine what life must have been like for Nathaniel and his mother who never married Louis and seemingly settled for the little nuggets of time that she could have with this ‘man.’
(BTW, how is it that Nathaniel’s surname is Kahn given that his parents never married let alone ever lived together?)
Sure, Louis Kahn was a great architect—perhaps of buildings but not so much of the lives he brought into the world (from not one, but two affairs) yet, based on this film, he neglected. After all, his love of architecture and ‘helping’ others were his priorities over the lives of his ‘accidental’ and secret children. His quote, #1 above, speaks volumes of his thought process. On the flip side, who wouldn’t prefer to have a father who thought and felt along the lines of the second quote? This latter one stated by Woody Allen.
To see and hear what Nathaniel has to share about his film, My Architect, visit http://www.ted.com/talks/nathaniel_kahn_on_my_architect.html or better still, view the movie; it is available through the Ottawa Public Library.
-30-
—L. I. K.
My legacy is my wife and kids, not my films.
—W. A.
I recently watched the 2003 documentary film, My Architect: A Son’s Journey, by Nathaniel Kahn. It is a story of Nathaniel’s search to know the hidden heart of his father, Louis I. Kahn, an American architect.
Similar to the story I am currently developing, My Architect is a powerful and touching film about a son’s quest to understand his father, a legendary architect. Nathaniel reveals this story by travelling the world, visiting his father’s buildings and interviewing many people who knew Louis. Some of the many people Nathaniel interviewed included his mother, his half-sisters, many of his father’s former business associates and even taxi drivers.
I felt deep empathy for Nathaniel for having basically grown up with an absent father; I also felt empathetic and sad for his mother. It seems to me that she ‘settled’ for this so-called relationship that she had with Nathaniel’s father, Louis, because of her deep feelings for him. A relationship with a man who, in effect, called the shots by showing up whenever it was convenient to him hit close to home as his pattern echoed the life style of my father.
After my parents’ separation, my father would show up spontaneously and leave whenever he felt like it. It saddens me to think this now, to view him in this way . . . but upon reflection it was as though our family home was like a hotel to him. Thus I can only imagine what life must have been like for Nathaniel and his mother who never married Louis and seemingly settled for the little nuggets of time that she could have with this ‘man.’
(BTW, how is it that Nathaniel’s surname is Kahn given that his parents never married let alone ever lived together?)
Sure, Louis Kahn was a great architect—perhaps of buildings but not so much of the lives he brought into the world (from not one, but two affairs) yet, based on this film, he neglected. After all, his love of architecture and ‘helping’ others were his priorities over the lives of his ‘accidental’ and secret children. His quote, #1 above, speaks volumes of his thought process. On the flip side, who wouldn’t prefer to have a father who thought and felt along the lines of the second quote? This latter one stated by Woody Allen.
To see and hear what Nathaniel has to share about his film, My Architect, visit http://www.ted.com/talks/nathaniel_kahn_on_my_architect.html or better still, view the movie; it is available through the Ottawa Public Library.
-30-
Saving Face by Lubna Karim
Saving Face is 2012 Oscar winning documentary film about the acid attacks on women in Pakistan. Sharmeen Obaid Chinoy and Daniel Junge directed the film.
It is a very complicated issue and thousands of women burnt with acid every year in different areas in Pakistan. This film follows a Pakistani British doctor comes to treat these women and makes their faces again. This story documents the cultural and structural inequalities towards women from Pakistani men. This cruel action makes thousands lives hell which often leads to suicides later on. This film follows the two women who were burnt with acid and then their struggle to healing and justice.
It is a very complicated issue and thousands of women burnt with acid every year in different areas in Pakistan. This film follows a Pakistani British doctor comes to treat these women and makes their faces again. This story documents the cultural and structural inequalities towards women from Pakistani men. This cruel action makes thousands lives hell which often leads to suicides later on. This film follows the two women who were burnt with acid and then their struggle to healing and justice.
Sharmeen Obaid Chinoy, directing Saving Face
Tarnation (2003) by Helena E.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLDQL23nutw
Alfred Hitchcock used to say that watching cinema was like peeping through a keyhole, that it resembled voyeurism. The audience looks upon the character’s lives on the screen and without any shame, spies on them. In film, you watch others act the way they never act in front of you in reality.
Our voyeurism is best exemplified, without a doubt, in first person documentary. And a great example of first person documentary is Tarnation (2003), where Jonathan Caouette exposes his whole life, without shame, without any doubts. He lets us spy. He lets us see. He makes us feel less alone.
This movie is also the best example of the many possibilities that were opened with New Documentary; the large amount of means available to us, the large amount of roads to take, the many number of ways in which to tell our non-fiction stories.
Alfred Hitchcock used to say that watching cinema was like peeping through a keyhole, that it resembled voyeurism. The audience looks upon the character’s lives on the screen and without any shame, spies on them. In film, you watch others act the way they never act in front of you in reality.
Our voyeurism is best exemplified, without a doubt, in first person documentary. And a great example of first person documentary is Tarnation (2003), where Jonathan Caouette exposes his whole life, without shame, without any doubts. He lets us spy. He lets us see. He makes us feel less alone.
This movie is also the best example of the many possibilities that were opened with New Documentary; the large amount of means available to us, the large amount of roads to take, the many number of ways in which to tell our non-fiction stories.
Jonathan Caouette, Tarnation (2003)
John Pilger - The War on Democracy by Helena E.
Criticizing the ongoing involvement of the United States in Latin American politics, John Pilger gives us an alternative version of Venezuelan politics, one that differs from the one that the North American media has shown us over the years. We see a fair Hugo Chavez, a president loved by his people, one that is going to change the world. The only reason why the media has made us dislike Chavez is, in the end, because his policies are an inconvenience for North American interests.
As a government committed to continue its Revolution and to stay in power despite several student protests, one can only wonder to what extent does his documentary serve as propaganda for the Chavez’s regime. Chavez’s charm – the same charm that captivated the hearts of millions of Venezuelans hoping for a better future- is an easy tool for convincing us that he, coming from a poor family and having endured the same harshness in life as many of his people, is the Chosen One, the ultimate hero, the fair master that will lead Venezuela to all that it can be.
My critique to this documentary is unrelated to my political beliefs. If we’re to criticize Michael Moore’s films for his manipulations, or his lack of credibility for showing only one side of the coin, it is necessary to ask ourselves, among other things, why didn’t Pilger question Chavez’s language, or why didn't we see any of his opposition? In my opinion, Pilger touches on a fair topic: Latin America's unfair distribution of wealth and the United States' manipulation of Latin American politics. However, his propaganda-style point of view is disappointing, it lacks credibility and appears naive.
-30-
As a government committed to continue its Revolution and to stay in power despite several student protests, one can only wonder to what extent does his documentary serve as propaganda for the Chavez’s regime. Chavez’s charm – the same charm that captivated the hearts of millions of Venezuelans hoping for a better future- is an easy tool for convincing us that he, coming from a poor family and having endured the same harshness in life as many of his people, is the Chosen One, the ultimate hero, the fair master that will lead Venezuela to all that it can be.
My critique to this documentary is unrelated to my political beliefs. If we’re to criticize Michael Moore’s films for his manipulations, or his lack of credibility for showing only one side of the coin, it is necessary to ask ourselves, among other things, why didn’t Pilger question Chavez’s language, or why didn't we see any of his opposition? In my opinion, Pilger touches on a fair topic: Latin America's unfair distribution of wealth and the United States' manipulation of Latin American politics. However, his propaganda-style point of view is disappointing, it lacks credibility and appears naive.
-30-
“The Cruise” (by Tae-eun Kim)
This is the 1998 documentary about a man named Timothy "Speed" Levitch who loves his city, New York.
Levitch worked for Manhattan’s Gray Line double-decker buses as a tour guide. The director, Bennett Miller, portrayed Levitch's life and philosophies, his relationship with NYC, and of New York City itself.
“The Cruise” was produced in black and white. This toned-down cinematography encourages an audience to focus more on the story. Viewers can be absorbed with Levitch's voice rather than being distracted by a huge metropolitan New York City backdrop with its complex streets and chaotic, messy alleyways. Those scrappy pieces of NYC were obscured, through this achromatic image, combined with appropriate music, and got changed to some romantic scenes.
‘Levitch’ is an very interesting character. He talks fast, he's in love with the city, and he orates his personal philosophy to the tourists. He also explains the city’s history with lots of facts, architectural analysis, and sometimes even through the singing of a song or the reciting of a poem. He is very emotional-- he screams and laughs and expresses anger all at once, and he talks non-stop about various things like about the carvings on the building wall, the street plants' enormous leaves or about the stone pillars of the Brooklyn Bridge. He's been arrested for going on the roof tops of skyscrapers to see "his" city. He says “one of my greatest abilities is to be able to feel." The film’s title also reflects the aim to pursue absolute freedom, the primary characteristic of Levitch.
Bennet Miller is a brilliant director. He captured the beauty of New York City, as well as the touching story of Levitch who is friendly, positive and is contentedly living in his own world. Levitch’s poetic conversations are sometimes representative of what the world offers--the opportunities and beauty within it. On the other hand, another powerful aspect of this documentary could be the scene of the World Trade Center. One of the film's final scenes involves a moment that Levitch stands between the towers of the former World Trade Center, spinning until he's dizzy, then looking up just as he recommended to a tourist. In fact, it is now referred to as the pre-Sept. 11th film.
If you watch “The Cruise” you may feel that you've traveled through New York City. I also could experience such a personal, unique, and pleasurable city tour for 76 minutes, not due only to the Levitch’s fast and fluent talking style, but also for his unusual love of his native city and passionate philosophical ideas. It was a memorable journey.
------ About Timothy “Speed” Levitch
: Timothy "Speed" Levitch (born 1970 in New York City) is an American actor, tour guide, speaker, philosopher, author, and voice actor. The name "Speed" was given to him by a childhood friend in high school. In 1992 he received his tour guide license from the Central Park Conservancy. He later took a position with Apple and Gray Line Tours as a tour bus guide. Levitch's fame was spread beyond NYC when he became the subject of the 1998 documentaryThe Cruise. “The Cruise” was a huge hit at the 1998 Sundance Film Festival and a popular festival favorite, since then Speed Levitch has become a bit of a cult celebrity. He had small parts in multiple films “Waking Life,” “School of Rock,” and “Scotland, Pa.” In 2007, Levitch moved to Kansas City and is starting a tour business called "Taste of KC." He still gives tours today. ----- (From Wikipedia)
------- Watch a trailer for “The Cruise” (1m 25s)
: http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi1569390873/
------- If you want to see the longer Clips? Click on here (7m 39s)
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1F1NeLDTvzQ&feature=related
-30-
Levitch worked for Manhattan’s Gray Line double-decker buses as a tour guide. The director, Bennett Miller, portrayed Levitch's life and philosophies, his relationship with NYC, and of New York City itself.
“The Cruise” was produced in black and white. This toned-down cinematography encourages an audience to focus more on the story. Viewers can be absorbed with Levitch's voice rather than being distracted by a huge metropolitan New York City backdrop with its complex streets and chaotic, messy alleyways. Those scrappy pieces of NYC were obscured, through this achromatic image, combined with appropriate music, and got changed to some romantic scenes.
‘Levitch’ is an very interesting character. He talks fast, he's in love with the city, and he orates his personal philosophy to the tourists. He also explains the city’s history with lots of facts, architectural analysis, and sometimes even through the singing of a song or the reciting of a poem. He is very emotional-- he screams and laughs and expresses anger all at once, and he talks non-stop about various things like about the carvings on the building wall, the street plants' enormous leaves or about the stone pillars of the Brooklyn Bridge. He's been arrested for going on the roof tops of skyscrapers to see "his" city. He says “one of my greatest abilities is to be able to feel." The film’s title also reflects the aim to pursue absolute freedom, the primary characteristic of Levitch.
Bennet Miller is a brilliant director. He captured the beauty of New York City, as well as the touching story of Levitch who is friendly, positive and is contentedly living in his own world. Levitch’s poetic conversations are sometimes representative of what the world offers--the opportunities and beauty within it. On the other hand, another powerful aspect of this documentary could be the scene of the World Trade Center. One of the film's final scenes involves a moment that Levitch stands between the towers of the former World Trade Center, spinning until he's dizzy, then looking up just as he recommended to a tourist. In fact, it is now referred to as the pre-Sept. 11th film.
If you watch “The Cruise” you may feel that you've traveled through New York City. I also could experience such a personal, unique, and pleasurable city tour for 76 minutes, not due only to the Levitch’s fast and fluent talking style, but also for his unusual love of his native city and passionate philosophical ideas. It was a memorable journey.
