I’m starting to like stylish docs like Manda Bala, the upcoming American Teen (heavy use of animation) and Morris’ S.O.P., and I don’t think it takes anything away from the story. At the same time, I still enjoy traditionally told docs like Nerakhoon, Young @ Heart and Up the Yangtze. The filmmakers’ decision to craft their documentaries in many ways just makes the genre that much better, as far as I’m concerned.

I’ll have to look into Frampton’s Filmosophy approach. But it sounds like academic posturing from the soft sciences rather than the hard sciences. I can appreciate both perspectives.

The academic approach to things really grates on my nerves sometimes and I totally agree with the posturing of bloggers. In some cases it can be fun to really de-construct something, but I think it usually comes across as dishonest. I suppose the challenge reviewing any film, fiction or non-fiction, is finding that balance where you have something fresh and interesting to say without alienating any of your listeners/readers by spouting analytical bullshit. I just try and express why I like or dislike something. (Although I’m sure I’m occasionally guilty of the blogger posturing as well.)

As for docs…I don’t think reviewers need to dissect the films from an academic or film-school approach, but rather acknowledge the fact that they are indeed still FILMS. Maybe they could think twice about penalizing a non-fiction film for attempting to use basic film making techniques like music, cinematography or editing to help tell a story or set a tone.

But there is a lot of posturing out there by bloggers who review like they all want to approach films from a film-school deconstruction method, who just parrot what they hear either by the professional film critics or by the barrage of information that has come from behind-the-scene commentaries. Academics have pre-conceived notions of how ’story’ and ‘narrative’ should intersect, how genre adherence or deviation is more often than not the beginning and end of analysis. Which, again, is fine if your sole interest in film is the craft, but when you take craft out of the equation and you have the visual representations of a focused film-thought, you can confront that directly without having to go through the surrogate of supposed motivations of the puppeteer behind-the-scenes.
The spectacle should be enough, most filmmakers do not want you to look at their craft (granted the bad ones do).

That’s exactly the point. There shouldn’t be a difference. It’s all film making, so docs should be judged not only on their subject matter, but on the craft as well, which is something a lot of reviewers seem to ignore.

I go by Frampton’s Filmosophy approach where you forego the notion of the film as a constructed thing (auteur theory being a lazy shorthand) and look at the ‘film’ as a focused thought, and one should try to articulate what it is thinking about its subject, and then consider what you yourself think of it, and see where these two overlap if at all. A documentary still has a thought to it, it still focuses on some things to the exclusion of others, it observes what it portrays.

If your ignorance factors into the experience it should be a part of the review, we should not posture as experts of anything but engage and articulate precisely where the mix of thinkings occurs. This is not a profession for either of us, there is no mercantile logic to feigning some kind of impartiality or treat the film in commodity terms (unless the film thinks of itself as a commodity i.e. Iron Man).

A film “documents” a story that metaphorically reflects the point-of-view truth that a storyteller wishes to impart on a viewer. The genre of film called documentaries dispenses with the metaphor.

I use the word “metaphor” with all the importance that Ray Bradbury has assigned to it.

I just read the review in “Exclaim!” for Errol Morris’ Standard Operating Procedure. The reviewer chose to discuss the subject matter without commenting on the film-making itself. Then it dawned on me what the problem is.

All films are documentaries. The genre of film called documentaries are stories that are filmed without scripts or prefabrication of material objects.

So Errol Morris is straying from the traditional documentary approach.

Just trying to figure out my schedule for Hot Docs. We’re hoping to catch some films this Saturday. I think I may be out of town for part of the festival unfortunately.

Any films you’re planning on check out?