Author Archives: AdelinG

Documentaries Are Not JUST Conversational Pieces

Documentaries are not just conversational pieces. I repeat. Documentaries are not conversational pieces. Instead they are a highly-regarded work of moving visual art. A documentary is visual storytelling–like all other film genres. They may elicit conversation but they are not conversational pieces unto themselves. Now why am I bringing this obvious point up? Far too often when first-time filmmakers decide to embark on the momentous sojourn that is documentary filmmaking their idea of making a documentary film–independent or a series–is to simply interview folks for a conversation on screen. Now while “talking heads” are a long-running element in producing a documentary it is not done in such a manner to leave documentaries simply as conversational pieces. There’s usually a story that is unraveling in a “talking head” documentary. Documentaries are not place-holders for visual podcasts. Documentaries are not live radio interviews. Documentary is a genre in filmmaking from start to finish. Documentarians are more artists than reporters, more filmmakers than journalists, more storytellers than interviewers. Film directors and their production teams must take on the art of documentary storytelling with every frame of film accounted for in a visual portrait of a given narrative. If the eye as much as the ear of a documentary filmmaker is not the driving force they are not doing documentaries.

Conversational pieces have their place and purpose in our vast world of digital content creation. They can be used in a range of milieus–churches, barbershops, schools, etc. Conversational pieces can be both entertaining and educational. YouTube and other growing platforms provide an endless space for conversational pieces mostly geared with sit-down interviews chiming away on a given subject or theme. Other social media platforms now are leaning in the direction of presenting conversational pieces in a thought-provoking approach, an educational avenue and an entertaining tone. But where conversational pieces fall short in its connection to documentary is the visual component of conveying a story.  Storytelling is an important aspect to producing a film of any genre. In fact, one can argue it is the single aspect to making a film. The ability to convey a story on camera must be a tier above the visual approach of having someone or some people talking in front of the camera. In other words, there’s more to making a documentary than having a conversation on screen. Documentaries are multi-layered works of film art. They encompass the same visual storytelling components in the film medium–cinematography, sound design, colors, moving footage, etc.


One of the best critiques I ever received in my documentary film work was: “Adelin–you explained more than you showed.” This cold slap in the face of a comment, this wake up call of a remark helped me understand fully what this artistic genre entails–ever so subtly and simply. In telling a story on film you must visually portray for viewers what the storyline is, what the problem-solution arc will come to, how the major and minor characters interact, what the denouement looks like. These aspects of storytelling can be talked about on screen but with far less impact and aim. It’ll come off as more of a report lacking the nuance of what a film can deliver. It’ll also come off as a reflective piece for a continuing conversation rather than an empathetic ride audience members want to embark on when they start to watch a documentary. Take Netflix’s latest documentary, Descendant–which I believe is a masterpiece. It has all the superb elements in stellar documentary filmmaking: nuanced, character-driven plot, access, historical data, masterful cinematography, timely cinéma vérité, and the enterprising of a legacy story. Descendant certainly elicits a conversation on the single most powerful narrative in the United States-race. However, the topics addressed, the characters portrayed, the storyline articulated in a visual media form would all be watered down if it was told from a single person narrative or a few people speaking in front of the camera. When the breadth of documentaries are explored and presented it has a far deeper impact on the true intention of documentary directors and producers and even distributors.

Challenging Your Thesis

The great documentarian must challenge her thesis throughout the journey of exploration, discovery, and intrigue. She must excavate the landscape of her sojourn to dig up all aspects of her thesis seeking the counter points of views and counter arguments. The documentary filmmaker with her dedicated team should not just be comfortable in making sense of her thesis for articulation and regurgitation. Instead, the documentarian should be disciplined to the core in challenging her mindset, perspective and insight. It’s the kind of open-ended journey W. Kamau Bell, comedian/TV producer, went upon in re-examining the complex legacy of Bill Cosby in his docu-series We Need to Talk About Cosby. In his revelation to inform viewers on Cosby’s impact in the entertainment business for over three decades Bell had to take on his own predilection on what Cosby meant for up-and-coming black standup comedians. After all, it was not long since Bell himself was a struggling standup comic. Bell’s work proves that a general thesis can expand to the very nuances that deliver perspective and truth on a single documentary narrative.

