participatory documentary – Otis Morley’s A-Level Film Studies Blog

Side By Side (Chris Keneally, 2013)

Side By Side (Chris Keneally, 2013) is a documentary film directed by Christopher Keneally. Presented by Keanu Reeves, the film investigates the history, process and workflow of celluloid and digital filmmaking respectively.

Throughout the film, a wide variety of notable directors, actors, producers and cinematographers are interviewed by Keanu. These include the likes of David Fincher, Martin Scorsese, George Lucas, David Lynch, Greta Gerwig and many more. The film cuts between interview clips featuring Keanu and one of the aforementioned filmmakers with relevant visuals of the filmmaking process being discussed.

*Keanu Reeves pictured with some of the crew members* *of Side By Side*

Each filmmaker is able to voice their opinion on both the photochemical and digital means of filmmaking, each giving us a different interpretation. For example, filmmakers such as George Lucas and James Cameron were early adopters of digital technology and are all for leaping into the future. Conversely, Christopher Nolan and David Fincher are still reluctant to do this, and insist on using film cameras.

There is a significant argument for both cases, due to the fact that digital is becoming increasingly cheaper and of a higher quality. Furthermore, Danny Boyle stated that he felt he had more freedom during the production of 28 Days Later which was filmed on digital. However, pro-celluloid filmmakers argue that actors take the noisier film cameras more seriously as they can “hear the money”. Alongside this, some argue that digital will simply never equal the sheer quality of authentic film reels.

The mode of this documentary is participatory, due to the fact that Keanu Reeves’ presence can be felt. However, he is not the filmmaker of this particular documentary, therefore it cannot be performative.

I enjoyed the film a considerable amount and it gave me a comprehensive insight into film production, featuring an ensemble cast of directors that I admire. However, I felt that the pace of the film faltered at points.

Overall, I would rate Side by Side ★★★.

The Trouble With The Six Modes

Bill Nichols’ modes of documentary are highly problematic for one key reason. The vast majority of documentaries cannot be categorised under a single mode of documentary, a clear example being The War Game (Peter Watkins, 1965). This particular film can be argued to be classified under a number of modes – including both observational and participatory. Because of this, an uncertain middle ground is created and the modes are rendered useless.

The main reason for this is that filmmakers attempt to create a wholly unique and intriguing documentary, often with a particular artistic vision in mind. Because of this, documentarians often attempt to prevent their films from being categorised under a single, pre-conceived mode created by a single person.

Filmmakers’ “theories” — Nick Broomfield

Nick Broomfield is an English documentary filmmaker known for his highly influential self-reflective style of documentary. Initially regarded as a performative documentarian, Broomfield begun to employ non-actors to play themselves in scripted works, beginning in the early 2000s. Broomfield refers to his work as ‘Direct Cinema’, attempting to capture his subjects as directly as possible.

Broomfield, like Michael Moore, has developed a participatory, performative mode of documentary filmmaking. Broomfield is an investigative documentarist with a distinctive interview technique which he uses to expose people’s real views. Like Watkins, he keeps the filmmaking presence to a minimum, normally with a crew of no more than three. He describes his films as ‘like a rollercoaster ride. They’re like a diary into the future.’

Broomfield can often be seen within his films, recording sound himself with a couple of camera operators at his side. Because of this, Broomfield’s films, such as Kurt and Courtney and the Aileen duology, are often categorised as either participatory or performative documentaries. Despite this, his films such as Driving Me Crazy also frequently detail the events of the making of the documentary itself – perhaps placing it under the reflexive mode. Nick Broomfield has inspired many other documentarians with this particular style of filmmaking – influencing the likes of both Michael Moore and Louis Theroux.

In 2006, Broomfield adopted the aforementioned style of ‘Direct Cinema’, casting non-actors within scripted works. He produced Ghosts, a dramatisation which detailed the events of the 2004 Morecambe Bay cockling disaster. Receiving immense critical acclaim and winning a multitude of awards, Broomfield managed to raise almost £500,000 for the families of the depicted disaster.

