This paper is to research the nature of documentary films, their history and theory. Documentary films are movies with close-to-reality plots. The themes of documentary films are often thoroughly chosen and arranged according to the unknown things of the world. The documentaries give the audience the lessons and warning about the peculiarities of the arrangement of different things. Many components of the films are analyzed through the impact they carry along with background voices and meaning of the scenes. These components are timbre, gender, texture, tone etc. They have connotative meanings similarly to those which modes of documentary films have. The modes are poetic, performative, observational and reflexive.
The earliest documentary films were short stories, recordings or events, which have no creative decoration to diversify the plot. According to McLane (6) the documentaries exist to bring “creative treatment of actuality”, so the speeches about reality are the keys to shoot good documentaries. The Lumiere Brothers were the first to try filmmaking as a kind of art. Documentaries became available to review since the early 1900. The documentary films of that time were created in order to inform people about great events, such as depression or war, genocide or illnesses. After the 50s, one was able to take a look at the documentaries about entertaining events, such as operas or concerts. With the rising movement towards freedom of choice towards music, the films of concerts backstage became popular and demanded. Nowadays there are plenty of documentary films with themes varying from scientific achievements to the biographies of famous people.
Bill Nichols defines all films as documentaries, but separates them into fiction and non-fiction films: documentaries of wish-fulfillment and documentaries of social representation, which are to inform the audience about social dangers or to analyze them (Nichols 1). The fictions explain people the arrangement of the world they live in and develop new ways to explore lands and sky in order to have more knowledge about the resources of the planet and try to deal with the changes the nature brings. Instead of it, non-fiction documentary films constitute the facts of people`s lives and their surroundings for the future generations to be aware of the past.
The documentary film theory has its origins in an auteur theory of cinema, where films are divided into genres and qualities of characterization in these films. Documentaries develop the foundation for critical thinking from the side of the audience, bringing the tools to know more about films and the aspects of reality described in the films (Nichols 158). The reality is usually shaped during the filmmaking process. To watch a film is the first stage to realize the message the film carries to people. As a rule, little attention is paid to the materialism, whereas the philosophical impact from society and people is discussed widely in documentary films.
All the knowledge collected is reflected on practice in the documentary films. The exploratory side of the plot of each film is the fundament for the story telling, while the interviews awake doubts in minds of scriptwriters and of audience. Since the last century, the practices of filmmakers changed the direction of documentaries (qtd. in Grindon 5). Although the themes of documentaries are constant, the producers tried to create a film, which would be in great demand, following all the needs of people. When they needed some explanation for political doings in the world – they got it in documentary films, but when their needs were of entertainment pattern, the filmmakers shot the biographies of famous people or presented the stories of fictional color.
The success of documentary films depends on many aspects. One of them is the correct following of all the components of documentaries. The tone of any documentary film should reflect the issues discussed in the work to provide an experience to people; this way the audience will be fully engaged in the story without being bored with false expectations. To create suitable tone, the filmmakers have to choose the storytelling technique. It can be in narrative form, where “the voice” is an objective person, who is not involved in the story or tells it from the point of view of an ordinary spectator. The technique of drama or recreations is used, where the plot is full of events that change the lives of people. In order to entertain the audience, some pieces of events may be missed in order to dramatize the script. The voice of the teller and the way he presents stories vary from nostalgic and sympathetic to the satisfied and happy. One can mention the tone in which the story is told as it sets the mood of the whole documentary and influences the way the audience perceives it.
Sometimes the drama technique can be expressed through the guide. The host style of telling a story to documentary film includes a person from the inside, who is acknowledged in all the events occurred and tells about them to the audience. The use of these techniques makes each documentary film interesting, but this effect can also be reached because of the “no narration” technique. In such films no narrator speaks about the situation – just scenes of interviews and on-screen text are in the film in order to make every spectator`s mind work on the development of the event. One can mention the special style of storytelling in the documentary film Triumph of the Will of 1935. The scenes of speeches and actions dazzle listeners. The spectators, and the notes of sorrow and pain are awoken in the spectators` minds, while the henchmen of Hitler`s ideology listened to his talks with adoration (Triumph of the Will, Riefenstahl).
