Evaluation
As in other 'real' new media products, TakeOut featured archive footage which is found in today's popular culture. This makes the issues featured in a documentary more relevant to the audience, and therefore makes them empathize with the people featured in the documentary. Watching a documentary involves a great deal of escapism for the viewer; a chance to live life in someone else's shoes.
Framing in TakeOut and in The Devil Made Me Do It is very similar; the subject is focused to the side of the screen and is looking in the opposite direction. The rule of thirds is also used. However, within The Devil Made Me Do It, the camera is focused closer to the subject, as the topic is much more serious, and so an extreme close up is used to allow the viewer to comment on the emotion of the interviewee, and therefore become more involved in the subject of the documentary.
Titles are also similar within the two documentaries; white and simple. This validates our documentary, as the understated titles look professional, but are still easily accessible to the audience, without detracting attention from the action on screen.
Reconstruction was also a documentary convention which was used in TakeOut; reconstructions are, again, important for the audience, as they not only reveal more on a subject, but make them seem more 'close to home'. This again reflects on the escapism that a viewer feels when watching a documentary, and therefore makes TakeOut more of a valid, professional documentary.
The print advert conforms to typical conventions of a channel 4 documentary advertisement; a specific colourscheme, with the writing conforming to this in a typical channel 4 house style. The channel's logo is also located in the same place; centred to the right of screen; the logo is obvious and eyecatching, in order to appropriately inform the audience of scheduling. The title on both adverts is also bigger than the scheduling, implying that if someone is interested by the title, the viewer is more likely to then seek out more information about it, in this case, through scheduling.
In terms of the radio advert, the same conventions are supported. For example, soundbytes from the actual documentary are used to advertise the documentary, and offer a 'teaser' into the ambience of the piece. The music bed on the radio advert is common; it helps the audio to flow more smoothly and sounds more professional and inviting to listeners. Contributing to this, as is typical in radio ads, the same voiceover is used as is used in the documentary. This helpes link the texts and validates the audio, ensuring that the target audience is interested and empathizes with the theme of the documentary.
2. How effective is the combination of your main product and ancillary texts?
3. What have you learned from your audience feedback?
4. How did you use media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation stages?
Research and Planning
The definition of a documentary is problematic. With this, we must respect that the purpose of a documentary is literally to document an event, which has to be done with evidence, using an element of actual footage. Most documentaries resemble the truth, but all use an element of construction – a documentary cannot all be simple footage, it needs to be layered together with narration and in most cases, cutaways.
Documentary was defined in the 1930’s by John Grierson and his team at the GPO ( General Post Office). He first coined the term documentary in 1926, but defined it as ‘The creative treatment of actuality’. Documentaries in those days were made for a cinema audience, as television had not yet been invented, and were used to boost morale in war times. Often, documentaries were made with government interest; used as public service announcements for example. They aimed to give people a glimpse into the lives of others; something we now take for granted, being brought up around cultural programmes and a media conscious society.
This video shows one of John Grierson's famous documentaries - Night Mail (1936)
John Connor stated in 1995 that ‘What distinguishes a documentary is the portrayal of the recorded sounds and images of actuality.’ This means that a documentary is a factual account of an event. With this, we must respect that parts could be staged and reconstructed using actors and sets, which helps to evoke feelings for the audience, and sensationalises documentaries, making them more accessible.
Therefore, we must take into account that even though documentaries are highly respected for their factual content, even the most pure of documentaries contain a high level of construction; even in interview formats, the interviewee is set up in a certain place, with a certain mise en scene and made to look a certain way; for example, in a documentary about a troubling topic; i.e eating disorders, the interviewee is made to look vulnerable. This in turn, makes the documentary even more constructed; we are seeing the subject at a biased view as an audience.
Scheduling of a documentary is very important; what is shown before and scheduled after the documentary is vital. A particular target audience will be hooked by one programme and seek interest in a documentary through this. For example, when showing a documentary surrounding the arrival of the Pope in England, Channel 4 chose to include a short minute long opinionated piece before showing the more biased documentary. This added an element of balance to the piece, but also hooked the audience’s attention.