Fahrenheit 9/11 (Michael Moore, 2004)

Fahrenheit 9/11 (Michael Moore, 2004) is a performative documentary written, produced, directed by and starring left-wing political commentator – Michael Moore. The film’s main point of discussion is a critique of the George W. Bush administration’s handling of the September 11 attacks, as well as the proceeding 2003 Iraq war. Alongside this, Moore persistently argues that the media were “cheerleaders” for the war and did not provide an objective or accurate portrayal of the the events that took place.

Throughout the film, Moore narrates over a wide variety of footage, including the 2000 presidential election, the aftermath of 9/11 itself as well as an array of clips from Bush’s many speeches. Moving chronologically through the events, Moore’s commentary remains comedic throughout, which is extremely typical of his style of filmmaking. He jokes satirically at the extremely serious events being presented, with them being predominantly at Bush’s expense. In effect, this makes Michael Moore’s opinion on the subject matter extremely transparent from the get-go, which sets the tone for the duration of the film.

Alongside his cynical commentary, Moore appears in person throughout the documentary in order to interview citizens affected by the topics discussed. This places the film under the performative mode, due to the fact that Moore is personally interacting with the subjects and has a direct impact upon the events.

Fahrenheit 9/11 was received mostly positively by critics, receiving an 82% on Rotten Tomatoes and winning the 2004 Palme d’Or. However, some critics expressed their distaste for the documentary, stating that it was extremely one-sided and “harshly satirical”.

Personally, I found the film to be relatively enjoyable and Moore’s sardonic humour lightened the mood of the extremely harrowing footage presented throughout. However, I have to agree with the consensus that the documentary was extremely biased and only offered a single perspective. In addition to this, I lost interest at certain points throughout the film and found sections of the documentary to be overly convoluted.

Overall, I would rate Fahrenheit 9/11 ★★★.

Modes of Documentary

Bill Nichols, a documentary theorist, stated that every documentary could be categorised under one of six ‘modes’ of documentary, listed and explained below.

Expository Documentary

An expository documentary is the ‘traditional form’ of a documentary film, setting up a specific point of view or argument about a subject matter. The narrator often addresses the viewer directly, establishing the relationship between what is being projected on screen and the accompanying verbal commentary. Examples of an expository documentary include the works of David Attenborough, such as Planet Earth (2006) as well as the feature-length March of the Penguins (Luc Jacquet, 2005).

Observational Documentary

An observational documentary aims to capture fully authentic, day-to-day life with minimal interruption. Also referred to as a ‘fly on the wall’ documentary, the filmmaker is a neutral observer of events – remaining hidden behind the camera at all times. Examples of an observational documentary include High School (Frederick Wiseman, 1968) and The Beatles: Get Back (Peter Jackson, 2021).

Participatory Documentary

Within a participatory documentary, the filmmaker themselves is directly included within the documentary’s narrative, typically onscreen. Their impact upon the recorded events is acknowledged and the filmmaker personally interacts with the documentary’s subjects, with their personality often shining through in the process. Examples of a participatory documentary include Sherman’s March (Ross McElwee, 1985) and The Danube Exodus (Péter Forgács, 1998).

Performative Documentary

A performative documentary focuses on the filmmaker’s involvement with the specific area of documentation that the film is centered around. The filmmaker often inputs their personal experience with the subject in order to explore the larger truth of the matter at hand. Examples of a performative documentary include Supersize Me (Morgan Spurlock, 2004) and the many documentaries of Louis Theroux.

Poetic Documentary

A poetic documentary utilises avant-garde and experimental techniques to evoke a specific emotion within the viewer, avoiding a typical linear narrative. Examples of a poetic documentary include Fata Morgana (Werner Herzog, 1970) and Tongues Untied (Marlon Riggs, 1989).

Reflexive Documentary

Reflexive documentaries are often extremely meta in nature, acknowledging the format of a documentary itself. Often featuring the filmmaker within the film, a reflexive documentary makes no attempt to explore an outside topic but solely focuses on the act of creating a documentary. Examples of a reflexive documentary include Man With a Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929) and Chronicle of a Summer (Jean Rouch, Edgar Morin, 1961).