Final Major Project Evaluation

When we were first given our final major project I was happy to have such a free reign when it came to deciding what I wanted to do. Having always previously been giving briefs for our projects, I was unsure what to expect.

 After looking at the paperwork we were given to accompany the task, I decided straight away that I wanted to create a documentary. I had tried twice before to make a successful documentary and neither project went particularly well. Never a person to shy away from a problem, I saw this last final project as a chance to overcome my difficulties with this genre of film.

 To start with I looked at my favourite documentary directors such as Kurt Kuenne, Michael Moore and Nick Broomfield and their movies , Sicko, Bowling for Columbine, Dear Zachary and Aileen: Life and Death of a Serial Killer. I felt like all of these documentaries had something in common - a personal touch.  This gave me the inspiration to create a documentary about something that was important and personal to me. I started to draw a mind-map of all the things that meant a lot to me, Snowboarding, the USA, my friends, ice-skating and my family. I also looked at the interesting people  in my life such as my parents who  want to emigrate to America, my unusual pets (ferrets), my grandfathers history and my step-sisters history of being adopted.

 The first idea I came to was a documentary about my grandfather, he had a very interesting life and although I never met him, I always felt that we would have gotten along really well due to similar interests. After his death, my grandmother discovered some family secrets on his side and shared them with us. I wanted to create a piece about the discovery of his secret life however my Grandmother was not happy to share everything on camera and therefore that idea was pushed to the side.

 The next idea I looked at was a documentary about my adopted half sister, Jackie. My father offered to raise her and her brother Paul as his own at the age of 4 and whilst she still has contact with her mother, she feels closer to our dad as he was always present in her life. Recently she discovered that her mum had been keeping secrets from her and she had another brother. I decided that for my documentary I wanted to follow my sister, who lives in Southampton,  as she found out more secrets about who her real dad was, if she and her brother were alike and more.

I started to storyboard the idea, but realised that to get a good feel to the documentary that wasn’t too acted, I needed to just create a general feel for the piece. So instead of storyboarding I decided instead to write a list of questions that I wanted to ask her.

·         How old were you when your mum left?

·         Did you ever ask about your dad?

·         What are your expectations?

These are a few examples from the list.  I sent Jackie the questions before I went to visit her, to see if she was happy to answer them all and also to see if there was anything else she wanted to include.

 Whilst conducting my research on different editing techniques, I watched a series of episodes called “weird weekends” by director Louis Theroux and was really intrigued by the way he involved himself in the situation and made it personal to him, therefore making it personal to the audience. I think that way that Theroux does this is by putting himself on camera with his subjects and really immersing himself in their daily lives.

 This personal feel is really what I was looking for in my own documentary so I took inspiration from Louis Theroux, and asked Jackie if she wouldn’t mind me accompanying her when she went to see her mum, and more poignantly to meet her real dad for the first time.  This then brought me to the title of my piece “The thing about my sister”, I feel like this allows the audience to know that the documentary would be as much about my relationship with my sister as it was about her finding out about her past.

 I travelled up to Southampton in April to see Jackie, and spent the first day of filming with her reminiscing about our dad and the silly things he gets up to. These stories made me realise how much me and Jackie had in common despite never actually living in the same house together.  I then tried to work that into filming as much as I could so as to add another aspect to the documentary.

 The set-back to this documentary came when Jackie mentioned the project to her mother. She was unhappy with the view of the piece and assumed that I would perceive her in a bad light. This unfortunately meant that unless Jackie’s mother was in a public place, there was no chance of us filming her, and so the project seemed to have hit a dead end.

 Without an alternative storyline to follow and with time running out, I decided to abandon the idea and start fresh with a new documentary. However, because of the extent of the research I had done on family dynamics and personal documentaries I wanted to keep within the same subject area.

 This is what led me to my family, and the view of families in the media. After speaking to a few of my friends, I realised that each one of them had described their family to me as odd, different and weird. I then thought about the perfect, Mum, Dad, and two children dynamic that we always see in cartoons like The Simpsons, Family Guy and American Dad, and movies like Little Miss Sunshine and Matilda. With three siblings, two half siblings and two parents, my family seemed a complete contrast to these characters and with that realisation came my next idea.