Some documentaries are emotional and sensational in order to gain a biased opinion. These documentaries are getting rarer however, as we live in a media conscious world, and viewers today are aware of when they are being persuaded to a certain opinion. Opposing this, they do not have to have analysis – they can be descriptive and leave the viewer to decide their own opinion. British documentaries are famed for their investigative journalism – they oppose the government and sometimes society in order to try to stir up debate between people. As long as documentaries are exposing hidden truths and constructing others, there will never be total consensus in society.
THE CREATIVE TREATMENT OF ACTUALITY.
Ken Loach, Filmmaker.
How creative should a documentary be? Documentaries always need to be authentic, although some elements can be faked/reconstructed; raw footage is often impossible, as of the topics that documentaries cover. For example, documentaries on murders or domestic violence, raw footage is few and far between, or too distressing to broadcast. Raw events which have not happened and can be filmed are taken control of by the documentary; camera angles need to be taken care of, crews will watch and ensure shots are appropriate.
Diane Tammes, an esteemed filmmaker once said ‘Truth is what you actually come away with at the end of seeing the film. I mean, it is your truth that you’re seeing. Everybody who makes a film is putting their own truth on the screen’. This is certainly true; filmmakers have an aim of what they want their film to portray and connote, and will always show the filmmaker’s opinion.
However, It is universally considered that within documentaries there must be elements of recorded images and sound of actual reality. If there is not either of these elements, the film is not a documentary; there is no evidence, and could therefore simply be a work of fiction.
Over the years, many people have began to argue over the ‘true documentary’ as of increased creative involvement. Because of this, there are now subgenres within documentaries, which will be discussed further on.
Current affairs programmes are described by many as halfway between the news and a documentary. These programmes offer a deep analysis and can be ranged from a couple of minutes to 30 minutes long. Many consider programmes longer than this to be classed as a documentary. Weighty issues and social problems are discussed, yet they are sensationalised in order to appeal to a mass audience. Programmes such as panorama are classed as current affairs; Panorama is a primetime programme which sensationalises current affairs to reach a wider audience.
John Corner states that there are 5 stages in a documentary
- Observation
- Mise-En-Scene
- Interview
- Exposition
- Dramatisation
Most documentaries use some element of observation – the camera becomes the eyewitness. We observe some raw footage as the audience also, which makes the documentary more authentic.
Documentaries rely heavily on interviews from many different people; they can be directly involved with the subject or simply an audience member just like the viewers. Full flowing interviews are often used when concerning huge events and consulting a close subject; e.g the Jackson family after Michael Jackson’s 2009 death. Break interviews can also be used, when an interview becomes fractured between cutaways and other action pieces to support or contrast what the subject is saying.
All documentaries have an element of dramatisation – drama needs to happen naturally and show real events happening. If dramatisation is not apparent, documentaries are not considered real as they may not be factual or interesting to the viewer. Reconstruction is also important as it adds an element of dramatisation to the piece and holds the audience’s attention.
Mise en scene is important to set the scene of the documentary – within interviews, the mise en scene needs to allow drama to unfold and allow the documentary to advance with the argument of the exposition. Without an appropriate mise en scene, documentaries become stale and boring to the audience.
The exposition of the documentary is the line of argument; it could be made of description and combined with commentary. The line of argument has to be clear within a documentary, so as not to confuse the audience.
Current affairs programmes are on a much shorter deadline than normal documentaries. This is because the news within them is much more topical, and will not be relevant if broadcast too late. Documentaries, on the other hand, can take months to complete; they can be on important events, but are usually after an event has finished; e.g. to mark the anniversary of Princess Diana’s deaths, many documentaries were made. Current affairs programmes also provide info-tainment for the viewer; these programmes are like the news, but add more interviews, facts and sensationalise most of the content, in order to make it more accessible for more viewers.
