Monday, May 29 - Thursday, June 1

Thursday
Today you will be in Room 100. You have time to work on your documentary annotation in Video Ant.
All the details about the assignment are in yesterday's post and in Office 365/content library/term4/documentary analysis Video Ant
Wednesday

1. Reading your term novel.
2. Documentaries of interest: CBC website: http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/
 Homme Less https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4C1wacZM3k
2. Look at some more elements of storytelling http://diydoco.nfsadl.com/elements.htm
3. Complete our class look at Pizza Boy and how to do Video Ant annotation.

Wow big question. I like everything from comedies to horror films. It depends what kind of mood I'm in, and each are great in their own way. Some of my favorite movies include The Thing, Alien, Shawshank Redemption, and There Will Be Blood.

Regarding Pizza Boy, I was inspired by my friend Alan who was a friend of mine in college. He had a genuine love for is job as a pizza boy. He enjoyed it's stress-free nature and found it exciting. My film exaggerates his passion a little bit, but the inspiration was based on Alan's true enjoyment of the job.

Filmmaking wise, I was inspired by some works I found on Vimeo, especially "Last Minutes with Oden." Such a powerful story.  You can watch it here: https://vimeo.com/8191217

2. Are there any filmmakers who you take inspiration from? Abby, Paige, Natalie

There are so many types of films and filmmakers, it's hard to lump it all into one category, but if I have to, I would say Chris Cunningham and Mark Romanek. They are both music video directors and I love their style. They seem to focus on art direction and editing, specifically Chris Cunningham - he has a very distinct look.

3. In your opinion, what is the best way to attract audiences to documentaries? Khyl

Attracting an audience, especially for documentaries, can be quite difficult. Creating a one-off short film like Pizza Boy is unlikely to gain a lot of attention. I would recommend creating a feature-length or a series of short films on a particular subject. A series may attract subscribers for websites like YouTube while a feature-length film may find success at film festivals, which could lead to a distribution deal and wind up Netflix, Hulu, etc.

JORDAN SCHMELZER

jordanschmelzer.com 

4. Quick run through of the Documentary assignment details below. We will be in room 100 tomorrow.

Writing task: 

For this assignment, you will use Video Ant https://ant.umn.edu/ to analyze a 5 minute segment of a documentary of your choice. The evaluation RUBRIC is at the end of today's post.

COMPLETE YOUR ANNOTATION USING SOME OR ALL OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS. 

Authors & Audiences 

Authorship:  

Who made the documentary? What does someone viewing the film need to know about the filmmaker in order to analyse it? Do a bit of research, don’t just state the person’s name. 

Purpose:  

What type of documentary is this: Expositiory? Observational? Personal/Reflective? Or Poetic/Avant Garde? How do you know? 

What central question is the film trying to answer? What does the filmmaker want people to know or remember? 

Who is the target audience? How can you tell? 

Economics: 

Who funded the making of the film? What is  their interest in this particular approach to the film's main topic/subject? 

Impact:  

Who might benefit from the messages in the documentary? Who might be harmed/disadvantaged by them?  

What have you learned from the film? Why might the film’s message matter to you? 

Response: 

What kinds of actions might you take in response to this film? 

Messages & Meanings 

Content:  

What central question is the film trying to answer?  

What do you think the filmmaker wants people to remember about the film? 

Who are the voices of authority in this film? Are there voices left out that would add important perspectives? 

Techniques: 

Who funded the making of the film? What is  their interest in this particular approach to the film's main topic/subject? 

What elements have been used to tell the story? Film footage? Photos? Music? Interviews? Narration? Graphics such as maps, titles, animation)? 

What camera, soundtrack, and editing techniques* does the filmmaker use to communicate essential ideas? 

* camera: movement, framing, lighting  

* sound: narration, voice-overs, interviews, music, sound effects  

* editing: sequences [juxtaposition], transitions, pacing/rhythm 

Interpretation:  

What is the tone of the film (tone is the filmmaker’s attitude towards their subject, ex. serious, angry, etc.) 

How might others see this film in a way that differs from the way you see it? How and why might different types of people interpret this film in a variety of ways? 

Who might benefit from the messages in the documentary? Who might be harmed/disadvantaged by them?  

What is your reaction to the film and what, if anything, have you learned about yourself from your reaction or your interpretation? 

What have you learned from the film? Why might the film’s message matter to you? 

How does the film make you feel? What is the film’s mood?  

Representations & Reality 

Context:  

When was the film made? Since then, has anything occurred that is relevant to the claims or focus of the film? 

Where or how has this film been distributed (shared with the public)? 

Credibility: 

Which of the film's assertions are facts and which are opinions? 

What sources does the film rely on for its information? Are these sources credible? How do you know? 

In what ways does this film reflect, or not reflect, the “reality” of the topic it presents? 

Curricular competencies:   

 In this documentary annotation, I can demonstrate that I am able to… 

·       I can recognize and identify the role of personal, social, cultural contexts, values and perspectives in documentary texts. 

·       I can recognize how different forms, structures and features of documentaries reflect different purposes, audiences and messages. 

·       I can respond to documentaries in personal, creative and critical ways 

·       I can think critically to explore ideas within, between and beyond documentary texts. 

