Documentary 'mini task'

A documentary is a non-fiction film focusing on a particular topic that documents an aspect of real life. The purpose of most documentaries is to inform viewers on the subject being documented and to maintain a historical record. There are several types of documentary that use different methods to depict the real life circumstances they portray.

Expository documentary:
An expository documentary is one which uses a voice over that almost narrates over the images being displayed, giving them context. Opinions can be featured in the documentary however these are often the opinions of those being interviewed rather than the film makers. Often if the film maker wants to insert his/her opinion into the documentary this will be done by featuring arguments that favor one side more than the other father than directly stating what they believe. The voice over will present facts and arguments to the viewers as well as giving captions for images in the film. Using these methods results in a documentary that is objective and one that is not bias. An example of an expository documentary would be Why We Fight (2005, Eugene Jarecki). This documentary questions the direction of the U.S military over the last fifty years by documenting the history of its conflicts and the origins of them. It does this in the expository mode, with no presenter just a voice over commentating over the images being shown giving them meaning.These images relate to the topics being focused on, for example here we see many pictures of war as well as archive footage of interviews with past presidents. Multiple arguments are also given in this documentary, however this is done through the use of experts with opinions talking into the camera on screen as seen here. There are a range of opinions from multiple points of view negating bias. As the audience we don't here any questions being asked, we only hear the individuals assessment of the

event being focused on. Throughout the film the camera will often cut away from the persons face while they are still talking, and will show more images relating to the topic, while the interviewee talks over them, acting as the commentator. Another feature commonly found in the expository mode is a strong argument. They are after all rhetorical in nature and often try to persuade the viewer. The over all message this film tries to convince the viewer of, is that the U.S government has purposely tricked its people into joining wars, with the sole purpose of maintaining the American military industrialisation complex, and by doing so, maintaining  US's foothold as he number one political power in the world.

Observational:

Observation documentaries do exactly that. They observe but do not interfere in any way. Usually the documentary will focus on a slice of real life. This method of observing but remaining uninvolved in the events being depicted is called unobtrusive construction. The film-maker/director is never on screen and hidden from the audience. The documentary will remain neutral and non bias depicting a transparent record of real life leaving the audience to determine what it is they are seeing and how they as individuals feel about it. As the event being depicted isn't tampered with, the audience is able to form an opinion that isn't misguided. However it could also be argued that what is filmed and the way the film is edited could be constructed in a way that highlights particular sides of the subject and leaves out others. For example in Armadillo (2010, Janus Metz Pedersen) it could be argued that the footage shown depicts the unit of soldiers in a positive, patriotic light, rather than seeing them as trained killers. Equipment used in observational documentaries can also be informal like hand held cameras for example. In many ways the observational mode is the purest type of documentary as any context being given to the audience roots from pictures of events that have taken place, not from anyone trying to impose a view on the audience. Long takes are also common in observational documentaries again because of the unobtrusive construction that is part of their nature. Lastly another feature of the observational mode is that of synchronous sound. This basically means sounds that exists at the same time or in tandem with something, that something in this case being the images we see on screen.  An example of an observational documentary would be Armadillo (2010, Janus Metz Pedersen). This film follows a group of Danish soldiers deployed at an army base in southern Afghanistan called Armadillo. The film includes no voice overs, narration or any interviews. There is no presence of any film maker and the film purely shows rather than tells the real life events that took place during the tour. Throughout the film synchronous sound and ambient sound are present as well as instances where these fade out and are replaced by music scores that are accompanied buy slow motion images. A trailer of Armadillo can be seen here, featuring some of the key features of the observational mode..

Interactive & performative:

In the interactive mode the film-makers' presence is obvious and they are a part of the film. There are often interactions between the presenter/film-maker and interviewees and in some films even the audience. This will usually be presented by recording a conversation with the presenter and the interviewee on screen as seen here. In opposition to the observational style, the filmmaker is foregrounded in the participatory mode, making it explicit that the film is made from their point of view.  The filmmaker is often the central character in the film with the emphasis on their interaction with the people they meet and these people’s reactions to them.  Techniques include filmmaker’s voice over (with pronounced use of ‘I’) hand-held camera and an emphasis on informal interviews.

