research

 What is a documentary?

 A documentary consists of pictures, interviews with individuals involved in an event to create a report of the subject.

Conventions of a documentary.

Archival footage(stock footage): can include things like picture, video footage including things like news footage, recordings from an historical event this can be found in a library/archive. This media wasn't made for the documentary but fits with the subject. An example of stock footage can be found crime scene: the vanishing at the Cecil hotel. Elisa lam the victim who supposedly "vanishes" is caught on cctv the night she disappear supposedly acting strange hiding and talking to someone who is not captured in the footage  Berlinger, J. (2021) Crime scene: The Vanishing at the Cecil Hotel, “Lost in Los Angeles” Series 1episode 1. Netflix 11^th February. 

Actuality(raw footage): real footage of events which can include interviews. Ghost adventures a paranormal documentary is a good example for this as mostly all the footage is raw, happening right there and then when the team document their investigation at haunted locations.  Bagens, Z. (2017) Ghost Adventures, “The Titanic museum” Series 17, episode 6. Amazon prime 25^th November.

Exposition: the introduction of the subject/content right at the beginning of the documentary allowing viewers to follow as a result of being provided with necessary background information. in the Jeffrey Epstein filthy rich documentary we as an audience are told almost everything about him, his life before money education and past jobs so that the audience can try putting things together as to why he was the /// he was. Gordon-logan, L. (2020) Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich "Hunting Grounds" Series 1, episode 1Netflix, 27th May.

Montage: show ideas visually in an order.

Interviews: In direct interviews the individual being interviewed is aware of the purpose of questions, either from being a witness or involved in something so that an indented responses is given. However an indirect interview the individuals are not like they are being exposed or confronted which builds characters and helps viewers choose sides. interviews are a very popular convention to a documentary because it shows others opinions and experiences it makes the subject for relatable or it helps the viewer to choose sides and pick at the evidence to create their own conclusions, it also gives viewers information they couldn't get from anywhere else. 

re-enactments: A technique to create realism to an event were archival footage can not be used for an example like historic events or footage of crime which is too horrific that its not public footage.

Voice over(voice of god): Non diegetic voice providing commentary throughout a documentary. The voice of god will explain information, link events meaning the viewer will find it easy to follow along with. The most popular voices of god are Morgan freeman and also David Attenborough, these two clips are no examples on voice overs in documentary's but show the idea of how there is a non diegetic voice which narrates.

Theorist Bill Nichols theorized that there are 6 modes of documentaries, created to distinguish different styles of documentary's. documentary's can be mutually exclusive and contain for than one mode.

The poetic mode, introduced in the 1920s focuses on visuals. giving the viewers a chance of seeing things differently to normal. Unconventional as they do not have a linear structure, they are usually organized by rhythm or tone to show the point to viewers. some poetic documentary's don't even contain narration and are more centered around cinematics. 

The expository mode, which focuses on getting a clear point across also known as an essay film. this the most common, they explain and educated viewers on a subject, they are scripted heavily which doesn't give then a natural feel however its very informative. its used to expose a certain topic. an exaple is 60  days in where everyday people are incarcerated undercover to see how it is actually like in a prison it exposes how inmates actually act and how the guards and inmates act towards each other. 60 days in.

The observational mode, aims to be as real as possible so it contains a lot of raw footage.it is to be observed by the audience and can have a time range up to a decade an example is knuckle, it was a collection of film of over 12 years as I said documentary's are mutually exclusive and knuckle did start with a voiceover but the rest of the doc was observational, the point of knuckles was to show the audience how fighting actually is and its show's how everyone has witnessed it even small children which doesn't have a good affect of their life choices they could make when they are older, it even includes children exited and cheering on fighters. 

The participatory mode, involves the creator of the documentary, in instead of them being off camera they engage with interviewees or anyone else who is being spoken too. An example of this is Bear Grylls with barrack Obama, Bear Grylls is interviewing Obama but is on camera participating with him.

The reflexive mode,  challenges the authenticity, the form and expectations of the subject and themes. a mocumentary could be an example of a reflexive documentary although they are observational but due to being fictional the audience questions the authenticity making it a reflexive documentary. This mode is fun because unlike most documentary's that are serious these could have more of a funny tone. this is an example of a reflexive documentary, we see the filming process and its no as shaped as another mode of documentary like expository where interviews are serious however in this the interviewee is laughing at the camera we as an audience question the authenticity because of this as it Doesn't  seem serious.