·       I can access information from variety of sources and evaluate its relevance, accuracy and reliability 

·       refine my writing to improve clarity, effectiveness and impact 

6 

This documentary annotation received a “6”. It is superior/exemplary because it represents a “rich reading” of the documentary. The annotation demonstrates a clear understanding of film and documentary conventions. It effectively deals with authorship & audience by providing deep insights and strong detail. The annotations contain clear ideas, and provide points, examples and explanations. Relevant technical terms related to camera work and editing have been woven into the analysis of the messages & meanings of the documentary. How the documentary represents reality has been thoughtfully explored. Vocabulary related to the elements of documentaries has been skillfully used throughout the annotations. The annotations have been properly proofread to ensure there are few if any spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors  

5 

This documentary annotation received a “5.” It is accomplished/proficient and reflects a strong grasp of the documentary analysis task; it completely meets expectations.  Although it deals with the documentary quite effectively, it does not have the depth of insight and the sophistication of a “6.” Some of the questions related to authorship & audience, messages & meanings and representations & reality have been dealt with in a superficial way, or not at all. There Is evidence of a solid understanding of the vocabulary related to the elements of documentary storytelling throughout the annotation.The writing is well organized and demonstrates a strong command of the conventions of language. Errors may be present, but are not distracting.  

4 

This documentary analysis received a “4”. It is competent/adequate. It has demonstrated a basic understanding of how to analyse a documentary text; however, some of the analysis may be a bit “thin” or basic.  It may deal with just barely enough of the documentary analysis questions. It deals with some of the questions about authorship & audience, messages & meanings and representations & reality competently – but some answers may be weak because they lack depth, elaboration, or real insight. Annotations tend to be largely about what the documentary directly states and shows as opposed to the filmmaker’s messages, techniques and representation of reality. A few terms and devices related to documentary storytelling are used. The writing is organized and straightforward. Conventions of language are usually followed, but some errors are evident.  

3 

This documentary annotation received a “3”. It is barely adequate. It just barely meets expectations. Understanding of the documentary or the analysis task may be partially flawed. While it attempts to deal with the ad deconstruction questions about authorship & audience, messages & meanings and representations & reality, there is no depth or insight shown in the analysis of the documentary. It may deal with too few of the documentary analysis questions. The annotations may be very disorganized. There is almost no use of vocabulary related to the elements of documentary storytelling. The errors are distracting. The annotation may show some sense of purpose, but the annotations basically restate what can be seen or heard in the film instead of analyzing the filmmaker’s messages, techniques and representation of reality.  

2 

This documentary annotation received a “2” and is inadequate. While there is an attempt to address the task, understanding of the documentary or the task of analyzing it may be seriously flawed. Very little understanding of authorship & audience, messages & meanings and representations & reality  have been demonstrated. Errors are recurring, distracting, and often impede meaning.  

1 

The one response is unacceptable. There has been almost no attempt to address the task. Annotations are too brief or there is a complete lack of understanding of the documentary or the analysis task. Errors in the writing are recurring, distracting and impede meaning. 

  

  

  

  

  

  

Tuesday

1. Reading your term novel. Reminder, your blog/MGP is due June 15 (not next week, but the week after)

2. Continue looking at group's camera shots.
3. Today's documentary:  The Minimalists https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Co1Iptd4p4
The Story of Stuff http://storyofstuff.org/movies/story-of-stuff/ - you could use any of the videos from this web site for your documentary analysis.
4. Take some notes to help with your documentary analysis: http://diydoco.nfsadl.com/eds_cam_timeline.htm (due next week - June 8!)
5. Pizza Boy https://vimeo.com/groups/veryshortdocumentaries/videos/29760197 class analysis of a documentary.

Monday

1. Reading your term novel
2. Sample documentary: Born into Brothels https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ehz3doE56A

3. View your shot examples, and complete taking notes.
4.  http://diydoco.nfsadl.com/eds_cam_timeline.htm   Elements of documentary filmmaking
5. Block D - did we do this yet?
Documentaries: "the creative interpretation of reality" John Grierson.

The handout sets out a series of factors that might have affected the end result of a film such as George Lumiere's factory exit film, outlining  some of the ways in which an early filmmaker such as  Lumière might have shot this sequence in 1895.  Your task is to decide which of A, C or I relates most to each situation. Space is provided to explain your decisions. Sometimes more than one of these elements will apply at the same time.

• Actual (A) – in other words something that would have happened whether or not the camera was there?
• Creative (C) – in other words affected by creative decisions made by the director/camera operator, and which had the effect of making the sequence more artistic or entertaining
• Interpretive (I) – in other words practical decisions made by the camera operator/director that might affect/alter an audience's understanding of what they were seeing and how they see it.

6. Nanook of the North: 

Nanook clips on YouTube

Building an igloo
Exiting the Kayak - begin at 4 mintues - stop at 7 minutes
Harpooning Walrus - begin at 22 minutes - stop at 26 minutes

Flaherty and Nanook collaborated in creating the events for the film. Nanook and his family were not simply recorded as they lived their life, but were asked to perform certain (some of them typical) behaviours for the benefit of the cameras.

Flaherty did not, in the manner of a cinema-verite filmmaker, simply film Nanook and his family going about their lives. Many actions on view in the film were performed for the camera and not simply 'documented' by it. The filmmaker actively involved his subjects in the filming, telling them what he wanted them to do, responding to their suggestions, and directing their performance for the camera...Much of what is on view is typical behaviour for Nanook and his family (lighting campfires, paddling kayaks, trapping foxes, making igloos). Some is not. For example, for the sake of his film Flaherty called upon Nanook and some other men to revive a traditional--and dangerous--method of hunting walrus with harpoons, a tradition Nanook's people abandoned as soon as they became able to trade pelts for guns and ammunition.