It therefore seems that current affairs programmes are more relevant in today’s society; they are culturally relevant and provide topics which are enjoyable for a much wider audience than a documentary. The main reason for making documentaries however, is the public’s right to know – documentaries can reference events that happened years in the past, which the public may still want to know about, and feel that they have a right to know. Documentaries also gain authority from the connections they have with democratic processes; lack of bias etc. They also have the power to change things in society for the better.
One important filmmaker who revolutionized documentaries was Ken Loach, maker of Cathy Come Home (1966). This documentary resulted in improved conditions for the homeless and laws and legislation were changed to accept and accommodate homeless people. From this, we gain that documentaries are extremely powerful, and have the power to sway mass audiences and even governments into believing in one opinion or improving society for the better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8fVnXXMw60
^Link to Cathy Come Home, KenLoachFilms
However, documentary makers rarely question the deeper organisation and fairness of society. For example, within documentaries of the James Bulger killings, films and popular culture are blamed – i.e. the film child’s play – rather than the neglect the child killers suffered from from their parents.
Dennis O’Rourke says that ‘It is critical that filmmakers be rid of the fantasy that the documentary can be unproblematic representations of reality, and truth can be conveniently dispensed and received like Valium’. This states that documentaries need to show both sides of the argument, in order to appropriately show the conflict in an issue; this also lets the audience pick their view, so they are not biased.
Within documentaries, ideas of truth and reality can be conflicting at times. Sometimes they can attract counter claims of lies. For example, when the news broke of Tiger Woods’ infidelity, lots of women came forward with claims that they had had a relationship with him; many of these claims were proven untrue, and were just made for fame or money. Corner believes that evidence rather than truth would help this; he states that recording technologies only record traces of the physical world and can be used as evidence of actuality or reality. Furthermore, this evidence can then support the exposition and strengthen the whole documentary.
The documentary represents the transformed world. They are not especially important in a TV schedule, yet cover all 3 of the BBC’s main aims; to inform, educate and entertain. However, documentaries are the first programmes to be cut if commercial channels find money tight, as, depending on the content, they can often be unpopular within ratings. Documentaries that are ratings winners include issues of sex, law and order and violence, but they are often unpopular with networks as they may offend advertisers; e.g Cadburys are unlikely to advertise on a documentary about a brutal murderer.
There is a 3 way process within the making of documentaries; relevant elements include who the documentary is aimed at, who is featured within the documentary and the reaction of the audience. Documentaries are often about society’s victims; this is popular as people want to empathize or put themselves in another’s shoes in order to escape from their daily life. Because of this, documentaries often use humans as evidence within their expositions. Documentaries also play on the audience’s right to know – if a viewer see’s something wrong they want to right it, which again, reinforces the power of the documentary in today’s society.
Types of Documentary
Fully Narrated
A fully narrated documentary has a direct mode of address, and an off screen voice over, nicknamed voice of God. For instance, within nature documentaries, there is always a voiceover explaining the action onscreen.
Fly On The Wall
Fly on the wall documentaries are similar to the cinema verite genre – they are almost all observational, hut will sometimes convey chilling events. The process of editing within fly on the wall creates meaning to the behaviour of the subjects; e.g Rogue Traders.
Mixed
Mixed documentaries have a mixed approach to interviews, observation and narrative.
In contrast to voice of god, narration is often news style. For example, a journalist will speak to the camera while visuals are used to anchor meaning.
Self Reflective
In self reflective documentaries, the subject acknowledges the presence of the camera. People talk to the documentary maker/journalist while they are sat behind the camera.
Docudrama
Within docudramas, there is a re-enactment of events as they are supposed to have happened. Docudramas are stories which are based on facts; at best they are misleading, and at worst, dangerous. They tackle big events, e.g 9/11.
Docusoaps
Docusoaps follow the daily lives of people in a range of different jobs/positions in society – for example, airports and cruise liners. Docusoaps are brilliant for light entertainment, and are very cheap to make, but are a phenomenon of recent years and enormously popular. Steven Barnett has blamed the docusoap for dumbing down the documentary drama through disneyfication. As things become more popular, they become less informative.