Throwing your thesis to the fire and seeing what comes out is an effective way to carve out a singular, concise approach to documentary storytelling. Such recourse in highlighting and conveying a subject matter would help drive documentarians and their team to establish truth and relevancy on a given topic. The journey in documentary filmmaking involves the creative expression of nonfiction storytelling as well as the personal outlook in seeing the world in a different light. We put ourselves in the shoes of our subject and make sense of their voice in articulating passions and tribulations. Take my approach in my documentary short, High On Heels. As a man covering a wholly female fashion item I went outside of my normal personal element to gain new insight to the everyday effect of the high-heeled shoe, which to this day still dominates modern women’s livelihood. In challenging my thesis I set out to dare my limited view on a highly personalized accessory from a woman’s vantage point.

Challenging your thesis takes homework and focus. It’s more about rolling your sleeves to do due diligence on creative and intellectual approaches to subject matter. It’s less of opining about varying perspectives on philosophical tangents on what could or could not be. It’s like the Master’s and Ph.D’s student who takes on a given academic thesis for completion of coursework. The student delves back and forth on the angle of her proposal which serves as a guide navigating through the research phase to deliver a sound argument-proven theory.  Challenging your thesis in this guise also can flip the direction of a film project from what it initially began as. Producers and production teams make a solid pivot to where the truth guides them and is under pressure to disseminate it in a creatively visual way. Searching For Sugarman is a great example of challenging a thesis to a documentary storyline because the producers’ journey began with two South Africans who set out to discover what happened to their unlikely musical hero, the mysterious 1970s American rock n roller, Rodriguez—-whom they initially presumed was dead. The film’s main characters along with the director and producers went on an unwinding road that took them across three continents while reflecting on three decades for their source material. In the end they found their living legend alive and well in obscurity. Hence, in similar fashion as an archaeologist who investigates a dig or a journalist who works her sources challenging your thesis pushes the documentarian to redirect and shift their approach from concept to completion.

Filler

Filler is all around us. It’s the ingredients in processed foods. It’s in our everyday speech in colloquial conversations. People find it in trash dumps and bottom of ocean shores. You see it in construction sites and littered parks. You watch it everyday when tuning into content on social media and digital platforms. Filler is ubiquitous.

Some opine that filler is needed to keep viewers tuning into media programs or when there’s a need to lighten up the mood in all kinds of scenarios. Filler has its place in our hyper-commercialized, technologically-evolving realities. It brings us in and keeps us attuned. Filler is what adds 100 pages to that bookstore novel just purchased. Filler is that extra 20 minutes to that television show that needs extra plots and twists for major and minor characters. Filler is story development oftentimes long extended. Filler is the additional space to fill in on 24-hour news networks.

Filler can be expensive and cheap. Filler can be disposed of as well as recycled. Filler can be deleted or saved. Filler has its place and yet can be removed. Filler fills up a lot of spaces in entertainment–music, TV, film, news, blogs and social media.

But just when does filler take away from potential? When does filler actually get in the way of progress and quality? How does filler stifle what could be in terms of greatness? Filler to fill in time for time sake is mediocre. Filler that is used as a disposable extra in creative work is underachieving. While subjective in its usage and utility, filler in many ways is–as objective in empirical analysis and social outlooks. Filler is meant to stretch time. Advertisers would love to add filler if it means not turning viewers away. Filler in the media world is to meant to keep the viewer engaged on branded content.

Creatives seeking their voice for expression need to stave off filler no matter how easily it can move in the creative process. Content creators turning out daily and weekly content for viable platforms for new and growing audiences should be discouraged from filler in all it’s temptations to be added. Artists should red flag filler at every corner, in every disguise.

Filler can come with a price tag. The price tag for relevant audiences which, in turn, accrues profit. The price tag for relevancy in movements, trends, and new tendencies. The price tag for sacrifice in order to reach greatness and the spectacular.

Filler do we want it?
Filler do we need it?
It keeps us glued and tuned in.
It won't let us leave our couch.
It plugs us on our phones.

What would the world look like without filler?
Perhaps, a bit more concise and to the point.
Places and societies without any BS.
A world of honesty, integrity and passion.

