Component 2 Section B - Documentary

Component 2 - Documentary

Section B Documentary

• Modes of documentary 
• Filmmakers’ theories
• Case study Amy (Kapadia: 2016)

Documentary as a genre

• Documentary as a style of filmmaking endeavours to document rather than fictionalise
• Documentary is enmeshed with ideas of representation and the ‘real’
• Reality and Realism
• to create the idea of ‘the real’ (art - Realism vs Impressionism)

Re-presentation

• What is presented on the screen is never ‘a window on reality’ or a transparent reflection of reality
• Reality on the screen is mediated by the production precesses: camera techniques, editing, lighting, locations
• All the above are choices
• These choices come with conscious and unconscious bias

Bill Nichols

Modes of documentary 

• Observatory
• Participatory 
• Poetic
• Expository
• Reflexive 
• Performative

Observational

• Emerges in the 1960s with the rise of new production technology 
• Notion of the hidden camera and camera person - aided by lighter and more portable equipment for being in the field
• Hidden process of filmmaking - in order to observe ‘real’ life unobserved - metaphor of the fly…
• Idea that reality emerges when it is not produced or re-created artificially 

Performative

• At the centre of the documentary, questions are raised about knowledge
• Material is gathered from wide-ranging sources
• The idea of knowledge and meaning as subjective rather than objective
• It shares similarities with poetic

Poetic

• Documentaries draw on a range of filmmaking styles and techniques to piece the documentary together
• This means weaving in music, effects, dance and other multi-media elements to create the desired final piece
• This is why poetic and performative documentaries overlap - creating meaning which can be subjective

Participatory mode

• Filmmakers go into the field to be part of the events first hand - to experience them and even shape them
• The reflect on their experiences
• Can be seen to be provocative

Expository Mode

‘Voice of God’ - an omniscient presence/voice

• a steering presence of the filmmaker
• Guiding the spectator towards a particular outcome/interpretation of the evens or the ‘truth’
• Underlying assumption that the spectator will not arrive at the ‘objective’ truth - if they are not guided towards this by the narrator 

‘Fly on the wall’

Examples

• 100% white (2000)
• Sister in Law (Kim Longinotto)
• The Family (1974)

Key features of ‘fly on the wall’

• Invisibility of the production enables ‘reality’ and ‘truth’ to emerge without and mediation or mediated reality
• What emerges is authentic and ‘real’
• There is no tampering with the material/witnesses/events, these are just observed as they develop
• ‘fly on the wall’ enables the spectator to arrive at their own conclusion or to make their own judgements 

Filmmakers’ Theories

Paticipatory	Observational
Michael Moore	Kim Longinotto
Nick Broomfield

Kim Longinotto

• Observational filmmaker
• Working with a team
• Not telling people what to do
• Detach herself from the emotions
• Final product - ownership - ‘their story’

Nick Broomfield

• Presence in the process 
• Visible
• Steers the outcome towards a particular direction
• Technique is to ask interviewees to repeat the last three words - as a way of getting them to talk further 

Asif Kapadia

Senna (2010)

Amy (2015)

Maradonna (2019)

Amy

Question?

• Why make his documentary about her?
• Less to report, more to explore
• A way to change the narrative 
• Does he want to change the narrative? Re-tell her story?

‘Observational’ because:

Kapadia is hidden/not visible

The spectator can observe evens and arrive at their own understanding of the events, or the ‘truth’

No interfering voice or authoritative presence 

Topic of debate - who is to blame for her tragic death?

