documentary mini task

A documentary is a format of non-fiction television
programming that portrays a topic that is to some
extent based on reality. In most cases but not always
a documentary is supposed to be a factual program,
this however does not always apply as the subject
matter may be subjective, or those involved in the
making of the documentary may have a bias
regarding their chosen subject, this can lead to the
overall message leaning towards a certain subjective narrative. Common conventions of the genre
involve interviews conducted in either a quiet controlled environment where the interviewee,
usually someone significant with professional knowledge on the subject is sat down in a fitting
environment and asked questions on the chosen subject, or an outdoor environment this is where
members of the public will be asked questions, this being a common method used in news
broadcasts. Both interviewing methods share similarities, the most obvious being that the
interviewee will be placed closer to the left or right of the screen, with them looking and talking
towards the interviewer who will be situated to the opposite side off screen behind the camera. This
makes the interview feel relaxed and less as though the audience themselves are being talked
directly to.

The following modes of documentary were identified by film critic Bill Nichols, each differing in
presentation to a great enough extent to be distinguishable from each other.

Expository – An expository documentary will typically feature a
presenter speaking directly to the viewer, this can be
simultaneously with b-roll footage or with the presenter
themselves being seen. Because of this the presenter should be
knowledgeable due to their direct approach of connecting with
the audience. Additionally, interviews can be conducted within
this format https://youtu.be/_147Rj9aSoE this is an example of
an independently produced expository documentary. Another
example would be an animal/nature documentary with
voiceover explaining what it is the viewer is seeing, such as the
video linked - Our Planet | One Planet | FULL EPISODE | Netflix

Observational – As the name suggests this method focuses on capturing footage of real-life events,
this means that those behind the camera re not to interact with their subjects. For example, if
someone wanted to create an observational documentary about what happened during a plane trip,
the camera operator would film the events of those around them (with consent as to respect their
privacy and to protect the company from getting into legal trouble) without conducting interviews or
telling people what to do. This method provides a guarantee of authenticity as if these guidelines are
followed, fabricated events should not be contained within. This gives the creators a lack of creative
freedom as they are unable to construct a story or narrative of their own without the use of
imaginative editing. An example of this would be the
documentary, Basic training, which focuses on the training
of solders during the Vietnam war at Fort Knox, the
filmmakers are not a part of the narrative as they and us
the viewers are instead outsiders observing the soldiers and
their superiors. In addition to this other works by the
director Frederick Wiseman also utilise the same
observational methods such as, hospital and Juvenile court.
1 MINUTE OF - Basic training (1971) Frederick Wiseman

Interactive – Much like before, the name is self-explanatory, an interactive documentary much
contrary to an observational documentary focuses on interfering or intruding upon the subjects or
subject matter. The film maker themselves will often be included within the narrative (non-fiction
still) much like how a news presenter may travel to a destination to interact with that environment.
The film maker themselves may wish to interact with a specific subject or environment, and they do
not necessarily have to talk to the camera directly as would be expected from an expository
documentary. A reality tv show although not a documentary is similar in the way that subjects are
interacted with and as such events can be much easier staged. The works of director Stuart Cabb
utilise interactive elements within his documentaries one such example is Louis Theroux: behind
bars, where the interviewer is placed into the environment (prison) as a part of the scene and not as
an over viewer or spectator that has momentarily pulled someone aside for an interview. From here
he can still conduct interviews, but they occur more naturally as they take place within the
environment, this being the prison. Louis talks to prison guards - Louis Theroux Behind Bars - BBC

Reflexive – A reflexive documentary is a little harder to
define than those previously explored. This method of
documenting will include a direct breakage of the fourth
wall with the filmmaking process itself being referenced.
One example of this would a documentary about the
creation of another film. Because of this, people within the
documentary may directly refer to the process of them
making the documentary. In doing this, common
conventions of the documentary genre can be shown to the
audience. Aspects of pre and postproduction can also be
highlighted such as the process of Appling makeup on
actors, costume and prop design, as well as showing
recognition for people involved in production that the
audience would not usually see. For example a behiend the
scenes documentary such as the road to el camino would fall into this category of documentary, as
actors are seen interacting with the director Vince Gilligan, and other crew members, with clips of
the film also being shown in small intervals. The Road to El Camino: Behind the Scenes of El Camino:
A Breaking Bad Movie | Netflix

Performative – This method of documentary filming is heavily based on subjectivity; this is where
the author will attempt to portray a specific message which is important to them. This means that
what they have to say may not be necessarily factual as they may bend the truth or only include
footage which supports their narrative. A successful film maker will portray a balanced argument as
to not seem bigoted, showing both sides to an argument while still in the end being able to push for
their belief while simultaneously showing that their subject is not just one sided, allowing the viewer
to come to their own conclusion. These documentaries will often contain non diegetic sound and
music in addition to scripted scenes such as those of a re-enactment or a specific shot that the
director desires. I believe a good example of this type of documentary is Steven Hawking – A brief
history of time, this documentary features voiceover, music and creative instances of editing, and
despite its title is not an objective overview on times history as it is segmented with Stephen
Hawking’s theory's constantly being interrupted with interviews of family members. Stephen
Hawking - A Brief History Of Time 1991.avi [good sound]

In conclusion despite my concerns regarding the authenticity and partiality of this genre, I believe
that performative documentaries allow for the most creative freedom when approaching the
creation of a documentary. The author should be allotted to present their messages however they
believe necessary and of course the integrity of showing a wide spectrum of views is appreciated but
not owed if that is the film makers wish.

Documentaries are one of if not the most (potentially) realistic way/s to depict life through the
format of video entertainment and although complete 100% authenticity is unattainable; through
my research I believe that observational documentaries are the closest a documentary can come to
realising this unfeasible goal of complete authenticity. This realism includes having as minimal
quantity of bias as possible, as observational documentaries leave very small room for influence of
opinion from the film makers, the main way in which a filmmaker can shoehorn their opinions is
through the editing process, by cutting clips in a way that some scenes may simply not be included
or be taken out of context by having the beginning or ending stripped from the clip.

Documentaries are expected to portray the truth and little else, but it is subjective weather the
creator has owed us as the viewers the truth. I believe a filmmaker with integrity would aspire to not
falsify their documentary, but I believe this can vary by genre. For example, I do believe that
exploiting footage of others to change the way that their words and actions will be perceived is
unethical, most especially in an observational documentary. If the film maker has made it clear that
their documentary is going to be presented in a unique way, (for example through untraditional

editing or filming methods) I believe there is room for creative presentation of their messages, even
if this means perhaps bending some truths and leaning towards a belief of theirs as it is their art all
things considered, and if they are not damaging the reputation or integrity of others, they are free to
create however they wish.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YjFmIGIulOw"
title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write;
encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>