Be weary of filler
Be mindful of the effects of filler
Be conscious to the reality of filler
Be on the lookout for filler in its many forms
Be one without filler
Give no excuse for filler


Underrating Documentary Filmmaking

Yeah it looks easy. Sure, anybody can pick up a camera, follow a story for a long period of time, and stitch the footage together. After all, documentaries are low-budgeted and unscripted. No need for location scouting, diva actors, high-maintenance directors, ego-driven producers. Just film an interesting storyline, keep it simple and there you have it–a documentary film. But, is worthwhile documentary filmmaking all that simple as it’s cut out to be? Does it look as easy as it sounds or looks?

Well, I can tell you with my seasoned, decade-long experience the documentary film journey from concept to completion is anything but easy. Sorry to disappoint the outsiders. Documentary filmmaking requires a master thesis, Ph.D doctoral dissertation focus for months if not years. New and old filmmakers’ patience will be tested to the core. Access will often be denied.

For the most part documentaries are often born as a passion project, driven by inspired pursuit. Pitches for these kinds of films don’t come with glowing business proposals. There’s not exactly a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow once it’s done. Marketing for documentaries aren’t easy deliveries. Documentaries are evolving works of art that unravel in the journey even after the film finally makes it into the can. Producers and directors of this genre naturally get enmeshed in the characters of the film whether it’s on camera or off. This changes the film business surrounding documentary film storytelling which, in many ways, lends itself to raising awareness on issues and exposing stories that don’t usually make it in the mainstream.

Far too often I see new executive producers, directors, cinematographers, and even editors walk into various phases of documentary filmmaking with an underrated approach. Their deadlines for delivering a film to completion are oftentimes way off. They are unrealistic about the cost to a documentary–despite how low the figures are in a given budget compared to films of other genres. Music video directors who often allow behind-the-scenes footage to be made while directing their music videos believe they can spill over their approach to such content in short-form and long-form documentaries. Editors of promo videos and broadcast television news are confident their creative, informative approach can make for an easier transition in documentary film work. And, while the approach and attempts at executing are commendable it’s the underrating, underlooking approach to the arduous journey of putting a documentary film together that needs to be squashed.

The far too often saying goes: “If it was easy everybody would do it.” But the better saying is: “If it was easy, who would want to do it?” Perhaps, this underrating approach taken by new documentarians will be enough for them to appreciate the art form and platform documentary film represents. Even with not-so-good documentaries being created ad nausem and distributed everywhere the better documentaries that get the recognition it deserves will be the example of why the creation of documentaries is one of the hardest sojourns in filmmaking art.

More

More is what keeps us going. More is why we wake up. More is what keeps us alive. More is our fuel for the grind. The inspiration. The aspiration. More works when you are ready to meet it. More is there when you least expect it. We should always be thankful for more.

In my career track more has never disappointed. It has left me wanting, desiring, seeking, understanding. More wasn’t always that clear to me but over time it proved to be my guide, my teacher, my anchor. I sought more for a long time but not in any greedy or gluttony sense. I wanted more not because of anything ostentatious or pretentious. More was not a motivation to get more likes or shares on social media. I wanted more for the simple sake of keeping me on track, allowing me to stay in tune to my destiny–helping me stay aligned with my purpose and truest intention.

With my latest documentary film more is essentially what I sought throughout the filmmaking journey. But as an independent filmmaker who usually works from concept to completion on projects more came after my film was already signed, sealed, and delivered. This time more presented itself in distribution. It’s a great feeling to shop around a new title looking for distributors (or, in this case, self-distribution). Finding creative ways to reach new audiences in the midst of a global health pandemic was a bit of a challenge. There I was putting press releases together, sending out thousands of emails (no exaggeration on the number range), making cold calls, and doing some leg work for the next opportunity at exposure for my finished product. I wanted more. But I had to be patient with more. The challenge of climbing up the marketing/PR mountain requires patience. Press releases get distributed but not easily read. Emails get sent off but not replied to until days later–if you’re lucky. Voicemails are rarely listened to, calls don’t always get picked up. And, digital platforms go through their own timely phase of streaming independent titles with their rules for specs and legal clearances.