However-

No new footage

Amalgamation of public archive footage and home videos (family/friends)

Edited by Kapadia to create a version of reality which he re-presents

Implications of this mode of documentary 

Spectators can make up their own mind about the reasons for her difficult life and tragic death

The material is there for them to determine a version of the truth

Enables Kapadia to come out of this without offering his own judgments or opinions - because he remains invisible as a film maker

Manipulative choice of footage

Editing decisions: what to include, cut out, continuity - all suggestive

Questions

1. Footage such as photos and videos of Amy Winehouse, with the people he’s interviewing as a voiceover 
2. You can focus more on the footage and what the people are saying in order to make a decision on why you think Amys life played out the way it did
3. Drinking, Drugs and eating disorders (maybe abuse?)
4. Were watching Amys life play out and were not getting involved

‘Discuss how this sequence works with the ‘fly on the wall’ style of documentary style’

During the documentary we are shown footage of Amy recording her song Back To Black in a New York studio. As this footage displayed we can tell that it is recorded in the fly on the wall style as we can’t see Amy interacting or even noticing the camera recording her. Amy starts singing and the lyrics of Back To Black are edited on screen as she sings them. At this point we can’t hear the backing music, and we only see Amy in her element singing. This sort of casual setting, along with the fly on the wall style, really lets us focus on nothing else other than the subject in focus, Amy. Additionally, the lyrics being displayed on screen is really effective in terms of understanding Amys feelings. The words being showed on screen, enables the ability to read the lyrics and not just hearing them, and in most cases this really helps understanding deeper meanings and the feelings behind the words.Once we’ve really gotten a chance to think about the lyrics’ meaning, and the feelings behind the song, the backing music comes in and gives a much more positive mood than when we were just hearing the lyrics with no music. Throughout this, we're still watching Amy record the song in the studio, on a low quality, grainy camera, continuing with the fly on the wall documentary style.

The fly on the wall style of recording really effective in enhancing the quite gloomy atmosphere created by just hearing Amy sing the lyrics. If the person recording was to get involved and get Amy to interact, the whole mood and atmosphere created could of been much different, perhaps more positive. If Amy had noticed the camera whilst she was singing, she may of acted happier, or more positive for the camera. However in not doing so, it was effective in terms of creating an atmosphere that really complimented the lyrics of the song and the meaning of them.

Summer Work

• Intense flashing of the cameras is enhanced on screen which can make viewers really uncomfortable, physically, as the flash can hurt viewers eyes. This also reminds the viewers that it was most likely worse for Amy as this is her everyday, and she doesn’t get a break.
• We as spectators are never given a ‘break’ as per-say as we are constantly following Amys life. The footage thats used in the documentary shows Amy constantly working, and even if she’s not working, she’s usually doing drugs, drinking, and overall harmful things to her body.
• One of the most noticeable clips which could be interpreted as ‘calm’ or ‘peaceful’ is the clip in which Amys friends are asking her to sing a new version of her song ‘Rehab’ whilst she was at Rehab. The clip itself may seem peaceful compared to others, but considering the setting and the context, it could make spectators uneasy.
• Along with the lack of ‘calm’ scenes, the spectators could also feel a low, constant sense of unease as sometimes when you’re watching the documentary, you can get so immersed in the footage of Amy that you can often forget that she has actually passed. So this constant gut feeling of unease can stick with the spectator throughout.
• A constant factor throughout the documentary, is that when Amy is singing one of her songs let's say in a studio or in-front of the crowd, the lyrics are often displayed on the screen. This is a poetic mode of documentary as it weaves music and other multi-media elements in order to create feeling in the audience. The words displayed on screen gives the spectator a chance to understand a deeper meaning to the lyrics as they hear and read them at the same time.

Kim Longinotto

• Observational
• Let people tell their own stories
• Doesn’t get involved - Its not her story to tell

Applied to Kapadia

• Sat down and just let them talked
• Didn’t interject - his voice isn’t in it

Kapadia certainly absorbed Longinotto’s methods of observational documentary. The idea of providing people with as much time and space to expand on their own stories relates to Longinotto’s moral and ethical intent; instead of instructing how recordings and filming should occur, Kapadia let conversation floe freely according to the interviewee. Additionally he detached from his own emotions in order to avoid disrupting the rawness of the interviewee. Kapadia would rather trigger a conversation with a few words, then allow the story to unfold with their own interpretation. Regarding Amy, this was taken into account, as Kapadia's voice was not heard throughout the entirety of the documentary, strictly following the observational mode laws.