Another style of shooting a documentary is observational, where the scenes are similar to the interviews with actions. There is no one in front of the camera – the actions tell their own stories, as the filmmakers allow them to reveal the truth by themselves (qtd. in Bernard 45). People do not give interviews - they are just engaged in the story process. Other techniques of storytelling are widely used, too, but they are not in great demand by the audience.
In documentary films, the symbols are used not widely because of relation to different cultures and issues of various patterns, but they have denotative and connotative meanings. They are caused by the “mechanics of film production” (Strong, Wilder 124), and can be attached by the shooting techniques. Camera focus, colors, filters and effects are the reasons of certain attachment of film conventions. Denotative meanings are shown through the differences in cultures of countries (Strong, Wilder 124).
For one nation a certain color means happiness, while it symbolizes death to another. These meanings are not ignored in documentary films, as they are often released in many countries, so the filmmakers try to avoid any incompatibilities in symbols. These meanings are the implementation of the filmmakers` opinion to the issues of a movie.
Beside the symbols, they pay a lot of their attention to the sounds and camera work for shooting scenes of great quality. Similarly to the revelation of economic crisis in Inside Job directed by Charles Ferguson every filmmaker goes through the process of development of his ambitions and abilities. They bare their souls for creating a masterpiece, where no important detail is missed. In the documentary Inside Job the emphasis is put on the details gathered, which led the economy to the path of ruining, while the characters made a lot of efforts to rearrange the situation (Inside Job, Ferguson).
The voice of narrator should not be put into question as well as his authority, because the audience is to listen to his words and trust them. Anyway, there are some documentary movies, where the filmmakers point out the uncertainty towards the narrator. For example, in Land without Bread scenes about horrors of starvation are shown (Land without Bread, Bunuel), where issues about ambiguity confuse the audience. This way a lot of questions are put to the narrator.
Considering the fact that the main narrator in the film is the camera, it cannot be questioned, as any machine has no authority at all; nevertheless, cameras are not capable to do any claims. They are used in order to enlighten some orders of things (Rothman 33). This way, anything revealed by camera is true, and no suggestions in lie can be justified: one cannot falsify data without being on the screen. Each narrator addresses his speeches to the audience differently: directly or indirectly.
Direct address is when people see the person speaking to the audience giving evidences for the issues he discusses at the time. While the indirect address is when the speaker is unseen, but people can receive the message only through the spoken text along with images of videos. The authority of unseen narrator is very questioned, as his absence symbolizes the impolite attitude to the matter of the documentary film. The message carried through the images and facts are persuasive, though. The audience is more likely to enjoy direct address from the narrator, as the connection between the listeners and the storyteller is set in a wink.
Documentary films are considered as scientific inscription, where the cameras are the way of scientific approach towards the evolution of movies shooting. The valuable movement, which is involved in a rush of development and evolution, is direct cinema. Following Brian Winston, direct cinema is the performance of ordinary lives, “uncontrolled existence” (Winston 44), where raw material is shown.
As a rule, this material is the key to the success of the documentary, as the whole truth of a situation is revealed. To counterbalance this truth, another kind of movement exists. It is the Cinema-Verite, where the filmmakers become the actors. To shoot the process of real observation of a matter, they appeared to be “restricted to making films about making films” (Winston 51).
This kind of making a film seems to be staged, as the work of the crew and the cast has to be left behind the screen, out of camera. This reflective approach to the process of filmmaking has the right to exists, but it breaks any aesthetic laws for privacy in some ways. Although the documentary films are artwork, they are not only to entertain people, but to inform them about different events, so the artistic elements are not necessary to fulfill the film with aesthetic captivation.
There are some problems with “ethnographic gaze” in documentary films. The matter is the improper use of things while presenting a historic background of any documentary. This theme is widely used and popular, as people have to be aware of their past. Some expeditions are held for getting some knowledge about different people. There the ethnographic depiction of lives is supposed to uncover a deeper truth about their emotions and actions by means of documentary realism.
