Week 9 Screening 2

                           

Comic-Con Episode IV: A Fan’s Hope. 2011. Murgan Spurlock.

Comic-Con is a documentary that follows several personal narratives as they prepare for and then attend the American national comic book convention. Because it primarily follows personal narratives the documentary primarily consists of interviews, and these interviews are used to progress the films narrative. An interview is a type of reconstruction, a condensing of information. In Comic-Con they are set up to interweave with the documentary and they all riff on a subject or a theme. The ‘geeks’ interviewed are comic con attendees and all seem to have an overdeveloped capacity to believe in a world of fantasy, unlike in the case of Marwencol which was created with the express purpose of cathersis, the world of comics were created by someone else. They escape into a shared world of fantasy.

Escapism is a recurrent theme throughout the film, computer games “make you feel as if your in another world”, and interviewees refer to how comfortable they feel at comic con as opposed to the rest of the year when they are in the real world. The producers shyed away from exploring this theme in any real depth; the connection between the escapist aspect of comic con and the individuals incompatiblility to social norms is only touched upon. Instead the film takes a lighter more populist tone and this tone is reflected in the visual integration of the comics template into the narrative of the film.

The lions share of the work for this film was done in the pre production stage, the researchers found several potential individuals for narrative strands that were all going to comic con and interwove these narratives with each other and reinforced them with interviews. The fact that the interviews all hit certain points indicates that they were guided and as mentioned, constructed. These interviews give the documentary a very specific focus while giving the events onscreen another layer of meaning. The film is edited in such a way as to give events a specific context by having it narrated by interviewees, the meaning of the footage is consequently altered.

With regards the interviews some of the behavior of the participants convey the impression of reconstruction, as if characters took direction from someone behind the camera. this is most evident when an event is required for the narrative to progress. Likewise many of the conversations in front of the camera feel staged, as if in order to fulfil the necessary pieces of the narrative. All considered Comic-Con is an interesting an entertaining slice of American culture, is does not dwell on any larger questions raised but getting to the truth was never its aim.

Week 9 Screening 1

Pulling John. 2009. Vassiliki Khonsari, Sevan Matossian.

Pulling John is the unfortunately named documentary about the American world champion arm-wrestler John Brzenk. Opening with a real life introduction by a competition announcement it then segues into a futuristic multimedia introduction by way of newsreels and headlines. Although slick this digital montage has little relevance to the documentary itself or the world of arm wrestling for that matter. It has no relevance to the narrative and is thus out of place, when a piece of the narrative such as this is out of place it interrupts the flow of the documentary. This is mainly because the section is noticeably out of place and this makes you consider the format of the film, thus interrupting the processing of information. This use of digital animation for exposition is repeated throughout the film as if marking chapters, although incongruous it does gives the film a lighter tone.

As with many narcissistic endeavors there is much potential humor in the scenarios observed, but this film does not explore the potential of the inbuilt humorous scenarios, this film could have had a completely different slant if the producer had wanted to send up its protagonists (see below for unfortunate quotes). This film illustrates that people can and will compete in just about anything as long as there is recognition.

The documentary introduces us to Brzenks competition in the world of arm wrestling and in doing so reveals the slanted perspective of the documentary somewhat. Before introducing us to his Russian competitor we are informed that in Russia arm wrestlers receive state help while in America they receive none. This seems like an attempt to pitch a scenario to the viewer (Brzenk as underdog) and illustrates bias on behalf of the filmmaker. Imparting this piece of information before we meet his Russian opponent prejudices us towards the subject. It is designed to inform the viewer whose side they are on in the upcoming battle.

The film often strays from the narrative in that certain elements of the participating subjects lives are overly documented. Instead of being another strand to run alongside the main story they instead wander and diverge away from the stories core. This may be to do with the documentary subjects eagerness to impart information on their lives. People like attention, they may not crave it but it enlivens them, this is evident in some of the interviews in Pulling John when some of the past masters of arm wrestling are enlivened in the presence of the camera. This aspect of the documentary underlines the necessity of having a good editor as it would have benefitted from a tighter narrative.

Unfortunate quote num 1 “I’ve pulled Yoshi three other times”

Unfortunate quote num 2 “When I pull Brzenk I will get a big rush ”

Journal entry week 8.

Monday the 25th February

This week I had arranged to film three clubs; boxing, lifesaving and basketball. All three were accommodating but boxing were especially so. It once again brings up the subject of how to treat the subjects of documentaries; the boxing club perhaps felt that they were in need of promotion, grateful for any attention. They were willing to do whatever I might have wanted in order to promote the club and as such they may be expecting results from participation. At the end of filming I tried to explain that I may only use a little of an extended interview I was given to try to dampen expectations somewhat but it has since occurred to me that this might only be my perspective of events. Another filmmaker might not have felt the need to balance the equation between those filming and those filmed. Another filmmaker would have created a different dynamic between himself and the subjects of the film and would perhaps not have felt the onus to create “realistic” expectations (ie expectations in line with my own perspective).

I filmed the club for its entire training session but noticed after sometime that I once again felt an obligation to stay for the duration of the training. I perhaps need to be more clinical and to take what I require. Having said this is I had not stayed until the end I would not have gotten the extended interview, something that may be a saving grace in the editing stage.

