The current appeal of Documentaries? (1 Viewer)

[Lew Crippen]

You guys in Collin County no longer have to drive to Dallas to see something interesting. You still should though—we are so much more interesting than Plano.

But as I live just to the east of the Angelika, to the west of the Inwood and the north of the Magnolia, I’m not going to get envious too soon.

When I read one of those 'I hate theater' threads, I always feel very lucky to be able to attend in Dallas.

 

[Lew Crippen]

You guys in Collin County no longer have to drive to Dallas to see something interesting. You still should though—we are so much more interesting than Plano.

But as I live just to the east of the Angelika, to the west of the Inwood and the north of the Magnolia, I’m not going to get envious too soon.

When I read one of those 'I hate theater' threads, I always feel very lucky to be able to attend in Dallas.

 

[George See]

I'd argue there's not much reality in reality TV.
Which goes right along with the discussion here about Staging the scene etc. I can't remember who exactly said it but there's that saying about Studying something causes that thing to change. Also is there really any way to be a completly impartial observer and just point a camera? At some point you have to make decisions like, if your studying a war and 2 soldiers are shooting at each other do you point the camera at soldier A or Soldier B? Of course your choice is based upon your own point of view. And someone somewhere is going to accuse you of not being an impartial film maker.

 

[George See]

I'd argue there's not much reality in reality TV.
Which goes right along with the discussion here about Staging the scene etc. I can't remember who exactly said it but there's that saying about Studying something causes that thing to change. Also is there really any way to be a completly impartial observer and just point a camera? At some point you have to make decisions like, if your studying a war and 2 soldiers are shooting at each other do you point the camera at soldier A or Soldier B? Of course your choice is based upon your own point of view. And someone somewhere is going to accuse you of not being an impartial film maker.

 

[Mike Broadman]

No, it's one of those weird distortions of a scientific principle, taken completely out of context (like "social Darwinism").

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principles states that a subatomic particle cannot be observed without affecting it becaue observing it requires light, and light photons are bigger than these particles.

 

[Mike Broadman]

No, it's one of those weird distortions of a scientific principle, taken completely out of context (like "social Darwinism").

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principles states that a subatomic particle cannot be observed without affecting it becaue observing it requires light, and light photons are bigger than these particles.

 

[Lew Crippen]

Ah quantum mechanics as applied to making films.

The answer is Edwin Schrodinger, who back in the 30s made an analogy that is still in use today (this because quantum mechanics is notoriously difficult to understand—even by those who are experts).

His analogy went like this (I may get a bit wrong—but this is reasonably correct):

You take a cat (alive) and put it in a very thick, lead box into which you also place a cyanide capsule, a Geiger counter and a measured bit of radioactive material. The whole thing is set with a Rube Goldberg device that measures if an atom in the material decays and if it does, the Geiger counter measures the decay and triggers a device that releases the cyanide and the cat dies.

There is an equal chance that an atom will decay or not in one hour.

So is the cat alive or dead? Schrodinger (as I recall) said that there the cat was both alive and dead. It was not until the box was opened and the cat observed that the alive/dead cat would either be alive or dead. Hence, the act of observation caused the state of the cat to change.

There have been some changes to this, one that I recall has takes measurements of gamma rays that manage to penetrate the lead. But their arrival is random and unpredictable. Is the cat alive or dead. When the box is opened the lead no longer reduces the background radiation and the cat dies. Therefore the very act of observation changes the state of the cat.

The concept is often applied to cinema verité, where the act of observation changes that being observed. The best example may be an experimental documentary that was shown on PBS back in the 70s (I think) where a family’s life was filmed almost without cease. The idea was to see the unvarnished truth of this family.

As it turned out, the highlight of the film (or series or whatever) was when the wife asked the husband for a divorce. Something that she said she did because of her own examination of the state of their marriage, occasioned by the constant filming.

 

[Lew Crippen]

Ah quantum mechanics as applied to making films.

The answer is Edwin Schrodinger, who back in the 30s made an analogy that is still in use today (this because quantum mechanics is notoriously difficult to understand—even by those who are experts).

His analogy went like this (I may get a bit wrong—but this is reasonably correct):

You take a cat (alive) and put it in a very thick, lead box into which you also place a cyanide capsule, a Geiger counter and a measured bit of radioactive material. The whole thing is set with a Rube Goldberg device that measures if an atom in the material decays and if it does, the Geiger counter measures the decay and triggers a device that releases the cyanide and the cat dies.

There is an equal chance that an atom will decay or not in one hour.

So is the cat alive or dead? Schrodinger (as I recall) said that there the cat was both alive and dead. It was not until the box was opened and the cat observed that the alive/dead cat would either be alive or dead. Hence, the act of observation caused the state of the cat to change.