Edgar Morin spent some time in expeditions, and his outlook changed a lot: he encountered many complicated situations and managed to see advices for future life in each of them. The process of editing scripts for movies made the man think over rhetorical questions about being happy and satisfied with the way he lives (Morin 8). Not all of the events and facts are included in the documentary films, but the impact the man has after working on it, is unforgettable. This way, the human`s perception of the world changes according to the actions he take to be famous.
Kevin Macdonald and Mark Cousins discuss the ethnographic side of filmmaking in their Imagining Reality, where they investigate the impact the audience receives after watching films, which are turned to touch their feelings because of the theme – the peculiarities of life in different countries. Different tones and techniques of narrating are used in order to attract the audience, to enlighten them about the problems, which ordinary people from all over the world encounter during their lives (qtd. in Macdonald, Cousins).
Another example of an ethnographic file is “The Bontoc Eulogy” (1995) by Marlon Fuentes. Marlon Fuentes, who at the same time is also the main character of this reflection, narrates the story. Being an immigrant, he goes through a conflict of his heritage, while on his days in the Philippines recollecting his grandfather’s road to Lt. Louis World’s Fair (Bontoc Eulogy). The narrator discovers his past and gives an inside look into his family history for the audience.
As one of the methods to tell a life story, auto ethnography is used. There the true data is present and help the audience to feel the atmosphere of an event. Auto ethnography can be used to tell the people about the author`s journeys or to tell his biography.
This way of telling stories is called “collaborative witnessing”, where both the author and the listeners share feeling and opinions (Adams et al.). Self-representation in documentary films has the pattern of pure depiction of events, when representing others can be accompanied by elements of decoration in order to diversify the story with bright patterns. The decoration is used to make stories more interesting and exciting.
As a consequence of all that is discussed above, one can track the way of development of documentary films, their peculiarities and impact of society. Considering a movie as an independent arrangement to share experience with the audience, one cannot ignore the components of films, which exist beyond the forms of narrating and carry the huge impact on people`s minds.
This way, documentary films is the only way for people to get the true information about past or present, as subjects of movies are not empty in sense and impact. Instead, they symbolize the great value of knowledge, which is necessary to have for every person.
Works Cited
Adams, T.E., Jones, S.H., Ellis, C. Autoethnography. Oxford University Press. 2015. Print.
Bernard, S.C. Documentary Storytelling: Creative Nonfiction on Screen. Burlington: Focal Press. 3rd ed. 2011. Print.
Bontoc Eulogy. Corporation for Public Broadcasting: Marlon Fuentes, 1995. film.
Dead Birds. Documentary Educational Resources: Robert Gardner, 1964. film.
Grindon, L. “Q & A: Poetics of the Documentary Film Interview”. Velvet Light Trap 60. September 2007: 4-12.
Inside Job. Dir. Charles Ferguson. Sony Pictures Classics, 2010. Documentary Film.
Land Without Bread. Dir. Luis Bunuel. Perf. Abel Jacquin, Alexandre O'Neill.1933. Documentary Film.
Macdonald, K., Cousins, M. Imaging the Reality: The Faber Book of Documentary. London: Faber and Faber. 1996. Print.
McLane, B.A. A New History of Documentary Film. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. 2nd ed. 2012. Print.
Morin, E. “Chronicle of a Film”. Visual Communication. 1985.
Nichols, B. Introduction to Documentary. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 2001. Print.
Renov, M. (ed.) Winston, B. Theorizing Documentary. New York: Routledge. 1993. Print.
Rothman, W. Documentary Film Classics. Cambridge University Press. 1997. Print.
Strong, M., Wilder, L. Viewpoints: Visual Anthropologists at Work. China. 2009. Print.
Triumph of the Will. Dir. Leni Riefenstahl. Perf. Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Viktor Lutze. Universum Film AG, 1935. Documentary Film.
