Analyze two documentary films. Discuss how the factual or documentarument for why you think they are persuasive, or not. Compare and contrast how the films work will help you make your argumenty status of these films is asserted, and make an arg
Feature films are treated as “fiction” and documentary films as “fact” — each belong to different genres. Explaining why truth is stranger than fiction, Mark Twain once said, “Fiction has to make sense.” Fiction involves appealing to familiar ideas and conventions. Thereby fiction films “make sense.” But a good documentary film is often structured like a story, and therefore borrows some of the conventions of fiction – e.g., a plot with heroes, villains and victims, and a happy or sad ending.
The documentary often refers to contemporary events that we know about from other sources (the news media, e.g.). Many documentaries seek to influence their audience about those events, and may even expect viewers to take a position, or vote in one way or other. Documentaries are often intended to have consequences beyond “mere entertainment.” In comparing the two films of your choice, you need to assess how the films work, beyond saying “I like x or y.” You need to explain why x or y appeals to you, and what specific elements in the film (acting, voiceover, music, lighting, editing, script) you think contribute to making it effective?
You should discuss and cite relevant literature in presenting the issue discussed in the films you are studying, referring to reading material prescribed for this class where necessary.
Questions/issues to consider:
1. What are the methods by which the filmmaker signals the factual claim of his or her film, and what aspects of the film suggest a “creative interpretation of reality”? Can these be distinguished, or not?
2. The choices the filmmaker makes regarding, for example:
a) Topic she/he treats (family drama, romance, individual careers, national history, political scandal, riots, etc)
b) Narrative (is the story or episode told in a tragic, comic, or ironic way?)
c) setting and background
d) camera angles
g) cutting (fast cuts with short clips or long takes? Something in between?)
Please pay close attention to: 1.Background of filmmaker
2. Context of the film: 5 things film deals with.
3. What people going to be interview
4. General facts:
a) Facts vs. opinion in the documentary
b) Outline stories- coherent story: past and present
c) Compare stylistically: voice over like in Ram movie, or movie which doesn’t have voice over.
d) How is the Interview process in specific movie, what kind of questions are asked, sometimes you just hear the answer instead of questions,
e) What is the Ideology of the film? , Politics – Ram film- provides perspectives of lower caste, shows folklore/ myth in politics; he is trying to paint the tragedy of Hinductory movement.
f) Soundtrack –audio visual sound: music, sound effects, voice over, sound rises, silence- how music can change the mood of movie?
g) Editing: long take vs. short take, how the movie is cut. Naturalistic approach- long; roughness of the moment..
h) Find articles about the films.
i) Timeline of the movie:
j) Background of the filmmaker.
*** In comparison please also used attached article, or article you find online regarding these two movies.
The additional source for these two movies is also attached and should be used in the research paper- this source is provided by professor so definitely should be used.
I also find short review about the Bombay our city movie, which might be helpful. – is also attached.
****Links to two movies is provided.