The performative mode, completing contrasting the observational documentary this mode exaggerate the filmmaker involvement with the themes and subject which their own personal involvement or opinion. in this example we hear through narration and also visually see the filmmakers love for basketball, we see his story and background experience with the sport while he exaggerates his love for it.

To show how filmmakers take difference approaches to documentary's I compared two different documentary's. Crime Scene: the vanishing at The Cecil hotel and Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich. Both are docu-series and the episode range from 51-58 between them but both had similar but also completely different themes and tone. In crime scene: The Vanishing at The Cecil Hotel explores murder and mystery surrounding the disappearance of one of The Cecil Hotels guests Elisa Lam, nobody knows how she died after being found in the water tank on the roof of the hotel.. Although in Jeffrey Epstein: filthy rich the themes do evolve around crime and justice however the theme is a sex offender and his inner circle of powerful friends who abused the power they had and silenced victims unlike the Cecil hotel docu-series which has a mystery and confused tone this has more of a sad and disgusted tone as we hear the victims stories of what they went through and how inferior they felt to this powerful man and friends.

I believe both documentary's to be expository. The Cecil hotel docu-series subjectivity of the mystery death of Elisa lam exposes how the system really failed her, her death although ruled as a accident is still a mystery as there is so many factors which as an audience we explore, like the hatch being closed on the water tank and the bizarre archival footage used in the documentary where we see Elisa which looks to be talking to someone and trying to hide, this was the last time she was seen we are shown the autopsy report which has things crossed out like someone had been tipped off to say it was an accident maybe to help with the hotels reputation. it feels like aim of this documentary is to show how easily murders can be easily swept under the rug. Similarly the Jeffrey Epstein documentary I feel is also expository, this show how filthy the richest of the rich and be i.e., the billionaire Jeffrey Epstein and how he got away with sexually abusing underage children and how we used he power and wealth to silence his victims and protect his image. This documentary also exposes how even media outlets like magazines also turnt a blind eye to the allegations made against him with a little threat he made.

Both documentary's do share a same subject of social justice this is probably due to both having Joe Berliner as producer and executive producer is both. Joe Berliner is most know for his documentaries of social justice and exposing hoe people were failed by the justice system. In the Cecil hotel documentary Elisa lam is failed due to being not only her death being a mystery but because if there was more of an investigation and powerful people like the NYPD possibly keeping secrets or ruling her death as an accident because they were so stuck on the case justice could have been served, because as an audience member its obvious it was not an accident. In the Epstein documentary all the victims are failed, not only because they were silenced at first but Epstein ending up “committing suicide” and this is also a conspiracy  because his autopsy showed bones broken not in the way they would have if he has committed suicide, all the victims clearly would have wanted him to spend the rest of life in jail, silenced like they were but they felt like he had the easy way out. The prison guards should have kept a close eye on him because he did deserve to have lived his sentence.  

Both documentarys have a wide range of interviews. In the Cecil hotel documentary the interviews are more around the Cecil hotels staff and people that worked on the case, there is only really a handful of interviews with witnesses like the individual who was first arrested on the suspicion of murdering Elisa lam but its later found he wasn't guilty, he talks about how he feels like he was set up so that the case could be closed. As we see interviews from the Cecil staff they are portrayed in a way that they are responsible for Elisa’s death because there is a lot of people putting the clues together and we also see this when youtube videos of people thoughts and reactions to the case are also shown throughout the documentary and most of them believe that her death was not an accident and that the hotel staff were behind it. Unlike the Jeffrey Epstein documentary we have actual victim interviews we get the see first hand how and what these victims experienced and how they were so afraid of what would happen if they spoke out about what happened to then as the audience of this documentary instead of picking out and trying to conclude what happened like we do in the cecil hotel documentary we are more saddened with the Epstein documentary and angry because we already know what had happened. Also in the Epstein documentary we also see the video of the interview with the subject unlike the cecil hotel documentary. We see how Epstein reacts to questions and by the way he answers them by using his rights be know he's guilty and he knows we know too, although he still tries to protect his image and power.

In both documentaries we see a huge variety of archival footage. In the cecil hotel documentary the archival footage of elisa lam is used in a clever repetitive way. Its repeated about her death is a mystery and the use of the archival footage just proves that something was wrong before she died and it highlights that it was the last ever footage of her, it makes it very dramatic and sad and its very clever how the producers used it over and over. In the Jeffrey Epstein documentary we see archival footage like Epstein police interview, like i said before we get to see how we reacted to interrogation but he always evoked his fifth amendment right this was definitely used not only because it shows he was actually questioned by the police but also during this we find out he had already been arrested for soliciting prostitution  but still refuses to admit he did, just like every other question he is asked.