On the other hand, Broomfield’s mode of documentary, does not relate to how Kapadia produced Amy. Broomfield commonly uses the participatory mode of documentary, being seen on camera, the opposite to Amy. Furthermore, Broomfield streets the outcome to a specific conversation which diminishes and removes the authenticity of the stories told.

Exam Question component 2 Section B

‘To what extent can it be said that your chosen documentary is shaped by the filmmaker’s approach? Refer to at least one filmmaker’s theory you have studied.’ [20]

Brief rationale for selecting the sequence 

Evaluation of how this sequence demonstrates Longinotto’s filmmaker’s theory- with examples 

Evaluation of why it does not fully meet Longinotto’s theory (‘to what extent’) – does it engage at any level with Broomfield’s approach?

EXAM QUESTION

SEQUENCE 1 - Belgrade Concert The way you interpret the scene depends on whether you have context and backstory to go along with it. If we weren’t told about how Amy was dragged there unconscious then you could think that Amy might be the villain in this scenario as she’s refusing to sing. However, with the added background information that kapadia provides us with, you feel sympathy for Amy as you know she didn’t want to be there. The ‘Observational’ mode is established in the way in which we might be on-lookers or ‘voyeurs’ rather than flies! Longinotto’s approach suggests that the spectator can reach their one conclusion by observing life on the screen. The footage is a mix of clips from people in the audience and probably the professional videographers. People in the audience whilst they me be booing, they didn’t get involved which enhances the idea of the observational mode.

SEQUENCE 2 - In St Lucia (With Mitch) Kapadia took up a Broomfield's approach when it came to choosing what footage of Mitch’s documentary to include. He specifically uses clips which show Mitch as making Amy feel very uncomfortable and exploited. Mitch probably liked to thin he was leaning towards the more observational approach, but he was trying to glamourise Amys life and only show the cameras what he wanted to so it ended up being more towards a Broomfield approach. Mitch was definitely more visible/participatory approach to make the outcome ‘flawless’ and how he thinks people would want to see it. Sense of ‘fly on the wall’ observational because be observe events through the ‘lens’ of Kapadia's selected/edited footage. Events unfold  without the presence of film production process of the filmmaker themselves and so there is a strong sense of authenticity of the kind Longinotto aims to achieve. If Broomfield’s style were utilised we might expect a more staged and dramatic effect with Bloomfield challenging Mitch or Amy We cane valuate the possible impact of each film making approach in the light of Kapadia’s subject matter. We dont need to prove that its a good fit - (the question asks to what extent)

SEQUENCE 3 - Younger Amy - after parents divorce Demonstrates Longinotto’s ideas as the clip is compiled of home videos of Amy Winehouse as well as narration about her childhood from Amy Winehouse herself.  Home videos really meets Longinotto’s theory as the director doesn’t have any interjection in the video at all as they’re filmed previously. They let you see the raw personality of Amy Winehouse as a child without others giving their opinions on what they thought she was like. By using Amy Winehouse her self for the voice over, you get the truth about what she was like rather than hearing how other people perceived her. This completely links with Longinotto’s ideology as you’re getting the story straight from the main subject. However, Kapadia was not conducting the interview used as the voiceover so who’s to say whether the original interviewer was altering or steering the conversation in a specific direction. Kapadia is editing the clips himself meaning he gets the final over all say. Whilst he is using home videos, and voiceovers collected from interviews he conducted himself, he still in a way shapes the story in the way he sees fit. Longinotto and Kapadia are different filmmakers, but Kapadia had no presence in the recordings at all; He knows the ending, so his work goes against the style longinotto develops.

