A thread for Documentaries

[sdp]

Any good documentary has to twist an angle and edit it so there can be a narrative, that doesn't mean "bad" for them to do it since it's what you have to do to make it more compelling.

But yeah you have to take it with a grain of salt and know that it's not all "one sided" like documentaries make it out to be, whether it's blackfish or even an inconvenient truth which are both excellent documentaries and I'm on "their" side of the issue, you have to know that they choose the interview scenes to make people look "bad' or "good" depending on their narrative.

Using King of Kong as an example, the "bad guy" Billy Mitchell is actually one of the the "good guys" in "man vs snake". He was really mad how he was portrayed in King of Kong but he made such an excellent villain there, not to mention that even if that angle was played out, you can tell from interviews that Mitchell even if not the huge Jerk that he is in king of kongs, definitely has a "strong" personality and likely a Trump voter but he isn't a huge ****ing bad guy as much as Leonard Cohen's "Everybody Knows plays in the background and with your feelings.

[TurtleWA]

Originally Posted by ProactiveMan

Since we're talking about documentaries... does anyone care that they are often full of s**t? I ask because I don't really. I love King of Kong, but from what I hear it plays pretty fast and loose with the truth, and Pumping Iron may as well be scripted... but I don't care as long as they're well made and entertaining.

I don't know what that says about me.

Originally Posted by sdp

Any good documentary has to twist an angle and edit it so there can be a narrative, that doesn't mean "bad" for them to do it since it's what you have to do to make it more compelling.

But yeah you have to take it with a grain of salt and know that it's not all "one sided" like documentaries make it out to be, whether it's blackfish or even an inconvenient truth which are both excellent documentaries and I'm on "their" side of the issue, you have to know that they choose the interview scenes to make people look "bad' or "good" depending on their narrative.

Using King of Kong as an example, the "bad guy" Billy Mitchell is actually one of the the "good guys" in "man vs snake". He was really mad how he was portrayed in King of Kong but he made such an excellent villain there, not to mention that even if that angle was played out, you can tell from interviews that Mitchell even if not the huge Jerk that he is in king of kongs, definitely has a "strong" personality and likely a Trump voter but he isn't a huge ****ing bad guy as much as Leonard Cohen's "Everybody Knows plays in the background and with your feelings.

Yeah film makers do have a point of view in which they focus the story. I don't watch thinking the films are completely accurate. I understand most film makers shape the movie through their partial experience of the subject, and that this partial knowledge is often translated into a complete truth. I watch for entertainment and to be informed of another's perspective. It doesn't bother me that the films have a message or agenda. It also doesn't bother me if scripted or one perspective is left out. I understand there are two sides of the story and try not to let my own opinion be shaped to much by the film. Blackfish did make me hate Seaworld.

[ProactiveMan]

Originally Posted by TurtleWA

Yeah film makers do have a point of view in which they focus the story. I don't watch thinking the films are completely accurate. I understand most film makers shape the movie through their partial experience of the subject, and that this partial knowledge is often translated into a complete truth. I watch for entertainment and to be informed of another's perspective. It doesn't bother me that the films have a message or agenda. It also doesn't bother me if scripted or one perspective is left out. I understand there are two sides of the story and try not to let my own opinion be shaped to much by the film. Blackfish did make me hate Seaworld.

I agree. You have to go in with your eyes open, but a good movie is a good movie.

Originally Posted by sdp

Using King of Kong as an example, the "bad guy" Billy Mitchell is actually one of the the "good guys" in "man vs snake". He was really mad how he was portrayed in King of Kong but he made such an excellent villain there, not to mention that even if that angle was played out, you can tell from interviews that Mitchell even if not the huge Jerk that he is in king of kongs, definitely has a "strong" personality and likely a Trump voter but he isn't a huge ****ing bad guy as much as Leonard Cohen's "Everybody Knows plays in the background and with your feelings.

I've heard Billy Mitchell is pretty cool; he still comes off as a bit of a tool in other things I've seen him in though. I do feel bad for Brian Kuh. The way they edited that whole Funspot section made him look like a total creep, but apparently a lot of it was used out of order and recontextualized. The story needed him to be LeFou to Billy Mitchell's Gaston, but that was mostly created in editing. Still a great movie though.

[Storm Eagle]

For those of you who might be fans of The Clash, I just remembered I'm currently borrowing a documentary about Joe Strummer from the library. It's called The Future is Unwritten.

[TurtleWA]

Recently watched ‘The Rachel Divide,' Netflix's new documentary about Rachel Dolezal. Also, not so long ago I watched ‘Jim & Andy’ a documentary on Jim Carrey’s Andy Kaufman Role. Both docs kept my interest.

[Utrommaniac]

My new favorite documentary series is Round Planet. Which is a BBC nature documentary, but the narrator will occasionally go off script. Such as the episode on Madagascar, when he'll stop to relate topic at hand to an eco-tourist resort he tried and failed to run in the 90's.