Genre Analysis
The Devil Made Me Do It.
This documentary was mixed, as there was a combination of elements. Reconstructions were used to dramatize it, narratives were used to push the exposition and interviews were used to add drama and sensationalise.
In terms of themes within this documentary, there are many deep social themes including murder, religion, music, and youth. Another theme is the effect of the media on society; Marylin Manson’s depiction and representation is part of the exposition within the documentary, as murders are blamed on him. This plays on society’s values, as even in a small rural Italian town, media affects the youth there.
The narrative structure within the documentary is linear; the beginning of the documentary sets up the exposition and conflict. We, as the audience, also ask the question ‘Why has the nun died?’, as this is the problem which surrounds the documentary. In the middle, we question the influence of Marilyn Manson – is he the puppetmaster of the murder, or is he simply being used as the scapegoat? The end brings resolution through equilibrium. The town is now normal, the inverted crosses are gone and the girls are in jail.
Cinematography in The Devil Made Me Do It mainly showed the town of Chiavenna as vulnerable; crane shots over the town were used under the narrative and during sounds of the reconstruction to make the town seem innocent yet deserted. High angles were also used a lot; over the graveyard and over the audience in the Manson concert, making the problem seem more important than them, while expanding the severity of the problem.
Cantered shots were also used which make the audience uncomfortable and confused, which contrasted with the more average establishing shots of Chiavenna and the murder scene. Other important shots within the documentary include the interviews of the teenagers; they are all in two shots in groups. This means that they are protected by each other and are not vulnerable. The last interview in the documentary includes a close up of the expert blaming Manson for the death; this finalises the audience’s perspective on the murder and cements the blame on the music star.
In terms of mise-en scene, within the interviews everyone is interviewed in their own environment. This makes the interviewees more comfortable and they seem to talk more fluidly.
When the psychologist expert is seen getting on a train, although this is staged, it also shows her as a career woman. She is also powerdressing in terms of her costume; she is wearing a bright red suit which commands the attention of the viewer.
In other terms of costume and makeup, when we are introduced to Marilyn Manson concertgoers, we see lots of people with their faces painted like Manson, wearing black clothing and stereotypically acting like the social group ‘goth’. This references rebellion; there were others that attended the concert who were dressed normally, but we are introduced to them as they seem to be the ones who will reinforce the exposition of the documentary.
Sound within the documentary was largely diegetic within the large amount of interviews, but non diegetic sound was also used (e.g within the reconstruction) to dramatize the action and shock the audience. Sound effects were used to compliment this and create the feeling that the audience were eavesdropping on the action. For example, religious music, gothic music and effects of heartbeats were used to break up the action and create excitement. Natural ambient sound used within the documentary also helped to ‘spice up’ the action, including police sirens and church bells.
Editing within the documentary included lots of long takes for which the voiceover narrative is very important, in order to make sure the audience’s attention is maintained. Cutaways were used in every interview for the same reason; several linear interviews wouldn’t make sense and would confuse the viewer. There is also shot reverse shot between the audience and Manson in the concert footage and eyeline match on the cantered camera footage.
Archive material used within the documentary to make it more interesting and show the history of similar events included concert footage, music videos, interviews, nun’s funeral and the news.
There was a small clip of the columbine shooting, for which Manson’s lyrics had been blamed before, which shows that he has a history with violence, although he was never found guilty, it supports the exposition.
All of the archive material used within the documentary evokes a sense of wrongdoing on Manson’s part, and again, reinforces the exposition.
Graphics used in the documentary were largely quite simple. Subtitling was used during the concert footage, which even included swear words, which is largely frowned upon and now prohibited.
The opening title was white on black and featured ‘The Devil Made Me Do It’ in religious style font; this connoted opposites and the contrast of good and evil. Also, when using captions underneath the interviewees to reference their names and occupations, the graphics were white and in a small, basic font, which didn’t detract the attention from the action.