With regards to audience and presenter interaction, this will usually take place through the presenter narrating and explaining events to the audience, for example giving the audience context of situations by notifying them of locations and dates enabling them to follow the events being depicted. Arguments and even agendas can be present in the interactive mode. This is because we are seeing what the film-maker wants us to see, and reality can perhaps be manipulated to emphasise or dramatise events or arguments being presented. Again manipulation of the text its self can be heavier and more notable than other modes usually through editing or the omitting of certain information that could effect our the audience perceive topics being presented. Interactive documentaries are often criticised for being misleading and perhaps misrepresenting the truth. However there plus side is that they are able to connect easier with audiences due to the inclusion of the presenting figure that prompts the viewer to not only feel a certain way, but to ask questions about the topic being presented. An Example of a documentary employing this mode is Dirty Wars (2013, Rick Rowley). This film follows investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill, author of international best seller Blackwater. In this film we follow Scahill on his journey reporting on a U.S night raid that took place in a isolated corner of Afghanistan. Over time this investigation turns into a global one focusing on a secretive American government agency known as JSOC or the Joint Special Operations Command. Throughout the film we learn of some of the operations in which JSOC have participated, including some that are of questionable legality. The film features Jeremy Scahill who acts as the presenter. He interviews a range of people from victims of such night raids as the one in Afghanistan to ex-members of JSOC as well as communicating with the audience by recounting events. The film clearly has an agenda, to make us the audience ask questions about the cost of security. We see many interviews with innocent victims and their families that are edited in a fashion that tries to evoke a targeted response from the audience.
This documentary however could also be categorised as a performative one. The performative mode acknowledges the emotional and subjective parts of a documentary and so are constructed in a way that makes the footage more dramatic and emotion provoking. Throughout film we see techniques specific to the performative mode such as re-enactments are present to help give context to the audience and immerse them deeper into the film. Exaggerated and dramatic camera angles as well as lighting are also used heavily in this film again to capture the audiences attention placing them further into the diegesis of the film as seen here.

Lastly the film is very stylized and depicts the topics presented in a provocative and striking manner. Whilst watching the film I felt as if I was watching part documentary part espionage thriller, a choice made purposefully by the creators because it widens its appeal to that of the average movie goer, therefore increasing its exposure and yield. This film uses both modes well, using the interactive mode whilst interviewing people and experts, and using the performative mode when escalating the journey as knew information is obtained and then translated to the audience providing a thrilling and eye opening experience. Both modes are evident in the trailer seen here.



Reflexive
 The Reflexive Mode acknowledges the constructed nature of documentary and flaunts it unlike that of the participatory mode -conveying to people that this is not necessarily "truth" but a reconstruction of it - "a" truth, not "the" truth the film maker acknowledges their presence on camera and gives a narrative to the documentary. This mode is usually used in experimental documentaries in which the audience is also interested in how the documentary is constructed as well as the content of the film. The content will be shots of real life however these shots can be strung together in a way that results in the experimental perhaps different style of film affiliated with the reflexive mode. Also another trait often features in reflexive documentaries is the inclusion of crew on screen. Because this style acknowledges the presence of the film makers this doesn't take away from the film but in a way adds to its reality. And example of a reflexive documentary would be Kurt and Courtney (1998, Nick Broomfield). This is documentary on the life of Kurt Cobain and his relationship with Courtney love. In the film Nick Broomfield is present on camera and asked questions in a conversational manner rather than firing questions at interviewees. Also featured on screen is the equipment used to record the film and shots are often arn't edited and rather continuous implementing more physical movement rather than planned shots or transitions. The trailer showing some of these traits can be seen here.


From my own perspective I prefer the interactive mode. This is because I like the how the presenter becomes involved in the documentary sometimes communicating with the audience giving context to what is going on. This also helps to make the documentary a sort of story, which personally draws me in more than some of the other modes. It is true however that this mode can be considered to be vulnerable to bias more than some of the other modes such as observational and expository modes. However these to can be open to bias in the way they are constructed. I feel however that to be a successful documentary there must be entertainment as well as truth included in the text and that sometimes if being slightly bias makes the documentary a more entertaining one, involving the audience more, that this is an acceptable method.