Since documentary films encompass a plethora of subject matter and topics on a range of issues the most relevant of documentaries are the ones focused on historical events and in current events. Historical documentaries focuses intrinsically on biographies, time periods, past governments and their policies, social movements—among other things—while current events tackles the topics of the day and the top issues in popular discussions—kind of like a long form version of news packages. The question arises whether documentaries make more or less of an impact on historical or current events or whether they fail in either regard. Television channels that touch on historical events like the History Channel, National Geographic, PBS, and Discovery—for example—today have slowly evolved into the constructing and distribution of documentaries focused on a range of current event topics. These channels put together programs that compete in the long form news documentary fashion such as CBS’ “60 Minutes”, ABC’s “Nightline”, PBS’ “Frontline” and NBC’s “Dateline” to name a few.
Timing is a fundamental aspect to documentary filmmaking not just for a project to go from concept to completion but more so, in distribution as well. The heart of documentary films is social consciousness which prompts production teams to raise awareness on given topics in order to convey its important themes, provide an in-depth look on a pressing issue, and investigate a topic to its core eliminating the tendency for bias, manipulation, and distortion. While documentary filmmakers aren’t always purists and take heed fully to accuracy and impartiality they are timing in their work. This sense of timing can have a marketing approach angle to it but in many ways it also adds to the conversation of a current subject matter. For historical pieces timing is all in the details of the historical timeline that is being conveyed in the film itself. So, will viewers take heed to timing documentary film projects or wait for it to come to life and unfold in historical portrayals? And, are documentaries at their best when timing correlates seamlessly to the best narrative portrayal on camera?
Eyes on the Prize, was an episodic American television documentary series that covered lucidly the Civil Rights Movement in the United States. The documentary consisted of 14 televised episodes in two different airing seasons that first premiered on PBS in 1987 nearly two decades after the movement was essentially over. Eyes on the Prize is a great example to the impact a historical documentary can have on the consciousness of its viewers especially when they are targeted to a generation after the social movement it conveyed. Lauded as the most critically acclaimed documentary on the American Civil Rights Movement the documentary series went on to garner several Emmy Awards and a Peabody Award. The question to pose here is—would Eyes on the Prize have made such a deeper impact on the thoughts and minds of its viewers if it had been produced during the movements’ time? Is their more credibility in facts, research of what transpired, and testimonials years later when a historical documentary is produced?
Perhaps, one can answer these hypothetical questions with a simple—each documentary, its own. Some documentary projects make more sense to produce and distribute even as the current event topic is still unfolding. Example of this is Charles Ferguson’s Oscar-winning documentary film, Inside Job—which effectively documented the global financial crisis of 2007–08 that led to the Great Recession. It was released in 2010 a year or two removed from the actual meltdown itself while the repercussions still were in effect. Ferguson and his team could’ve easily waited until the dust was really settled—where major lawsuits have been settled and all new governmental policy was enacted since clearly political and economic activities were still being framed years after the Great Recession formally ended. Another example of a semi-historical documentary based on current events was the controversial documentary, Loose Change, a series of films released between 2005 and 2009 which argue in favor of certain conspiracy theories surrounding the September 11th attacks. Clearly, the makers of this series of films needed time to gather all necessary data, research all relevant information, and articulate a strong enough thesis to move forward to a completion of the thought-provoking film piece they eventually put together. Surprising enough documentaries can work as a current event piece upon the time of its release and then as a historical piece years later like Peter Gabriel’s powerful film, Hearts and Minds, which captivated the audience on the reality of the Vietnam War and released in 1974—the last days of the war. It is clear that specific documentaries work well in hindsight where others are more effective in covering the latest hot topics. Special is the case of documentaries that do not fall in either side of this dichotomy. Like Morgan Spurlock’s Super Size Me which analyzed the growing sales trend of McDonald’s former value meal selection. Here, Spurlock covered the historical ascendancy of the mega fast food chain while simultaneously documenting the social trends and health implications presently occurring with the company.
A lot happens in documentary film storytelling with timing. A story never really ends once the camera is off nor when the editing of past footage material is finalized. Thus, with personal stories where filmmakers become a “fly on the wall” to capture a storyline and its characters interacted in its rawest forms and moments the same thing happens in historical pieces of work covering large periods of time. Yes, one can argue that historical events are timed in the sense that it’s over and is no longer happening but historians, journalists, and anthropologists covering a specific moment in time of past events are constantly digging and finding new stuff to opine about and discuss. Each documentary film functions on its own breadth and film producers, directors, and writers all get to work on the arbitrariness of a given moment. After all, documentary film works well when there is an audience ready to consume such content. So, from whatever platform marketing initiatives take into effect some films may work in the present moment while others are more effective in hindsight for a release date. The market of would-be consumers of a given documentary program or film is essential to whether a specific documentary does well in timing for a successful outlet and business plan. As long as documentary films do not lose its elements in nonfiction portrayal of spontaneous, non-scripted storytelling and nor does makers of documentary films lose their merit in the integrity of telling the truth and exposing reality in its purest form then historical and current event documentaries work for specific reasons.