In a very “Dear Zachary” type style, I wanted to create a documentary that showed audiences that although they may think their family is incredibly weird and different, all families are in fact the same. To do this I had to put my family, and the dynamics we have, in a spotlight. I was more excited to start on this documentary than the previous one due to their being no potentially awkward situations to deal with, and I think that this really showed in the piece.

 I asked my family to be featured and they agreed, so again I started to film. This time however I storyboarded and I feel that this was the wrong thing to do, because as I had previously feared the footage became stiff and acted. I then went back to just asking light hearted questions such as “What annoys you most about mum” and “what are Josh’s best traits” ect. I think that this method worked better, and the improvements between my storyboard and the finished piece are noticeable.

I decided to take the name of my piece from the well known Madness song “Our House” because not only was the song a favourite of my parents, but  the lyrics and beat really matched the friendly and silly nature of my family.

 I had a few set backs during filming that included older brother Sam deciding that he did not wish to be featured in the piece. It was hard to re-create some moments between my siblings that had been previously captured when we had to reshoot due to Sam being in the background but I feel that because of the nature of the piece, a few potentially “stiff” moments, went unnoticed.  Filming went quite well, with only a few minor problems like dark lighting and camera shyness from the youngest member of the cast.

 When it came to shooting the cut-away footage, I really wanted to capture the personal nature of this piece and so asked each member of the family to choose five things they wanted me to include. This allowed them to feel included in the making of the piece, and in turn made them more willing to participate in extra interviews.  I also think that this personal feel comes across in the documentary, giving the audience something to relate back to their own family.  

 When I started to edit I was unsure about how the project would be perceived, and therefore decided to add a few small titles to outline the objective of the documentary. After a couple of hours editing I encountered a problem with the computer. It decided to wipe a lot of footage and sound from the editing software I was using. This was a major problem because a majority of the footage was now unusable. After taking five minutes to decipher how it had happen, I decided that to fix the problem, I needed to just re-capture the footage. Being able to come up with a solution for the problem was a new step, one that I had previously failed to overcome when creating the other two documentary projects that didn’t go very well.

 Overall I think that my piece turned out really well, I am happy with the message that it conveys and think that it does what it was intended to do.  If I were to make “Our house in the middle of our street” again I wouldn’t storyboard at all because the difference in free-filming footage and scripted footage is very noticeable. I would also look more into different editing techniques before editing the piece,  I became very focused on the style of Kurt Kuenne in “Dear Zachary” and taking inspiration from that when my piece could possibly have benefitted from a different style.

Dear Zachary Critique

"Dear Zachary" is a 2008 documentary by Kurt Kuenne with the tagline "a letter to a Son about his Father".
 The story follows Kuenne as he discovers the background around the story of his best friends murder. Dr Andrew Bagby was found in a car-park in 2001 stabbed to death.
 Shortly after his death, Andrews Semi-secret girlfriend Shirley announces she is pregnant with his child. After she gives birth, Kuenne goes on a journey to see Kathleen and David, Bagby's parents in Newfoundland, Canada. On the way he visists every person who had known Andrew, and documents it with the intention of giving the "cinematic scrapbook" to Andrews son newborn son, Zachary. Girlfriend and mum to Zachary, Shirley Turner then becomes a prime suspect in the murder case, but is incredibly allowed to remain caring for Zachary.
 Kuenne's documentary then turns to the case, and the fight between Shirely and Kathleen and David Bagby for custody of 13 month old Zachary which tragically ends when Shirely chooses to end both of their lives by jumping into the atlantic ocean in August 2003 with Zachary strapped to her chest.
 Although this subject that Kuenne is documenting is a very sad and heartbreaking story, he remains upbeat for a majority of the film. As he visists people that Andrew knew, Kuenne keeps the story going by telling funny stories of his friend and helping each person through their own memories. He keeps whole feeling of the film light and funny trying to make it a nice collective for andrews son to watch as he grew older. After Zacharys death however, the filming became more intense and the film then turned into a showcase of how the legal system had let the Bagby's down. Kurt says "I wanted to make this movie as funny as I could, because I wanted it to mirror Andrews personality."
 As each relative, friend and collegue uses their own words to describe their friend, Kuenne uses an editing technique within the film to overlap their words and create the feeling that Andrew is very well known, friendly and loved by all. I think this technique is very clever because it is fast, gets the point across and then allows a shocking comment to have the full effect intended when the cheerful comments stop. An example of this technique is very clearly shown in the trailer above for the film.
 Another technique that Kuenne uses is a variety of good and bad archival material, including videos of Andrew making his own films combined with pictures from the crime scene where he was stabbed. I think that using this combined footage allows the audience to make a connection with Andrew and therefore gives them a connection with Zachary, Kurt Kuenne, Kathleen and David, and all of his other friends. It also gives the audience a reason to hate Shirley, because almost from the start, they know the extent and brutality of her crime from seeing the police pictures and evidence. Kuenne describes that this was how he inteded the audience to feel. "My goal was to make people, by the end of the movie, feel like they knew the people and were part of this family, so they would feel personally attacked and want to do something."
 I looked at this documentary with the view of learning about different editing techniques, and although I have realised some potential ideas for the editing of my video, I feel I have also seen the effect that archive footage can have on a production, and will take this into consideration whilst filming my own project. 

