Our BetterMost Community > Chez Tremblay
Mandatory Viewing
JennyC:
But rt, shouldn’t we expect more objectivity in Documentary than other films? I know when I watch a documentary, I come with the expectation that the major objective is to present the facts in an unbiased fashion. I can count on the facts presented and then make my own judgment. Particularly for Documentary, I don’t want to be intentionally or unintentionally manipulated. Most of the times I watch documentary as a way to learn history, event, or a specific topic. If I can not count of the objectivity (I am not talking about absolute objectivity, since nothing is absolute) of Documentary, then what’s the point of Documentary, using the footage of true events to paint a distorted picture?
twistedude:
Gee...I LIKE MM, and his films, and I don't insist that documentaries have to be objective--if the man didn't have a point of view, but only a scholarly interest, he'd probably be reading books and writing in scholarly journals. It's funny how W can lie like a rug, but MM can't stretch it a little...
Oh: I can't wait to see "The Dreyfus Affiar," when it gets made...I wanna hear all the people in the gay bar in the Village yell"Play it again, Sam!" when the necking tape runs out...and I wanna see Major League Baseball get kicked in the teeth (that last part is a bit unrealistic, I'm afraid).
Sheyne:
--- Quote from: JennyC on April 24, 2006, 11:42:13 pm ---But rt, shouldn’t we expect more objectivity in Documentary than other films? I know when I watch a documentary, I come with the expectation that the major objective is to present the facts in an unbiased fashion.
--- End quote ---
Not necessarily true, Jenny. I think the lines between the different genres of filmmaking have become sufficiently blurred that supposed "traditional" documentaries, especially those that get cinematic release, are a rarity. I agree that there was a time that going to view a "documentary" carried with it a certain expectation of what you may see. These days, its different. Especially when you consider a documentary that has box office release. Its probably not asking too much of the viewer to expect something a bit different. Certainly a little sensational.. a la Mr Moore. I mean, there has to be a reason that a documentary makes it to the box office, right? Traditional docos don't generally make to the Aust box office at least..
--- Quote from: JennyC on April 24, 2006, 11:42:13 pm ---I can count on the facts presented and then make my own judgment. Particularly for Documentary, I don’t want to be intentionally or unintentionally manipulated. Most of the times I watch documentary as a way to learn history, event, or a specific topic. If I can not count of the objectivity (I am not talking about absolute objectivity, since nothing is absolute) of Documentary, then what’s the point of Documentary, using the footage of true events to paint a distorted picture?
--- End quote ---
Its called creating an argument. And can things really get that distorted with raw footage?? I don't know.. I can't imagine how you could distort a clip of Dubya lying to the American people into something other than what it is...
starboardlight:
--- Quote from: JennyC on April 24, 2006, 11:42:13 pm ---But rt, shouldn’t we expect more objectivity in Documentary than other films? I know when I watch a documentary, I come with the expectation that the major objective is to present the facts in an unbiased fashion. I can count on the facts presented and then make my own judgment. Particularly for Documentary, I don’t want to be intentionally or unintentionally manipulated. Most of the times I watch documentary as a way to learn history, event, or a specific topic. If I can not count of the objectivity (I am not talking about absolute objectivity, since nothing is absolute) of Documentary, then what’s the point of Documentary, using the footage of true events to paint a distorted picture?
--- End quote ---
I can't agree with that at all. In this day and age where there's just too many agendas, hidden or otherwise, I think we all have to have the exact opposite expectation in everything. Documentary and news in particular, we have to watch out for agendas. Think Fox News. We have to be thinking all the time about whether we're being manipulated or not and why it is happening.
Documentaries can be "news" and try to have an appearance of "objectivity", but they can also be stories about the human experience. I think of Murderball or Spell Bound, where we look at the people competing in events. In those cases, objectivity would just not apply. The point of those documentaries were meant to show us these people's live and spirit. They aim to open us up and make us feel those people's excitement and passion for their respective activities. The emotional connections may be "manipulated" but it tells the story which in the end is what film, documentary or movie, are meant to do.
delalluvia:
--- Quote ---I can't agree with that at all. In this day and age where there's just too many agendas, hidden or otherwise, I think we all have to have the exact opposite expectation in everything. Documentary and news in particular, we have to watch out for agendas. Think Fox News. We have to be thinking all the time about whether we're being manipulated or not and why it is happening.
Documentaries can be "news" and try to have an appearance of "objectivity", but they can also be stories about the human experience. I think of Murderball or Spell Bound, where we look at the people competing in events. In those cases, objectivity would just not apply. The point of those documentaries were meant to show us these people's live and spirit. They aim to open us up and make us feel those people's excitement and passion for their respective activities. The emotional connections may be "manipulated" but it tells the story which in the end is what film, documentary or movie, are meant to do.
--- End quote ---
I'm with Jenny on this. I'm watching a documentary for a reason. If I wanted to watch historical footage that tells a story or is manipulated to make a point, then I can watch Forrest Gump.
As Jenny says, I don't expect pure objectivity because it isn't possible, but I do expect a balanced POV. Documentaries DO make it to the big screen from time to time Sheyne - but usually only to the arthouses, that is why it was so shocking when they hit big because they normally don't. When you create an argument, you are debating and usually only telling one side of a story. Your side. You can start drifting into the grayish side of propaganda. Presenting one side to 'make an argument'. That's not what a good informative documentary should do. I would expect objectivity even in such movies as Murderball, Star. Not only would I expect a good story of humans overcoming a serious handicap, but I would also want to see that they suffer, their families struggle under the burden of supporting them, the trips to the doctors, that they can be jerks and assholes just like everyone else - just because one is handicapped doesn't instantly turn someone into a saint. I expect to see that. I understand the people involved might get offended, but are the documentary filmmakers telling a 'true' story or a fairytale?
I understand from rt that documentaries need to make a point, but that's easily done as well. Several movies in this thread are fiction, but they're about the human side of the 'enemy' of the U.S. in war. The suffering of the Japanese civilians in WWII or what have you. A documentary can make a point about a subject like that without being manipulative (e.g. That the Japanese civilians were suffering horribly and the U.S. was a big bad monster to hurt them - which is what MM does).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version