------ About Timothy “Speed” Levitch
: Timothy "Speed" Levitch (born 1970 in New York City) is an American actor, tour guide, speaker, philosopher, author, and voice actor. The name "Speed" was given to him by a childhood friend in high school. In 1992 he received his tour guide license from the Central Park Conservancy. He later took a position with Apple and Gray Line Tours as a tour bus guide. Levitch's fame was spread beyond NYC when he became the subject of the 1998 documentaryThe Cruise. “The Cruise” was a huge hit at the 1998 Sundance Film Festival and a popular festival favorite, since then Speed Levitch has become a bit of a cult celebrity. He had small parts in multiple films “Waking Life,” “School of Rock,” and “Scotland, Pa.” In 2007, Levitch moved to Kansas City and is starting a tour business called "Taste of KC." He still gives tours today. ----- (From Wikipedia)
------- Watch a trailer for “The Cruise” (1m 25s)
: http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi1569390873/
------- If you want to see the longer Clips? Click on here (7m 39s)
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1F1NeLDTvzQ&feature=related
-30-
The Lost Art of Non-fiction Storytelling by Justin Nalepa
Still from Alain Resnais' Night and Fog (1955)
I’d have to say that what most captivated me about the art of dramatic storytelling in non-fiction was Donald Brittain’s Fields of Sacrifice (1964). In this documentary short, Brittain uses some interesting techniques to tell the story of Canadian WWII efforts without relying too heavily upon archival footage or expository narrative. Instead, his use of poetic descriptions and aural imagery allow us to connect with these historic locations in a way that evokes our sense of imagination. It allows the audience to reflect on the significance and magnitude of these events in a way that a literal explanation just isn’t able to capture.
Another film it immediately reminded me of was Alain Resnais’ Night and Fog (1955). Not just because of the war theme, but they both share visual elements and techniques, as well as that kind of poetic narration that paints a picture and brings the atmosphere of these desolate locations alive again. It’s the kind of film you watch and never forget. It leaves such an impression and doesn’t stray from showing the cold hard, and quite often gruesome, events that took place during the Holocaust.
Both films are so effective at telling their stories and are a kind of documentary filmmaking that needs to be re-explored or re-interpreted into today’s documentary landscape. For me, it’s an interesting way of exploring a subject and a refreshing take from the otherwise over-saturated use of “talking heads” and literal narratives that have become all too formulaic in the documentary medium. If you’re interested in taking a look at Night and Fog, you can find it on youtube. Be warned, it is not for the faint of heart:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8qTFuMcDLs
-30-
Another film it immediately reminded me of was Alain Resnais’ Night and Fog (1955). Not just because of the war theme, but they both share visual elements and techniques, as well as that kind of poetic narration that paints a picture and brings the atmosphere of these desolate locations alive again. It’s the kind of film you watch and never forget. It leaves such an impression and doesn’t stray from showing the cold hard, and quite often gruesome, events that took place during the Holocaust.
Both films are so effective at telling their stories and are a kind of documentary filmmaking that needs to be re-explored or re-interpreted into today’s documentary landscape. For me, it’s an interesting way of exploring a subject and a refreshing take from the otherwise over-saturated use of “talking heads” and literal narratives that have become all too formulaic in the documentary medium. If you’re interested in taking a look at Night and Fog, you can find it on youtube. Be warned, it is not for the faint of heart:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8qTFuMcDLs
-30-
Narrating for Emotion by Eric Archambault
Ottawa-born Donald Brittain
In an interview for the National Film Board, Donald Brittain
tells a young filmmaker of the importance of emotionally engaging the audience
as quickly as possible, and advises her to "grab them in the first 20
seconds".
The first 20 seconds of 1964's Fields of Sacrifice consist of a shot that focuses on a partially destroyed stone building in an Italian landscape with picturesque mountains in the background; then we are shown a sea of poppy flowers swaying in the breeze. We view these images while Brittain speaks his laconic narration: "the ruins of Italy speak for them; the poppies of Flanders stand for them; they still echo across Vimy Ridge". Brittain uses his skill for creating beautifully-scripted narration to engage our emotions from the very beginning by making us ask questions - who are they? Once we see the poppies, we quickly surmise they are the Canadian soldiers that sacrificed their lives in the Great Wars, and this film is about them.
The concise, terse narration conveys a sense of drama, which is reinforced by the austere, uneasy soundtrack consisting of string instruments and the sound of a lone trumpet. This haunting trumpet solo evokes the bugle in the "Last Post", the song played before we observe the one-minute of silence during Remembrance Day. Brittain's narration also refers to a line of that most famous of war poems, In Flander's Fields; the line We are the Dead is spoken here as They are the Dead. Brittain makes the opening of the film both emotionally resonant and reverential. Fittingly, the opening of the film also evokes a powerful sense of absence, with the ruined church building symbolizing the fallen soldiers. The entire film can be screened at http://www.nfb.ca/film/Fields_of_Sacrifice/
-30-
The first 20 seconds of 1964's Fields of Sacrifice consist of a shot that focuses on a partially destroyed stone building in an Italian landscape with picturesque mountains in the background; then we are shown a sea of poppy flowers swaying in the breeze. We view these images while Brittain speaks his laconic narration: "the ruins of Italy speak for them; the poppies of Flanders stand for them; they still echo across Vimy Ridge". Brittain uses his skill for creating beautifully-scripted narration to engage our emotions from the very beginning by making us ask questions - who are they? Once we see the poppies, we quickly surmise they are the Canadian soldiers that sacrificed their lives in the Great Wars, and this film is about them.
The concise, terse narration conveys a sense of drama, which is reinforced by the austere, uneasy soundtrack consisting of string instruments and the sound of a lone trumpet. This haunting trumpet solo evokes the bugle in the "Last Post", the song played before we observe the one-minute of silence during Remembrance Day. Brittain's narration also refers to a line of that most famous of war poems, In Flander's Fields; the line We are the Dead is spoken here as They are the Dead. Brittain makes the opening of the film both emotionally resonant and reverential. Fittingly, the opening of the film also evokes a powerful sense of absence, with the ruined church building symbolizing the fallen soldiers. The entire film can be screened at http://www.nfb.ca/film/Fields_of_Sacrifice/
-30-
Point of View Documentary: Michael Moore by Julien S.
Whether it be Bowling for Columbine, Roger & Me, or F9/11, Moore always takes a very distinct position as narrator. Although he may not always be present on screen, the audience is typically aware that all views expressed are his own, and do not claim to be unbiased.
I think ultimately what makes Michael Moore a compelling director is that he immerses himself in the issues. In 'Bowling', the central issue is gun laws, and he manages to make a broad story personal when he enters a bank to open an account, in which he will receive a gun in exchange. When Michael Moore denounces Nike's international sweatshops (and total lack of American factories), he does not do so from the editing bay, but rather with microphone in hand, in your face and up your block. By putting himself in front of the camera, Moore exaggerates and emphasizes the reality of these situations. All too often we can forget that the images we see are representations of a very real world. The news tends to gloss over issues, and will often shy away from pertinent issues, even through the simple means of editing. In order to bring a certain gravity, and 'real life' feeling to his films, it is almost necessary for Michael Moore to immerse himself in the subject. His man-on-the-street type interviews are integral to feeling as though these issues are not only real, but are also deserving of a hands-on approach (as opposed to a more distant style of documentary).
I think ultimately what makes Michael Moore a compelling director is that he immerses himself in the issues. In 'Bowling', the central issue is gun laws, and he manages to make a broad story personal when he enters a bank to open an account, in which he will receive a gun in exchange. When Michael Moore denounces Nike's international sweatshops (and total lack of American factories), he does not do so from the editing bay, but rather with microphone in hand, in your face and up your block. By putting himself in front of the camera, Moore exaggerates and emphasizes the reality of these situations. All too often we can forget that the images we see are representations of a very real world. The news tends to gloss over issues, and will often shy away from pertinent issues, even through the simple means of editing. In order to bring a certain gravity, and 'real life' feeling to his films, it is almost necessary for Michael Moore to immerse himself in the subject. His man-on-the-street type interviews are integral to feeling as though these issues are not only real, but are also deserving of a hands-on approach (as opposed to a more distant style of documentary).
Interactive documentary and the NFB by Cristin S.
I recently spent one-and-half hours in front of my computer
(the most I can stand at one stretch) dipping my toe, for the first time, into
the invitingly deep and mysterious (to me) waters of interactive documentary.
On the National Film Board’s spectacular site, I looked at Welcome to Pine Point, which is “part book, part film, part family photo album” about a mining town that disappeared; Highrise, a “multi-year, multi-media, collaborative documentary experiment” about people’s experience in highrises around the world, and This Land, a 16-day photographic journey aimed at promoting understanding of Arctic sovereignty “and Canada’s place in protecting the North”. All three are cutting-edge examples of what interactive “documentary” can be. How did I feel? Amazed by the sheer creativity and talent of the doc-makers and boggled by what looked to me to be a very complex filmmaking enterprise. What did I love? The breadth of, and connections made, by Highrise which links occupants of highrises from all around the globe and takes us into their various worlds and fascinating experiences—which are both strikingly different and similar. Being empowered, via my mouse, to explore the subjects in the way, and order, that I wanted to, at my own pace. Being able to take a journey to the northernmost part of Canada’s Arctic and see its awesome beauty via Dianne Whelan’s superb photos, mixed with video, in This Land.
For me what did not work well, was the use in some of these films of reams of text on screen, or other features (e.g. temperatures placed on screen) that I found cluttered the visuals and were either too time-consuming and laborious to read, or actually distracted from what the narrator was saying, or the visuals (i.e. the various elements worked against each other, rather than complementing each other to create a great flow). All in all, I was blown away by these interactive mixed media works, especially Highrise because it so innovatively brings together the viewpoints and experiences of people who share common realities, despite being separated by thousands of miles.
-30-
On the National Film Board’s spectacular site, I looked at Welcome to Pine Point, which is “part book, part film, part family photo album” about a mining town that disappeared; Highrise, a “multi-year, multi-media, collaborative documentary experiment” about people’s experience in highrises around the world, and This Land, a 16-day photographic journey aimed at promoting understanding of Arctic sovereignty “and Canada’s place in protecting the North”. All three are cutting-edge examples of what interactive “documentary” can be. How did I feel? Amazed by the sheer creativity and talent of the doc-makers and boggled by what looked to me to be a very complex filmmaking enterprise. What did I love? The breadth of, and connections made, by Highrise which links occupants of highrises from all around the globe and takes us into their various worlds and fascinating experiences—which are both strikingly different and similar. Being empowered, via my mouse, to explore the subjects in the way, and order, that I wanted to, at my own pace. Being able to take a journey to the northernmost part of Canada’s Arctic and see its awesome beauty via Dianne Whelan’s superb photos, mixed with video, in This Land.
For me what did not work well, was the use in some of these films of reams of text on screen, or other features (e.g. temperatures placed on screen) that I found cluttered the visuals and were either too time-consuming and laborious to read, or actually distracted from what the narrator was saying, or the visuals (i.e. the various elements worked against each other, rather than complementing each other to create a great flow). All in all, I was blown away by these interactive mixed media works, especially Highrise because it so innovatively brings together the viewpoints and experiences of people who share common realities, despite being separated by thousands of miles.
-30-
Photo: NFB
Interviews and history-on-the-run by Cristin S.
After spending time with David Lynch’s Interview Project at interviewproject.davidlynch com, I felt empowered as a transmedia reporter. I was stimulated by the possibilities the interactive film-making project suggested to me for revolutionizing journalism, and the other ways we document history.
The Interview Project involved short 3- to 5- minute interviews with 121 “ordinary” people randomly encountered on a 20,000-roadtrip around the United States. Visitors to davidlynch.com can click on any--and as many-- of the individual interviews as they wish. It is a wonderful experience. Everyone has a story. People are frequently compelling, funny and moving as they answer questions such as “do you have any regrets” and “what are you most proud of in your life?”
Interviews are among my favourite aspects of journalism/documentary film-making. I feel incredibly privileged when people tell me their stories and share their insights and knowledge with me. I want to share as many of the highlights of the interviews as I can with reader/viewers.
Print newspapers are more and more constrained by space limits (not to mention people’s time and attention spans). Even on websites, news outlets can only offer up a tiny percentage of the interesting material they have gathered.
But in the interactive world of the web, the potential exists to present an incredibly rich, detailed, comprehensive and interactive experience for those who visit the websites of news outlets.
The 2012 sinking of the MS Costa Concordia cruise ship off Italy is a great example of a news event which lends itself to a similar treatment as Lynch’s Interview Project.
Imagine if one interviewed 121 survivors of the stricken cruise ship—how incredible would it be to hear the different observations, insights and experiences of so many people? It would provide an almost unprecedented way of documenting an event—from many, many vantage points--in the voice and visages of many people.
What a wonderful new way to present interviews—to make the whole even greater than the sum of its many parts. Imagine if after an event such as 9/11, or during the revolutions that have taken place during the Arab Spring last year, such projects were undertaken.
People could even “interview” and film themselves and post their interviews. To my mind, the possibilities of such an approach to enrich and enlarge contemporary journalism, and preserve history for future viewers/readers—not to mention to interconnect our individual personal experiences -- are mind-boggling, incredible, and thrilling.
-30-
A Filmmaker For The Taking? (by Gean Kim-Butcher)
Frederick Wiseman
Carpe Diem Shooter
Frederick Wiseman is a modern-day American documentary filmmaker who is known for his "fly-on-the-wall" approach (Observational Mode based on the Cinema Verite style) to capturing footage as they happen within an institution or system. Some of his well-known documentaries include Hospital (1970), Public Housing (1997) and Boxing Gym (2010) among many others.
