So today was the first day of class and the topic of discussion was about documentaries.
On that note, remember that the deadline for the documentary module is the 12th of December
We watched a documentary called "The Global Warming Swindle" and was asked to deconstruct it, analyse it's techniques and such. It's also good to point out that it was said that we should think of a good title for our documentaries, one that would attract attention, basically the thinking goes that if anyone were to browse channels and see our title, we'd want them to stop and watch.
We were to look at the:
1) Editorial Angle
- Clearly establishes their stand on the topic and constantly questioning the reasons behind the opposite stand. Uses graphics including animations setting a cool and sometimes humourous tone, it keeps the documentary interesting. The B- footage is often of people enjoying the sun or of the equipment that is mentioned in the narration. Most of the experts are filmmed behind books or labs of sorts; makes them look more "official".
2) How the narration develops
- Much like the Freytag's pyramid, the equilibrium is a question that is answered (often by experts with some kind of authority in the matter) and as the answer turns into the "peak" a disruption comes along in the form of another raising question/suspicion which in turn creates the new equilibrium. In other words, the narrator questions why something is the way it is, answes why it is and asks a question that's probably something like "so why is the way that is is like the way that that way is like?"
3) How the arguement is put together
- The documentary had quite a biased tone, however it did explore the opposition's reasoning breifly before deconstructing it and in a way debunking their theories. In a way this gives enough fairplay to constitute the use of polemic arguement.
4) Who and How do you think the researchers have possibly contacted to make the documentary
Most of the experts that appear in the documentary are affiliated with an institute of education, some have even written books, so perhaps they did some secondary research and took note of the author's name and contacted them via the agents and asked if they could discuss some things about the topics raised in ther books in corellation to the documentary topic?
This is basically a brief idea of what I learned or deconstructed from the documentary we watched in class. I need to take these points into consideration when structuring my own documentary (atm on procastionation- it's open to change as per suggestion of the tutor).
I hope things go well!
Ciao puppies!
