Now at the end of this semester, it is time to reflect on what I have learnt and achieved so far.

 

In the first half of the semester, what we focused on are the basic theories and skills that would be very helpful for us to practice our own projects later. It includes the basic functions of EX-3 camera like how to adjust exposure, white balance and focus which are the things I frequently used during my shooting. We also got a basic of understanding on the sound recording, which I think is the most challenging things for me because I always forgot how to make the sound mixer work. As a result, I must say the sound part of my short film is not satisfying at all, even I did lots of postproduction works to fix the soundtracks but it still has lots of problems with the sound. Therefore next year, I will pay more attentions on sound recording to improve my relevant skills.

 

For the short film I have done, there are lots of things to say. Before I started to shoot, I never thought it would be such challenging and after I finished it, it looks completely different from what I expected. As mentioned in my previous posts, at the beginning I was struggling should the story itself be easy and logical enough to understand if I decide to make it experimental at the same time by some unusual approaches like using subtitles and voice over. But soon I realized that I can’t make it both reasonable and abstract at the same time, which means I can only focus on practicing the experimental devices, or telling a story which makes sense like normal drama. As a result, I decided to focus on the devices rather than plot. A story of a man who might have mental problems is not able to speak when wakes up on Sunday morning, which he call it ‘lost my language’. Actually, there are many ways to understand what happened to him: a bad dream, consequences of alcoholic hallucinosis, or due to some reasons he has to repeating the day. All of these can be possible, and even myself don’t know which one is true. But what I do know is, in terms of practicing the devices I haven’t used before, this film (or whatever you call it) is something I was meant to make. Indeed, it is abstract, ambiguous, and even wired. However, I value it because I have proven my ability to turn the ideas in my mind to reality, even just partly, but it is still a good feeling to do that.

 

This course has offered me an amazing experience. I should say thanks to Robin and all the others who helped me to improve myself. I may not be a filmmaker eventually, but the skills I have learnt through this course is something always useful in my future career. Goodbye and see you next year!

 

Patrick Drazan. ‘War is Stupid: War and Anti-War Themes in Anime’ in ANIME EXPLOSION! THE WHAT? WHY? & WOW! OF JAPANESE ANIMATION. Stone Bridge Press. Berkeley. 2003. pp. 192-207

 

In brief, the article introduces the plots and analyzes the features of several representative Japanese animated films which tell different stories about both fictional and real wars that Japan was involved. As the author indicates at the beginning, these are two major kinds of animated war films in Japan (except those have no connection to the Earth). The gravestone of fireflies screened this week belongs to the real one. But however, in my own opinions on the film, how real or completed it is, in terms of reflecting the war?

 

“September 21, 1945. That was the night I died”. Such heart-breaking words spoken by a 14-year-old boy, as well as the every single piece of the film which constructs a desperate, miserable atmosphere for audiences. As a piece of Art I can’t find any moment in this film that I don’t appreciate or enjoy. Two young lives are struggling to survive is a great perspective and the scene of fireflies flying in their shelter and the boy burned his sister at the end is brilliantly drawn. And I have to say, it is, indeed, an anti-war film because just watching it you will find yourself more hating war than ever. But however, war is complicated. As the author points out, ‘It is difficult to see issues such as Japanese war guilty or atrocities In Asia and Pacific could be introduced as anything other than an artificial and ideological driven digression from the stories these films are trying to tell’(p. 194). Almost all real war films introduced in the article focus on the terrible situations inside Japan and describe Japan as the biggest victim of the war and only based on this point, they reflect the WW2. Therefore, I think this reflection is not completed. If it is not completed, how cloud it be true and real?

Scene 1:

Starting with a close up of his phone ringing, and the man wakes up in his room and answers the call. But he realizes the fact he is not able to speak any more. He goes to bath room, washes his face to make sure it is not a dream and drinks lots of water, but it doesn’t help. This scene will end with an extreme close up of his helpless face and the subtitle shows up.

 

Scene 2:

Just before the camera changes to next location, the sound of it comes out first when the picture is still the helpless face of the man (or the subtitle). Then go to the next scene which the man is running on the street to find the doctor. This scene won’t be long, it will end with the man runs into a building (a hospital or clinic).