Friday the 1st March

I had arranged to film the basketball club having spoken with the club captain, they had agree to wear their home and away jerseys both for my filming (it would look better) and for their own ends (to use the footage in their upcoming presentation). When I arrived to film the club captain wasn’t there and they were not wearing their club jerseys (they all were wearing different training attire). In a way it informed me as to where I stood with the club, they could take or leave my presence. This impression also informed my further interactions with the club for the rest of the training session. For example I tried not to interfere at all with their training, just letting them get on with it. The footage I got might not be as good as if I had asked them to partake in certain activities that would suit the tone of the film I am making but I got the impression that it was the best I could do. Asking the participants to turn up wearing certain uniforms could be called off camera directing in any case. After filming the practice game they were playing for a while I was caught tinkering with the camera when one of the players performed a spectacular slam dunk, all the players on the court then turned to me to see if I had caught it on film (I hadn’t). This scenario made me aware that they were aware of the presence of the camera and if only in this instance it was altering their behavior.

Friday 1st March

The last club I had arranged to film was the lifesaving club, I had originally wanted to film the water polo club as it is vibrant and filmic but they are finished training for the year and club captain offered me the chance to film lifesaving practice so I said I might. When the time came I was free and since I had the camera I decided to go down to the sports hall and film. It was an after hours training session and so it was quite late but I found myself unable to capture the mood I experienced watching these athletes train at such a late hour on a Friday night. They were getting ready for a lifesaving intervarsity (who knew?) and so there wasn’t much dynamic activity as I had hoped there would be. I was finding it hard to frame shots where there wasn’t anyone chatting in the background and thus ruining the dynamism of the shot. Not knowing what activities they were going to practice I had to ask before I began to shoot, this was the extent of my interaction with the participants. I filmed each activity in turn but realized halfway through training that I would not have enough space on my memory card for filming the rowing club on the weekend if I were to keep on filming. Upon realizing this I said my thanks and left. The importance of filming the rowing club (even though I could not film them in the end) meant that any onus I would have felt to remain and film the whole session went out the window.

Week 8 Screening 2

Fire on the Track. The Steve Prefontaine Story. 1995. Erich Lyttle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0WMzYGhCgw

This tribute documentary opens with a poetic introduction to the deceased subject of the documentary, athlete Steve Prefontaine. At first the introduction uses a montage of images and a professional voiceover but it quickly switches to a talking head interview. This sudden switch to a completely different type of content is jarring, although documentaries are often made up of differing source material the footage is so different it appears to have not been graded. The tone change is also abrupt, going from poetic retrospective to a casual contemporary interview in the space of a few seconds. Although this is only one particular sequence the slapdash feeling of the edit continues throughout the documentary. In a sense the ungainly editing of the opening sequence sets the tone for the documentary as such changes of tone occur regularly throughout. Although it was released in 1995 it appears to be from the 1980’s in style and content.

The film has many other unprofessional aspects that ruin the flow of the film, aspects such the titles covering the mouth of the person speaking, or the interview subjects being badly framed and badly lit (and sometimes both). Worst of all was the sound not being mixed well, the interviewees having to compete with the score. The filmmaker had limited footage of Prefontaine to work with and this aspect becomes comparatively repetitive and visually tiring. The documentary has a regulated structure switching between romantic observation and interview mode, all of which pay tribute to someone who was undoubtedly a great sportsman but the message of the documentary is the same throughout. This repetitious singing of Prefontaines praises becomes a little indulgent and tiresome. There were other aspects of Prefontaines life that could have been explored to give the narrative of the film some depth or texture. Aspects such as his battles with the athletic association, or his use of food stamps to survive but instead it recurrently plays the same note for the entire film.

Week 8 Screening 1.

The Four Year Plan (2011) Mat Hodgson.

Tracking the story of English football club QPR’s attempt to climb back into the premier league, this documentary film opens with expository text to bring the viewer up to speed with the story. Although a useful method to impart information quickly it also quickly creates a specific perspective of events as there is no other information to go on. The images that follow this text introduction embellish further a perspective of the club and its financial position. Montages are used prolifically to illustrate the changes that occur at the club, considering that the documentary is filmed over a four year period there was always going to be some instances where a synopsis would be required.

The editing is used very effectively to give insight to events and to reinforce what the filmmaker would like the viewer to focus on, this gives the film a strong narrative. An example of such reinforcement is when a comment is made by Flavio Briatore in the stands and then unbeknownst to Briatore a reposite is filmed from the dugout. The viewer can observe the two sides to the debate, while neither party would have been aware of the other comments they are edited in such a way as to give the viewer a sense of omniscience. As a viewer you are privy to more information than the participants.

The documentary is able to thread togheter the storyline as it sees fit due to the lenghty period of time that they were filming for. This results in a very strong narrative and a satisfyingly speedy development of the story. The editing of the film is done in such a way as to make explicit any developments in the story. The editor had a lot of footage to choose from (from four years of filming), but he manages to stick tightly to a central narrative. Adhering to a specific narrative excludes everything extraneous to that narrative, to the benefit of the story but to the detriment of the truth. This documentary was made in the editing suite.           