There have been some changes to this, one that I recall has takes measurements of gamma rays that manage to penetrate the lead. But their arrival is random and unpredictable. Is the cat alive or dead. When the box is opened the lead no longer reduces the background radiation and the cat dies. Therefore the very act of observation changes the state of the cat.

The concept is often applied to cinema verité, where the act of observation changes that being observed. The best example may be an experimental documentary that was shown on PBS back in the 70s (I think) where a family’s life was filmed almost without cease. The idea was to see the unvarnished truth of this family.

As it turned out, the highlight of the film (or series or whatever) was when the wife asked the husband for a divorce. Something that she said she did because of her own examination of the state of their marriage, occasioned by the constant filming.

 

[Lew Crippen]

In furtherance to Mike’s post (while I was typing), I would add that in the case of Schrodinger’s Cat, whether observation changes the state of the cat from alive/dead to either alive or dead, depends on your being able to believe that the cat is both alive and dead while you are unable to observe the cat.

Clearly (if there is such a thing is these discussions) if you can’t accept this as a concept, then observation does not change the cat, but only confirms the state.

 

[Lew Crippen]

In furtherance to Mike’s post (while I was typing), I would add that in the case of Schrodinger’s Cat, whether observation changes the state of the cat from alive/dead to either alive or dead, depends on your being able to believe that the cat is both alive and dead while you are unable to observe the cat.

Clearly (if there is such a thing is these discussions) if you can’t accept this as a concept, then observation does not change the cat, but only confirms the state.

 

[Brook K]

Not to mention Lew, documentaries like John Huston's Battle of San Pietro that the military suppressed as an "anti-war" film.

You make good points Seth. I agree in your disdain of genre theory and how it presets certain expectations in the mind of the viewer. Sounds like an excellent topic for a paper.

I'll be watching just such a "documentary" tonight, Touching The Void

 

[Brook K]

Not to mention Lew, documentaries like John Huston's Battle of San Pietro that the military suppressed as an "anti-war" film.

You make good points Seth. I agree in your disdain of genre theory and how it presets certain expectations in the mind of the viewer. Sounds like an excellent topic for a paper.

I'll be watching just such a "documentary" tonight, Touching The Void

 

[George See]

I think the act of observation/study changing or destroying things applies to more then just physics however. I often remember a teacher using that statement in an Archeology/Antropology class. I can't remember the exact wording he used as that was many years ago but the idea was the same.

I'd say it's a safe bet to say that most people act differently when they know they are being filmed some act more restrained some act less restrained.

This organization basis their exsistance on the idea that the act of filming something can change it.
http://www.witness.org/

 

[George See]

I think the act of observation/study changing or destroying things applies to more then just physics however. I often remember a teacher using that statement in an Archeology/Antropology class. I can't remember the exact wording he used as that was many years ago but the idea was the same.

I'd say it's a safe bet to say that most people act differently when they know they are being filmed some act more restrained some act less restrained.

This organization basis their exsistance on the idea that the act of filming something can change it.
http://www.witness.org/

 

[Lew Crippen]

Indeed—but unfortunately I’d bet that not one person in a hundred knows Morris’ name (though his recent Oscar win on a film on a high-profile subject may have changed that) and not one person in a thousand knows about the Maysles. Probably five out of ten are aware of Moore.

BTW Chris, did you see Albert Maysles at the Dallas Video Festival?

 

[Lew Crippen]

Indeed—but unfortunately I’d bet that not one person in a hundred knows Morris’ name (though his recent Oscar win on a film on a high-profile subject may have changed that) and not one person in a thousand knows about the Maysles. Probably five out of ten are aware of Moore.

BTW Chris, did you see Albert Maysles at the Dallas Video Festival?

 

[Chris_Richard]

I was able to see Albert Mayles a year ago at the video festival and see a screening of Salesman. He spent most of the discussion on his style vs. the on-screen filmmaker. He will also be back at this year's festival next month.

Earlier this year I was at a screening of Fog of War with Errol Morris at the 6th Floor Museum. It was an interesting night. It was the day after he was nominated for the Oscar and the discussion began with his work but quickly became a dialogue between Morris and people who were alive in the 60s and think McNamaria is the devil.

 

[Chris_Richard]

I was able to see Albert Mayles a year ago at the video festival and see a screening of Salesman. He spent most of the discussion on his style vs. the on-screen filmmaker. He will also be back at this year's festival next month.

Earlier this year I was at a screening of Fog of War with Errol Morris at the 6th Floor Museum. It was an interesting night. It was the day after he was nominated for the Oscar and the discussion began with his work but quickly became a dialogue between Morris and people who were alive in the 60s and think McNamaria is the devil.

 

[Lew Crippen]

I envy that discussion with Morris, Chris. I was alive in the 60s (three years of them in the military) and have a view.

 

[Lew Crippen]

I envy that discussion with Morris, Chris. I was alive in the 60s (three years of them in the military) and have a view.