In just five months I was able to get my latest film, High On Heels, to be distributed on two popular digital streaming platforms with hundreds of viewers tuning in daily. I was able to get up to 5 news/magazine websites to post a featured article about my documentary. I was able to get fashion bloggers to give me a social media shout-out and a hyperlink or two. I landed podcast and radio interviews. A few film critics chimed in with short and long reviews. All this at a considerate, doable price of financial means, time, and initiative. Did and do I still want more? Absolutely. But more than wanting more in terms of exposure to my recent work is something even more subtle yet vital to my focus on succeeding as an independent documentary filmmaker. I now learn first-hand what it takes to win in this new digital 21st century landscape of media saturation. More taught me to play the long game.

I now know that it really takes more to get to the next level. It takes persistent yet proper communication from concisely, written missives to one-minute-and-less elevator pitches. It takes constant drudging through “no”s and soft “maybes” to keep at the ambition of getting your project noticed, watched, reviewed, and shared. It takes timely events to seek new creative en-routes to reach your targeted audience. It plainly just takes more. In an ever-increasing digital landscape where new streaming apps are delivered as fast as content itself it takes more to get eyeballs on one’s work. This attention to detail, learning how new markets emerge and studying what ways people now consume videos and films is paramount. To deliver your original content is a matter of how much one wants it. In my case, how much more I want it.

Conspiracy Theory, Documentary Film’s Nemesis

Leave a reply

No other form of art, angle to truth, aspect to storytelling, and approach to the unknown does more damage to the boundless energy of documentary filmmaking than conspiracy theories. A range of documentaries—-big and small—-represent the didactic, the educational, the revolutionary, the introspective, the informative, the bonafide, the engaging, the rebellious, the probing. Conspiracy theories represent the questioning, the challenging, the explaining, the opining, the invoking, the thought-provoking. Clearly, both share parallel trajectories in non-fiction storytelling. And, so, often do both worlds collide especially when subject matter delves into sociopolitical territory. However way the two worlds and pursuits for the Truth come to a meeting ground more often is the case today that conspiracy theories serve as a liability for documentarians and their dedicated teams.

Conspiracy theories have come a long way. And, with the advent of our internet age propelled by this burgeoning era of social media conspiracy theories have not only become commonplace but mainstream. There was a time conspiracy theorists not too long ago regulated themselves on the margins of society with years-long research on topics like Roswell UFO landings and the JFK assassination. Dedicated thinkers employed in a range of skilled disciplines in the sciences and the humanities, and as paraprofessionals were motivated by one common thing—the truth. Years were taken to excavate the remains of commonly-held beliefs. Such thinkers and researchers at the time were not interested in fandom, publicity or platforms for commentary (i.e. radio, internet websites, social media channels). Documentaries at this time served a vital role for these earlier bastions of conspiracy theorizing. Such award-winning works completed at this time were Nigel Turner’s 9-part series, The Men Who Killed Kennedy and David Kasper’s Oscar winner, The Panama Deception. As a learning and engaging tool documentaries produced at this time were a bridge for research done outside the typed word. Documentaries delivered in fashion were motivated by the impulse for facts over commentary, raising awareness beyond the distracting, and kernels of truth separate from ideology.

Today, conspiracy theories rarely require homework much less investigation and research. 9/11 Truthers lead campaigns of vengeance against governmental bodies based on reactionary politics over a particularly figure or a party organization. They often take to the streets and flood comment sections on Facebook and YouTube—-rarely on details of facts and probing researched information. Popular documentaries in recent years have leaned in the contours of ideology and propaganda. In Michael Moore’s protrusive work, Fahrenheit 9/11, viewers were taken on a two hour thrill ride of left-wing ideology. The film contended that American corporate media culture served as “cheerleaders” for the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. Moore expounded on his theory by angling his position that the Bush II Administration did not provide an accurate, objective analysis for the rationale for the war and the resulting casualties that came. Historical and scientific accuracy did not motivate Michael Moore and his team to accomplish a thorough job of nonfiction storytelling. Instead, his angle to discredit a sitting president and his foreign policy was the main motivation. Ideology in popular documentaries have even spilled into the topics of race for conspiracy theory-laden documentary films. Ava DuVernay’s Netflix flick, 13th, analyzed the intersection of race and the U.S. criminal justice system. The film took deep en-routes in topics like slavery, the Jim Crow era, and mass incarceration. But, DuVernay’s thesis rested on the conspiracy theory that the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery, led to present-day prison labor. This labor was spawned by the war on drugs which served as a precusor to imprisoning large numbers of black and brown people throughout the U.S. One critic opined “You’d think from 13th that crime didn’t exist.”