 

Scene 3:

The scene starts with the close up of the man writing what happened to him on a paper by his hand. Then the doctor reads it and explain what the problem is, suggesting he should go to find friends for help. The scene also ends up with subtitles reflecting the man’s thinking.

 

Scene 4:

The man is waiting in his place and then opens the door for his friends coming to help him. This scene is basically about his friends comforting him. And after his friends gone, it is late and he feels a little bit better, then goes to bed.

 

Scene 5:

At the morning, the phone rings again and he answers it. It is a call of his friend asking if he is ok now. He says ‘I think so’ and suddenly finds he is able to speak again. He seems really happy and says ‘Thank you my friend’. The film also ends up here with subtitle ‘Thank you’.

I decide to make a drama as my short film project for this semester, and I expect it to be about 5-7 minutes long. It will have about 4 characters and be filmed in three different locations.

 

The plot:

A man wakes up and finds he is not able to speak; He is so nervous and looking for help from everyone he knows; the doctor says you lost your language because the loneliness in your heart; After being helped by so people he knows, he still can’t speak but doesn’t feel that nervous anymore; he go to bed at that night; when tomorrow he wakes up, he is able to speak again.

 

So the 4 characters are the man, two of his friends and the doctor. The locations should be his home, his friend’s place and the doctor’s office. Also, there might be several shots of the man walking on street as montage and transition between moving from his place to his friend’s.

 

Objective:

What I want to express by this short film, is when you feel alone, disappointed or helpless and do not know how to handle the pressure in your heart, do not just repress this emotion. Otherwise, you might finally be like the man who is not able to ‘speak’. The solution is to share it with your friends and look for others’ helps. I think I’m inspired by the fact that nowadays, due to the extensive use of Internet and heavy pressures caused by work and study, people sometimes seem indifferent and spend less time with their friends in real life and families.

 

Approach:

The first thing I want to make sure is the narrative is clear and logical enough for audience to understand what I’m talking about. I don’t want to make it too abstract like an experimental or poetic film. Therefore the way of storytelling, shooting and editing will not be so different and special.

 

However, I do want to try something different in this project. For example, to emphasize that the man is not able to speak and feels alone, I want to use subtitles with pure color background to show what he thinks and wants to say in his mind, just like the silent films have done before.

 

Here is an example of it, in film sunrise a song of two humans, the director used this approach to make a silent film such emotional and moving.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnLVMREVA6M

 

But this approach will be only used for the man, not every character in the film. Everyone except him is speaking, to emphasize how different he is.

Location: A high school classroom

Characters: Students and teacher

 

Approach: The content of documentary will be some students having class in school. There is no voice over and interview of anyone. The way to present it is using camera shooting different students, focusing on their behaviors and reflections on the teacher’s words. Specifically, we can use their first points of view, by the camera, to achieve some certain effects like the person is concentrating on studying, or doing some other things he likes and how he manages to do this without having the attention of the teacher. Similarly, there is also the first point of view of the teacher, to see what the class is doing, from his perspective, and the reactions of his students on the things he is trying to teach them. And when changing between these points of view, the camera also need to shoot establishing shots of the whole classroom, long shots including more than one person, medium shots from different perspective and sometime medium or even extreme close up on the person whom will be used as the first point of view next. Through this device, I think the documentary will be able to show how a daily high school class runs, from a perspective which we don’t usually see. However, there will be no clear narrative, but the footage will be edited according to the logical connection between them, in order to make the film not too abstract for audiences. In sum, I want to do a documentary which the priority task of it is observing the reality happening in our lives.

I want to continue my research on the blurred ‘line’ between fictional and documentary film. But just to clarify, I’m clear about that this topic is not the focus of this course, and I think the purpose of discussing the differences and similarities between two kinds of films is to  encourage us to understand the both features of  them and decide which of them we want to involve in our own project. I have decided and believe a drama is what I want to make in this semester.

So here I have two specific films I want to discuss, one is an animated documentary the Waltz with Bashir, and another is the Nanook of the North. 

