Truth, History and The Thin Blue Line - Essay Example

The Thin Blue Line: the thin difference between truth and lies and its impact on justice 7 July On November 28, 1876, Dallas Police Officer Robert W. Wood approached a car to inform the driver that his/her lights were out. As he came near the driver’s window, the driver shot him five times. The police charged Randall Adams for the murder of Wood, an allegation that was largely based on the testimony of sixteen-year-old drifter David Harris, as well as three other surprise witnesses. The Thin Blue Line is a documentary on this crime, where director Errol Morris shows different testimonies from both the prosecuting team and their supporters and the defendant’s team and their supporters, so that the viewers themselves can determine who truly killed Wood. In this film, Morris deviates from the usual features of a documentary and uses a non-narrator approach and a dramatic technique, so that he can depict the thin blue line between appearance and truth, a line that can either result to justice or injustice. Morris diverges from the usual norms of documentary films and follows an expressionistic rendering of the testimonies. First, in this film, a clear narrator does not exist, and instead, Morris relies on his viewers to digest the testimonies fed to them, so that they can ascertain the truth. He prefers to call his film a “non-fiction feature” than a documentary (Hunter 1995, p.65). The viewers become the narrator, because they have to sift through the material of testimonies provided to them (Hunter 1995, p.65). Chapman (2009) believes that this self-reflective nature of the film helps viewers to find the truth (p.p.24). Second, the film is constructed using dramatic techniques. Williams (1998) asserts that Morris abandoned “cinema verité realism” for “studied, often slow-motion, and highly expressionistic re-enactments of different witnesses’ versions of the murder” (p.383). These re-enactments define the difference between the truth and biases. The editing and sequencing, using cuts and diverse symbolic items, such as newspaper clippings, the Dallas map, “Voluntary Statement” and the TV schedule, depict meaning through what these objects mean and how people use them to attain their purposes. When Adams signs the “Voluntary Statement,” he believes he offered the truth. For the homicide detectives, this statement, however, becomes a confession for his crime. Ponech (2005) believes that the map stands for the inability of Adams to understand the corruption of the justice system (p.85). The map stands for the irony of being lost in a society, where deception and scapegoating undercut the search for truth and justice (Ponech, 2005, p.85). The TV schedule and newspaper clippings represent the centrality of the media in the making of the truth. They show how the media can easily change lies into the truth. Moreover, Hunter (1995) explains that the film has a “Rashomon-like quality,” because it keeps on going back to the “fatal five seconds” before someone shot Wood five times (p.66). The scene contains the 1980s police-thriller style with close-ups of the nuzzle of the pistol that shot Wood, which is shown in slow motion and with smoke coming out of it (Hunter 1995, p.66). Morris also repeats the slow-motion image of Wood’s partner throwing away her milkshake. Barsanti (2011) describes these scenes as part of the “rhythm that pulses throughout the film” (p.332). They represent the crucial decisions that people make, which affect other people’s lives too. The film follows a four-part structure of narrative movies, which starts with the background of the characters and ends with the delivery of justice. The exposition begins with preliminary interviews with Adams and Harris. Appearance is important to this part, because at first glance, the charming Harris seems to be an impossible cold-blooded murderer, especially since he was only sixteen years old during this time. Adams, on the contrary, looks so distant and cold. People might easily see him as the true murderer. During the complication part of the film, several testimonies emerge from the homicide detectives, Judge Don Metcalfe, the three surprise witnesses, and Elba Carr, an employee at Fas-Gas, who personally knows Emily Miller and her husband. These testimonies oppose each other, but through carefully juxtaposed interviews, the film demonstrates that Harris has a deceiving appearance. On the one hand, Harris’ pleasant quality appears to be the trait of an unrepentant psychopath. Furthermore, Ferncase (1996) describes that the re-enactments signify the “veracity of recalled experiences” as “wishful thoughts” (p.111). The “high-gloss” appearance of these scenes suggests “the nebulous movie-like quality of memory,” thereby turning witness testimony into “more anecdotal than factual” evidence (Ferncase, 1996, p.111). Adams, on the other hand, takes the “translucent skin” and demeanour of an angel, although an unfortunate one, who was at the wrong place and the wrong time (Hunter 1995, p.66). He shows disgust over the corruption of the Dallas county justice system, and how they are more eager for a finding a scapegoat than finding the truth. The exposition of the film is cryptic, although Harris hints that he admits killing Wood. When asked if he thought that Adams was innocent, he said, “No doubt,” because he is the “one that knows.” Thus, the tape is a form of confession for him and ends doubts regarding the truth. Characters and issues are represented as they are, without any attempt to discredit them through leading questions from Morris. Glass produced the original score, which is described as hypnotic. Since the same music is used throughout the film, Morris does not attempt to influence the viewers