His unique filmmaking process has set him apart in his art in that he uses his own methods of "putting together" a complete film: no research into his topic, no planned point of view or theme before filming, capturing 80-100 hours of footage within a concentrated time then spending a year alone editing it with no paper edit or outline used. Even in viewing all what he captured, he says that he doesn't do so chronologically, rather random sequences depending on his mood that day.
It is obvious that this filmmaker has found his groove in how to make successful films, but how many of us emerging documentarians can actually follow his methods without adopting at least some of his approaches to life in general? It is my supposition that he is person who "takes things as they come or as it's given;" a carpe diem ("seize the day" in Latin) kind of experience-seeker; one who is fully present and aware of his immediate surroundings at each moment; and as he himself professes, someone who is lucky and patient enough to be at the right place at the right time to capture life as it happens. I don't imagine that for the Type A personality who needs predictability, order and recognition, Wiseman's unconventional ways would much coax their filmmaking ventures.
Furthermore, Wiseman's admittance that once he has spent his due time birthing a film, then promptly moves on by daydreaming about the next project lest he falls into a deep post-partum depression signifies to me that he needs to "ride out the waves" for sheer survival. How many of us can claim to so desperately need our art to sustain our sanity? Perhaps this is truly what it takes to follow in this particular filmmaker's shoes.
-30-
Billy Bishop Goes to War - Again (by Eric Archambault)
Completed several years after the musical Billy Bishop Goes to War, Paul Cowan's The Kid Who Couldn't Miss doesn't quite stand up on its own as a serious documentary, because it is not quite able to step out of the shadow of its entertaining predecessor. A pioneering example of the docu-drama form, here the performance aspect of storytelling overshadows a sense of factual accuracy, as the film borrows too heavily from the musical production. The NFB posts the disclaimer that this is by no accounts a biography of Billy Bishop. So what is it then? If this is not a biography supported by dramatic re-enactments, is it a musical enhanced by archival footage? Neither option seems very satisfactory. To be fair, the archival footage of Bishop's military training at RMC works well with the musical pieces, as when the musical number "We're off to fight the Hun, somehow it didn't seem like war at all". Many sequences of Cowan's film convey the feeling that although no one knows exactly what war will be like, many believed war would be a noble and glamorous pursuit, more akin to a polo match, that many dashing young men wanted to partake in. The film deftly captures this sense of war as sport, not when it comes to trench warfare, but specifically as related to the war in the skies, as footage of aerial dogfights is intercut with scenes of enthralled fans packed in stadiums watching an exciting match play out between opposing teams. Cowan sustains the sense of sport and playing by showing us a scene of WWI ace Bishop playing with toy planes during one musical number.
But what does not blend in as well are the scenes that underscore that war was not a game, the graphic and disturbing archival photographs of the "kills" showing the dead pilots next to the wreckage of their downed planes. One can imagine the director considering the pros and cons of the answer to the question -- should we or should we not show the grim reality of war, especially during an era when it was not common practice to depict the dark and disturbing side of war. Clearly the effect is meant to be jarring --- but at what cost? Although one can see using archival footage as a counter-point to the light-hearted musical exposés, the overall effect here of combining the two distinct storytelling modes is of one discontinuity which interrupts the story flow...
Audiences of the day were conditioned by war films such as Richard Attenborough's A Bridge Too Far, examining the planning strategy for Operation Market Garden, which, if not exactly portrayed as a polo match, it is at least seen as an epic spectacle akin to game of chess. And audiences would certainly have been shocked by 1998's Saving Private Ryan, which in no way spared the viewer from the horrors of war by using a first-person viewpoint. These films are in a sense what docu-drama re-enactments have evolved into, and work best with one consistent mode of representation that can be emotionally varied to deal with both serious and light-hearted subject matter when appropriate.
Now more than 30 years on, and close to the age Bishop was when he died, Eric Peterson reprises his role for the film adaptation of "Billy Bishop Goes to War"... The trailer can be seen here...
But what does not blend in as well are the scenes that underscore that war was not a game, the graphic and disturbing archival photographs of the "kills" showing the dead pilots next to the wreckage of their downed planes. One can imagine the director considering the pros and cons of the answer to the question -- should we or should we not show the grim reality of war, especially during an era when it was not common practice to depict the dark and disturbing side of war. Clearly the effect is meant to be jarring --- but at what cost? Although one can see using archival footage as a counter-point to the light-hearted musical exposés, the overall effect here of combining the two distinct storytelling modes is of one discontinuity which interrupts the story flow...
Audiences of the day were conditioned by war films such as Richard Attenborough's A Bridge Too Far, examining the planning strategy for Operation Market Garden, which, if not exactly portrayed as a polo match, it is at least seen as an epic spectacle akin to game of chess. And audiences would certainly have been shocked by 1998's Saving Private Ryan, which in no way spared the viewer from the horrors of war by using a first-person viewpoint. These films are in a sense what docu-drama re-enactments have evolved into, and work best with one consistent mode of representation that can be emotionally varied to deal with both serious and light-hearted subject matter when appropriate.
Now more than 30 years on, and close to the age Bishop was when he died, Eric Peterson reprises his role for the film adaptation of "Billy Bishop Goes to War"... The trailer can be seen here...
-30-
A Marriage in Trouble, brought to you by Allan King... (by Eric Archambault)
I thought it would be interesting to take 5 sketches of everyday life taken from Allan King's A Married Couple (1969), to study the relationship between husband and wife, and between the couple as subjects being filmed and the director of the doc.
Billy and Antoinette fight over how to use a vacuum cleaner
Probably the most memorable and disturbing of the fighting scenes, Billy's physical ejection of Antoinette from their house following an altercation over the vacuum cleaner suggests the possibility of physical abuse in their relationship. This scene makes us sympathetic primarily for Antoinette's point of view. This sequence plays to the most common gender role stereotypes, portraying Antoinette as female victim and Billy as the male aggressor, although these roles were in fact being questioned during the 60s, which may account for a sense of confusion and frustration felt by many couples as male/female responsibilities were being challenged and redefined.
Billy and Antoinette eat a meal together and discuss shopping and finances
The scene occurs shortly after the vacuum cleaner blow out, and we wonder how they will respond to each other as the silent meal progresses. Antoinette tentatively begins discussing her day, by offering Billy her thoughts on what she saw at a store that caught her attention, a marble pedestal, and where she might put it if she were to buy it. She is sharing her thoughts on the events of her day with Billy, who is politely enquiring about more specific details by asking her short questions. Both seem conciliatory to each other, showing a willingness to put the earlier fight behind them. The film shows us the mealtime small talk to make us feel both are making efforts to make things work.
Billy and Antoinette as parents to Bogart and Merton
The film includes many domestic tableaux as counterpoints to the turbulence of the couple's discord: scenes where Billy plays with the dog on the bed, or his son Bogart rides him like a rocking horse, reinforce a sense that despite what was going on as a couple, happiness could still be found in the way the couple interacted with the other members of the family. What the film does very well is capture the sense of how quickly and fluidly the couple cross the line from friendly teasing banter to outright aggression and hostility, but they are never shown directing their negative emotions at Bogart or Merton.
Billy and Antoinette discuss moving into separate parts of the house to lead separate private lives while still leading a communal family life
Although Antoinette seems very keen on the idea of her taking the upstairs of the house while Billy takes the bottom, Billy dismisses the idea as a bad one. The scene suggests to us that Billy still wants his marriage to work, and is not willing to accept any changes he believes may further weaken their relationship.
Billy and Antoinette discuss their troubles on the bed
In this scene Billy states "I'm bewildered. Every time I think we've reached a plateau of understanding, this is what happens." The director aims to show the audience how hard the two worked to try to understand their bad dynamic, so that they might try to change the way they get into fights over the day to day affairs of work, finances, and ultimately, who is the head of the family. Or so it appears.
The following quote from Vincent Canby's review of A Married Couple, published in the New York Times in 1970, sums up the feelings we are left with at the end of the film:
"... What King ultimately proves, I think, is that something that is neither fact nor fiction is less meta-truth than sophisticated sideshow. As I've never believed there is a novel in everybody, nor even a tape-recorded book, I now am convinced there are probably very few people worthy of being the subjects of an actuality drama..."
I agree with Canby's statement; somehow, no matter how hard King works to make us sympathize with the Edwards, in the end we are left with the feeling that many times the couple are performing for the camera; this is the dawn of our age of FaceBook and Twitter, where our every thought is offered up for public consumption, and we as a culture are addicted to being performers in the non-reality "sideshow" of social media.
A mature Antoinette reflects on her troubled marriage here...
-30-
Billy and Antoinette fight over how to use a vacuum cleaner
Probably the most memorable and disturbing of the fighting scenes, Billy's physical ejection of Antoinette from their house following an altercation over the vacuum cleaner suggests the possibility of physical abuse in their relationship. This scene makes us sympathetic primarily for Antoinette's point of view. This sequence plays to the most common gender role stereotypes, portraying Antoinette as female victim and Billy as the male aggressor, although these roles were in fact being questioned during the 60s, which may account for a sense of confusion and frustration felt by many couples as male/female responsibilities were being challenged and redefined.
Billy and Antoinette eat a meal together and discuss shopping and finances
The scene occurs shortly after the vacuum cleaner blow out, and we wonder how they will respond to each other as the silent meal progresses. Antoinette tentatively begins discussing her day, by offering Billy her thoughts on what she saw at a store that caught her attention, a marble pedestal, and where she might put it if she were to buy it. She is sharing her thoughts on the events of her day with Billy, who is politely enquiring about more specific details by asking her short questions. Both seem conciliatory to each other, showing a willingness to put the earlier fight behind them. The film shows us the mealtime small talk to make us feel both are making efforts to make things work.
Billy and Antoinette as parents to Bogart and Merton
The film includes many domestic tableaux as counterpoints to the turbulence of the couple's discord: scenes where Billy plays with the dog on the bed, or his son Bogart rides him like a rocking horse, reinforce a sense that despite what was going on as a couple, happiness could still be found in the way the couple interacted with the other members of the family. What the film does very well is capture the sense of how quickly and fluidly the couple cross the line from friendly teasing banter to outright aggression and hostility, but they are never shown directing their negative emotions at Bogart or Merton.
Billy and Antoinette discuss moving into separate parts of the house to lead separate private lives while still leading a communal family life
Although Antoinette seems very keen on the idea of her taking the upstairs of the house while Billy takes the bottom, Billy dismisses the idea as a bad one. The scene suggests to us that Billy still wants his marriage to work, and is not willing to accept any changes he believes may further weaken their relationship.
Billy and Antoinette discuss their troubles on the bed
In this scene Billy states "I'm bewildered. Every time I think we've reached a plateau of understanding, this is what happens." The director aims to show the audience how hard the two worked to try to understand their bad dynamic, so that they might try to change the way they get into fights over the day to day affairs of work, finances, and ultimately, who is the head of the family. Or so it appears.
The following quote from Vincent Canby's review of A Married Couple, published in the New York Times in 1970, sums up the feelings we are left with at the end of the film:
"... What King ultimately proves, I think, is that something that is neither fact nor fiction is less meta-truth than sophisticated sideshow. As I've never believed there is a novel in everybody, nor even a tape-recorded book, I now am convinced there are probably very few people worthy of being the subjects of an actuality drama..."
I agree with Canby's statement; somehow, no matter how hard King works to make us sympathize with the Edwards, in the end we are left with the feeling that many times the couple are performing for the camera; this is the dawn of our age of FaceBook and Twitter, where our every thought is offered up for public consumption, and we as a culture are addicted to being performers in the non-reality "sideshow" of social media.
A mature Antoinette reflects on her troubled marriage here...
-30-
The Art of Cleaning a Toilet (By Gean Kim-Butcher)
How far would you, as a documentary filmmaker, go to win the trust of your subject? David Stenn, director of "Girl 27," went so far as to clean the toilet and do housework to gain access and secure a friendship with Patricia Douglas, the main character of his documentary.
Patricia Douglas became the centre of a 1937 Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) Studio scandal when she, a 17 year-old movie extra/dancer, went public with her accusations of rape from a MGM executive. It would prove to be the most elaborate cover-up in Hollywood history, driving Patricia into isolation. By the time David happened upon her story (nearly 65 years later!), Patricia was a recluse who lived in two areas of her house—her couch to watch TV throughout the night, and her bed to sleep in during the day.
After having Patricia hang up on his numerous attempts for conversation via phone, then stand him up after a long-coming plan to meet, David finally resorted to simply playing the persistent visitor to her home by making himself “useful.” Thus is the action of either a desperate director or a compassionate man…..
Often the relationship between a director (especially if they’re the main interviewer or even camera-person) and their subject gets into an intimate space that is unlike any other relationship (even that of counselor or confessor). Though bound by a contract (ie. release form) and a goal (ie. film produced), the interchange of confidence and openness between the director and the subject is a delicate and mysterious matter. The filmmaker must hold the cards in order to direct; yet they must give of themselves in whatever ways are necessary in order for their subject (s) to feel safe, and maybe even “loved.”
