In my own opinion a deep, raw, and personal narrative is more captivating then empirical data in any fashion. Capturing somethign as it truly is and bringing it to the screen through film makes the subject matter more accessible to the viewers. Audiences are able to grasp the content without prior education on the subject as a result of the fact that the are human. This innate connection is exploited through Lumieres and realism, and gives credit and time to topics that might not otherwise received “light”. For instance, in Waiting For Superman the raw emotions capture in the faces of the parents and children during the lottery as to which school the children will be going to, grasp at the hearts of the viewers. Although Waiting For Superman is not a Lumiere, it is a documentary which is a development of the style.
However, there are benefits to adapting the view of the “eye” by means of the camera.
Its not only a matter of capturing subjects that have yet to receive light, its about shedding new light on older subjects as well. This means changing the view, either through new narratives ,new depictions, or a new angle. The Lumiere Manifesto describes in-camera and post film editing as harmful to the audience and content. Yet, I see such techniques as zooming, cutting, etc. as means of emphasizing certain aspects of a piece so that the audience focuses on what is truly important. Also, each artist/director tends to have their own style that separates them from the group. By adding a personal “flavor” to a piece of work it not only separates the director but the content and helps to give it focus by making it interesting. Again, although it is not a Lumiere, David Gugenheim gives a specific form to Waiting For Superman. Although I may not fully agree with every point made in the film, the director takes a certain angle to his argument and builds it through his filming techniques. Through his angles when interviewing, music, graphics, edit, organization, etc. he creates a conversation or narrative on the topic of the American education system.
In regards to altering original pieces, he Manifesto states,”At best, we display an edited view of our worlds. At worst, we destroy important viewpoints through unnecessary editing.”  This quotes helps display the “grey” area between the “black” and “white” of filming and editing. Therefore, I believe the most important issue is drawing the line between an “edited view” of the world and “destroying important viewpoints”.  By creating a code of ethics or norms of artistic activity, filmmakers can help to keep the original meaning of a work (not necessarily the original work itself) while also helping to separate it from other work with a special “flavor”. In creating a boundaries, artists are free to take on the world as they see it, give new light to old subjects, form new conversations, all the while keeping the content “raw” to some extent.The Salisbury reading shows realism as a definitive genre stating, “Realistic films that try to show the world as it actually is, and Fiction/fantasy films that try to present the artist’s imaginative view of the world in an entertaining manner” (Realism). However,  taking a piece of the world and showing it with artistic edits doesnt make the content fantasy. Artistic techniques make the content more approachable and enjoyable to an audience. In a Digital Age characterized by an audience with short attention spans, and grasping for instant gratification, making content more interesting is vital to making the piece seen by more people.
Advertisements