When documentary filmmaking takes on conspiracy theorizing far too easily does it fall into the murky web of ideology and propaganda. Here’s where the two worlds of documentary filmmaking and conspiracy theorizing become enemies in the battlefield. So, much of documentary filmmaking is about credible reporting and fact-gathering along with a honest approach to stories and characters. Just like that of journalists–whether as writers or media personalities. Viewers of these documentary films are informed not swayed. If a new wave of viewership and growing audiences expanding beyond niche markets seek documentary films for the means of authenticating their deeply-held political and religious views than documentary filmmaking has turned the corner. And, perhaps, it is a move beyond the point of no return.

The Illusion of Perfection

Leave a reply
“Don’t let your want for perfection become procrastination.” – author/blogger

The pursuit of perfection is elusive, self-limiting, and regressive. Instead of propelling the artist it stagnates the artist. Instead of inspiring and nourishing the artist it dries up and starves the artist. Perfection is a lovely conceptual notion on paper and visually appealing in imagination. But, in all actuality perfection is a mirage not worth chasing after in any journey worth embarking upon. Wherever artists can find their authenticity needed to accomplish their works perfection is no where to be seen. Part of the reason for that is perfection is a diversion, a misnomer, an illusion.

I find myself needing to confront the slippery slope of what and how perfection is in all its myriad disguises. I want to combat this not necessarily for accomplishment sake but to stymie procrastination and not distract from focusing. Perfection usually comes up once the student has completed their schooling in a specific craft. Perfection entices newcomers to industries and platforms for an aim at longevity in a given career path. Perfection is also that elusive concept that keeps hungry artists from finishing their work in fear of not accomplishing quality projects or creative, daring endeavors. Was perfection the motivating factor as Michelangelo masterfully decorated the Sistine Chapel with his fresco, “The Last Judgment”? Could perfection be what Ingmar Bergman sought after while directing his classic epic, The Seventh Seal?

For filmmakers perfection appears in the edit bay when producers and editors stress-pick great material for finessing. For painters perfection shows up at the stroke of a brush. For writers perfection stares at them from a computer screen with every word and punctuation. All these appearances of perfecting one’s craft leads to the tendency of not fully completing a work nor attaining a goal at the best of one’s ability. Here, perfection makes one procrastinate and lag and drag. All while slowing down progress to near stops.

One has to be careful with the notion of perfection. Instead of getting frustrated that one hasn’t arrived at the highest caliber of attainment coined as “perfection” or “genius” one should use it as a measuring barometer to continue at improving. Perfection should serve as guide posts rather than the fuel for the engine to start and keep running until the journey concludes. By getting away from this illusionary path of perfection one finishes a passion project or dream pursuit with the highest of satisfaction. Perfection just like in character and behavior should prompt one to reach excellence and a job well done. Anything short of that–would be inauthentic in the creative process. So, I say: “Let’s aim for purity not perfection.”

Producer motives

Leave a reply

The saying goes: “life imitates art far more than art imitates life”. But if that’s the case why is it that in today’s media-saturated world do we have content creators driven and motivated to give audiences what they like to hear, see, touch, and even feel? New films, blogs, and music are put out daily from artists all over the world. These artists send their crafted content—-top quality or subpar—-to a given market. Here’s where reception and dollars come in. Media distributors’ number one aim is to reach a target audience for this new content. This ensures they are maximizing their content’s potential in order to generate a profit. Otherwise, their business model would fail. But, what’s the real aim here for the producer? Do they simply exist to placate to audience members? Feed them stuff that they know will resonate and cajole them? Do the avenues and platforms that are out there for producers and content creators simply there for easy consumption so people can have careers? In other words, how much responsibility do content creators have to be great and brilliant rather than mediocre and expectant?

I don’t know about you but I am all for the adventure; the daring. Producers need to shake shit up! Stir the pot. Make people think in new and creative ways. Inspire them to take part in movements and differing mindsets. Force them out of their comfort zone. Create works that are legacy pieces not just fast food filler!