This, then, begs the question: Is not the art of wooing another human being an essential tool needed by a doc-maker in getting the stories for their film? Therefore, dear colleagues, as we perfect our camera angles and watch tutorials on Final Cut Pro, let us not forget to perk up our ears and hide the clocks to listen to stories being told, or even roll up our sleeves to offer service and support to those placed around us. Comparable to a beggars’ good fortune, a director never knows where their next story will come from.
-30-
Patricia Douglas became the centre of a 1937 Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) Studio scandal when she, a 17 year-old movie extra/dancer, went public with her accusations of rape from a MGM executive. It would prove to be the most elaborate cover-up in Hollywood history, driving Patricia into isolation. By the time David happened upon her story (nearly 65 years later!), Patricia was a recluse who lived in two areas of her house—her couch to watch TV throughout the night, and her bed to sleep in during the day.
After having Patricia hang up on his numerous attempts for conversation via phone, then stand him up after a long-coming plan to meet, David finally resorted to simply playing the persistent visitor to her home by making himself “useful.” Thus is the action of either a desperate director or a compassionate man…..
Often the relationship between a director (especially if they’re the main interviewer or even camera-person) and their subject gets into an intimate space that is unlike any other relationship (even that of counselor or confessor). Though bound by a contract (ie. release form) and a goal (ie. film produced), the interchange of confidence and openness between the director and the subject is a delicate and mysterious matter. The filmmaker must hold the cards in order to direct; yet they must give of themselves in whatever ways are necessary in order for their subject (s) to feel safe, and maybe even “loved.”
This, then, begs the question: Is not the art of wooing another human being an essential tool needed by a doc-maker in getting the stories for their film? Therefore, dear colleagues, as we perfect our camera angles and watch tutorials on Final Cut Pro, let us not forget to perk up our ears and hide the clocks to listen to stories being told, or even roll up our sleeves to offer service and support to those placed around us. Comparable to a beggars’ good fortune, a director never knows where their next story will come from.
-30-
Ryan (By: Megan R.)
Recently in class we watched a documentary about the making of the NFB film Ryan. Ryan was about Ryan Larkin, an artist with the NFB turned into a drug addict and alcoholic on the streets of Montreal. I had seen the film last fall and always wondered what was going on in the filmmaker, Chris Landreth's, mind. This film showed that. He said when making the film he didn't necessarily worry about how the film would make Ryan feel or look. He sat with Ryan as he saw the film for the first time, and Ryan was not happy with his portrayal. This is an issue that comes when dealing with delicate matters, and being that the documentary I am working on currently is a delicate subject matter, I took note of the situation. To me, when making a documentary about delicate matters, it is of the upmost importance to keep the integrity of the situation. If the subject is a bad person, that will come across without me prodding them or backing them into a corner, which is what I felt Chris Landreth did to Ryan. There is a way to get a subject to talk about the topic you want them to discuss without blatantly blurting it out. It is important to ease the subject into intense topics when the person seems hesitant with the entire process.
As for the cartooning, what Landreth did was interesting but it distracted me against the actual story. Maybe that was his plan, but I would rather have seen the footage in its natural form. This sort of animation is fine in some forms, but not a documentary with this serious of an undertone. However, that is my personal opinion and I do respect what Landreth was trying to do.
Overall, Ryan is an interesting film. It is worth watching and has some great, yet very distracting effects.
-30-
Recently in class we watched a documentary about the making of the NFB film Ryan. Ryan was about Ryan Larkin, an artist with the NFB turned into a drug addict and alcoholic on the streets of Montreal. I had seen the film last fall and always wondered what was going on in the filmmaker, Chris Landreth's, mind. This film showed that. He said when making the film he didn't necessarily worry about how the film would make Ryan feel or look. He sat with Ryan as he saw the film for the first time, and Ryan was not happy with his portrayal. This is an issue that comes when dealing with delicate matters, and being that the documentary I am working on currently is a delicate subject matter, I took note of the situation. To me, when making a documentary about delicate matters, it is of the upmost importance to keep the integrity of the situation. If the subject is a bad person, that will come across without me prodding them or backing them into a corner, which is what I felt Chris Landreth did to Ryan. There is a way to get a subject to talk about the topic you want them to discuss without blatantly blurting it out. It is important to ease the subject into intense topics when the person seems hesitant with the entire process.
As for the cartooning, what Landreth did was interesting but it distracted me against the actual story. Maybe that was his plan, but I would rather have seen the footage in its natural form. This sort of animation is fine in some forms, but not a documentary with this serious of an undertone. However, that is my personal opinion and I do respect what Landreth was trying to do.
Overall, Ryan is an interesting film. It is worth watching and has some great, yet very distracting effects.
-30-
Disney Propaganda (Megan R.)
My degree has a long lengthy title: Communications with a Specialization in Images, Politics and Persuasion. It is a mouthful to say the least. What it means is that throughout my undergrad I studied a fair bit of propaganda or, as today’s society likes to call it, persuasive advertisements. I have seen a number of short documentary films made by Disney about the war effort and other issues, such as smoking. Unlike the Disney we know today, most of these films were geared towards the older generations: those who would be involved in the ally war efforts. From the films I saw from both sides during World War II, Disney had some of the most effective war films.
It has been reported that Disney made over 65 hours of propaganda film, including anti-Nazi and anti-Japanese films shown to both the servicemen and the public. Originally these films were strictly for servicemen, but were sent to theatres due to their popularity. When it comes to animated documentaries, I am usually not a fan. I find it takes away from the overall message, but when the subject matter has been shown over and over sometimes it is good to change things up. For us today, animation is not a big deal. Most of us grew up watching cartoons, and with technology today old Disney movies seem (pardon the pun) a little Mickey Mouse. However, for society in those times this was amazing technology.
The anti-smoking film with Goofy was also ground breaking because when the film was made in 1951, smoking did not have the same negative connotations as it does today. The film showed how addictive smoking is, and normally smoking would be highly advertised on television in the 1950s. It is strange how all of this is from a man who is mostly known for a mouse in white gloves.
-30-
The Use and Abuse of the Documentary Form (By Gean Kim-Butcher)
It may not be kosher to ask an artist why it is that they do their art—doing their art is being an artist. Why, then, does there seem to be somewhat of a suspicion around why a documentarian (an artist in their own right) chooses their film topic, especially in the films deemed as a POV (Point of View) documentary?
Somehow, filmmakers like Michael Moore have gained great popularity from using his films to “make a point” or “expose a story.” Is this the driving force behind why documentary filmmakers do what they do?
It is not surprising that the documentary film form is treated differently from its fictional cousin. After all, the roots from which the documentary grew was for the purpose of a newsreel and for a propaganda tool used by the government; whereas the fictional film was for the sheer enjoyment of entertainment and for escaping reality. It seems to me that the documentary form in today’s popular culture mostly falls into the categories of being either educational, journalistic or reality-based (ie. reality TV shows).
I was recently asked by my professor whether I thought documentaries should be used to change someone’s perspective—to be used for the purpose of “changing the world." I responded that I probably did, but wished I didn’t since it was too much pressure—a reality which seemed, now in retrospect, to have affected me directly while making my first student documentary. Upon further pondering of that question, I have come to realize that in wanting to “use” my documentary to drive home a message (ie. a women may appear to have it all but not be able to do it all, having children doesn’t erase a woman’s identity, my large family is not weird, etc.), I was not free to do my art for I was not identifying myself as an artist--never mind being one.
I see now why I could not get beyond the confines of the box or why I lacked the confidence to explore my art form or why I did not actually enjoy the process of the creative. I would hope that from hereon, my “purpose” of wanting to shoot documentaries will be purely as an artistic self- expression—surely this is not deemed as a lost art, as a lost cause or as frivolous. It is especially in my passion for social justice issues that I do not want to utilize my art of creating films to fuel an already existing life force. I am in the season/in the business/in the mindset at this moment to grow the artist, not the activist, in me. I will consciously choose to use film as my medium and art form, first and foremost for the raison d’etre to simply be a filmmaker, indeed, an Artiste.
-30-
Somehow, filmmakers like Michael Moore have gained great popularity from using his films to “make a point” or “expose a story.” Is this the driving force behind why documentary filmmakers do what they do?
It is not surprising that the documentary film form is treated differently from its fictional cousin. After all, the roots from which the documentary grew was for the purpose of a newsreel and for a propaganda tool used by the government; whereas the fictional film was for the sheer enjoyment of entertainment and for escaping reality. It seems to me that the documentary form in today’s popular culture mostly falls into the categories of being either educational, journalistic or reality-based (ie. reality TV shows).
I was recently asked by my professor whether I thought documentaries should be used to change someone’s perspective—to be used for the purpose of “changing the world." I responded that I probably did, but wished I didn’t since it was too much pressure—a reality which seemed, now in retrospect, to have affected me directly while making my first student documentary. Upon further pondering of that question, I have come to realize that in wanting to “use” my documentary to drive home a message (ie. a women may appear to have it all but not be able to do it all, having children doesn’t erase a woman’s identity, my large family is not weird, etc.), I was not free to do my art for I was not identifying myself as an artist--never mind being one.
I see now why I could not get beyond the confines of the box or why I lacked the confidence to explore my art form or why I did not actually enjoy the process of the creative. I would hope that from hereon, my “purpose” of wanting to shoot documentaries will be purely as an artistic self- expression—surely this is not deemed as a lost art, as a lost cause or as frivolous. It is especially in my passion for social justice issues that I do not want to utilize my art of creating films to fuel an already existing life force. I am in the season/in the business/in the mindset at this moment to grow the artist, not the activist, in me. I will consciously choose to use film as my medium and art form, first and foremost for the raison d’etre to simply be a filmmaker, indeed, an Artiste.
-30-
The Grey Garden Visitors (By Gean Kim-Butcher)
In 1972, there was a newspaper splash about former US First Lady, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis,’ aunt and first cousin living in squalor inside a family estate called Grey Gardens. From this news release came two strangers by the names of David and Albert Maysles knocking on Grey Gardens’ door to request permission to bring a camera into their home to film their everyday with no set-ups, prompts or formal interviews. This style of documentary-making was influenced by a definitive shift in filmmaking history known as Cinema Verite.
“Cinema Verite” coined by the French, “Direct Cinema” by the Americans, and in Canada and England, known as “Free Cinema,” emerged beginning in the 1950’s with the creation of lightweight, handheld cameras with synchronized sound. This newly developed technology allowed the next generation of filmmakers to get really close to their subjects while filming, capturing unrehearsed, immediate, and spontaneous footage. This allowed the filmmaker, and thus their audience, to have an authentic experience through close proximity and fluid movement. No more was voiceover utilized, and even intervention by the director was kept to a minimum—their role was to act like a fly on the wall, though film as though they were buzzing around.
I wonder what kind of personalities the two Maysle brothers had. I imagine that for a cameraman to shoot with no directives, never mind minimal interaction with their subjects (at least while the tape was rolling), they would have to be on the laid-back side, maybe even quiet or shy, and definitely not controlling of their storyline shots, never mind their subjects.
In the same consideration, how does the one being filmed not be cautious, awkward, or maybe even overly compensating for their lack of confidence, unless they are of the performance-oriented and self-focused bent to begin with (as the Mother and Daughter Beale Tag-team of Grey Gardens clearly were)? If they truly do not belong to that flock of feathers, then it may only take genius filmmakers to make a story engaging enough for an audience to view when the subject so sorely lacks presence.
I may be painting too wide a brush stroke of generalization, but it seems to me that the form of Free Cinema favours a specific partnership of the yin and yang—opposite personality types of a demure director and a divulging subject; which is fine, as long as it is understood that a select few combinations may be privileged in using this form.
Personally, I do not cater to that description of a filmmaker, nor do I desire to aspire to be that. The camera in my hand becomes a tool through which I actively participate in the conversation and dance of the subject(s)’s process of discovery (of themselves, of another, and of their world), making me an essential player in whether the documentary reveals a journey of growth and/or change or not. I fit more the template of the subject over the director; thus leaving me best suited, perhaps, of being both the filmmaker AND the subject in a self-cam documentary in the world of self-imposed cinema verite.
-30-
“Cinema Verite” coined by the French, “Direct Cinema” by the Americans, and in Canada and England, known as “Free Cinema,” emerged beginning in the 1950’s with the creation of lightweight, handheld cameras with synchronized sound. This newly developed technology allowed the next generation of filmmakers to get really close to their subjects while filming, capturing unrehearsed, immediate, and spontaneous footage. This allowed the filmmaker, and thus their audience, to have an authentic experience through close proximity and fluid movement. No more was voiceover utilized, and even intervention by the director was kept to a minimum—their role was to act like a fly on the wall, though film as though they were buzzing around.
I wonder what kind of personalities the two Maysle brothers had. I imagine that for a cameraman to shoot with no directives, never mind minimal interaction with their subjects (at least while the tape was rolling), they would have to be on the laid-back side, maybe even quiet or shy, and definitely not controlling of their storyline shots, never mind their subjects.
In the same consideration, how does the one being filmed not be cautious, awkward, or maybe even overly compensating for their lack of confidence, unless they are of the performance-oriented and self-focused bent to begin with (as the Mother and Daughter Beale Tag-team of Grey Gardens clearly were)? If they truly do not belong to that flock of feathers, then it may only take genius filmmakers to make a story engaging enough for an audience to view when the subject so sorely lacks presence.
