Documentaries

For my senior project I have decided to present my findings through a documentary. What I love about the art of documentaries is exactly that, it is a form of art. The art class I am taking this semester is actually focusing on the art of documentaries, and so far we have been discussing the manipulation of emotions that is present in most of them, and what exactly makes a documentary manipulative. Let's begin by what I believe makes a documentary manipulative...

1. Non-diegetic music (music that is played externally): music can make moments feel more emotional than they actually are. A prime example of this is from the documentary we just watched called Life. Support. Music. At the end of the documentary you see the man who the documentary unfolded on playing a guitar on stage and the music just starts to build up and you feel a rush of happiness and hope as you watch this man (if that's too vague I'm sorry but I don't want to give the story away).

2. Use of camera angles :if a camera is far away from the subject it can give off the feeling that the person is alone, or possibly an outsider.

3. Lighting: Bright lighting can make you feel happier while a darker lighting can sometimes have an ominous effect.

Overall it comes down to stylistic choices.

Now here is the fork in the road that I am at. I am stuck between the ethics that come with doing qualitative research and use of stylistic devices to make my documentary not only informative but art.


Here is the trailer to Life. Support. Music.





The trailer is somewhat manipulative but it isn't nearly as manipulative as this trailer for the documentary Waiting for Superman. The trailer itself will make you cry.



So I guess what I figure right now is that everything is manipulative, whether it's a documentary or a paper. The thing is to understand that manipulation and to be conscious of it. I think it is okay if my documentary manipulates emotions a little bit as long as it doesn't over do it, like I think Waiting for Superman does.