Developing Ideas

My intial idea was to create a documentary about my adopted sister who lives in Southampton. I travelled up to see her and to document some of the similaritys between us. Using most of my time to research into her family history I was unable to decide on an idea that I was really happy with. There was too many important factors in Jackies history that would need to be included for a documentary to make sense. I set about trying to find a solution and again was unable to settle on an idea.
 I decided that to create a good Final Major Project, I would need to pick an idea that would be simple yet personal.
 I started to look around me and accumulate some ideas. I looked at the people around me, Plymouth, the sports I love and finally the people I live with, my Family. To make my FMP personal I would need to choose and idea that was close to my heart and so I started to storyboard a short documentary about living with my family.
 Within the documentary I want to explore the different characters within my house. My parents, my brothers and sisters, and even the two ferrets we all adore (except dad!). I looked at the differences between us and found some interesting moments that I wanted to share.
 Having looked into multiple documentary styles and film-makers, I decided to create a piece that included slightly vintage feeling archive footage, like Michael Moore's "bowling for columbine" and a variety of montages and sound edits like Kurt Kuennes "Dear Zachary".

Due to this change in idea, I have created a new pitch to show off my idea. The main part of this presentation can be found in my workbook, but this is the viral video to accompany it.

Nick Broomfield - Documentary Director

English director Nick Broomfield is a documentary film maker. With other 30 controversial documentaries on his resume, Broomfield is an innovator in his own right for leading the reflexive documentary mode into the modern film industry. I chose to watch "Aileen: The Life and Death of a Serial Killer" and was struck by how extremely personal Broomfield's take on the subject was. Having previously met Aileen whilst making "Aileen Wuornos: The Selling of a Serial Killer" 12 years before, Broomfield had remained in contact with her before finally being given "a subpoena to appear at Aileens's final state appeal before execution." He then decided to create the second film about Wuornos who was born in Troy, Michigan. During the film he explored her slow descent into losing her mind, from an abusive childhood to the prostitution of her body. He fully involved himself in her case, and therefore was able to give a very personal and hard-hitting account of the path that Aileen had chosen.
 I think that "personal" is an attribute that Nick Broomfiled brings to a number of documentary he has made and this is an aspect that I would like to explore in my own documentary.
 Broomfields films fall into the self-reflexive genre purely because he spends almost 50% of the time documenting how the film is being made, and the moments that happen that change the course and nature of the film.
 Even when Broomfield ventured into the television industry for a short period to create a series of adverts for the volkswagen passat, he included himself. Asking comical questions to important people about how " the visitors" had chosen important materials for the use of a car. He implies that volkswagen have used the bullet proof glass ment for the president for their headlights, and the ejector seat technology from a fighter jet for their seatbelt ejectors. Each advert lasts around 1 minute, and includes Broomfield in his usual manner with his ever-present boom microphone. These adverts were created with the intention of being a 'teaser trailer' for the car and I think that Broomfield really captured the idea well.
 Broomfield has a very particular way of presenting his subject, by showing the viewer the background story of each character alongside the moment that he is documenting, he allows the viewers to feel sympathetic towards his protaginist no matter what their current situation. For example in "Aileen: life and death of a serial killer", Broomfield shows the naive and vulnerable moments of a woman on death row, and yet he manages to bring out the forgiving side of his audience with some viewers calling Aileen "heartbreakingly human". 
I think that Nick Broomfield is a big inspiration for my project because he was the leading film-maker of this style.  I really want to make my project personal and therefore well recieved. I think that I can use this research to create my documentary.