I may be painting too wide a brush stroke of generalization, but it seems to me that the form of Free Cinema favours a specific partnership of the yin and yang—opposite personality types of a demure director and a divulging subject; which is fine, as long as it is understood that a select few combinations may be privileged in using this form.
Personally, I do not cater to that description of a filmmaker, nor do I desire to aspire to be that. The camera in my hand becomes a tool through which I actively participate in the conversation and dance of the subject(s)’s process of discovery (of themselves, of another, and of their world), making me an essential player in whether the documentary reveals a journey of growth and/or change or not. I fit more the template of the subject over the director; thus leaving me best suited, perhaps, of being both the filmmaker AND the subject in a self-cam documentary in the world of self-imposed cinema verite.
-30-
"What's Up, A Doc-Or-Not?" (By Gean Kim-Butcher)
After viewing Robert Flaherty’s, Nanook of the North, in one of our Documentary Form classes, we were asked whether we thought this was a documentary or not. According to the website www.Dictionary.Reference.ca, a documentary is, [“based on or re-creating an actual event, era, life story, etc., that purports to be factually accurate and contains no fictional elements”]. According to that definition, then, yes, it was.
Furthermore, according to that definition, the realm of the kinds of films that would fall under the construct of a documentary is very broad. The question I would like to propose for this post is, “Should there be a tighter structure and appointment of what deservedly qualifies as a real documentary or not?”
I have danced ballet for most of my life. It is an extremely rigid art form, both in the selection of its dancers and in its execution of the art. I’ve always believed that part of the coveted status of keeping this art form pure was its exclusive nature. The open arms extended round and wide for beginner ballerinas to imitate, eventually becomes positioned as straight and narrow tight-fisted grips for a select few as professionals; yet the art continues to mesmerize aspiring dancers and draw admiring crowds.
Does this trajectory have any merit in the film world, specifically in application to the doc form, where a less definitive and a more permissive component-checklist or lack thereof (ie. interview, clear storyline, etc.) is needed to embrace aspiring and/or seasoned filmmakers and their audiences?
I have seen many documentaries that do not recreate or capture everyday actuality, especially through a sub-section of the documentary film form called experimental. It is nonetheless associated and coined as a documentary (I wonder, however, whether John Grierson, who said that documentaries were a “creative treatment of actuality,” could have predicted how far that statement would be carried and challenged!). Rightfully so, I should think, as it does capture some kind of reality of the human experience through its un-scripted characters and non-fictional events (even if sometimes it is unrecognizable!).
Just as the ballerina attempting to dance to simply express herself through her body, so does the filmmaker in the documentary form attempt to simply display through a screen a mirror of what our eyes and ears absorb in our environment. Since the exposures-to, experiences-in and the perceptions-of are as vast as the individuals who partake in them, it seems only fitting that the documentary form entail just as wide a variety and selection of films for these individuals who make them, who are filmed in them, and who watch them.
-30-
Furthermore, according to that definition, the realm of the kinds of films that would fall under the construct of a documentary is very broad. The question I would like to propose for this post is, “Should there be a tighter structure and appointment of what deservedly qualifies as a real documentary or not?”
I have danced ballet for most of my life. It is an extremely rigid art form, both in the selection of its dancers and in its execution of the art. I’ve always believed that part of the coveted status of keeping this art form pure was its exclusive nature. The open arms extended round and wide for beginner ballerinas to imitate, eventually becomes positioned as straight and narrow tight-fisted grips for a select few as professionals; yet the art continues to mesmerize aspiring dancers and draw admiring crowds.
Does this trajectory have any merit in the film world, specifically in application to the doc form, where a less definitive and a more permissive component-checklist or lack thereof (ie. interview, clear storyline, etc.) is needed to embrace aspiring and/or seasoned filmmakers and their audiences?
I have seen many documentaries that do not recreate or capture everyday actuality, especially through a sub-section of the documentary film form called experimental. It is nonetheless associated and coined as a documentary (I wonder, however, whether John Grierson, who said that documentaries were a “creative treatment of actuality,” could have predicted how far that statement would be carried and challenged!). Rightfully so, I should think, as it does capture some kind of reality of the human experience through its un-scripted characters and non-fictional events (even if sometimes it is unrecognizable!).
Just as the ballerina attempting to dance to simply express herself through her body, so does the filmmaker in the documentary form attempt to simply display through a screen a mirror of what our eyes and ears absorb in our environment. Since the exposures-to, experiences-in and the perceptions-of are as vast as the individuals who partake in them, it seems only fitting that the documentary form entail just as wide a variety and selection of films for these individuals who make them, who are filmed in them, and who watch them.
-30-
Invisible Government and the World of John Pilger by Justin Nalepa
United States World War I & II propaganda
Since the early part of the 20th century, media and mass communication have been used as a means of influencing people and public opinion towards certain causes or positions. It was during World War I and WWII when propaganda became an increasing used political and sociological tool of governments. Due to its necessarily manipulative intent, it has since taken on a negative connotation in its use. In order to get past this perception, Edward Louis Bernays came up with a more ambiguous definition, public relations. It was through this redefining of the term that governments, and now even corporations and businesses, have had an avenue in which they are able to control what information is being given to the public.
Throughout his career, John Pilger has sought out to expose and investigate those stories that have been filtered through the branch of PR departments. He has been an advocate of alternative media, promoting first hand information and investigation into information that has been processed and manipulated before being passed onto the public. In his most recent film, The War You Don’t See (2010), John looks at the dangers of misinformation coming from journalism in today’s mainstream media outlets. Focusing on the Iraq War, with examples throughout the past century, John brings into the question the competency of journalists in their investigation methods and reporting.
Pilger’s perception is not one of complacency. John asks the right questions and the hard questions to get to the truth of the subject. He cuts through to the heart of the matter by exposing mainstream media fallacies and substandard investigative practices that mislead and misinform public opinion. In today’s corporate and government dominated media structure, we should heed John’s warning as a wake up call to look beyond the surface of what’s being reported and see mainstream media for what they really are, a way to make up your mind for you.
-30-
Throughout his career, John Pilger has sought out to expose and investigate those stories that have been filtered through the branch of PR departments. He has been an advocate of alternative media, promoting first hand information and investigation into information that has been processed and manipulated before being passed onto the public. In his most recent film, The War You Don’t See (2010), John looks at the dangers of misinformation coming from journalism in today’s mainstream media outlets. Focusing on the Iraq War, with examples throughout the past century, John brings into the question the competency of journalists in their investigation methods and reporting.
Pilger’s perception is not one of complacency. John asks the right questions and the hard questions to get to the truth of the subject. He cuts through to the heart of the matter by exposing mainstream media fallacies and substandard investigative practices that mislead and misinform public opinion. In today’s corporate and government dominated media structure, we should heed John’s warning as a wake up call to look beyond the surface of what’s being reported and see mainstream media for what they really are, a way to make up your mind for you.
-30-
Paul Anka
The Lonely Boys by Eric Archambault
Ryan Larkin
After watching the excellent "Lonely Boy" on the NFB web site, a "what is the price of success" style documentary looking at the life of teen idol Paul Anka, it somehow reminded me of the Ryan Larkin story, the NFB golden boy who's tragic fall from grace is the subject of a more recent film by Laurence Green, Alter-Egos, included on the Ryan DVD. I feel the connection between these two films made more than 40 years apart is worth exploring further.
The following sentences are taken from the article "Paul Anka doesn't live here anymore" by Tony Lofaro, and reveal intriguing facts about Paul Anka's early life:
"... Near year's end in 1956, he pestered his father for permission to travel to New York City and visit more record companies... Days later, Andy Anka was in New York signing a contract on his son's behalf.... And Paul Anka, 15 years old, would never come home again... At the height of his popularity in the '60s, Anka's mother, Camelia, died... ``Paul was very sorrowful and took it very hard at the time because he was close to his mother,'' says Mr. Tannis, 74, Camelia's brother. He says Paul tried to remain close to his brother and sister after their mother's death, but his tour schedule always prevented that...."
My impression is that it is what the film leaves out that makes him out to be such a tragic figure: where were the scenes showing the domestic family relationships to counterbalance the pressures of being a successful public performer at such a young age. The sense we get in Lonely Boy is of Anka as a shrewd, ambitious individual even at this young an age, who chose to sacrifice the typical care-free youth for the hard work required of a successful songwriter and performer.
For me the most powerful scenes in Lonely Boy are the ones where the camera is showing his P.O.V. during his onstage performances, wide-angle shots of the sea of female fans clamoring for his attention, each one believing his songs are meant just for her. Close-ups of female faces screaming and crying, unable to control their emotions, also contribute to the feeling that satisfying the emotional needs of these "Lonely Girls" has become the dominant thing in his life, and that to remain successful, he must appear available to all by remaining an eligible bachelor. These scenes, combined with the scenes of the significant police and security protection Anka requires out in public or onstage, serve to make the point that Anka's loneliness stems from his isolation from the depth of real, emotionally satisfying relationships we take for granted with our close family members, and/or significant others. This is clearly not possible for someone living this kind of life.
In Alter Egos, there are several scenes which paint Ryan Larkin as the tragic figure: the most prominent one for me is where he is shown alone at a table at the back of a Montreal bar, reading a book, having a beer, smoking a cigarette. This is a wide-angle shot that shows us the many empty seats and tables in the bar, echoing the fact that this is a person that has lived a life of isolation, unable or unwilling to make any meaningful human relationships. Although in some ways his existence shares some similarities to Anka's in that his life is missing the close relationships most people take for granted, Ryan Larkin's isolation of the down and out is very different than the isolation of success that Paul Anka experienced at the height of his popularity, and still today.
The close-up shots of Ryan Larkin show us a face aged by hardship and substance abuse; we can sense regret as he recounts his fall from grace at the NFB, explaining how he just couldn't deal with the day-to-day bureaucracy of the business, the pressures of success and the impact of an alcohol and drug addiction that arose from the need to constantly push the limits of his craft. This is so difficult for him to discuss that he cannot provide much detail or insight into the events that lead to his downfall. The decision not to edit the pauses and silences from these interviews highlight a reflective thoughtfulness, perhaps even hesitation and discomfort in recounting his story.
The film also shows Larkin walking through the streets of urban Montreal, like a character from his award-winning short film Walking, which celebrates the movement of the human body. Although this exterior footage portrays him as an anonymous homeless person, a tragic figure begging for change on the street like any other panhandler, one senses that the freedom of this bohemian lifestyle makes him feel more at home here on the streets than he ever was in the corporate offices of the NFB. The film conveys a sense of Larkin as an exceptionally keen observer, someone who has spent countless hours by himself looking at the world and reflecting, then producing an incredible body of work to share his view of the world.
The quote which ends this assignment is from Hubert Selby Jr, and is taken from the article "Last Exit on St. Laurent Street: The Wonderfully Fucked Up World of Ryan Larkin" by Chris Robinson: "Being an artist doesn't take much, just everything you've got."
-30-
The following sentences are taken from the article "Paul Anka doesn't live here anymore" by Tony Lofaro, and reveal intriguing facts about Paul Anka's early life:
"... Near year's end in 1956, he pestered his father for permission to travel to New York City and visit more record companies... Days later, Andy Anka was in New York signing a contract on his son's behalf.... And Paul Anka, 15 years old, would never come home again... At the height of his popularity in the '60s, Anka's mother, Camelia, died... ``Paul was very sorrowful and took it very hard at the time because he was close to his mother,'' says Mr. Tannis, 74, Camelia's brother. He says Paul tried to remain close to his brother and sister after their mother's death, but his tour schedule always prevented that...."
My impression is that it is what the film leaves out that makes him out to be such a tragic figure: where were the scenes showing the domestic family relationships to counterbalance the pressures of being a successful public performer at such a young age. The sense we get in Lonely Boy is of Anka as a shrewd, ambitious individual even at this young an age, who chose to sacrifice the typical care-free youth for the hard work required of a successful songwriter and performer.
For me the most powerful scenes in Lonely Boy are the ones where the camera is showing his P.O.V. during his onstage performances, wide-angle shots of the sea of female fans clamoring for his attention, each one believing his songs are meant just for her. Close-ups of female faces screaming and crying, unable to control their emotions, also contribute to the feeling that satisfying the emotional needs of these "Lonely Girls" has become the dominant thing in his life, and that to remain successful, he must appear available to all by remaining an eligible bachelor. These scenes, combined with the scenes of the significant police and security protection Anka requires out in public or onstage, serve to make the point that Anka's loneliness stems from his isolation from the depth of real, emotionally satisfying relationships we take for granted with our close family members, and/or significant others. This is clearly not possible for someone living this kind of life.
In Alter Egos, there are several scenes which paint Ryan Larkin as the tragic figure: the most prominent one for me is where he is shown alone at a table at the back of a Montreal bar, reading a book, having a beer, smoking a cigarette. This is a wide-angle shot that shows us the many empty seats and tables in the bar, echoing the fact that this is a person that has lived a life of isolation, unable or unwilling to make any meaningful human relationships. Although in some ways his existence shares some similarities to Anka's in that his life is missing the close relationships most people take for granted, Ryan Larkin's isolation of the down and out is very different than the isolation of success that Paul Anka experienced at the height of his popularity, and still today.
