Documentary mini-task

A documentary is a factual programme or film that covers a real life topic. There are a number of different ways in which it can be presented to the audience. Different styles of documentary achieve a multitude of different reactions and feelings from the audience. For example a documentary that uses a lot of voice-over work could be seen as less genuine as the commentator could be seen as telling the audience how to feel about certain topics.


The first style of documentary, according to the styles as defined by Bill Nichols, is the expository
documentary. The key features of an expository documentary is that the production features a voice-over which will inform the audience what is happening in the different shots. The voice-over will also supply facts to accompany the images seen on the screen as a form of explanation. The main idea of the piece is that an objective view of the situation is shown. This is usually seen as accurate,
however, in many cases this can be seen as biased as the voice-over may be used in a way to cause the audience to look at the images in a different way. An example of this can be seen in the documentary entitled Land of Dragons, which follows Komodo dragons and the wildlife of the island in which they live. This documentary is in the expository form as there are images of the various wildlife accompanied with voice-over. An example of this can be seen at 43:42 where the Komodo dragon is approaching its food and the voice-over is explaining what is happening. This text has all the key features of the expository type as there is an accompanying voice-over in which the facts are spoken to the audience.

A screenshot from Land of Dragons

The second style of documentary, according to Bill Nichols, is the observational documentary. This is a type of documentary production that has no intrusions by a voice-over or interviewer. The filmmaker is completely hidden from the shot and cannot be seen, thus not interfering with what is happening on the screen. This type helps the audience to decode and view the text without having an opinion or explanation read to them from the voice-over. This type of documentary is seen as more realistic as it offers and uninterrupted slice of life. An example of this would the be 1969 film entitled  Salesman. The production follows door-to-door bible salesmen as they go about their average day, travelling across America in order to visit potential customers. This production has no voice-over and is presented with a high level of reality. There are some shots which detract from this such as the music put on after and the fact that at one point the audio from the previous shot carried over. An example that can be seen in the text is at 0:00 where the production starts and there is no explanation of what is happening in the shot, it is for the audience to extract that detail by viewing. I personally find this both good and bad. It is good because most productions tell the audience too much and tell them how to feel so it is good to have a piece which lets you draw your own conclusions but it is bad as it can cause confusion if you have no idea what is happening, some explanation would sometimes help in this situation.

A screenshot from Salesman

The third style of documentary is the interactive style. This is where the filmmaker's presence is plain to see as they are a participant in the production. There is often an interaction between the presenter and any interviewees, and with the audience. Arguments are presented and discussed, often with the presenter being impartial, listening to all sides equally despite their own opinion on the matter. There are criticisms of this type of documentary as it can easily be manipulated through editing, showing only the sides and opinions that the filmmaker wants to show to the audience. There are many examples of this, and it is possibly the most common type of documentary. Examples include Marooned with Ed Stafford in which the presenter has only himself and a handheld camera attempting to survive in the wild. This is an interactive style as he talks to the audience via the use of the camera and it is clear that he is there. The example I have chosen, however, is Ross Kemp on Gangs. This is where TV personality Ross Kemp talks to various different gang members of different gangs across the world to find out the truth about the gang and how the members became involved. Kemp is the filmmaker and presenter of the production and can be seen on screen interviewing people and addressing the camera as well as providing a voice-over in certain circumstances. An example of this can be seen at 25:00 where Kemp interviews a leading member in a Los Angeles gang. He is seen on the screen and is questioning the man.

A screenshot from Ross Kemp on Gangs

The fourth style of documentary, according to Bill Nichols, is the reflexive documentary. This is very different to the other types of documentary as the filmmaker of this type of production is often attempting to expose the conventions of a documentary. The whole production is much more of an experimental piece containing clips of everyday life. An example of this would be the 1929 production entitled Man with a movie camera which follows the production of a movie. The piece has no dialogue and does not attempt to communicate with the audience in any way other than visually. There is a soundtrack which is played over the top but it does not add to the footage as it does not help to explain what is happening. This is an experimental type documentary and therefore follows the key features of this style of documentary. An example can be seen at 20:00 where there is a scene of a train put to music.

A screenshot from Man With A Movie Camera

The final type of documentary, as defined by Bill Nichols, is performative. The key features of this particular style is that it emphasizes presentation as opposed to content in an exaggerated manner. This style also commonly uses re-enactments and hyperbolic camera positions and movement to help submerge the audience in the diegesis of the piece. The aim of the style is to present a subjective opinion of the subject matter. An example of this would be the documentary produced by and starring internet group Anonymous entitled How Anonymous Hackers Changed The World. This has the majority of the features of a performative documentary. There are interviews with different people who are relevant to the piece as well as cutting in footage of various protests attended by the group. The only thing that this piece does not have is re-enactments of events, however it does have the feature of there being no presenter seen in the piece. An example of this can be seen at 1:33 where a person is talking to the camera about the organisation. This clip therefore follows the conventions of this particular type of documentary.

A screenshot from How Anonymous Hackers Changed The World

In this final paragraph I will discuss the use of dramatisations and re-enactments in performative documentaries and the potential implications in doing this. I believe that re-enactments are used to help to explain different situations to the audience in a clear visual way. Without the use of a re-enactment it could be difficult to explain what happened in a certain situation through words alone as, depending on the explanation, different people would interpret it differently. Using a re-enactment allows all members of the audience to clearly see what happened, however in a number of different cases it can sway the audience to look at a situation in a certain way that they may not have seen it before. Another issue with using re-enactments is that people may see them to detract from the authenticity of the text. I personally think that the use of re-enactments help to increase the authenticity as there is a form of proof of what happened, allowing the audience to follow along easier.