Week 7 Screening 2

Triumph Of The Will (1935) Leni Riefenstahl.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHs2coAzLJ8

“We want to see no more class divisions” - Hitler

Triumph of the Will is a propaganda documentary that takes a rose tinted view of the activities of Germany's Nazi party after World War I and before World War II. As the name suggests the films tone is one of triumphalism and it is classed as a documentary, the term documentary in this case is only a ruse. There is no genre for films that make fiction out of factual footage. The use of the word triumph suggests an adversary but there is no representation of an other within the film, there is only one voice. Hitler is credited at the start of the film as having a role in its production (“Produced by order of the Fuhrer”), this suggests a level of control exerted over its production. The only voice in the film is that of the Nazi party, and as this was controlled by Hitler the sole voice of the documenatry could be said to be that of Hitlers.

Replete with regalia and stiff arm salutes the films intention appears to be the repeated reinforcement of the symbolism of the Nazi party. When released this film might have had a small captive audience. A contemporary viewing with its dated format and style of music positions the film as almost quaint in its naivety if not for the atrocities that were since carried out by these same smiling subjects.

The content of the film and the film itself are both propaganda, awareness of its flagrant subjectivity becomes a lens through which the film is viewed.

The edited snippets of speeches suggest that it was made to convince the contemporary viewer as to the wisdom of the nazi party, not just to revel in triumphalism. The film captures the synchronized aspect of conformity and features numerous scenes of coordinated and systematic activities, there is no individual representations of the people in the crowds. The crowd represents and manifests the activities of the one voice.

The camera techniques, the framing of the proceedings and the editing of this footage are skilfully done and make it an easy watch despite its content and its message. At 110 minutes the films monotone and lack of narrative structure means that it is a struggle to maintain interest for its full lenght.

Journal entry week 7

Wednesday 20^th February

The weather has finally brightened, enough to attempt some outdoor filming. I headed straight out to Furbo to film exterior shots for the boat building documentary. Getting the majority of the exterior shots would mean that I wouldn’t have to worry too much about the weather when returning to film. I spent the morning capturing every interesting filmable shot I could. Perhaps a little too much as the excess footage is might make it difficult once I get to the editing suite. Being over excited was probably partially to do with the change of subject (and the fact that I was filming compliant and inanimate objects..). I have filmed with a sequence of shots in mind but also I took some extra in order to leave the pattern open, how the narrative unfolds is of course dependant on the interview. I will have to prepare questions well for this interview as he is pretty media conversant having been filmed so much before. I’m not sure was there lots of interesting sailing objects lying around to film or if I was buzzed from the sunshine but lets say I have lots of potential cutaway footage if needs be. I intend to accost a fiddler and acquire some original music, the boat builders tone is quite melancholic, his conversation pieces are often tinged with regret and I would like to emphasize this somewhat using music (without it becoming the overwhelming tone of the piece). Also I’m not sure I have the skill to do it but; boats are made to be sailed and the documentary is being filmed primarily on dry land, this feeling of separation from purpose would be a good honest representation of what I have experienced in visiting this boat builder. Managing to convey this impression in a short documentary without betraying his trust is a difficult tightrope to walk.

Friday 22^nd February.

Today I had arranged to meet with one of the Galway hurlers to film some more for the sports documentary. It was a stark reminder of why I am tired of filming the sports clubs and the athletes involved. It was arranged with the aid of the secretary of the sports office a while in advance. On the day it became quickly obvious that it was going to be the bare minimum effort, I wish that apathy could be made visible with the movie camera. Twice they lost the sliotar, the first time I have to get it out of a stream because neither of them would go in for it and the second time I called it quits after a severely lackluster effort to find it in some brambles. This calls into question the balance of aspiration behind and in front of the camera. I have something to gain from the working relationship but those featuring in the documentary can have little interest beyond seeing themselves onscreen. It begs the question how do you get the balance right between getting what I need from the documentary subjects without taking advantage of what is essentially free content to be edited as I wish.

Sunday 24^th February

The good weather continued today and although I had to work in the afternoon I decided to anyway catch the rowing clubs training session. A lot of the filming for this film is going to be a bit distant; I wont be sticking the camera into anyone’s face as they train. I am intending to give equal billing to the river as well as the rowers themselves. For this reason I have been looking forward to filming this documentary as the river itself loans itself very well to being framed. I began by filming the rowers setup from a distance, the boats are so long that I wanted to catch the length. I filmed them entering the water before jumping in the car to try and catch them upriver. Due to the brightness of the day I was using the viewfinder to focus instead of the screen, whether this caused the footage to capture out of focus or not I am not sure but basically the whole days filming was out of focus. There is a bit of play on the camera where you can turn the focus and nothing seems to happen, I now think that something does happen but it is not visible to the eye. I will endeavor to film the club again this coming weekend and perhaps bring a cloth to throw over the camera to block the sunlight so I can use the screen. When I film I will again frame the rowers and the river the same way, this could be a sign that I know what I want or it could be an indicator that I am stuck in my ways.