The close-up shots of Ryan Larkin show us a face aged by hardship and substance abuse; we can sense regret as he recounts his fall from grace at the NFB, explaining how he just couldn't deal with the day-to-day bureaucracy of the business, the pressures of success and the impact of an alcohol and drug addiction that arose from the need to constantly push the limits of his craft. This is so difficult for him to discuss that he cannot provide much detail or insight into the events that lead to his downfall. The decision not to edit the pauses and silences from these interviews highlight a reflective thoughtfulness, perhaps even hesitation and discomfort in recounting his story.
The film also shows Larkin walking through the streets of urban Montreal, like a character from his award-winning short film Walking, which celebrates the movement of the human body. Although this exterior footage portrays him as an anonymous homeless person, a tragic figure begging for change on the street like any other panhandler, one senses that the freedom of this bohemian lifestyle makes him feel more at home here on the streets than he ever was in the corporate offices of the NFB. The film conveys a sense of Larkin as an exceptionally keen observer, someone who has spent countless hours by himself looking at the world and reflecting, then producing an incredible body of work to share his view of the world.
The quote which ends this assignment is from Hubert Selby Jr, and is taken from the article "Last Exit on St. Laurent Street: The Wonderfully Fucked Up World of Ryan Larkin" by Chris Robinson: "Being an artist doesn't take much, just everything you've got."
-30-
Observational Documentaries: Harder than it looks. (Megan R.)
Recently we studied observational documentaries in film class. An observational documentary is where the filmmaker completely removes themselves from the film, they are not seen or heard from and let the film play out on its own. We watched two examples of this type of film Hospital (1970) and Public Housing (1997) both by Frederick Wiseman. I found this approach to filmmaking interesting and unique simply because in today’s documentary market, more and more filmmakers are coming in front of the camera in one way or another. The observational approach is no better or worse than other approaches but for the examples shown in class provided as much of an unbiased view of the film as possible. Recently during my own filmmaking I tried to take this approach but was unsuccessful. I would always be asked what I was doing or the subjects would ask me questions or try to strike a conversation with me. Because of this I gained a newfound respect for filmmakers who are simply able to remove themselves completely from the scene and simply film. It takes talent and restraint to do this and I am still learning the trade. I enjoyed Hospital because in my practice of documentary making, I have come across medical topics and found those issues to be fascinating. I did however find it strange that although the footage was “untouched” by filmmakers the sound was very stylized. There was a steady beat of machines to symbolize a heart beat.
-30-
-30-
Michael Moore: The change in documentary format. (Megan R.)
In a recent class we discussed Michael Moore’s approach to documentary filmmaking and whether or not his approach was successful. Moore has been criticized many times for providing false facts and over exaggerating information within his films. Moore is a popular subject to discuss within the documentary field because he has brought about a new sub genre of documentary with the over stylized Hollywood type film. Morgan Spurlock’s career almost piggybacks Moore’s, and there are many similarities between the two. Spurlock came out with Supersize me shortly after Fahrenheit 911, both films provide fancy graphics, stylized filmmaking and humour to get the point of their film across.
Do these films however fit into the documentary genre and are they true documentaries if they are stretching facts? In my opinion, I would considered these to be documentaries simply because there isn’t one single definition of what a documentary should or shouldn’t be. For example, an action film does not have such stringent roles placed upon it so why should documentary? Moore and Spurlock provide the audience with knowledge which viewers will take and further explore. An audience member might go home and research what is in McDonald’s foods or go explore the details of the 2000 American election.
The positive thing about Moore’s films are that the average public will go see them, learn about a subject they might not have had any interest in previously and then go research said topic on their own time. This would give them the true information that the film might not have provided, as well, many people will simply return home after the screening and wonder if Moore was truthful and seek out the answers as well. Therefore, Moore’s film do provide a sort of learning tool to the public which documentaries are infamous for. The point of these films are to entertain with learning injected into them. Typical documentaries are the opposite, so why is one right when the other is wrong?
-30-
Do these films however fit into the documentary genre and are they true documentaries if they are stretching facts? In my opinion, I would considered these to be documentaries simply because there isn’t one single definition of what a documentary should or shouldn’t be. For example, an action film does not have such stringent roles placed upon it so why should documentary? Moore and Spurlock provide the audience with knowledge which viewers will take and further explore. An audience member might go home and research what is in McDonald’s foods or go explore the details of the 2000 American election.
The positive thing about Moore’s films are that the average public will go see them, learn about a subject they might not have had any interest in previously and then go research said topic on their own time. This would give them the true information that the film might not have provided, as well, many people will simply return home after the screening and wonder if Moore was truthful and seek out the answers as well. Therefore, Moore’s film do provide a sort of learning tool to the public which documentaries are infamous for. The point of these films are to entertain with learning injected into them. Typical documentaries are the opposite, so why is one right when the other is wrong?
-30-
"NEVER COME BACK" --A Socially Activist Documentary? By Cristin S.
From left, Karl Nerenberg ( Producer, Writer, Co-director); Malcolm Hamilton ( Co-director, Editor, DOP); Martha Plaine ( Researcher)
I was fortunate yesterday to see a new local film that I see as being in the finest traditions of “documentary as social justice activism which incites debate and action” (as John Hayes puts it his 2007 article in 49th Parallel).
“NEVER COME BACK: A Year in the Life of the Roma in Canada,” was produced by
Ottawa film-makers Karl Nerenberg and Malcolm Hamilton, who also teach in Algonquin College’s 2012 documentary film production program.
Their hour-long documentary sympathetically presents the dire plight of the Roma people in central Europe—which ranges from government discrimination against them in education, employment and health care to suffering organized violence from paramilitary forces.
The information is presented mostly via interviews in an eye-opening and compelling way, without being overtly one-sided a la Michael Moore.
One particularly chilling clip showed a television ad run by a far-right political party in Hungary that characterized the party’s despised Roma targets—as “mosquitoes” to be exterminated (shades of the tactics used in Rwanda to dehumanize Tutsis as “cockroaches”.)
The film’s screening was followed by a panel/audience discussion on Canada's refugee policy vis à vis the Roma. That policy has drastically changed in recent months--from accepting many Roma as genuine refugees requiring sanctuary in Canada to refusing almost all who apply.
“NEVER COME BACK” is a strong (implicit) rebuke to federal policy makers who recently tabled Bill C-31 in Parliament which, if passed, is expected to make it almost impossible for Roma to come here from so-called “safe” designated democratic countries (such as Hungary and the Czech Republic) which supposedly are able to protect Roma from persecution.
But as a Hungarian embassy official present at the Ottawa screening acknowledged afterward, the situation of the Roma remains “disastrous” and totally unacceptable in central Europe.
The film is timely, and informative, and does much to dispel the stubborn false stereotypes of Roma (also known as gypsies) as thieves and miscreants. If “NEVER COME BACK was intended to be a call to action by the film-makers it was successful, judging by the reaction of last night’s audience members, who asked what they could do to help improve Canada’s refugee policies and to help end the persecution of the Roma people.
-30-
I was fortunate yesterday to see a new local film that I see as being in the finest traditions of “documentary as social justice activism which incites debate and action” (as John Hayes puts it his 2007 article in 49th Parallel).
“NEVER COME BACK: A Year in the Life of the Roma in Canada,” was produced by
Ottawa film-makers Karl Nerenberg and Malcolm Hamilton, who also teach in Algonquin College’s 2012 documentary film production program.
Their hour-long documentary sympathetically presents the dire plight of the Roma people in central Europe—which ranges from government discrimination against them in education, employment and health care to suffering organized violence from paramilitary forces.
The information is presented mostly via interviews in an eye-opening and compelling way, without being overtly one-sided a la Michael Moore.
One particularly chilling clip showed a television ad run by a far-right political party in Hungary that characterized the party’s despised Roma targets—as “mosquitoes” to be exterminated (shades of the tactics used in Rwanda to dehumanize Tutsis as “cockroaches”.)
The film’s screening was followed by a panel/audience discussion on Canada's refugee policy vis à vis the Roma. That policy has drastically changed in recent months--from accepting many Roma as genuine refugees requiring sanctuary in Canada to refusing almost all who apply.
“NEVER COME BACK” is a strong (implicit) rebuke to federal policy makers who recently tabled Bill C-31 in Parliament which, if passed, is expected to make it almost impossible for Roma to come here from so-called “safe” designated democratic countries (such as Hungary and the Czech Republic) which supposedly are able to protect Roma from persecution.
But as a Hungarian embassy official present at the Ottawa screening acknowledged afterward, the situation of the Roma remains “disastrous” and totally unacceptable in central Europe.
The film is timely, and informative, and does much to dispel the stubborn false stereotypes of Roma (also known as gypsies) as thieves and miscreants. If “NEVER COME BACK was intended to be a call to action by the film-makers it was successful, judging by the reaction of last night’s audience members, who asked what they could do to help improve Canada’s refugee policies and to help end the persecution of the Roma people.
-30-
One World Film Festival - creating awareness through media and performing arts
Alexandra Graham
Last night the class and professors headed down to the National Archives to watch the film NEVER COME BACK, directed by two of our professors Karl Nerenberg and Malcolm Hamilton. As Christine describes above, the film was an intriguing, yet unsettling, exposition of the racism and discrimination Romas face in their home countries and their struggles to gain refugee status in Canada. I was surprised to find out, upon arrival, that we did not have to pay to attend this screening. The screening was sponsored by One World Arts - a volunteer-based charity organization working to create awareness on world issues. When I got home I was very interested to find out more about this organization and festival as my own goal is to produce documentaries to engage and inspire viewers to re-evaluate their choices in relation to the environment, animal welfare, and health.
One World Arts was founded in 1972 in the Ottawa-Hull region to use art as a powerful tool to engage the public. They focus on issues that concern human rights, social justice, and the environment. Under the umbrella of One World Arts, this charity hosts One World Awesome Arts and One World Film Festival.
One World Awesome Arts is a program that brings a variety of arts-based workshops to youth and children, including hip hop dance, slam poetry, theatre, and video. Watch this short stop motion film created by children (5-12) about water (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Rj-_E5sRvg&context=C43b6152ADvjVQa1PpcFOjtMmUNZgjojzLscqOuY3dKj-4Q1NV4YY=). This program is a great way to demonstrate to youth that they can use their voices and creativity to engage others in important world issues even at a young age. Providing youth with tools to express themselves will inspire them to reach out and share their voices.
One World Film Festival (see promotion video here: https://vimeo.com/29333063) is another way One World engages Ottawa in social justice through art. For 22 years this festival has been bringing together filmmakers, activists, students, and the greater public to discuss human rights and environmental issues. Participating in this festival would be an amazing opportunity for filmmakers whose goal is to reach a broad audience to educate and engage them in discussion.
If you would like to get involved with One World Arts they are always looking for volunteers. If you are interested in getting involved please contact their volunteer coordinator at [email protected].
-30-
One World Arts was founded in 1972 in the Ottawa-Hull region to use art as a powerful tool to engage the public. They focus on issues that concern human rights, social justice, and the environment. Under the umbrella of One World Arts, this charity hosts One World Awesome Arts and One World Film Festival.
One World Awesome Arts is a program that brings a variety of arts-based workshops to youth and children, including hip hop dance, slam poetry, theatre, and video. Watch this short stop motion film created by children (5-12) about water (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Rj-_E5sRvg&context=C43b6152ADvjVQa1PpcFOjtMmUNZgjojzLscqOuY3dKj-4Q1NV4YY=). This program is a great way to demonstrate to youth that they can use their voices and creativity to engage others in important world issues even at a young age. Providing youth with tools to express themselves will inspire them to reach out and share their voices.
One World Film Festival (see promotion video here: https://vimeo.com/29333063) is another way One World engages Ottawa in social justice through art. For 22 years this festival has been bringing together filmmakers, activists, students, and the greater public to discuss human rights and environmental issues. Participating in this festival would be an amazing opportunity for filmmakers whose goal is to reach a broad audience to educate and engage them in discussion.
If you would like to get involved with One World Arts they are always looking for volunteers. If you are interested in getting involved please contact their volunteer coordinator at [email protected].
-30-
The Thin Blue Line - The Making Of
Alexandra Graham
As we started documentary form class this January, Peter showed a behind the scenes video describing Errol Morris's experience filming his classic documentary The Thin Blue Line. I had watched this documentary a few weeks prior to this class and was completely captivated by the suspense, the mystery that pulled you into the story Randal Adams, a man falsely convicted for a murder he did not commit and sentence to die.
Watching "Making Of the Thin Blue Line," I was intrigued to discover that Errol Morris worked as a private detective in the 80s because that was the only work that he could get - even after he had directed two films. He worked for law firms on Wall Street. He was given money to interview a psychiatrist known as Dr. Death.
