Exploring The 'Truth' Within Documentaries-1500-Word

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 5

Exploring the 'truth' within documentaries

We all view documentaries as “ truthful” and professional, especially in the realm of nature
documentaries. With such big names as Sir David Attenborough, we rely and trust his words
and facts. With these types of documentaries on demand and new ones airing every week, it is
hard to pinpoint the actual numbers and figures, especially when a new presenter comes on the
scene with little or no history with anything related to their current role.

On one hand we have a small group of passionate people dedicating


their whole adult life to nature and documenting it for the public, on
the other hand we have aspiring new presenters taking a steady
step into the televised world of nature documentation. A very good
example of this is Chris Packham in the, now, fairly well established
“ The Watches” live broadcast nature series consisting of:
Springwatch, Autumnwatch, Winterwatch.

These “ Watches” broadcast one episode a week LIVE one day of


the week, they setup live hidden cameras all across RSPB Minsmere
and across the UK, showing animal behavior in real time straight to
the viewers screens. Being funded and shown on BBC Two, we can
believe and rely on the information we are told by the presenters.Wikipedia. (2022). Springwatch. [online]
Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springwatch [Accessed 23 Jan. 2023].

This information will aid me in documentary making as it will help me understand what sources
to look to and how to be as unbiased as possible. I will also learn how to present to the camera
and deliver my lines, queues and where to stand. Through this, I will also know how popular
each subject in nature documentary making is, and bring out the smaller subject into the light.

Location and conditions is also very important for these documentaries, as you want it to be as
natural as possible, this leading back to “ truthful” documentaries, could deceive the viewer with
incorrect and/or cheaping out on location and travel to it. This is why Sir David Attenborough’s “
our Planet” is so great, being of older age, he still travels to/ near the location of where their
target for shooting is situated, whether that be an iguana in the Amazon forest, he will be there
in a boat with the camera man pointing out the creature to the camera and the viewers.

Truth in documentary film might be approached as a way of creating meaning from a filmic text.
Thus the search for documentary truth, a search for an understanding of what we are presented
with, can be seen as a phenomenological undertaking. Explaining phenomenology’s main
interest as “attempting to describe what is in front of us”. A phenomenological approach to
understanding documentary film allows for a guide through the spaces between the textual
elements that must be navigated in order to construct meaning. He notes that “documentaries
via phenomenology guide us…to the real world. We, as viewers, accept the contract, implicit or
otherwise, that what we see is about the real, not the real”. Thus the impossibility of
documentary to present us with reality is dealt with through film’s ability to allow us to
understand the real within it.Offscreen.com. (2019). The Gap: Documentary Truth between Reality and Perception. [online]
Available at: https://offscreen.com/view/documentary.

My chosen area of investigation is important as it allows


documentary makers to deliver some medium of truth to
the audience. The filmmakers chose to create the show
to help increase science literacy among the general public.
It is more important nowadays because the “ truth” in
nature documentaries could be very important for
future human life, for example, people documenting
on birds can help scientists understand how to build
considerably more sustainable housing

We can learn a whole bunch from many other different


creatures, one example is how termites build their hills
with ventilation, flood and predator protection in mind.
Considering that these hills are built from the ground up,
this means that snakes and spiders could potentially
climb up and into the hill, causing harm to the inhabitants.
However, the way that the tunnels are formed means that
the attacker could very easily get confused and lost, no way
of getting back out and starve to death. In terms of ventilation,
the eggs and housing are suspended by a false floor-bridge
type structure to let air flow over and under the main
compartments, this is vital as these termite hills are all
located in Africa, Australia and South-Africa. Same for the
flooding protection, rain seeps in through the tunnels, collects
at the bottom of the hill and is relieved through the bottom
tunnels into nearby plant roots, watering these plants and allowing them to give off fruit of
flowers which are collected and eaten by the termites.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0795176/awards/ https://www.emmys.com/shows/planet-earth

A masterpiece of a documentary

Users from all over the internet applauded the works of Sir David Attenborough on the ‘Planet
Earth’ (1) TV Mini series. Celebrating the stunning scenery and shoots, congratulating the
directors, crew and editors. The amount of effort everyone had to put in and the amount of
sweat and aches to go through. Reading through the reviews, the most commonly celebrated
aspects were the shots of open vast tropical forests, loud deep oceans or windy treacherous
deserts, it was all shock and awe from the audience.

