This is an assignment I got in Petru's Visual Language class. It was actually supposed to be somewhat modernistic and full of symbols but I thought this approach would be more fun for me.

A challenge here was that I didn't have a tripod and people wouldn't move, so I couldn't do a master shot and then just edit stuff in. The shots were handheld from different angles and were blended together in post in the free program paint.net. I also used a plugin to help me remove the greenscreen. Eventually I used the shot with the two girls as a master shot.

The gallery above shows different versions of the composition. Notice how important the lighting is. Below is the final image. I desaturated most of the images to make them blend better. Didn't pay too much attention to masking stuff perfectly because it wasn't required for the project at all.

After finishing camera class I started in light class. These are some of the setups we did last week. Fun!

Hoping to send this to some festivals. Shot in 3 hours at the Hedhehog Lady's house.

I had a lot of fun editing this.

Shot in 4 hours. I think this turned out pretty good considering the limited nature of the location and story. I didn't do the lighting for this film.

​

During the 5 obstructions week I got to work as a sound person, actor, script writer, cameraman and director. These are some of the films I was involved with.

The reading and exercise did not help at all. If anything it helped show how my documentary is incredibly far away from the topics I actually care about. But the exercise was good for figuring out what I NEED to do. I think my most engaging film topic is “Being right but having the system work against you”. Maybe I’ll address that in a future documentary.

But yeah, the exercise was quite demotivating and I’d rather not think more about at it at this time.

The idea:
How can there be a disco in a quiet town like Ebeltoft

Why I'm doing it:
I find it to be absurd that there is a disco in a place like this and I want to know what kind of people go there.

Development:
The disco is closed.
Why?
What does this mean for the young people of ebeltoft.

What I hope to find:
Insight into how it is being young in a place like Ebeltoft.

I believe this film should be made because:
It's going to be funny when the audience realises my documentary project gets totally shut down by the disco not being open
It's going to be interesting to see how the young of Ebeltoft cope with it

My producer:
Big plus if he/she speaks danish cuz I don't
Willing to go out in the field with me and help with translation/sound/light

Some reflection on the pitch:
I think my presentation went okay considering I made the pitch the same morning. I still have to figure out what I really want to tell with my documentary. My producer is Camilla and she seems really motivated so I think we will have a lot of fun no matter what.

Since we already talked about the answer in class I think I'll just post my notes.
Types of documentaries (Documentary Screens, Creative Documentary):

Cinema-verite:
NOT "Be really objective with no voice-over" That is called "Direct cinema"
Follow the action as it unfolds. "Fly on the wall"

What is cinema-verite?
The camera is explicitly participating in the event. The filmmaking process was a significant part of the film. Using your role as a filmmaker to get to the truth, and showing this process to show the truth.

Documentary genres/Modes of representation:

Interactive/participatory

• Filmmakers interview or interact with subjects.
• Narrative is created by the dialogue between interviewer and subject

Observational

• "Fly on the wall"
• Core form: No interviews and no commentary. Consists of recording unfolding events, long takes, synchronous sound and shaky shots.
• The presence of the camera is not supposed to influence the unfolding events

Expository

• "Classic" documentary form
• Voice of "God" narration
• Presents a "truth of the matter"
• Addresses social issues, explains certain phenomena
• The narration dictates the images, and holds the documentary together

Reflexive

• Intention is to reveal the production process of the film itself
• Make the viewer aware that he/she is watching a film (Also participatory)
• Exposes objectivity by revealing the filmmakers subjectivity
• Can be critical to the documentary medium

Performative

• The filmmaker takes on different roles to provoke, elicit, persuade, cajole or seduce their subjects into revealing feelings, ideas, fantasies of wishes.
• The documentary itself "performs" and draws attention to itself
• Emphasis of experimentation

Poetic

• Emphasis on personal approach to the historical world
• Uses juxtaposition, association and reflection to mix a variety of shots and sequences of diverse locations. (Samsara, man with a camera??)
• Narrative is not driven by logic but rather association, ideas, feelings, fantasies, experiences and reflections. (Uses categorical form?

Documentary genres (Film Art):
Compilation film

• Produced from compiled archive footage

Interview/Talking head documentary

• Records testimony about events or social movements
• Uses medium and close shots of real people retelling their experiences

Direct cinema

• Follows an event as it unfolds

Nature

• About our world, animal and plant life.