In Dallas in the 1980s, to sentence someone to death, you were told to bring in a "hanging psychiatrist" who would determine whether on not the criminal would commit a similar crime. This was Dr. Death's job. After interviewing Dr. Death, he was encouraged to interview some of the characters on death row who had been sentence to death because of Dr Death. That is where he met Randall Dale Adams.
He had been warned that he would hear "I'm innocent. I didn't do it" over and over again. And he did. But there was something about Randall Adam's story and how he kept talking about "the kid. the kid. the kid!" that caused Morris to become obsessed with the case. He spent two years investigating this case.
While reflecting on his filming experience, Morris explains that in interviews, if you set things up correctly, often questions you didn't even know you should ask get answered. This is exemplified in the case of Emily Miller. She was credited for pointing out Randall Adams in the courtroom and yelling "that's the man. That's who did it." But during her interview with Morris, she confessed that she had failed to point him out in a line up before. When Morris asked her how she knew she had failed. She replied, because the police man told me that I had failed and then pointed to the right man so I wouldn't make that mistake again. Here - without even asking for it, Morris discovered a major case of purgatory, of police cover up. This is where his documentary really takes off.
Watching The Making Of The Thin Blue Line was an educational experience that demonstrated two things. First - significant research is necessary for compelling, investigative documentaries. Today's doc filmmakers are not solely entertainers, but we are a new form of journalists. Second - investigative documentaries aren't about hiding in the dark corners hoping not to get caught, but they are a product of great listeners.
-30-
Watching "Making Of the Thin Blue Line," I was intrigued to discover that Errol Morris worked as a private detective in the 80s because that was the only work that he could get - even after he had directed two films. He worked for law firms on Wall Street. He was given money to interview a psychiatrist known as Dr. Death.
In Dallas in the 1980s, to sentence someone to death, you were told to bring in a "hanging psychiatrist" who would determine whether on not the criminal would commit a similar crime. This was Dr. Death's job. After interviewing Dr. Death, he was encouraged to interview some of the characters on death row who had been sentence to death because of Dr Death. That is where he met Randall Dale Adams.
He had been warned that he would hear "I'm innocent. I didn't do it" over and over again. And he did. But there was something about Randall Adam's story and how he kept talking about "the kid. the kid. the kid!" that caused Morris to become obsessed with the case. He spent two years investigating this case.
While reflecting on his filming experience, Morris explains that in interviews, if you set things up correctly, often questions you didn't even know you should ask get answered. This is exemplified in the case of Emily Miller. She was credited for pointing out Randall Adams in the courtroom and yelling "that's the man. That's who did it." But during her interview with Morris, she confessed that she had failed to point him out in a line up before. When Morris asked her how she knew she had failed. She replied, because the police man told me that I had failed and then pointed to the right man so I wouldn't make that mistake again. Here - without even asking for it, Morris discovered a major case of purgatory, of police cover up. This is where his documentary really takes off.
Watching The Making Of The Thin Blue Line was an educational experience that demonstrated two things. First - significant research is necessary for compelling, investigative documentaries. Today's doc filmmakers are not solely entertainers, but we are a new form of journalists. Second - investigative documentaries aren't about hiding in the dark corners hoping not to get caught, but they are a product of great listeners.
-30-
The Man Who Crossed the Sahara
I was blown away by “The Man Who Crossed the Sahara”-- Montreal filmmaker Korbett Matthews haunting and elegiac 2008 film about the life, work, and unsolved violent death of prominent Ottawa documentary filmmaker, Frank Cole. Insights from Cole’s family, friends and co-workers are combined with footage taken by Cole and those close to him to create a fascinating film about a unique and memorable filmmaker.
.
Cole, who studied film here at Algonquin College, made intimate, first-person documentaries, a genre Patricia Aufderheide describes as “somewhere in-between the essay, general reportage and the well-told tale. It is marked not only by the first-person voice in testimonial, but also by the bringing of the viewer into the world of the story-teller’s experience.”
As Aufderheide points out, personal documentaries are made by filmmakers who “go on journeys of discovery, often triggered by medical crisis—AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease, brain damage, bulimia, mental illness—or by a family crisis. Accidents of fate or birth trigger an exploration of social identity, as a way of making meaning from events. The camera becomes not just a recorder, but an assistant in the construction of reality.”
So it was with Cole, who was traumatized by the death of his beloved grandmother from cancer—a death he painfully chronicled on film.
As Peter Wintonick observes in Matthews’s documentary, Cole used his camera to deal with his own personal demons. Cole was obsessed with death. Jean-Yves Dion, cinematographer on Cole’s 1986 film “A Life”, said his friend wanted to live a near-death experience every day in order to confront (and try to overcome) death. In doing so Cole felt truly alive. “A Life” was shot both in the Sahara (the pair drove 16,000 km.) and in a room in Ottawa. In 1990, Cole went back alone (Dion declined to come) to cross the Sahara on foot and camel in 11 months-- a world record. Ten years later he released his tour-de-force film from that journey “Life Without Death.” Soon after, over the objections of family and friends, Cole went back to the Sahara where he was killed (as he feared he would be) by bandits in October 2000 near Timbuktu, Mali.
Cole said in a letter he was consumed by his fear of death and that it was the fear of death that summoned him, like a calling, to the Sahara. What courage he had to face that fear head on! He produced very few films but, in my view, Cole was an influential film maker and “Life Without Death” is among the most extraordinary personal documentaries one is ever likely to see.
-30-
.
Cole, who studied film here at Algonquin College, made intimate, first-person documentaries, a genre Patricia Aufderheide describes as “somewhere in-between the essay, general reportage and the well-told tale. It is marked not only by the first-person voice in testimonial, but also by the bringing of the viewer into the world of the story-teller’s experience.”
As Aufderheide points out, personal documentaries are made by filmmakers who “go on journeys of discovery, often triggered by medical crisis—AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease, brain damage, bulimia, mental illness—or by a family crisis. Accidents of fate or birth trigger an exploration of social identity, as a way of making meaning from events. The camera becomes not just a recorder, but an assistant in the construction of reality.”
So it was with Cole, who was traumatized by the death of his beloved grandmother from cancer—a death he painfully chronicled on film.
As Peter Wintonick observes in Matthews’s documentary, Cole used his camera to deal with his own personal demons. Cole was obsessed with death. Jean-Yves Dion, cinematographer on Cole’s 1986 film “A Life”, said his friend wanted to live a near-death experience every day in order to confront (and try to overcome) death. In doing so Cole felt truly alive. “A Life” was shot both in the Sahara (the pair drove 16,000 km.) and in a room in Ottawa. In 1990, Cole went back alone (Dion declined to come) to cross the Sahara on foot and camel in 11 months-- a world record. Ten years later he released his tour-de-force film from that journey “Life Without Death.” Soon after, over the objections of family and friends, Cole went back to the Sahara where he was killed (as he feared he would be) by bandits in October 2000 near Timbuktu, Mali.
Cole said in a letter he was consumed by his fear of death and that it was the fear of death that summoned him, like a calling, to the Sahara. What courage he had to face that fear head on! He produced very few films but, in my view, Cole was an influential film maker and “Life Without Death” is among the most extraordinary personal documentaries one is ever likely to see.
-30-
What’s Old is New Again by Justin Nalepa
A panel from Marjane Satrapi's graphic novel Persepolis
Since the days of Winsor McCay’s The Sinking of the Lusitania (1918), animation has been used as means of storytelling in documentary narratives. Within the last few years we’ve seen a reemergence of animated documentaries within the global film landscape. The beauty of animation works not only as a means of visually engaging the audience, but functions as a storytelling device for events that cannot be captured on film. The latter has been particularly emphasized in recounting memories of events, especially tragic ones.
In 2007, author and first-time director Marjane Satrapi released her graphic novel adaptation, Persepolis, onto the big screen. The film recounts her childhood growing up in 1970’s Iran during the Islamic Revolution. Through the use of some endearingly well-drawn animation and superb voice acting, her life story is recounted in stark contrasts of black and white. The use of animation works so well that you can’t imagine the story being told any other way. It’s no surprise that it took home the Best Animated Feature award from the Oscars in 2008. Though more animation than documentary, the line between the two categories is becoming more blurred as the boundaries of the documentary medium are becoming redefined in the increasingly growing realm of media.
Another exceptionally beautifully animated film and documentary that deals with memory is Ari Folman’s Waltz With Bashir (2008). This film deals with the tragic events of the first Lebanon war in 1982 and how it has caused a collective trauma and a kind of amnesiac response to its participants. After a meeting with an old friend at a bar in the middle of the night, Folman dreams of the war and attempts to revisit his memories of the events, but finds that they are now lost. He sets off to rediscover the events of the war, and gain back his memories, by interviewing fellow veterans of the war. From the beginning Folman intended this film to be an animated documentary and not a documentary, nor animated film first. The only thing the film fell short of was garnering attention from the Oscars. It’s truly a masterpiece in visually storytelling and its powerful story will leave you with a changed perception of war and its side affects.
You can watch Persepolis the full movie in high resolution here on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBbL-X_a6Rk&feature=related
You can find the trailer for Waltz with Bashir here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLkwfsFzrJw
-30-
In 2007, author and first-time director Marjane Satrapi released her graphic novel adaptation, Persepolis, onto the big screen. The film recounts her childhood growing up in 1970’s Iran during the Islamic Revolution. Through the use of some endearingly well-drawn animation and superb voice acting, her life story is recounted in stark contrasts of black and white. The use of animation works so well that you can’t imagine the story being told any other way. It’s no surprise that it took home the Best Animated Feature award from the Oscars in 2008. Though more animation than documentary, the line between the two categories is becoming more blurred as the boundaries of the documentary medium are becoming redefined in the increasingly growing realm of media.
Another exceptionally beautifully animated film and documentary that deals with memory is Ari Folman’s Waltz With Bashir (2008). This film deals with the tragic events of the first Lebanon war in 1982 and how it has caused a collective trauma and a kind of amnesiac response to its participants. After a meeting with an old friend at a bar in the middle of the night, Folman dreams of the war and attempts to revisit his memories of the events, but finds that they are now lost. He sets off to rediscover the events of the war, and gain back his memories, by interviewing fellow veterans of the war. From the beginning Folman intended this film to be an animated documentary and not a documentary, nor animated film first. The only thing the film fell short of was garnering attention from the Oscars. It’s truly a masterpiece in visually storytelling and its powerful story will leave you with a changed perception of war and its side affects.
You can watch Persepolis the full movie in high resolution here on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBbL-X_a6Rk&feature=related
You can find the trailer for Waltz with Bashir here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLkwfsFzrJw
-30-
Hitting a High Point by Justin Nalepa
Screenshot of Bear 71's grid map of Banff National Park
Interactive storytelling has really started to hit its stride within the last few years. More and more we’re seeing interactive media used as a means of documentary storytelling. The NFB has had particular influence in setting the standard for these creative and exceptional interactive-web documentaries. Out My Window (2010) and Welcome to Pine Point (2011) are two that illustrate this point particularly well. Both these documentaries explore some fascinating content in completely different ways using a mix of styles, flash animation, photographs and effective voice-over narrative. Those with time on their hands and a good set of headphones will find the experience worth the investment.
The only drawback with many of these interactive documentaries is that in order to fully experience them, you do need to dedicate a couple hours of your time, and while putting aside a couple hours to watch a film in a theatre or a movie on your television at home is easily considered, the same principle does not hold true for those on their computers. In today’s online media world, our attention is constantly being fought for. Every minute is a moment you could be watching another person’s work, reading up on an interesting article, playing a game or rummaging through the news feed on your social media account. It’s a battle to get your content to your audience and attract newcomers to your work; every minute, every second counts.
One documentary that I think succeeds in taking this into consideration is Leanne Allison and Jeremy Mendes’ Bear 71 (2012). Produced by the NFB, this production follows a grizzly bear through Banff National Park. The documentary uses security-like trail cameras and a GPS tracking grid to explore Banff National Park and the connection between the human and animal world. The grizzly bear we follow, code named “Bear 71”, is given anthropomorphic like qualities through the use of voice acting. We get to hear and see her perspective of what it’s like to live and be collared in a protected reserve. From the onset, it tells you that it is a 20-minute documentary and right away the clock begins to count down. It grabs you with the anticipation of what might happen within those twenty minutes, while still allowing you to explore the documentary in your own way. With the rise of interactive documentary storytelling, it’s likely we’ll start to see more productions focusing on this concern of length in their publication and finding new and creative ways to get your attention.
You can experience Bear 71 here:
bear71.nfb.ca/
-30-
The only drawback with many of these interactive documentaries is that in order to fully experience them, you do need to dedicate a couple hours of your time, and while putting aside a couple hours to watch a film in a theatre or a movie on your television at home is easily considered, the same principle does not hold true for those on their computers. In today’s online media world, our attention is constantly being fought for. Every minute is a moment you could be watching another person’s work, reading up on an interesting article, playing a game or rummaging through the news feed on your social media account. It’s a battle to get your content to your audience and attract newcomers to your work; every minute, every second counts.