 

To what extent can it be said that your chosen documentary is shaped by the filmmaker’s approach? Refer to at least one filmmaker’s theory you have studied.’ [20]

INTRODUCTION Stage one: Select your sequences/material Younger Amy (after parents divorce) Mark Ronson (Studio Sequence) Belgrade Sequence Rationale for choosing said clips: You see the raw side of Amy without her performing for a camera. She isn’t ‘aware’, nor interacting with the cameras which are recording her.  When she was younger she wasn’t famous so she wouldn’t of been concerned with her self image on video. During the Mark Ronsen sequence she looks particularly in her element whilst recording Back to Black, and perhaps unaware of the camera recording her. During the Belgrade sequence Amy is obviously completely out of it so she doesn’t even seem to know where she is, never mind there’s probably hundreds of cameras on her. As for Longinotto or Broomfeild I’d say it doesn’t necessarily fit into either of them. But the sequences are quite obviously not Broomfeild as Kapadia doesn’t alter the footage to give a certain outcome.  Her childhood videos don’t necessarily alter the audiences view on her as this was before she was famous so it doesn’t really affect peoples impression on her. There don’t seem to be any jump cuts in the Mark Ronson sequence so therefore we can’t assume Kapadia was trying to manipulate the footage to lead to certain outcome. If Kapadia were to alter the Belgrade sequence, it could be easily spotted as you could most likely find an unedited version online. Due to this fact its unlikely Kapadia altered the Belgrade sequence.

PARAGRAPH 1 Talk about first sequence: Younger Amy after parents divorce - Kapadia demonstrates Longinotto’s  ideas as he compiles home footage of Amy, as well as a voice over narration about her child by Amy Winehouse herself. This is a great execution of her ideas as home videos don’t allow the director to disrupt the video and alter the outcome as the videos were already previously filmed. By using an audio of Amy Winehouse herself for a VoiceOver you get the truth from the subject directly rather than a perhaps warped perspective of her from someone else. This once again completely complies with Longinotto’s ideology as you’re getting the story directly from the subject themselves. However Kapadia was not conducting the interview that Amy was taking part in himself so who’s to say if the original interviewer was steering the conversation to a specific outcome Whilst the visuals and audio may match up with Longonitto’s, behind the scenes, Kapadia had to edit the clips himself to get the overall outcome he wanted meaning in a way he does get a say in the overall final outcome. Whilst the visuals match up with longinotto’s ideologies, Kapadia is a filmmaker in his own right and had no presence in recordings at all, yet knows the ending and final outcome that he’s working towards. Therefore his methods are not 100% compatible.

PARAGRAPH 2 Talk about second sequence: Mark Ronson studio sequence During this sequence we are shown Amy, completely in her element recording her song Back to Black. The scene is a great example of how Kapadia utilises Longinotto’s idea as the person behind the camera doesn’t disrupt Amy in any way, nor does Amy even look aware of the camera. By adding this footage of Amy singing a song which means a lot to her without interruptions, Kapadia really plays into Longinotto’s idea of just letting the subject tell their story with o guidance from the director. On top of this, overlaying the lyrics that Amy is singing onto the screen, really helps her story get across to the audience as it allows them to read the words as they come which can really improve an individuals ability to understand the deeper meaning. So without completely altering and manipulating footage, Kapadia helps Amy’s story get across which inevitably plays into Longitnotto’s ideologies. However once again, Kapadia had a final outcome that he wanted to work towards with the footage he was provided with. So whilst the clips in their own right may of suited Longinotto’s filmmaking ideas, Kapadia as a filmmaker in his own right, so therefore may f had his own approach to the documentary as a whole.

PARAGRAPH 3 Talk about third sequence: Belgrade sequence The footage used in this clip can actually be interpreted in two ways depending on whether or not you’re given context before hand. The videos of Amy can easily be used to manipulate the audience into perceiving her in a specific way. We were given information on how her dad took her there whilst she was passed out meaning that we are able to feel some sympathy for her in the scene as were given background information as to why she’s acting like that. The ‘Observational’ mode is established in the way in which we might be on-lookers or ‘voyeurs’ rather than flies! Longinotto’s approach suggests that the spectator can reach their one conclusion by observing life on the screen. The footage is a mix of clips from people in the audience and probably the professional videographers. People in the audience whilst they me be booing, they didn’t get involved which enhances the idea of the observational mode. Overall, the context and background information given prior can steer to a desired outcome as it can alter the audiences view on a subject and therefore alter the overall all result of the documentary.