According to Betsy A. McLane in his book < A New History of Documentary Film>, the main characteristics that most documentary have in common, which are distinct from other types of cinema especially fiction film, are ‘Subjects and ideologies; purpose, viewpoints or approaches; forms; production method and techniques; and sort of experience they offer audiences, including actions that result from films’ (McLane, 2013). These characteristics picture an ideal form of documentary film, and also suggest the major differences between a traditional documentary and a fiction film. However, are they really sufficient to distinguish contemporary fiction and documentary films, especially those exist on the boundary or grey zone?

How much does the Waltz with Bashir meet these characteristics? The subjects in this film are apparently the director, his comrades and their lost memories during the 1982 Lebanon War. The purpose is considered as through retracing the fragments of their memories, to reveal the humanity in the war and the cruelty of the massacre. The point of views are himself and his comrades, but no one from another side or even the commander of Israel Army at that time. For the form and techniques of the film, it is remarkable to make the whole documentary (except the ending back to the reality) animated. This experiment means the total re-creation of the reality, which apparently challenge the traditional concept of documentary filmmaking. However, there is no convincing theory that argues a documentary cannot be animated, so it could also be considered as an acceptable re-creation of reality rather than fictional creation. But in most re-created documentaries, evidence like tape, photos and historical materials are essential to support the suggested truth. For example, in the Battle 360 series made by History Channel (Elliott, 2008), it is impossible to find actual footages which cover every single battle in WW2. So they use animation to re-create the key moments in the battlefields with the testimonies of the still alive veterans and photos shot by war correspondent to ensure the truth is reliable. But in the Waltz with Bashir, there is no guarantee on the reliability of the testimonies, but too many artistic and dramatic re-creation involved. As a result, it does have some of the characteristic, but also miss many.

And what about the Nanook of the North? Apparently, the subject is those Inuit lived in the northern Canada. The purpose is also obvious. The director was meant to show audience the primitive life of Eskimos. But here the question comes: was he more willing to show the Inuit primitive life which he thought it should be, or the actual life they were living at that time? In fact, the main viewpoints in this film, Nanook and his family are fictional character, which means the film can also be considered as an artistic re-creation. But does it mean this re-creation make the film all fictional and not a documentary? Some fictional elements may not totally deny the truth of the film. Not all the habits and customs in the film are made up by the director’s imagination. The man played Nanook was Allakariallak, an actual skillful hunter in Inuit tribute, and most characters in the film are Inuit living in the north (7), which does increase the realness to some extent. In terms of the techniques and form of the film, Nanook of the North as a silent, black-white film successfully uses subtitles to make up the lack of expressive force, and the fluent editing with skilled use of camera makes it an influential film at the early age of cinema. Again, it matches some characteristics that a traditional documentary should have, but also miss some of them. Therefore, it seems making a long list of the common characteristics that a documentary should have and compare them one by one with the film to figure out whether it is a documentary or fiction, is not a practical method to make a distinction, because as mentioned above, the hybrids always meet some but miss some.

 

 

Elliott, S., 2008. A Series and Its Sponsor Capture a Shared Link With History. [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/business/media/29adco.html?_r=0

McLane, Betsy A. 2013, A New History of Documentary Film, e-book,  <http://RMIT.eblib.com.au/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=1190703>.

 

I have an idea of a short film, which just takes place in a study room or common area in building 9 RMIT. The plot is very simple: in a quiet study room, some people are studying or doing their homework, it starts with the camera giving close up from different perspective of a person who is writing his or her essay (extreme close up of his finger, the laptop screen and medium close up of his or her face and body), and then a wide shot indicating the location. Then a girl opens the door and the sound of it attracts his attention. He stops writing and looks at the person coming in and the camera cuts to her after that. The girl comes to him and politely asks if she can sit next to him, he said OK, of course, and continue to write. But then the she starts to make noise: playing music, watching video and laughing loudly. The camera should frequently cut between her behaviors and his reactions. The man tries many ways to remind her not to do that (should be some actions really funny, like showing his headphone to the girl, which suggests using this rather than your speaker please), except saying you are making too much noise directly, but she just ignores it. As a result the man gives up with leaving the room. But interestingly, after seeing he gone, the girl immediately stop making noise, and shows a mean smile of triumph, which means she might deliberately do such behaviors in order to make that man gone because she doesn’t want to sit with him, wants to occupy the table alone or just doesn’t like him (whatever reasons you like).