Exposition in the documentary's are very different. Straight away in the cecil hotel documentary we are introduced to elisa lam straight away but not in a simple way. The use of archival tweets from elisa lam are used so that we become knowledgeable about this individual. We relate to her and we understand her. We then also straight away are aware she was reported missing and then the necessary background story of this college student that had stayed at a hotel is now missing. In the Jeffrey Epstein documentary exposition is used differently we are shown his deposition straight away. We know he is a disgusting person because without even getting to know him we are straight away into his denying these allegations of sexual abuse and solicitation of prostitution even though he has already served time in jail for them. No one even knew how this man had became so powerful from lying to become a teacher to being friends with Donald Trump and Prince Andrew and very wealthy. Although we are thrown straight into epstein being interrogated later on we are shown Epstein's past life like i said about him growing up with not a lot of money and having to lie his way into a job which he was sacked from when they found out obviously. We find out ever job he had to end up this very wealthy rich individual.

During both documentarys, there is voice over but not a main narrator, the voice overs are done by interviewees while montages are shown, this is mostly shown in the Jeffrey Epstein documentary, we are told by a reporter about Jeffrey Epsteins wealth, while being shown his belongings like private jets and estates. Similarly in the Cecil hotel documentary we are shown a series of news reports about the cecil hotel while reporters and staff are narrating in the background. Although in the cecil hotel documentary we hear  a narrator of elisa lams tweets and posts while being shown someone typing them, this is great because its like shes there and as an audience before we know shes missing we are introduced to her and start kind of building a relationship with this individual which has such a massive effect on when we are told shes was missing we feel like we need to work out what happened to her.

Both documentaries have date and time frames, as an audience we know what days things happen, for example in the Jeffrey Epstein documentary we know what day the first report about Jeffrey Epstein was made to the police, we know the dates of victim interrogations, days police kept watch on him and the dates of him being taken in, its all in q chronological order so that we as an audience can easily follow along with the subject and theme. This is similar in the cecil hotel documentary, however instead of starting off like the Jeffrey Epstein documentary with his background and first victims we just straight into the day elisa lam was reported as missing and as an audience we follow along with the investigation to her death, however the investigation back track’s because the NYPD think they have solved the case by arresting Pablo Camilo but he wasn't guilty so the investigation was back to the start about this mysterious death.

Sobre, uneasy and sinister music can be heard throughout both documentaries. These types of music completely fit the themes of both documentaries, and emphasis them to also scare us as an audience. We know bad things are about to be shown or told to us because the music playing through the background. The uneasy music as guest step into the lift at the cecil hotel foreshadowing the repetition of the last footage of elisa lam. And the sinister music in the Jeffrey Epstein documentary tells us as the audience about this sinister man who scared his victims into silence because his power.

The ending of both documentaries are similar is ways. For an example they both concluded without justice for the victims, Jeffrey Epstein commits suicide so he doesn't serve his sentence and ad i said before its like the victims had closure but they wanted to see him live the rest of his life in prison but most feel like he had an easy way out and in the Cecil hotel documentary elisa lams death is concluded as an accident but nobody actually believes that that happened and her death is still really a mystery. 

How can creative choices affect our perceptions? 

Filmmaker can manipulate the way an audience react to a film (documentary) with different creative choices to do with micro-elements (cinematography, mise-en-scene, editing, sound, codes and conventions) the choices help the audience depict tone and pace of a piece of media. In this essay i am going to talk about the micro - elements and the impact they have as creative choices on perceptions.

The first element is cinematography(lighting, mise-en-scene) lighting and colour is a huge part of a piece of media it can simply manipulate emotions from the audience so a sad scene can be lit up blue and dim because as an audience thats what we could assume sadness to represent and a horror scene possible lit red because red signifies danger but then it can also be dark to represent the unknown. A great example is the Bagens, Z. (2017) Ghost Adventures, “The Titanic museum” Series 17, episode 6. Amazon prime 25^th November. Its a proven fact that you can hunt ghosts in the dark, activity Doesn't just happen when its dark but the use of the dark clips and use of a night vision camera adds to the theme and as its shot in the dark its more likely to receive an emotional response from the audience ( adrenaline from sudden, unseen activity and also fright). We also see mise-en-scene being used to its advantage in the Ghost Adventures we see several shots of where one of the team members are almost always standing behind another, this give the audience a visual of the members reactions to whatever happens in the clip, this almost give the audience verification that not only is the team aware but also that what happened couldn’t  have been staged as every single member is in the shot this creates realism which is necessary when trying to document the reality of the afterlife.