March of the Penguins - Documentary research

"March of the Penguins" is a 2005 film set in Antarctica, that follows the epic journey of the emperor penguins as they march across the continent to find a partner and raise a family. Directed by Luc Jaquet, and featuring a voice over by Morgan Freeman, this "French nature documentary" has won over nine awards from various different awarding bodies.

 We watch as the penguins make their way from the waters edge, to a breeding ground over 70 miles away across the dark and icy features of Antarctica. They march day and night in single file until they meet with other penguins from their colony. They then find a mate, breed and thus begins their emotional and physical journey to keep their new family alive. We watch as viewers, as storms threaten their survival, and we will them to reach the waters edge once again to feed their family without being taken by predators like the seal. Filmed in super 16mm, this documentary features not only the Penguins, but also the breathtaking scenery around them, including under-water shots of the animals and the natural world.

 Director Luc Jaquet became director of "March of the Penguins" purely by chance, in a rare documentary for cineamareview.com, Jaquet revealed that he had "responded to a classified ad which basically said something like "looking for fearless biologist, ready to spend fourteen months at the end of the world."...I had never held a camera in my life." The outcome of this non-experienced 24 year old biologist turned director was the highest grossing indie nature film of its time.

A very significant feature of the film, is the lack of human presence amongst Penguins, not only because of the absence of the film-makers, but also because the director has chosen not to name or characterise singular penguins. Filmed over 13 months, the film-crew chose not to interfere with the entire process, allowing tragedy's to happen such as the egg touching the ice and freezing, and the baby penguin being caught by the bird of prey. I think that this was partly because of the dangers that situations such as those can present, but also because it was a natural part of the life that they were documenting, and they didn't want to sugar coat reality, I think this is exactly how the director wanted to movie to feel, secluded yet incredible, Jaquet commented "Individually, you can't really distinguish between them. They're all alike. When you...perceive them more as a group; the colony has its own aura, and it changes." Because of this, "March of the Penguins" represents the observational mode of documentary.

 Morgan Freeman provides the voice over for this nature film, and I think that the use of a well known male voice denotes authority and popularity. This enhances the feeling of the documentary because of the authoritative characteristics of the subject, the emperor penguins. I think that Jaquet purposely wanted to make this connection, to allow the viewer to form a relationship with what they are watching on-screen. This relationship then creates a reason for the viewer to feel emotion when the penguins suffer, despite the lack of names and characteristics.

 I feel that the success of this film is directly affected by its ability to attract a wider audience range, rather than the typical nature lover. I also think that the passion of the director is what excelled this film, and the main reason why he chose to make this film. "I wanted to tell things more as I felt them, rather than try to describe them as a scientist" I think that this outlines that Jaquet's motive to create such a documentary was to discover things about the penguins for the first time himself. This naivety is what creates such an awe-inspiring documentary.

 This documentary is a very powerful form of story telling and I think that by watching this I have realised the effect that a voice over can have on footage. I also have looked into the background planning of this documentary and I think that I will take a similar view on my own documentary. Looking at the tag line "In the harshest place on earth, love finds a way" and seeing the effect that these words have on the viewer and the way they percieve the film, I have decided to pick my tagline carefully as it is important to the success of my film.

Bowling For Columbine - Documentary Research

Bowling for Columbine is a documentary made by director Michael Moore. Created in 2002, this documentary explores the possible reasons behind the April 20th 1999 shootings which killed twelve students and 1 teacher in Littleton, Colorado at Columbine high school. Moore also looks briefly at the history of America and their relationship with guns, and then goes on to campaign against K-Mart selling bullets with the help of Columbine student, Richard Castaldo, who was rendered disabled after being shot in the back, chest and arms with K-Mart ammunition.

 Written, produced and directed by Moore, "Bowling for Columbine" was released in November of 2002, with a budget of $4,000,000, and soon became the highest grossing documentary in the UK and Australia.