CONCLUSION - To conclude the ideas said above, whilst Longinotto’s ideas and practices can be applied to the clips used my Kapadia in the given sequences, its what Kapadia does with them which makes him his own filmmaker with his own ideas on how to create documentaries. As he demonstrates with how he utilises the footage he was given in order to complete the documentary in a way in which he’s happy with.

Amy Essay - Completed

The documentary Amy exhibits the filmmakers approach is crucial to the outcome of the film, along with the spectators perception to the events displayed. This allows Kapadia to create a narrative around the subject, in this case Amy Winehouse, with only the footage given to him in a way which gives Amy the ability to tell her own story through the documentary. Through this, Kapadia's filmmaking style can be compared side by side other directors methods. These include Kim Longinotto’s more observational style of documentary, along with Nick Broomfield’s participatory documentary style.

Kapadia demonstrates Longinotto’s  ideas as he compiles home footage of Amy, as well as a voice over narration about her childhood by Amy Winehouse herself. This is a great execution of her ideas as home videos don’t allow the director to disrupt the video and alter the outcome as the videos were already previously filmed. By using an audio of Amy Winehouse herself for a Voice Over you get the truth from the subject directly rather than a perhaps warped perspective of her from someone else. This once again completely complies with Longinotto’s ideology as you’re getting the story directly from the subject themselves. However Kapadia was not conducting the interview that Amy was taking part in himself so who’s to say if the original interviewer was steering the conversation to a specific outcome. Whilst the visuals and audio may match up with Longinotto’s, behind the scenes, Kapadia had to edit the clips himself to get the overall outcome he wanted meaning in a way he does get a say in the overall final outcome. Whilst the visuals match up with longinotto’s ideologies, Kapadia is a filmmaker in his own right and had no presence in recordings at all, yet knows the ending and final outcome that he’s working towards. Therefore his methods are not 100% compatible.

During the sequence where Amy was recording with Mark Ronson. We are shown Amy, completely in her element recording her song Back to Black. The scene is a great example of how Kapadia utilises Longinotto’s idea as the person behind the camera doesn’t disrupt Amy in any way, nor does Amy even look aware of the camera. By adding this footage of Amy singing a song which means a lot to her without interruptions, Kapadia really plays into Longinotto’s idea of just letting the subject tell their story with o guidance from the director. On top of this, overlaying the lyrics that Amy is singing onto the screen, really helps her story get across to the audience as it allows them to read the words as they come which can really improve an individuals ability to understand the deeper meaning. So without completely altering and manipulating footage, Kapadia helps Amy’s story get across which inevitably plays into Longinotto’s ideologies. However once again, Kapadia had a final outcome that he wanted to work towards with the footage he was provided with. So whilst the clips in their own right may of suited Longinotto’s filmmaking ideas, Kapadia as a filmmaker in his own right, so therefore may f had his own approach to the documentary as a whole.

The footage used in this clip can actually be interpreted in two ways depending on whether or not you’re given context before hand. The videos of Amy can easily be used to manipulate the audience into perceiving her in a specific way. We were given information on how her dad took her there whilst she was passed out meaning that we are able to feel some sympathy for her in the scene as were given background information as to why she’s acting like that. The ‘Observational’ mode is established in the way in which we might be on-lookers or ‘voyeurs’ rather than flies! Longinotto’s approach suggests that the spectator can reach their one conclusion by observing life on the screen. The footage is a mix of clips from people in the audience and probably the professional videographers. People in the audience whilst they me be booing, they didn’t get involved which enhances the idea of the observational mode. Overall, the context and background information given prior can steer to a desired outcome as it can alter the audiences view on a subject and therefore alter the overall all result of the documentary.

To conclude the ideas said above, whilst Longinotto’s ideas and practices can be applied to the clips used my Kapadia in the given sequences, its what Kapadia does with them which makes him his own filmmaker with his own ideas on how to create documentaries. As he demonstrates with how he utilises the footage he was given in order to complete the documentary in a way in which he’s happy with.