through music. The lighting, however, is darker when the homicide detectives were interviewed. The darkness suggests that people cannot ascertain their motives for believing that Adams truly killed Wood. The theme of finding the truth is shown through allowing the viewers to listening to as many testimonies as possible. The interviews with the Millers expose them as the “scum” that Carr describes them to be. The way they speak and carry themselves, which can be inferred from the medium close-up shot, strongly suggest that they testified against Adams for money. Nevertheless, the manner by which the Millers expressed themselves is so strong and emotional, that their testimonies can be considered as factual. In particular, the police officers and prosecutors robustly believe that Adams is not innocent, because he does not show any sign of “remorse” for his crime. Apparently, displaying emotions is critical to credibility. In “The Importance of Being Earnest: Displayed Emotions and Witness Credibility,” Kaufmann et al. (2003) examined the effect of displaying emotions on witness credibility. They used an experimental set-up that involved three kinds of testimonies from a rape victim, which 169 subjects watched. Findings showed that the emotions shown during testimony can be a strong factor in shaping the perceived credibility of a rape victim, including the believed likelihood of guilt and beliefs about one’s own ruling in the case. This article shows that by showing strong emotions, it is possible to manipulate the truth. Morris shows that the truth can be as flimsy as choosing to stay behind the police car to finish a milkshake, instead of following proper procedures for safety purposes. The theme of the truth is also shown through a film allegory and the montage of pictures that depict Harris’ youth, where they both assert the complications of finding the truth, but Morris illustrates that in this case, the truth is so important that it must be determined more painstakingly than relying on the easiest scapegoat. Rosenheim (2001) describes the role of Dillinger’s film in The Thin Blue Line. It suggests the power of the media in manipulating truth (p.322). The feature film on Dillinger is like a fantasy, and this fantasy can also be used to charge an innocent man for murder, just because he is a “nobody” in society. In addition, the media makes it easy to blur the line between truths and lies. The title of the film represents the allegory of the difficulty of knowing the truth, when people in authority use their power to influence the production and consumption of the truth. Rosenheim (2001) also believes that Morris uses the montage of Harris’ youth, which shows him and his brother swimming together, as a way of showing Harris’ guilt. It is possible that he blames himself for this accident, although he also holds his father responsible for it, because he did not look after him. In the tape-recorded final interview, Harris says that it is possible that he is in prison, because no one gave him a place to stay that night. An interpretation for this is that society can also blame his parents for the monster that Harris became. His father became detached since his son died, and Harris confessed that his criminal activities might be a way “to attempt to get back at him.” In other words, he yearned for his father’s love, understanding and attention, but he did not get any. As a result, he became angry at himself and at the world, thereby transforming into a violent and angry psychopath. Thus, the truth is not only about who killed Wood, but why he killed him. The Thin Blue Line rejects the narrator-approach to documentaries and adopts a dramatic technique, so that he can describe the thin blue line between appearance and truth, a line that can either end with justice or injustice. Morris uses feature films, newspaper clippings, and the TV schedule to represent the media. He shows that people, who control the media, control the truth. The testimonies also reveal the inherent corruption in a society that values speedy verdicts instead of finding the truth. In addition, it argues that appearance is deceiving. Harris appears like an innocent and sweet young man, but in reality, he is an emotionally troubled teenager. Hence, Morris uses The Thin Blue Line to help viewers understand the truth about Wood’s murderer and the social forces that shaped the mind of a young psychopathic killer. Reference List Barsanti, C., 2011. Filmology. Massachusetts: Adams Media. Chapman, J., 2009. Issues in contemporary documentary. UK: Polity Press. Ferncase, R.K., 1996. Outsider features: American independent films of the 1980s. Connecticut: Greenwood Press. Hunter, S., 1995. Violent screen: a critics 13 years on the front lines of movie mayhem. Maryland: The Bankcroft Press. Kaufmann, G., Drevland, G.C.B., Wessel, E., Overskeid, G. and Magnussen, S., 2003. The importance of being earnest: displayed emotions and witness credibility. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17 (1), pp.21-34. Rosenheim, S., 2001. Interrotroning history: Errol Morris and the documentary of the future. In M. Landy, ed. The historical film: history and memory in media. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, pp. 316-330. The thin blue line. 1988. [Film] Directed by Errol Morris. USA: American Playhouse. Ponech, T., 2005. Non-fictional cinematic artworks and knowledge. In: T.E. Wartenberg and A. Curran, ed. The philosophy of film: introductory text and readings. UK: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 77-90. Williams, L., 1998. Truth, history, and The Thin Blue Line. In: B.K. Grant, ed. Documenting the documentary: close readings of documentary film and video. Michigan: Wayne State University Press, pp.379-396. Read More