During the documentary, Moore speaks to multiple people about what happened in Littleton. He talks to people who were affected by the incident, as well as celebrities such as Charlton Heston and Marilyn Manson. I think that the use of people that the audience could possibly idolise gives the viewers a connection to the incident and allows them to have an opinion. As well as speaking to people involved directly, Moore also includes footage of news broadcasts and interviews with related issues. I think that he used this technique because it enforces the reality of the subject onto viewers.

 Michael Moore was born in Flint, Michigan, just a days drive from Columbine, Colorado. In 1999 he had just finished creating a documentary called "Teen Sniper School' which was of a similar nature to Moore's other controversial documentarys (Roger and Me; Canadian Bacon), when he heard about the shootings at the high school. As he started to look more into the reports about the incident, he discovered the "chilling coincidences" amongst what had happened and the people involved. He writes in his directors notes that "he had been intrigued to find out more about the culture he had been raised in" and so went to producer Micheal Donovan with his idea of making a feature length documentary about guns. Donovan agreed to fund the project. I think they wanted to create this documentary with Moore to outline America's relationship with guns, and to encourage audiences to think about how they view crime.
 Moore has a very distinctive style of documentary making, he creates controversy and then resolves it, all in the name of creating a good movie. Every Michael Moore film is easily recognisable, with a picture of Moore on the front cover. This is a good indication of what a viewer will find when they watch a film by this creator, a documentary filled with Moores own opinions 80% of the time, and the subject that covers the rest of the 20%. Although this could be seen as a very selfish point of view, Moore creates a fantastic view of each subject, and isn't afraid to bring up the hard home-truths that other documentary makers would shy away from due to legal and political issues. This controversial take on subjects such as George W Bush ( Farenheiht 9/11) , Gun Crime (Bowling for Columbine) and the American health system (Sicko) has not gone unnoticed and in the year of 2004, Disney owned company 'Miramax' announced that it would not be distributing Farenheiht 9/11 because they didnt intend to "be the distributor of a politically charged movie in an election year".  Moore then fought the case and won, Farenheiht 9/11 was released later on in 2004, showing again that Michael Moore stands up for what he wants the publc to know, regardless of the political controversy it might cause.

 "Bowling for Columbine" was created with the intention to shock viewers into listening and taking into consideration how their culture has influenced them. Moore uses the technique of a non-linear storyline to give the audience multiple things to think about, this allows them to take information on and think about what they have heard, and then connect it to the other parts of the film. I think that that he used this technique because of the nature of the subject. The shootings that happen around America are ongoing occurrences, and by giving the documentary an opening and ending it would have falsely conveyed a conclusion to the reasons behind the crime, however by using this non-linear approach, Moore has left the idea open to other answers to the question "Are we a nation of gun nuts, or are we just nuts?".

  Because "Columbine" is the main and emotive subject of the documentary, Moore had be careful as to how he handled the issues surrounding it. As an experienced film maker, I think that he was aware that to involve too much gloom would have limited his target audience and so instead injected the piece with some wry humour, and I believe he did this to allow some relief for the viewers from the hard hitting facts.

  Although I enjoyed "Bowling for Columbine" and the issues it raised about American culture, I feel that Moore could have chosen some better points to argue, and possibly chose the wrong people to put those points too. For example, the fight against K-Mart was slightly unfair, because the two boys that carried out the shootings, could have brought the bullets from any store that sells ammunition, like Moore demonstrated when he purchased bullets from his barber.

 From watching this documentary, I have realised what effect stock footage can have on a subject. Moore uses a variety of footage, from old war videos; to news reports; to presidential footage of Clinton announcing the bombings in Kosovo just an hour before the shootings began in Littleton. He has manipulated the footage to fit his story, and although this could be perceived as deceptive, I think that the use of this footage is in context with the point Moore is trying to make about America's destructive nature.