Portrait

• Centers on scenes from the life of a compelling person.

Synthetic documentary

• Common in television journalism
• Mixes several genres together

(From the book Creative Documentary)

Experimental film

• Explores the medium using different gimmicks
• Does not have to tell a story
• Subgenre: Found-footage films
• Using random footage to create something new
• Can express feelings, interesting visuals
• Challenges the viewer
• Can use all forms, including abstract and associational.

Form:
The way a documentary is put together/organised. Logic of the film.

Categorical form

• Often begins by identifying its subject
• Patterns of development will usually be simple (small to large, local to national, personal to public etc.)
• Maintains interest by choosing broad and or weird categories. Often mixed with other forms.

Rhetorical form:

• Filmmaker presents a persuasive argument
• Commercials use it
• Adresses the viewer openly
• Tries to make the viewer realise something, possibly act on it
• Uses argumentation and evidence to convince the viewer that the filmmakers position view is the most plausible
• Often appeals to our emotions
• Often persuades you to change something in your everyday life
• Ways of argument:
• Arguments using a source
• First-hand accounts
• Expert testimony
• Subject-centered arguments
• Appeals to beliefs common at the time in a given culture (Trying to contradict it or use it)
• Examples, not always well grounded, that support its point (Such as in commercials)
• Exploit familiar argumentative patterns (enthymemes) (Here is a problem, we solved it! This solution is obviously best!)
• Viewer-centered arguments
• Appeal to the emotions of the viewer (using symbolic items for example)
• Typical four part structure:
• Introduction of the situation
• Discussion of relevant facts
• Presents proof of given solution that fits the facts
• Ends with epilogue that summarizes what has come before

Abstract form

• Organised around colours, shapes, sizes and movements in the images
• The content does not need to be abstract

Associational form

• Images and sounds are juxtaposed (placed side by side, especially for comparison or contrast) so that we try to look for a connection, - an association that binds them together.
• Doesn't use rhetorical tricks
• Often has a point to make
• Typically images are grouped in larger sets, each creating a distinct unified part of the film
• Often has repeated motifs that reinforce associational connections.
• Strongly invites interpretation
• Can have both a clear and unclear meaning

The film: (Land without bread)
Staged, throwing goats off cliffs.
Gets involved with the subjects both verbally and physically
Comments on midgets, calling them degenerates. Argues for this.
"We had difficulty photographing them" Narrates about the creative process
"Here is another type of idiot"
"Quoting" the old woman
The darn goats getting killed.

Genre:
Expository

• "Classic" documentary form
• Voice of "God" narration
• Presents a "truth of the matter"
• Addresses social issues, explains certain phenomena
• (The narration dictates the images, and holds the documentary together) No!

(Somewhat reflexive)

• The trouble he had interviewing the midgets
• Brings attention to the fact that they are doing a documentary

Participatory

• Examining the little girls mouth

Form:
Rhetorical form

• Shows how behind the times the people are, argues this.

What this REALLY is:
Critiques the expository form.
The distance from the events unfolding is too great.
Music does not match. (Not particularly sad music during the baby is dead sequence)
Narration does not always match what we see. (The midget who supposedly was 25)

Is Exit through the Gift Shop a documentary?

To answer this question we need to have an idea of what a documentary actually is. My definition is:

“Storytelling using moving pictures with or without audio depicting anything non-fictional using actual or re-created footage that claims to be factually accurate.”

The film uses moving pictures and audio to tell a story. The question is if it is fictional or not. If no events or characters in the film are staged for the purpose of the film then I would say that it is a documentary about graffiti, the artists, and the rise of Mr. Brainwash. However there is reason to believe that is not the case.

I don’t think this assignment is about arguing about how real the events of the film are. Most of the events have many witnesses. The real question is if the film portrays the main character Thierry Guetta in an honest way, or if it deliberately lies to its audience. If the filmmakers knowingly portray the protagonist in a dishonest way, making up his actions and presenting them as facts, then it doesn’t fit my definition of a documentary because it is no longer factually accurate.

The problem is that we don’t know if the filmmakers deliberately excluded parts of the story to create a character that isn’t who he is presented to be. One could wonder if Thierry really earned enough from his vintage store to finance the show and pay for his huge exhibition and crew. Because if he got financial help from someone in the documentary team without the documentary making that clear it’s no longer a portrayal of him raising to fame by himself like the documentary presents it to be