performative 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 ★★★.

Filmmakers’ “theories” — Louis Theroux

Louis Theroux is a British-American documentarian, journalist, broadcaster, podcaster and author. He is known for hosting performative documentaries, such as When Louis Met… and Weird Weekends, as well as a number of BBC Two specials including The Most Hated Family in America.

The faux-naïf persona he presents is deceptive to the interviewee because it will make them feel like they have to tell him everything from the basics, which is an advantage for the viewer as they will get the clearest picture of the subject that they are talking about.

Theroux’s documentaries typically follow Louis’ investigation into some of the world’s most restricted and controversial communities. Including the Westbrook Baptist Church, a notorious neo-nazi group and the San Quentin prison, there seems to be no limit as to where Louis Theroux will document next.

Louis Theroux’s style of documentary is like no other. Being typically categorised under the performative mode, Theroux purports a façade of naïveté and inquisitiveness in order to establish a diplomatic rapport between himself and his interviewees. Through this, the viewer is able to place themselves in Louis’ shoes and receive an objective, transparent insight into these marginal subcultures.

In addition, a number of unscripted humourous moments often occur throughout Theroux’s films due to Louis’ occasional remarks towards the interviewee. During these, Louis will often comment on exactly what the viewer themselves is thinking and this creates a sense of relatability between Louis and the viewer.

Due to this, Louis Theroux has received a number of accolades including two BAFTAs for Best Presenter as well an Emmy award in 1995. He is popular among the documentary viewership and arguably one of the most recognisable documentarians of our time.

Louis Theroux

The Most Hated Family in America (Geoffrey O’Connor, 2007) is a performative documentary written and presented by Louis Theroux. During the film, Theroux visits the Westbrook Baptist Church in Kansas. Led by Fred Phelps, the church members vehemently believe that America is immoral due to the tolerance of homosexuality present throughout the country,

*Louis pictured with the daughters of the church*

Throughout the film, Louis accompanies the church to a number of pickets at the funerals of military soldiers who were killed in action. Throughout the protest, each member of the church – including the radicalised young children proudly displays a multitude of extremely derogatory signs pictured below.

Alongside attending the pickets, Louis takes time to interview each member of the church in order to fully understand their extremely controversial way of life. He exerts an extremely polite and almost naive demeanour towards the church members, cleverly making them more eager and willing to converse with him. He strikes the perfect balance between getting up-close and personal with the interviewees and keeping enough distance between to remain impartial towards the situation.

This film could be categorised under the performative documentary mode, due to Louis Theroux’s heavy involvement upon the events depicted within the film. Revolving around Louis’ interactions with the church members, Theroux holds the film together and the viewer can easily place themselves in his shoes.

The film aired on 1 April 2007 on BBC Two and received 4.3 million viewers. Later the film was awarded overwhelmingly positive acclaim for exposing this controversial family to the public eye in an extremely professional manner.

Personally, I thoroughly enjoyed The Most Hated Family in America from start to finish. Being a fan of Theroux’s style of documentary, I was engaged within the interactions between Louis and the church members.

Overall, I would rate The Most Hated Family in America ★★★★.

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.

Aileen: Life And Death Of A Serial Killer (Nick Broomfield, 2003)

Aileen: Life and Death Of A Serial Killer (Nick Broomfield, 2003) is a performative documentary film that details the events leading up to Aileen Wuornos’ execution – America’s first female serial killer. The film is a follow-up to Broomfield’s previous film Aileen Wuornos: The Selling of a Serial Killer (1992) in which Broomfield attempts to interview Wuornos, and those around her who exploit her.

Throughout the film, Broomfield documents his relationship with Aileen and her family members through a variety of interviews. Alongside this, a large portion of the film is made up of Aileen’s courtroom hearings in which Nick Broomfield is summoned as a key witness. Broomfield additionally employs an assortment of news-reel footage in a non-linear manner to further inform the viewer of Aileen’s crimes. Interestingly, Aileen’s mental state can be seen to be visibly deteriorating over the course of the film.

This film could be considered a performative documentary due to Nick Broomfield’s heavy impact upon the events depicted throughout the film. Every event portrayed throughout the documentary can be traced back to Broomfield in one way or another.

The film grossed $16,158 after being released on three screens and received positive acclaim, receiving an 86% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

Personally, I enjoyed the film to a certain extent and found Aileen’s hearings to be quite enjoyable and engaging. Despite this, I found many of the interviews to be relatively boring and unenjoyable – especially Aileen’s.

Overall, I would rate Aileen: Life And Death Of A Serial Killer ★★★.

Filmmakers’ “theories” — Michael Moore

Michael Moore is an American documentary filmmaker, author and left-wing activist. Often addressing the topics of globalisation and capitalism, Moore’s documentaries frequently utilise his trademark cynical satire to expose a typically controversial subject matter.

Moore, like Broomfield, is a very visible presence in his documentaries, which can thus be described as participatory and performative. His work is highly committed — overtly polemical in taking up a clear point of view, what might be called agit-prop documentary. He justifies his practice in terms of providing ‘balance’ for mainstream media that, in his view, provides false information. Part of Moore’s approach is to use humour, sometimes to lampoon the subject of his work and sometimes to recognise that documentaries need to entertain and hold an audience.

Moore’s work is typically a combination of his aforementioned cynical narration over a variety of archive footage intertwined with present day interviews with relevant authority figures and other noteworthy members of the public. Through this, Moore creates an engaging and unique experience throughout his filmography – often generating a great deal of controversy.

Moore’s films are extremely personal, tackling topics that hold a great deal of significance to him. Films such as Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 9/11 are now cornerstones of the performative documentary genre. Because of this, it is no surprise that Time magazine named Michael Moore as one of the world’s 100 most influential people.

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).