Local news affiliates in major and small markets run their stations with “what bleeds leads” approach. National news media networks focus in on punchy headlines and pontificating soundbites to attract and keep viewers. Ideologies and bias drip in every word, take up every video frame on the screen. You hear it all the time in newsrooms and some writers room across the country–“we’re giving them what they want.” Journalists have to keep backstories short and light for easy consumption to a mass market. Comedies must stay consistent with stereotypical cliches. Just look at Kevin Hart’s films.  Investigations are limited due to time management and shorter attention spans. News directors and managing editors must think marketing as an appeal to their content-driven products. Scriptwriters regurgitate the same material for reuse in later projects. Hollywood pours millions into sequels, prequels, and trilogies after one hit movie. Clearly the mainstay for producers in big media outlets and those at the independent level is to operate with the mindset of how can we get people to like our stuff? But why think so small for a specific audience of media consumers? Why is there the assumption that a given audience will only want what you think they like rather than what they need–content that will challenge them, open them up, and raise their awareness–if not, consciousness? After all, what is entertaining falls more in the nonlinear creative space not simply based on a static formula.

Content creators in this constantly evolving, technology-driven digital space shouldn’t be motivated by the basic, the average, the norm. Think Vice Media in their earlier days when it was about adding unique voices to stories that were few and far in between. Artists of this new millennium are at their best when they are bent on molding new concepts for insight and perspective. Their drive is much bigger than click-bait, answering back to internet trolls, or keeping tabs on their follower counts. Numbers are extra—the additional reward for a new, unique product that pushes the needle and, perhaps, humanity forward.

What ever happened to inspiration? What happened to being driven by a concept, idea, and story? And, the driving impulse to tell it? When did the business model of distribution of new content material get shifted to creating what we think a targeted audience wants? Documentary filmmakers seem to be the only genre and avenue in the media and entertainment industry not beholden to the interests of catering to audiences. Look at Errol Morris’ filmography. Its filled with eccentric topics, raw subject matter all completed not necessarily because he thinks a given audience may like it. However, as this niche genre of documentary continues to find a home in various platforms–Netflix, PBS, HBO, etc. producers and directors will find themselves asking questions of ‘how can we get people to like our stuff’? The reason indie documentary film teams can escape and elude this impulse is because they are motivated by different means to an end. A new story worthy to get out in its rawest, purist form. Access to subjects that make a compelling story more revealed and authenticated. The newness of a subject and topic delivered creatively and with a unique expression.

Nobody likes an ass-kisser. Content creators moving toward appeasing audiences to stay relevant only add to the vast humdrum of mediocrity filling up our saturated media space. Just click on every other YouTube channel. While producers stay up finding ways to be liked the revolutionary makers and trendsetters are taking content to the next level. They are introducing new approaches to visual storytelling. They are challenging humanity to be extra with their attention span, focus, desires, and creative outlook. They are the ones history books remember. They are the ones critics seem to always talk about. They are the movers and shakers of each genre. They are the auteurs we’re glad to come across.

Dear Documentary

Leave a reply

Dear Documentary,

Thank you. Thank you for the inspiration. Thank you for the creativity. Thank you for the passion. Thank you for the love. Thank you for choosing me. Thank you for pushing me. Aiming me toward my destiny. It’s an arduous road with you but its rather cleansing. In my most darkest hour you showed me the light. When all things made little to no sense you brought clarity and ease. Your simplicity warmed me against the cold and bleakness the world often falls to. You never abandoned me. You never scared me away. You challenged me. You took me in; under your wing. Sent me journeying to personal levels I never thought was possible. When career marks leave me guessing you were the assured answer. I hope until my time expires in this temporal human experience I can be your most fervent servant beholding your grace and presence until the very end.

The world chose favoritism through corporate hierarchies. The talented chose the path of money over career longevity. The smartest and ablest of us stayed away because of the risk taking up your calling. You operated differently than all other genres. You moved at different paces than all the other art forms. The greedy and corrupt couldn’t enter your doors. The opportunist came and went but never stayed in your humble space and grace. You spoke to me at my level and assured me along the way. You molded me. Crafted me. Excited me. Whether I was watching enthusiastically in movie theaters or whether I streamed your presence across my computer screen I know I could always count on you.