Another creative choice that can be made is the mode of documentary (poetic, expository, observational, reflexive, participatory and performative) for an example as a filmmaker you have to choose the genre by the theme and how you would want an audience to take it. Most crime documentary's are expository and with also hints participatory this is because you want the audience to have the same opinion on the matter if the director had made a documentary on murder but made it reflexive the audience may not have a great reaction to it as the director has taken a serious crime and turned it into something unrealistic, not relatable not serious because the audience will question the authenticity of it. A great example is  Gordon-logan, L. (2020) Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich "Hunting Grounds" Series 1, episode 1Netflix, 27th May, this documentary is expository, it exposes how billionaires can get away with terrible things because their position of power, as an audience we connect to the documentary because the filmmaker is portraying Epstein as this powerful disgusting man  and we agree, because its expository we are shocked at some of the factors of the subject like how Epstein was friends with Donald trump and price Andrew , however if this documentary was reflective we may not think and audience that these facts would have been true.

Sound is such a huge factor that can be manipulated by a filmmaker, firstly by music with is a sub factor. Music can be used to create tone, it can also lead an audience from shot to shot by telling the story with sound. Typically it depends of the subject and tone to what music a filmmaker would use for a documentary, subjects like crime and supernatural have sinister, somber and suspenseful this is to get an emotional response from an audience if music is sinister and suspenseful you will get an adrenaline response from the audience and they will automatically think somethings about to happen a bit part of the subject which they wouldn’t want to miss. Somber music also creates an emotional response and if you aim if to get that from an audience you will want to include this because if you have an upbeat background with a sad theme it just Doesn't go well because its so contrasting but with a somber background it fits the tone of the subject. In filthy rich : Jeffrey Epstein we are surrounded by suspenseful music and it goes so well because the filmmaker has thought this huge sex trafficker/ solicitor of minor prostitution is about tho be caught and we as as audience feel tense because the subject and music because we really really want him to be caught. Also in Berlinger, J. (2021) Crime scene: The Vanishing at the Cecil Hotel, “Lost in Los Angeles” Series 1episode 1. Netflix 11^th February we are surround by sinister and uneasy music which goes so well because we know someone was missing and the filmmaker emphasises the last footage of Elis Lam in the lift and so every time a guest goes to get into the lift we hear this surge of uneasy music like its a clue to her death but then nothing happens with kind of is like what happens in the investigation of her death we have this footage of her in the elevator and its like she running from someone and we hear uneasy background music then it stops and then her death is an accident.

 Another sub factor of sound is voice over, this is the use of a non diegetic voice commentating a story. This is a huge creative choice, it can provide tone to a piece of media. If there was a documentary on crime we would expect as an audience a sympathetic but kind of neutral voice to commentate because if it was like a jolly, jokey voice it wouldn't go because you wouldn't look at a theme like that and have that reaction to it, it would be contradictory and confusing. In the blue planet (commentated by David Attenbourgh) we hear an inquisitive voice which is so fitting to the theme, tone and subject because its about learning about animals and creature of the earth.

Interviews can be a creative choice, when conducting an expository documentary interviews are almost a must, as an audience we want people real stories and how they feel about a situation or an event that has taken place. Having interviews can also determine a target audience. There two types of interviews there is informal and formal. With an informal interview we get to see someone telling a story wherever its there personal story or someone they know its a laid back interview allowing the audience to take their own perspective on it. Whereas an formal interviews are sit down professionally organised interviews.

To conclude i think there a lot of ways and things that can change with just one creative choice. Some changes are clever  like sound but going against codes of documentary's can be damaging towards a perspective.

bibliography: 

documentarysite.com .2020 .documentary conventions [online] https://www.documentarysite.com/2020/02/01/documentary-conventions/#:~:text=Documentary Conventions 1 Archival Footage and Photographs. Archival,soundtrack without a matching source in the image. [accessed 19th march 2021]

documentarysite.com.2020. Documentary modes [online] https://www.documentarysite.com/2020/08/19/documentary-modes/ [accessed 19th march 2021]

Alfano.R .2018. The importance of sound in documentaries with peter albrechtsen [online] https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/blog.prosoundeffects.com/the-importance-of-sound-in-documentaries-with-peter-albrechtsen%3fhs_amp=true[accessed 19th march 2021]

Gentile. B.  2012. rules for conducting formal and informal interviews [online] https://videojournalismworkshops.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Formal_and_Informal_Interviewing.pdf [accessed 19th march 2021]