Intro to Documentary Response

The observational documentary is very interesting to me. The article describes this type as a "persuasive argument." Most people don't usually associate persuasion with film that isn't advertisement, or even an argument--we think of persuasion arguments belonging in writing. But, observational works in a similar way, presenting argument, or footage in the case of the documentary, that supports their thesis, or message. Although, it almost works reversely--the filmmaker might form an idea only after they have observed the evidence "through the lens." It seems that one might not even know quite what they're looking for, or what they might find prior to documenting. This is because live experience is spontaneous. Despite this information, a documentary can still be persuasive, depending on how the footage is presented. Another interesting bit that was mentioned in the article (concerning the observational type) is that the scenes are real, but tended like fiction. Everyday events can be formulated into a story, which can only be done from a observational perspective. Although some implications might be that there is a blur between fiction and reality, which is what caused much controversy in the documentary "Armadillo" (2010). There is also moral conflict concerning what should and should not be captured.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcwrLV-H5UU

"Intro to Documentary" Response

I’ve always enjoyed documentaries because I find them captivating and the way the information is displayed visually and auditory kept me intrigued. I found this piece interesting because it explained the why’s and how’s of my enjoyment. “The emotional intensity and subjective expressiveness” that arose in the 1980s/1990s is definitely a key aspect I plan to include in my documentary (101). It’s that intensity that engages the viewer- especially when documentaries are typically lengthy.  I found the participatory mode particularly important because it aims to grab the viewer – and teach them something! Direct, personal, involvement by the filmmaker is important in the documentary. Whether, this means responsive, reflective, and personal, or discussing ramifications, I agree that personal involvement is key to portraying an idea (117). Anyone can sit in front of a camera and talk about a topic. However, talking about something personally impacts you makes the passion infinitely higher, which makes the video better because it feels genuine.

At the link embedded, there are five documentary clips that discuss Olympic athletes (for the upcoming Olympics) giving thanks to their parents and discussing the conflicts they overcame to reach the Olympics. The mothers discuss the child and the child discusses the mother, with lots of overlapping. This enabled me to get the full story from two perspectives. The language used isn’t necessarily script, but it’s real- real emotions, thoughts, and feelings help to understand what the speaker is trying to convey. Documentaries aren’t like films because the speakers are speaking from the heart- there’s no script, it’s truly genuine and I think that’s why I like the idea of documentaries. Average people are able to learn from other average people through recording and editing.  In  addition, the background sounds create anticipation, excitement, and momentum in the video. The tempo picks up and the passion is out and about and fully conveyed.

"Intro to Documentary" Response

Although it was a bit confusing at times, I really enjoyed reading this article about the different types of documentaries. Reading it really helped me kind of navigate my way through ideas for my documentary for our next assignment. Personally, I favored the poetic, participatory, and reflexive forms of documentary. I like the participatory mode because it goes along with what I have been learning in anthropology through immersing yourself in some setting or culture and capturing the practices while also participating in rituals or other practices. The only thing is that for our project, I'm not sure what I would be able to fully participate in and interview people about. The reflexive form was completely new to me and I liked how it draws references to historical context and also involved participatory mode. I like the combination because it gives more room to take something that is happening now and connect it to a problem or event in the past with a little less involvement than participatory. The only thing I was a little confused about was how we would go about doing this mode and engaging the audience to show realism as well. Poetic seemed interesting and I like the idea of focusing on images and a more stylistic approach so it seems more open to ideas than the other modes which require more participation. I ran across these two short documentaries about the history of title sequences and thought they went well with this reading. Both are conveying the same history but the first one is more artistic, along the lines of the poetic mode, while the second is more expository with a lot of vocal narration.

A History Of The Title Sequence from From Form on Vimeo.

THE FILM before THE FILM from ntsdpz on Vimeo.

Intro to Documentary

In this reading the author breaks the genre of documentary films into 6 categories or sub-genres. Each sub-genre is a different style that are utilized by filmmakers in the representation of their documentaries. The sub-genres are as follows: poetic, expository, participatory, observational, reflexive, and performative. These types of documentaries all intertwine when filming. Just because the focus of a specific documentary is reflexive doesn't mean that the film's only focus is reflexive. The film can utilize each of the 5 other categories with reflexive being the focal point. I found the reading to be pretty informative in the break down of the documentary film. 

ESPN airs sports documentaries every so often titled 30 for 30. These documentaries are my favorite to watch. They tell the story of a specific athlete, team, or sports organization. One of my all time favorite ones to watch is the 30 for 30 special on the former NBA player Chris Herren. The film they air includes past and present footage of Herren. Interviews of Herren, acquaintances of Herren, coaches, sports analysts, etc. They include news clips and old highlights of him in high school, college, and the pros. This particular special can be enjoyed by anybody, even somebody with no background in sports. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcmBAgqWnt4

Performance video

https://vimeo.com/79068852

Response to "Intro to Documentary"

I found this reading to be very informative and a great start to our next project. For instance, I enjoyed how it explained all six modes of documentary as well as present specific examples for each one. In addition, I liked how the author compared each mode to one another because it allowed me to figure out which one I would choose for my next project and whether it will be effective to my audience or not. As of now I am interested in the Reflexive mode because "rather than following the filmmaker in her engagement with other social actors, we now attend to the filmmaker's engagement with us, speaking not only about the historical world but about the problems and issues of representing it as well". I also like how this mode "is the most self-conscious and self-questioning mode of representation". Overall, when reading this article I was reminded about photography and how we as viewers are constantly trying to figure out whether something is "real" or "true" and if so, how close is it to reality. Therefore, as I think about our next project I want to make sure that my documentary is as "real" or "raw" as possible because documentaries center on the attempt in one fashion or the other to document reality. I think this video is a good example of what a Reflexive documentary looks like. It documents a woman and her reflection upon why coffee occasions are so important.

Response to Introduction to Documentary

The reading gives me a new idea on looking at the Documentary film.With the word "film", people normally cares about the images and the contents rather than the sounds that comply with the images. "Expository documentaries rely heavily on an informing logic carried by the spoken words". Suddenlu, it twists the way and angle that we are seeing a documentary piece. It is no longer about the acting, but the immediacy and the presence of the action. With this I realize, isn't advertisement a little documentary? Yes, the voice with the introduction is more important and overreaching than the content itself. No, it is acting and contains lots of arrangments over the actions. How does advertisement fits into the content then?

The documentary film I share here is about a rumor that two young men started. Czech people are crazy about supermarket. So the two men started a supermarket called Czech Dream. Everybody though it was real with all the outfits and planning. On the opening day, people were rushing to the supermarket, but they realized it was a joke. The documentary contains the components of interviewing, observations, and the real effect that happens in front of the camera, which it is worth watching. It is just fascinating,