You have a godlike presence appearing at the right times. You were there in Errol Morris’ The Thin Blue Line. You were felt in Spike Lee’s 4 Little Girls. I even saw you in Searching For Sugar Man. Your spirit fills up scripted outlines and budget summaries. Your spirit brings ease to narratives and tone. Your energy always aims for completeness and thoroughness. Your best work is that which refines and educates. You were there with me when I went out in scorching heat shooting necessary b-roll footage. You were there with me as I logged hours and hours of interviews transcribing that perfect soundbite every time. You were there with me in edit bays going through hundreds of files of instrumentals aimed at picking the right music score. You were there through laborious hours of logging content. You were there in the audience when my film was being screened.

Thank you for keeping me alive. Thank you for helping me evolve my conscious state of being. Thank you for helping me wake up with a smile. Thank you for piercing through my identity with a realized personhood. Thank you for being real and articulate. Thank you for being my love. I went through all the pits and avenues television, film, and digital media has to offer. But you were by far the best. Honest, probing, focused, sincere, gracious, courteous and sagacious. That first project was rough but worth the entrance in your ultimate embrace. The research that brought projects to life made it all too real your love and appreciation for facts, reality, and the truth. Even the seamless editing that delivered your finished product was a beautiful experience. It married creative expression with lucid narrative. Thank you for all that. Thank you for all this. Thank you.

Yours truly,

A humbled documentarian

Breathing

Leave a reply
We know the importance to breathing. It’s the source of life as well as the engine that keeps the human body going. People breathe through their noses and mouth to take in oxygen and then they release carbon dioxide in order to sustain life to the body. Breathing is also as much a luxury as it is a necessity. Breathing in and out properly can make for a great workout at the gym. Breathing correctly can also enhance the sexual experience and all the pleasures that come with it. Breathing effectively can also help one reach the equilibrium necessary in meditation and prayer; plus, it helps in yoga. There’s also a different type of breathing used metaphorically in filmmaking. It’s the luxury of editors, producers, directors, even writers to place pauses throughout film stories for reflection, cessation, and/or emotion. But such a luxury may, in fact, be vital to the life of a film itself.

We’ve seen it in every film and TV genre out there. We see it in international film works as well as local indie projects. Breathing is there in the action thriller during a car chase or the kissing scene that makes up a romantic comedy or a sitcom before and after the cued laughing track that accompanies an actors’ dialogue. Breathing is an important creative element in documentary filmmaking as well. Those pauses subtly layered with music can make and break a scene, a segment, a soundbite. Breathing helps end cadences, pitches, or reverberations that come about as the film rolls. It can even end and begin one chapter after another. It’s highly crucial that the simple aspects of allowing films to breath is not overlooked in the filmmaking process.

Nature documentaries that you often see on National Geographic or the Discovery Channel have this breathing element on point with their works. Producers allow for the capturing of nature to take its course with or without background music. If it’s a climate change piece allowing the breathing aerials or drone video to capture the melting ice and all the natural sound that comes with such an effect is pivotal for audiences to take in. Heck, anybody can speak on camera about what’s happening to the physical environment based on evidence of global warming. But, a segment that includes various video clips that allow for it all to breath shows and reveals more than it tells and explains. Breathing is also found in more complicated documentary storylines like sociopolitical pieces that cover issues like economic inequality (PBS Frontline’s Money Power and Wall Street), race relations (Raoul Peck’s I Am Not Your Negro), sports narratives (Ezra Edelman’s Magic & Bird: A Courtship of Rivals), and even biographies (MTV’s Tupac Resurrection). In these documentary film narratives the story builds in paces of pauses without being jam-packed with information, material and sound. These documentaries allow audiences to patiently take in the nuanced message of its given themes for emotional affect and self-reflection. There’s a reason why feature-length titles like these exceed pass the 60-minute mark. Breathing is a matter of being timely.

Where young artists or inexperienced filmmakers fall short in this breathing element is they fall into the tendency to not pace through their film’s story. Breathing is not usually scripted-in. Nor does it come with storyboard illustrations. And, it falls short to fit in a documentary film outline. Inserting or finding those vital yet simple moments of breathing in a film is something that often should be imagined and envisioned. It comes directly as an element called symbolic imagery–where a cutaway to a random shot can play in effect to a film as a metaphor or simile does in a writing prose. Breathing in this regard is as much part of film language as is the slick movements of the camera in an important scene or the right music score that captures the sentiment of a given segment. What breathing really allows for is pressure points in the film to release any air-tightness that needs to get out. It eases messages and leitmotifs into the longevity of a documentary or TV series.