Here are a few questions suggested by the Nichols reading, "How can we define documentary film?" pp. 1-33.
On page 5, Nichols writes doc “filmmakers maintain their distance from the authoritative tone of corporate media in order to speak to power rather than embrace it.”
How do we see (or hear) this "distance" in The Thin Blue Line? What about it seems "distanced" from the tone of corporate media?
What do you think is Morris's critique—that is, what is the truth the film/filmmaker “speaks to power”?
Consider the assumptions about documentary Nichols describes, starting on page 7. What kinds of exceptions can you think of, or what kind of objections might you make to those assumptions?
No comments:
Post a Comment