 

So it is not complicated at all, but very useful to practice my camera shooting and sound recording skills. The story might not be amazing but has its narrative and logic, at least I think so.

On Friday this week, we watched some films which are quite controversial in terms of what they are: documentary or drama? This reminds me what I studied last semester about documentary, so I decide this Initiative pose should focus on those hybrid films which exist on the boundary between documentary and drama.

 

Janus Metz, a famous Danish filmmaker who has made feature documentaries like Love on Delivery (2008) and Ticket to Paradise (2008), called the blurry boundary as ‘grey zone’ in an interview (Sim, G. 2011). He said ‘Making documentaries is all about truth, it’s all about having a certain relationship to what realism as a representation of truth entails’ (Sim, G. 2011). What he points out is the very nature of documentary film. As many critics think, a documentary is usually expected to be objective and real, and the director has the responsibility to make his film the closest to the truth. But in actual practice, filmmakers sometimes pursue the things more than that. As Metz also said ‘But I think what’s important to me is, through a poetic appropriation of reality, to get closer to some of the things that are not necessarily immediate – to see some of the hyperreal structures or mythological implications of the moment’ (Sim, G. 2011). Here, simply uncovering the immediacy of realism seems to become the duty of journalists, but the filmmakers seek the aesthetics, the approaches and most importantly, the questions behind the immediate, because a documentary is not just an introduction of actuality, it is also a sort of art. Hence, it becomes much easier to understand why there is a grey zone between documentary and fiction film – dramatic features and artist re-creations are sometimes significantly involved in documentary filmmaking, especially like Waltz with Bashir and Nanook of the North, the hybrids exist just on the boundary.

 

David Balfour also mentions this in his article on the Vertigo Magazine that ‘By creating a fictional character we were able to explore something which traditional documentary or fiction films cannot do, and which was relevant to our subject’ (Balfour, 2006). This point has been well proved in Nanook of the North. A fictional character Nanook in this case helps a lot to explore the life of Eskimo in the past, which makes the film much more effective to tell the story than traditional straight documentary. Even there were never a Nanook in reality, it does not affect the fact that this fictional film is also a documentary which tries to tell the truth of the primitive life. Therefore, as Guarneri suggests, maybe it is not meaningful to have a strict definition or clear distinction to figure out which side those hybrid films do belong to, because it already becomes a new form of film, which carries the features from both documentary and fictional cinema.

 

So is the line or boundary too blur for us to make a meaningful distinction? Do we have to make a distinction between them at all?

 

Michael Guarneri, an Italian film scholar, answers this question in his article. ‘Doubting (the boundary) is legitimate but, if taken to its extreme consequences, it leads us in a cul-de-sac where no discourse is possible’ (Guarneri, 2012). It leads the debate from where is the boundary to a very practical question that is it really necessary to have such a boundary at all. In his opinion, since more and more contemporary filmmakers are deliberately practicing the films which blur the lines between fiction and fact, why ‘…waste time and energy providing strict definitions and clear distinctions between “documentary film as a whole” and “fiction film as a whole”?’ (Guarneri, 2012). This argument is as same and reasonable as the criticism on Nicola’s documentary modes, which doubts the necessity of separating documentaries into the six fixed modes.

 

Guarneri’s reasoning of not having strict definition and clear distinction between fiction and documentary film is supported by some other filmmakers and commenters for the reason that the hybrid film like Waltz with Bashir brilliantly demonstrates its function as both documentary and fictional film. For example, ‘Good films that are talking about the truth are welcome right now’ said by Mary Lea Bandy, chief curator of Film and Media Art at New York’s Museum of Modern Art, ‘In telling what you’re trying to tell, a narrative story can be more truthful than a straight documentary, creating a narrative fiction can be extremely effective’ (Svetvilas, 2004). According to her theory, in Waltz with Bashir, although a strong narrative of director’s personal experience is involved and there is no attention to have perspectives from both sides in the war to ensure the objectivity, it is still a documentary because subjective and fictional narrative is just effective to express the truth in director’s memory. Since there is no truth for everyone, the director does have the right to show his own truth, in his own ways, through his own film called documentary.

