parkerenixross-blog

[parkerenixross-blog]

Quest notes

One major thing I learned from Jon’s presentation and documentary is how, at least in documentary, projects can go on way longer than intended, and you have to be really committed to your subject. Jon spent ten years with that family; they truly embraced him and that allowed him to dive deep and get incredibly moving shots. The flip side is you don’t want to stay on one singular project too long, as you risk loosing out on other work.

I admire his dedication to, and his very stark portrayal of, the family. Some of the interactions Christopher and PJ had after Pj was shot reminded me of how my father reacted after my diagnosis, which really hit me. I’d never really seen a parent suffer with their child from the outside. It was incredibly powerful.

[parkerenixross-blog]

Ch 9, 12, 13

1. On page 145 in chapter 9 the author mentions that documentary filmmakers may prefer to use a zoom lens over a prime, due to the flexibility afforded by a zoom. This is something I had never considered, but it’s importance can’t be underestimated, especially during live events when things cannot be reset. 

2. The introduction of the idea of lighting styles on page 188 interested me because up until that point, i really never considered lighting in a documentary beyond the 3 point array. I’m not sure my documentary will make use of more advanced techniques, as it’s a mostly standard narrative style documentary but it was good to expand my horizons’ even just conceptually.

3. The chapter starts off discussing the fact that most filmmakers don’t factor in how important sound is in their productions and I’ve found that to be true. There are so many smaller elements to consider, and those issues can be compounded in documentaries, where filmmakers may not have 100% control of a location. Even with scouting the location beforehand, there is no way to guarantee you get the sound you want, which makes for a more volatile production experience. 

[parkerenixross-blog]

Milton Graves Full Mantis

I found Milford Grave’s documentary Full Mantis fascinating, and I believe a big part of that, at least for me was how the editing in the documentary matched the energy of the subject. Full Mantis was loud, chaotic and at times overwhelming, but that works to its benefit in its portrayal of its subject, the drummer, Milford Graves. You get a fuller look at Milford’s character through this more frenetic style; anything else would be doing a disservice to the subject

There isn’t really a narrative in Full Mantis, at least not a traditional one. It follows elements of Grave’s life but the documentary is more about his character, not a following of one central narrative. It bounces around with Grave’s thoughts; cutting from one moment to the other, painting a picture of how Grave’s see’s the world. A straightforward narrative wouldn’t work, as the documentary isn’t about Grave’s rise and fall as a drummer, or something else that more easily lends itself to that style of A-B storytelling. It’s more rapid fire, with Grave’s firing off different stories, mostly unconnected to each other, but each one drawing you in, making you engage more and more with this character. I was especially captivated by his story about his son being assaulted. Given the time the story took place, and Grave’s being a black man I was fearing the worse, and pleasantly surprised when my expectations were subverted. I feel like this more anecdotal style of filmmaking made for a more intimate connection overall.

Full Mantis is loud, which, given the subject, makes sense. At times I felt it was overwhelming but that could have been because of where I was sitting. The energy and volume are essential to this documentary and should not be altered. It was just something I had to adjust to.

Milton Grave’s Full Mantis was an experience, one I was happy to partake in. It was a deep, intimate dive into a character in a way a lot of documentaries don’t manage. It gave me things to consider in my own work, and I am glad I was able to witness it.

[parkerenixross-blog]

Intro to documentary Ch. 1,2,10

In the first chapter, when defining the term documentary, the author suggests that an acceptable definition would be “The creative treatment of actuality.” But then it sites Supersize Me, a documentary that has become somewhat notorious over the years for its inaccuracy. Similarly, Waiting for Sugarman has also been criticized for not being wholly accurate in its portray of events. it  brings up the question about what is more important:Narrative or accuracy.

Chapter 1 also brought up the subject of the filmmaker vs the subject, in terms of the overarching story. Some documentaries, like Fahrenheit 9/11 clearly have an agenda and it makes me wonder, does that inherently cheapen the documentary as a whole?

I thought the chapter on ethics bringing up the scene in Hoop Dreams was interesting. One could argue that it was an unncessary inclusion, and put the family at risk, as the that clip could be used as evidence. However, the directors asked the family how they felt and ultimately decided to go forward. It calls to question what, if any, obligation the documentary has to his subject.

[parkerenixross-blog]

Research Links-Lupus Documentary.

1. Article Citing a 2013 Havard study discussing men with lupus, and the effects it has on them, specifically. https://search-proquest-com.libproxy.temple.edu/socscijournals/docview/1461988501/F8493A00C4624C6EPQ/2?accountid=14270

2. https://search-proquest-com.libproxy.temple.edu/docview/337832115/D18B8477C8D04673PQ/3?accountid=14270 This was a article from the Philadelphia inquirer, giving a broad overview of what lupus is ad what the details of the condition are. I felt it was important to start here, as it would provide context for the documentary at the start.

I felt these two links were important, as it set’s up the subject of the documentary, as well as the  detail on the primary character, myself, being an outliar, in that I am a male with Lupus, which is rare for the condition.

[parkerenixross-blog]

Journal #1

1. In reading Documentary in vision I got intrigued by the idea of style in a documentary and what that means. How does one know what style suits them? Is the style of documentary dependent on the subject, or can you use any style for any subject.

2. Documentary in vision also brought up interesting points through cinema verite, and the role of the documentarian, and how involved they should be with their subject. At what point should filmmakers draw the line? As a filmmaker, if my subject confesses to a murder, what is the right course of action? What are my moral obligations?

3. Examining the history of documentary, like a lot of film history, was fascinating as it allows one to see the genesis of many of the techniques that we take for for granted today. It made me wonder, what kind of new documentary techniques, what new styles, are being developed now that will alter the genre and how we make documentaries.

[parkerenixross-blog]

Test