...Or do they? In a perfect world, documentaries are a perfect balance of revelation and judgement - that is, their point of view is so subtle and undemanding, audiences are inadvertently implicated within it. The article the above quote came from is part of this week's third reading - the first part, to be exact. Neither the boys (there is only 3 of us now, by the way, as Christine has gone to another group) nor I had even suggested using a narrator for this documentary, however we did stay back on Wednesday after class to watch Sadness - a doco directed by William Ayres, that centers around the life story of William Yang and how he grappled with his Asian identity and losing so many of his friends to the AIDS epidemic of the early 1990s. This film contained quite a bit of narration by Yang, something that both Deno and I thought detracted from the content because of its prevalence. The story would have been much more effective if it hadn't been so formulaic, and had strove to step outside the square much more than it did. Especially considering how powerful some of the content was, it could definitely have been executed in a more discrete manner - a more aesthetic one, at the very least. Something else for us to keep in mind with our own productions, that's for sure.
I want to catch another doco @ MIFF this weekend, seeing as it's about to wrap up, but I'll have to play it by ear and make sure I have enough cash and everything else. It'd be good to see though. I'm also considering hiring out 'Capturing the Freidmans' for a bit more inspo... everyone I'ce talked to about it said it was good, and David did mention that there were a few twists in it. And we like twisted, don't we? (Rhetorical question, I know)