 

For me, the answer is simple: why not ask the director? Of course not simply ask the director that is your film a documentary or fiction, but exploring the film from different perspectives, to assess and speculate that does the director really have a strong will of making a film which tells the truth to audiences. If yes, ignoring the subjectivity, fictional and dramatic elements and any kinds of re-creation, the film is a documentary, maybe not for everyone, but certainly for someone. Everyone has his or her own opinion of the truth and own understanding of the truth as well. Sometimes it is insignificant to whose truth is the real truth, the guaranteed truth and the objective truth. Back to the very nature of documentary, it aims to explore and reveal stories in our real lives, and therefore the both sides of humanity can be seen in an artistic form. As a result, the only thing that matters becomes if the director truly desire to tell his truth, which is just a blurry but also meaningful boundary.

 

Bibliography

Balfour, D., 2006. Real Fiction – Blurring Lines Between Documentary and Fiction. Vertigo, Ⅲ(1).

 

Barnouw, Erik (1993). Documentary: A History of the Non-Fiction Film. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 33–35.

 

Elliott, S., 2008. A Series and Its Sponsor Capture a Shared Link With History. [Online]

Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/business/media/29adco.html?_r=0

 

Guarneri, M., 2012. c. Between Documentary, Fiction and Appropriation Art. [Online]

Available at: http://www.photogenie.be/photogenie_blog/article/c-between-documentary-fiction-and-appropriation-art

 

McLane, Betsy A. 2013, A New History of Documentary Film, e-book, accessed 29 May 2015, <http://RMIT.eblib.com.au/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=1190703>.

 

Reidemeister, H., 1982. On documentary filmmaking. [Online]

Available at: http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC27folder/ReidmstOnDocy.html

 

Sim, G. 2011, “A Gray Zone Between Documentary and Fiction: Interview with Janus Metz”, Film Quarterly, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 17-24.Svetvilas, C., 2004. Hybrid Reality: When Documentary and Fiction Breed to Create a Better Truth. [Online]

Available at: http://www.documentary.org/feature/hybrid-reality-when-documentary-and-fiction-breed-create-better-truth

On Thursday, we have learnt how to use the sound mixer with Sony Ex-3 camera. To be honest, it was quite challenging for me because I haven’t used any sound mixer before, and this one seems quite complicated. There are so many buttons on the machine, and some of them work independently or together with each other’s. It took a while for me to remember what they do. But just knowing what each button does is not the most difficult part. For me, connecting the mixer to the camera and make them work together is the most difficult part: when it is not working, there are too many possibilities that may cause the problem, and you need to check them one by one until you find the reason. For example, there are signals on both the camera and mixer, but after shooting you find there is no sound or the sound is not from the place you want (like it was recorded by the built-in mic rather than the plug-in mic), it could be because the cable connecting mixer and camera was not working properly or you forgot to select the external mic on the left side of camera or maybe there is something wrong with the channels. If any of these happens it could cause the problem, but it is your duty to find out and handle it.

 

This reminds me again that being a camera operator, or a director, there are much more things you need to know besides those filmmaking theories, devices and techniques. Things written on books are useful but real experience of using camera and other equipment for shooting is also valuable and essential. I should borrow those equipment and practice not only in class but also whenever I get chance.

This week I was absent for the class on Thursday, later I asked Lisha and Mona about what they did, and they told me basically they did a writing exercise and used Premiere to edit the footage we took last week. I will do the exercise later in my next post and in this post I will focus on the shooting on Friday class.

 

On the Friday morning we watched some abstract documentary made by Dutch and American directors. I was quite impressed by the way they filmed, because there is usually no clear narrative and meaning of the shots. You even don’t know what they want to say through the film. These we call abstract films are interesting but hard to define. And after watching we went outside to shoot our own six shots. Although these shots are not directly relevant, but while the discussion and shooting we did make some plans and consider about how to edit them together later next week. So what I try to achieve is to take some abstract and confusing shots, and put them in a certain order to make them somehow meaningful. And while planning this, I really find it is interesting: I might not deliberately make up the story, but when you look at and think about it, a ‘rough’ story appears, and it seems reasonable and logical.

 

However, there were some problems worth noticing during the shooting: again, a little bit over exposed, camera was shaking and not realizing there was a better location for the camera. The only way to improve it, in my opinion, is to practice more frequently and get more familiar with it.