 Accompanying the hard-hitting parts of the film, is a soft soundtrack of piano. This is used during the segment that shows the audience CCTV footage and reports from inside and around the school on the 20th April. I feel that this part of the documentary is the most emotive part because of the soundtrack used, and then the actual 911 calls are placed on top. I think that the use of these calls enforces the reality of the situation to the audience, and hearing the panic encourages them to sympathise with the victims. In other parts of the film, he also uses appropriate soundtracks. For example, during the part of the documentary where we are shown all of the facts in caption form about how the U.S have funded terrorist organisations, Moore uses "wonderful world" by Louis Armstrong to accompany the shocking footage. I think this is appropriate because the point he is trying to make is that America sugar coats all of their mistakes, and he therefore does the same by using a sickly sweet song to dampen the blow of the horryfying facts and crime that we see as we listen to the music. In other parts of the film, Moore uses his words as a voice-over to explain some of the things he is doing, and why he is doing them. I think that by using this "god-like" technique, he is able to inflict his opinion onto the viewers and therefore immediatley persuades them to be on his side.

 Although I am interested by the way Michael Moore has produced this documentary, Im am unsure wether I would use this as inspiration for my own piece because my target audience could possibly get confused with the back and forth nature of a non-linear storyline. I also think that the nature of my subject would benefit from being told in a different context.

The Documentary Genre - Modes and Examples

 
In Bill Nichols 2001 book 'Introduction to Documentary' he explains that there are six different kinds of documentary.

- The Poetic Mode - 'reassembling fragments of the world', a transformation of historical material into a more abstract, lyrical form.

- The Expository Mode - 'direct address', social issues assembled into an argumentative frame, mediated by a voice-of-God narration.
 'Grizzly Man', a documentary about bear lover Timothy Treadwell directed by Werner Herzog, falls into this genre, simply because of Herzogs voice-over that swayed the viewer to believe that Treadwell was crazy to live with the grizzly bears, despite the message that Treadwell was trying to convey by spending all his time with the fascinating creatures. I think that Herzog created a very impressionable tone by using his 'God-like' narration.

 - The Observational Mode - as technology advanced by the 1960s and cameras became smaller and lighter, able to document life in a less intrusive manner, there is less control required over lighting etc, leaving the social actors free to act and the documentarists free to record without interacting with each other.
 "March of the Penguins" is a observational documentary, directed by Luc Jaquet with a voice over by Morgan Freeman. The film follows the emperor penguins as they embark on a journey to find a partner to mate with. The documentary includes no human participation or interuption at all, and some parts of the footage seem rushed as the film-makers try to keep up with the action.


- The Participatory Mode - the encounter between film-maker and subject is recorded, as the film-maker actively engages with the situation they are documenting, asking questions of their subjects, sharing experiences with them. Heavily reliant on the honesty of witnesses
I think that a good representation of this would be 'Bowling for Columbine' by director Michael Moore, as the narrative of this documentary really includes him in the process of the event he is documenting. This is also partly poetic, shown by the way that the storyline jumps around and goes back and forth between recorded facts and then includes Moore giving his opinion. I think that this genre isn't seen as much in the modern movie industry because it isn't very popular and is confusing for viewers unless the documentary subject is a very broad one.

- The Reflexive Mode - demonstrates consciousness of the process of reading documentary, and engages actively with the issues of realism and representation, acknowledging the presence of the viewer and the modality judgements they arrive at.
 "Man with a movie camera" directed by Dziga Vertov, is an abstract documentary featuring similar traits to "Life in a day" produced by Ridley Scott, he documents a day in the life of a soviet union worker, but also includes the editing of the film, and the film being shown to an audience, all in a silent form.He also includes several camera tricks, such as theatre seats moving by themselves and a tiny camera man, climbing onto a full life-size version of his own camera.  I think that this documentary demonstrates the reflexive mode because it shows the viewers the whole process of creating the documentary, allowing them to make their own judgements and opinions about the footage.

 
- The Performative Mode - acknowledges the emotional and subjective aspects of documentary, and presents ideas as part of a context, having different meanings for different people, often autobiographical in nature.
  Performative documentaries are considered "highly personal' and they focus more on the experiences and emotions of the subject area rather than the facts. "Dear Zachary" is a documentary by Kurt Kuenne, the tagline 'a letter to a son about his father'. Kuenne sets out to create a documentary for his best friends son 'Zachary' about his dad Andrew Bagby who was murdered by his girlfriend. 'Dear Zachary' falls under the performative genre because of the personal link that the film-maker has with the subject