One documentary that I think succeeds in taking this into consideration is Leanne Allison and Jeremy Mendes’ Bear 71 (2012). Produced by the NFB, this production follows a grizzly bear through Banff National Park. The documentary uses security-like trail cameras and a GPS tracking grid to explore Banff National Park and the connection between the human and animal world. The grizzly bear we follow, code named “Bear 71”, is given anthropomorphic like qualities through the use of voice acting. We get to hear and see her perspective of what it’s like to live and be collared in a protected reserve. From the onset, it tells you that it is a 20-minute documentary and right away the clock begins to count down. It grabs you with the anticipation of what might happen within those twenty minutes, while still allowing you to explore the documentary in your own way. With the rise of interactive documentary storytelling, it’s likely we’ll start to see more productions focusing on this concern of length in their publication and finding new and creative ways to get your attention.
You can experience Bear 71 here:
bear71.nfb.ca/
-30-
Me and the Mosque by Lubna Karim
This documentary discusses about the historic role of women in Islam faith and what is happening practically in mosques in Canada. She speaks about the herself and describes the situation with 91% muslim women brought up outside Canada and rest of 9% born and brought up in here. This film comprises of very personal interviews with original animation and archival footage. This film documents the debates and presents the personalities on all sides of issue..
http://www.nfb.ca/film/me_and_mosque
QUILT Lubna Karim
It is a short beautiful piece of art by Gayla Thomas. The duration of this film is 6 minutes and 37 seconds. It is a tribute to a long establishing art form of patchwork quilting. This is an abstract animation film in which different computer experimental techniques are used. I like this piece because it starts with simplicity leading to complexity and again turns back to simplicity as a quilt is made up.
It demonstrates the role of geometry and colors role in quilt design and I felt like start making a quilt in a minute. The music is fantastic.
You can experience thif film on Quilt/nfb.ca
WASTE LAND Lubna Karim
Catadores at recycling
Waste Land is directed by Lucy Walker. This film spans over three years time period when the director travells to Brazil to witness the world's biggest garbage dump. She photographed the recyclable material pickers. It runs for 90 minutes. It is a film about recycling, but its far more intriguing than average eco-documentary. The subject is Brazillian garbage pickers called catadores. Catadores are proud of their work. They consider themselves recyclers, not trash pickers. Director Lucy Walker focuses on workers who are really fascinating and formed an association that fights for better conditions for catadores.
Ross McElwee and Sherman's March: this is Pit ( by Wasim Baobaid)
This documentary is not just one of the greats, it's one of the best documentaries ever made ethereal beauty, spoken and photographed. Plus first-rate editing. And this was made years before reality television. Directed by Ross McElwee and it is only 4:32 but it gives you a full of emotional and inspirit of the life at that time.
Karam Has no walls (Wasim Baobaid)
Karama (Dignity) Has No Walls, by Sara Ishaq has become a huge hit at festivals and with human rights activists after it was released recently, and has been shown twice on Yemeni TV.
This film is about the Yemen’s revolution when it started on Juma’at El-Karama (Friday of Dignity). The tragic events that took place on this day – when pro-government snipers shot dead 53 protesters and injured a thousand more - shook the nation to its core and propelled hundreds of thousands more to flock to the square in solidarity with their fellow citizens. Military officials defected and joined the protests; members of parliament resigned and announced their support for the revolution; southern separatists, northern Houthi affiliates and apolitical Yemenis united; entire tribes set aside their weapons, made amends with rival tribesmen and pitched up tents in the square in support of one cause -– the liberation of Yemen from the shackles of a barbaric, oppressive regime. It gave the Yemeni nation a sense of responsibility towards their fellow citizens, particularly those who lost their lives on that fateful day.
This film is about the Yemen’s revolution when it started on Juma’at El-Karama (Friday of Dignity). The tragic events that took place on this day – when pro-government snipers shot dead 53 protesters and injured a thousand more - shook the nation to its core and propelled hundreds of thousands more to flock to the square in solidarity with their fellow citizens. Military officials defected and joined the protests; members of parliament resigned and announced their support for the revolution; southern separatists, northern Houthi affiliates and apolitical Yemenis united; entire tribes set aside their weapons, made amends with rival tribesmen and pitched up tents in the square in support of one cause -– the liberation of Yemen from the shackles of a barbaric, oppressive regime. It gave the Yemeni nation a sense of responsibility towards their fellow citizens, particularly those who lost their lives on that fateful day.
Arts Budget Cuts - What does this mean for new documentary?
Alexandra Graham
What do they recent cuts to the arts mean for young Canadian filmmakers? We live in pretty unsettling times as the government works towards deficit reduction. Just like everyone else - I understand that we have to make cuts somewhere. And since we apparently aren't seeing any cuts from oil and gas subsidies, cuts fall on "luxury" expenses such as the arts, the environment, and food safety.
Let's zoom in on the arts cuts. What exactly do the numbers look like. Over the next three years, the federal government is cutting the CBC's budget by $115 million, Telefilm by $10.6 million, and the National Film Board by $67 million. Each company's budget was essentially reduce by 10%. This translates into more than 700 lost jobs, less programming variety, and more commercials. Jacques Bensimon, president of ADAJOVE communications, protests that these organizations have strict mandates to invest in the future creative wealth of Canada, and by cutting their funds we are cutting off the legs of Canada's production industry.
So what exactly does these mean for us young documentary makers? CBC has announced that 18 positions in the documentary unit will have to be cut. This translates to less focus on documentaries and less jobs in house. However, our teacher Lisa Nault pointed out in class that this may also be a unique opportunity for young independent filmmakers like ourselves. With less money to produce their own documentaries, CBC will have to outsource. However, they will still be looking for quality Canadian content. Nault's advice was to take this opportunity to seek financing elsewhere, but look at CBC as a more willing distributor in the future.
There may be a few more Colgates advertisements between clips of your documentary - but they may be the difference between YouTube or CBC Television.
Let's zoom in on the arts cuts. What exactly do the numbers look like. Over the next three years, the federal government is cutting the CBC's budget by $115 million, Telefilm by $10.6 million, and the National Film Board by $67 million. Each company's budget was essentially reduce by 10%. This translates into more than 700 lost jobs, less programming variety, and more commercials. Jacques Bensimon, president of ADAJOVE communications, protests that these organizations have strict mandates to invest in the future creative wealth of Canada, and by cutting their funds we are cutting off the legs of Canada's production industry.
So what exactly does these mean for us young documentary makers? CBC has announced that 18 positions in the documentary unit will have to be cut. This translates to less focus on documentaries and less jobs in house. However, our teacher Lisa Nault pointed out in class that this may also be a unique opportunity for young independent filmmakers like ourselves. With less money to produce their own documentaries, CBC will have to outsource. However, they will still be looking for quality Canadian content. Nault's advice was to take this opportunity to seek financing elsewhere, but look at CBC as a more willing distributor in the future.
There may be a few more Colgates advertisements between clips of your documentary - but they may be the difference between YouTube or CBC Television.
Timelapse Video - From birth to age 12 in minutes
Watching my nephew Leif grow up over the last three years it amazes me how fast he grows up. How wonderful would it be to have a video that documented this? That is what filmmaker Frans Hofmeester has done with his daughter here: http://vimeo.com/40448182
Every week he would take stills of his daughter. First on her crib and then as she began to sit upright, in front of her baby blanket. From birth to 12 years old, you see his daughter Lotte experience different emotions ad personalities. He strung these pictures together, take 3-4 for from each week, using Final Cut Pro to re-create a parent's incredible journey of his daughter growing up. It now appears as a fluid video of Lotte chatting with her dad as she gets older and older. I wonder how easy it will be when she get's into her teen years! Beautiful piece!
Every week he would take stills of his daughter. First on her crib and then as she began to sit upright, in front of her baby blanket. From birth to 12 years old, you see his daughter Lotte experience different emotions ad personalities. He strung these pictures together, take 3-4 for from each week, using Final Cut Pro to re-create a parent's incredible journey of his daughter growing up. It now appears as a fluid video of Lotte chatting with her dad as she gets older and older. I wonder how easy it will be when she get's into her teen years! Beautiful piece!
Okay Finally this stupid weebly is working for me... First off I think that this site is the shits,,,and WHY is the Algonquin discussion board not being used???
Okay so lets talk here about things i enjoy and hate in a good Doc...First off I want to talk about Micheal Moore at first I hated that guy thought he was just a big fat arsehole with a big mouth! Yet I still think that way about him, yet I am starting to appreciate him for what he has done for the Documentary world. But I still think he is Full of shit.like his 9/11 F just that I think he and all the other truthers are so screwed up... Having lost my cousin in the Pentagon I can really feel the BS in this doc.
For me I really love the old docs especially the B/W ones to me black and White shows are intense and were done with the cameras of the day.
Movie makers are always experimenting ..Take for example a movie I saw called Bellflower,Bellflower is a 2011 American film written and directed by Evan Glodell. It was produced on a shoestring budget in Ventura, California[2] and premiered in January 2011 at the 2011 Sundance Film Festival.[3] The film was nominated for the Independent Spirit John Cassavetes Award for best feature film made for under $500,000.[4][5]
Evan made this for under 500,000 grand and was wanted in many states as he was on the run from the authorities ..Really interesting however that it was picked up and made it to Sundance, the person who picked it up from him actually paid off all his fines...just take a look at the car LOL he actually made a liqour depenser in it I wonder why he was wanted??/ Most of the time he was wasted driving it Ha ha... good on him...a little rebel in all of us ...but he took it to the extreme. The movie I think is brilliant.
Another movie that I like and was also made on a shoestring under 3 grand and I'm talking about the Blair Witch movie...my thinking if you can catch a viewers attention with a trailer and have people talk about it like it got ...no wonder it was a giant money maker... Just goes to show you how the social networking works.
Well now that we have done the course i think which way to go as you are aware of I am heading off to north hollywood with a possibility of doing some work also with an old high school friend Randall Dark in Austin Texas.
As in Scarface I love the motto in that movie...The World is Mine1 and indeed I will be working on that....after all I am considered a celeb. in the animation world and the radio world So watch out because "The World is Mine now.".....
Okay so lets talk here about things i enjoy and hate in a good Doc...First off I want to talk about Micheal Moore at first I hated that guy thought he was just a big fat arsehole with a big mouth! Yet I still think that way about him, yet I am starting to appreciate him for what he has done for the Documentary world. But I still think he is Full of shit.like his 9/11 F just that I think he and all the other truthers are so screwed up... Having lost my cousin in the Pentagon I can really feel the BS in this doc.
For me I really love the old docs especially the B/W ones to me black and White shows are intense and were done with the cameras of the day.
Movie makers are always experimenting ..Take for example a movie I saw called Bellflower,Bellflower is a 2011 American film written and directed by Evan Glodell. It was produced on a shoestring budget in Ventura, California[2] and premiered in January 2011 at the 2011 Sundance Film Festival.[3] The film was nominated for the Independent Spirit John Cassavetes Award for best feature film made for under $500,000.[4][5]
Evan made this for under 500,000 grand and was wanted in many states as he was on the run from the authorities ..Really interesting however that it was picked up and made it to Sundance, the person who picked it up from him actually paid off all his fines...just take a look at the car LOL he actually made a liqour depenser in it I wonder why he was wanted??/ Most of the time he was wasted driving it Ha ha... good on him...a little rebel in all of us ...but he took it to the extreme. The movie I think is brilliant.
Another movie that I like and was also made on a shoestring under 3 grand and I'm talking about the Blair Witch movie...my thinking if you can catch a viewers attention with a trailer and have people talk about it like it got ...no wonder it was a giant money maker... Just goes to show you how the social networking works.
Well now that we have done the course i think which way to go as you are aware of I am heading off to north hollywood with a possibility of doing some work also with an old high school friend Randall Dark in Austin Texas.
As in Scarface I love the motto in that movie...The World is Mine1 and indeed I will be working on that....after all I am considered a celeb. in the animation world and the radio world So watch out because "The World is Mine now.".....
The Reluctant Revolutionary in Hot Doc 2012 (Wasim Baobaid)
This film will be shown in Hot Doc - Toronto this year. A film by Sean McAllister.
"McAllister has achieved something incredible here. The Reluctant Revolutionary is a stunningly humane portrait that shows vividly what's at stake before leaving it bloody on the Formica floor of a battered concrete building." [Cole Abaius, Film School Rejects]
This film about young man from Yemen. He struggle to make ends meet and working in his father's travel agency. He is philosophical, articulate and reflective but as the story begins he is cynical about the undercurrents of dissent in his country and supposrtive of the President.
"McAllister has achieved something incredible here. The Reluctant Revolutionary is a stunningly humane portrait that shows vividly what's at stake before leaving it bloody on the Formica floor of a battered concrete building." [Cole Abaius, Film School Rejects]
This film about young man from Yemen. He struggle to make ends meet and working in his father's travel agency. He is philosophical, articulate and reflective but as the story begins he is cynical about the undercurrents of dissent in his country and supposrtive of the President.
Afghan Chronicles (Wasim Baobaid)
This feature documentary looks at democracy, freedom of speech and nation rebuilding in Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban. With a radio station and 2 magazines - one of them aimed at women - the press agency Killid Media is a real media phenomenon. As it follows the distribution of these popular magazines across Kabul, this film shows the struggles within this changing society and paints a touching picture of a land that is a work in progress, dreaming of a better future.