Michael Kelem Cinematographer - 5 Episodes, 2006


Doug Anderson Cinematographer - 3 Episodes, 2006
Andrew Shillabeer Cinematographer - 3 Episodes, 2006
Peter Kragh Cinematographer - 2 Episodes, 2006
Paul Stewart Cinematographer - 2 Episodes, 2006
Doug Allan Cinematographer - 1 Episode, 2006
Martyn Colbeck Cinematographer - 1 Episode, 2006
Wade Fairley Cinematographer - 1 Episode, 2006
Simon King Cinematographer - 1 Episode, 2006

Andy Netley Editor - 3 Episodes, 2006


Stuart Napier Editor - 2 Episodes, 2006
David Pearce Editor - 2 Episodes, 2006
Andrew Chastney Editor - 1 Episode, 2006
Martin Elsbury Editor - 1 Episode, 2006
Jill Garrett Editor - 1 Episode, 2006
Jo Payne Editor - 1 Episode, 2006
Thom Sulek Editor - 1 Episode, 2006

https://www.bafta.org/television/craft-awards/springwatch-special-award-recipient-in-2011

A different approach

From reading the Springwatch reviews on imdb, I see that everyone enjoys the live footage of
wildlife and how the whole series is presented as a whole. Authentic passion for the job,
unparalleled love for the small birds and nightlife creatures and the sense of community within
every episode that is broadcasted right to the screens.

Since 2005 many aspects of the series have changed, Smaller compact cameras that shoot in
higher resolutions, easier methods to travel to filming locations and overall simpler management
and overseeing of documentary production. Now the presenters have the ability to express their
thoughts and opinions on “ the seasons” or “ the transformation of butterflies”.

However, it also made it easier to “ fake” certain scenarios, especially with smaller creatures.
The BBC makes an artificial home and surrounding areas for tiny creatures that have been
planned to have a documentary made on them. For example, ‘ Life of a woodlouse’, they create
a living space with bark, plants, holes, water etc… Put the bugs into said area and document its
life as if they were actually going out into the forestry areas, searching for specific creepy-
crawlies and documenting them in its authentic natural habitat. However, it IS easier on the
wallet and on the crew itself as traveling and logistics are cut by 80% as this filming studio
would be considerably closer to them, and it decreases risk and health injury.

Thanks to humans being humans and always striving to push forward, this area of investigation
has changed drastically, but at the same time has kept some tradition. In terms of technology,
there has been a massive step-up in audio, camera and post production. An example of how
sound/audio has improved, you look at all the boom mics and microphones hooked up to
presenters, crisp and clear quality capturing speech even if heads are turned or the mouth is
slightly away from the mic itself. An example of how cameras have improved, much much
higher capture quality cameras have become portable/ semi-portable allowing to shoot in the
best possible resolution nearly anywhere, from mountains, to beaches, to tropical rainforests, to
barren tundra. An example of how post production has improved, way back when Sir David
Attenborough first started nature documentaries for audiences viewing it on their black and
white TVs, the editing and refining process was tedious and soul sucking, it consisted of taking
the used film, and cutting bits out that were and weren’t needed, then carefully sticking it back
together with scotch or some sort of glue praying you didn't splodge any excess glue on the
frames.

How has the audience improved over these times as well? More and more people have access
to a device fit for viewing films and other forms of entertainment, this means that more viewers
have a higher chance to view these documentaries. More and more people start to worry about
this world and how we treat it and urge each other to learn more and understand what we can
all do to change it for the better.

You might also like