Genre Analysis - Marketing Movies
Marketing Movies
Marketing Movies is a mixed documentary, as it has a combination of voiceover, interviews and archive footage. The voiceover leads the narrative, while the archive footage serves as important during cutaways. The interviews structure the whole documentary, while also using graphics to separate chapters.
Themes within this documentary included marketing, merchandising and target audiences. The documentary focused on the overall marketing of a film, as this was the exposition – ‘Why Is Marketing Important?’ Merchandising footage was used a lot throughout the documentary, through cutaways and archive footage. This is because merchandise was said to be a central theme through marketing, and ironically, advertised products to the viewers while we watched the documentary. Target audiences were also stipulated as very important within the documentary; filming is worthless if the audience is not targeted correctly, as with documentaries.
The narrative structure of this documentary was simplistic and linear. The beginning posed the exposition question – ‘Why is Marketing important?’ The audience then watches on to see how films are made successfully. The middle then includes information which represents conflict; how to overcome bad reviews in the film industry. We are also introduced to a case study of Mouse Hunt, which follows as a theme in the documentary right until the end. The end then uses an open ended narrative – was or wasn’t Mouse Hunt successful as of appropriate marketing? This is clever, as during the time the documentary was made and released, this answer was yet to be found, as Mouse Hunt was still in the process of being marketed and sold; however, now we can see that it was a very successful children’s film.
Within Marketing Movies, camera work was relatively simple. During interviews, there was a static camera and medium close ups, filming only the interviewee. These interviews were fractured, and on some, sound was continued over a new set of visuals when using cutaways. Cutaways always used content which related to what the interviewee was saying; close ups of money, panning shots of merchandise and high angle shots looking over London. During some interviews, the camera sometimes altered between deep and shallow focus, between the interviewee and the poster. This literally means that the audience focuses on what the documentary makers want them to.
In terms of mise-en-scene within the documentary, within interviews, subject matter was left to lead, and the background images related to the speech within interviews; film posters were used in the background, which not only remarkets the film to the viewer, but also makes sure content is kept relevant. In other areas of the documentary, there are shots of London – this is where most of the documentary’s action is set and is appropriate, as London is said to be the capital of UK filmmaking. Contributing to this, in cutaways, we see many people gathering around premieres, around film sets and even outside the cinema box office. This not only shows exhibition and distribution, two key factors of filmmaking, but also reinforces the whole theme of the documentary and backs up what experts are saying in their interviews.
Sound wasn’t really used to anchor meaning within Marketing Movies, like in The Devil Made Me Do It, but music was instead used to compliment the theme; a music bed of an upbeat tune was used in the background throughout, and sound was continued over new sets of visuals. All other sound was relatively naturalistic – the sound that was used in interviews was not dubbed, and was instead used accordingly.
Editing within the documentary was also relatively simplistic; cuts were used between action, and fades were used as a quick fix when editing did not make sense. There were also fades to the graphics that were used to mark the chapters, which was again, unusual for a documentary as graphics are usually minimally to allow the action within the documentary to speak for itself. In terms of cutaways, many different shots of related scenes were used to anchor meaning to the words of the interviewers; they complimented things well, e.g. when talking about cinema sales, shots of people purchasing tickets at a box office.
Archive material was used continuously throughout the documentary, as the theme allowed footage to be used from past award ceremonies and film premieres, and footage was even used from trailers from films which the interviewees were talking about. Trailers were used as evidence to support successful/unsuccessful marketing, as were clips from films and footage from premieres. The main case study in Marketing Movies was the popular film, Mouse Hunt. This was a new, modern film at the time of the documentary’s release, and therefore was very popular to fans of the film and those wanting a ‘behind the scenes look’ at the films success or failure.
Graphics were used continuously throughout the documentary; there was a cartoon man which announced the titles of new scenes/chapters within the documentary, which alerted the audience what the theme of the next scene would be. This made the documentary very simplistic, and the content was self explanatory through colourful graphics. This is unusual for documentaries, as they usually manage to keep the audience wanting more, and therefore hook the audience’s attention by offering a simple exposition at the beginning of the documentary, and the audience then expect an answer to this by the end of the film.