A Comparison of the Documentaries Points out Key Issues - Essay Example

Bob Dylan Dont look Back and Michael Moores Roger and Me This essay will be comparing and analyzing the impact and uses that new technologies have on two documentaries shown on this module. Notably, this paper will explore a comparison between “The Roger and Me” (dir. Moore, 1989) and Bob Dylan: “Don’t Look Back” (dir. Pennebaker, 1967). This essay will look at highlighting the similarities and comparing different technological developments and their influence on the two different generations. Bob Dylan don’t look Back and Michael Moores Roger and Me Presently, technology has headlined the news bulleting; everyone is talking about it, using it, and practicing it. This has been caused by a sudden advancement in times and seasons. The times when general technology as well and information technology was left for the media alone, no longer exist (Wherle, 2009, pg76). Currently, almost everyone in the world is an IT expert since people have the idea of how to use a technology. However, it should be considered that this is the main aspect of life, that has witnessed a continuous advancement, hence emergence of the term technology development. Documentaries have been made using technology. Bob Dylan’s “Don’t look back” and Michael’s “Roger and Me”, are some to the documentaries that portrays a sense of a well used technology (Pennebaker, 1968, pg65). This essay compares the two documentary’s use of technology. Where, apart from the message in the movies, technology has proved a phenomenon to put into considering when watching this movie. Bob Dylan don’t look back First, it is noted here that, the media portrays a gap between message and medium, where Dylan’s’ manager by the name Albert Grossman who is the movie producer airs his client. Many will take this incident as a bad omen, however to him; he literally does it without thinking or rather taking it as a bad omen. Notably, during the cutting and editing of the documentary, it is clear as per the presentations that Grossman’s presence is felt (Eason, 2010, pg26). As much as this might be considered as an artistic job, the truth is that it portrayed a flattering idea at the edge. In this context, it can be noted that the question of centralization became centrally framed; this is evident prior to the presentation of each character. The film is made to be viewed in a very different phenomenon. The sound of observational documentary such as Don’t Look Back is muddy that makes it difficult for a person to differentiate particular person speech and the general uproar. In essence, the quality of the sound in the documentary is wanting since it is difficult to distinguish a set of noise. Essentially, the set of noise in this movie shares the same spectrum. For instance, the clattering of plate, the murmuring of cyclist, phone ringing, and conversation on the table are similar. Observers can view the above phenomenon in a very negative way and others can view it as a commercialized documentation. The above two, are because of technological manipulation of the article. Here, it is incredibly hard to put a division between framing and character; however, this is mostly evident in the representational genre, which is portrayed apparently as unmediated or as an observational cinema. Importantly, the documentation portrays a framing principle that is unique (Pennebaker, 1968, pg54 ). Here, the documentary can well be understood in terms of ethnography, where a celebrity is ethno-graphed. This is done where the celebrity to overwhelm the person, who was literally thrown into the role. In as much as the framing has so far portrayed something that many will think is the best way of portraying a character, the same thing raises problems (Stephen, 2012, pg65). The problem raised here all centers on the partiality and the recognized properties of verité. The problem of partiality give out a fact of truth, while at the same time the verité’s properties explains a shallow twerp as well as flattering of the commissioned portrait. Generally, the issue of partiality and stylistics is market from limitations of ethnography. Another pertinent issue to consider here is the fact that this work has critically developed analysis of the systematic critique of the media that at that time was dominating. The work did this by the liberal consideration of the press in modern democracy (Ellis, 2011, pg87). Hall as the main spear header of this phenomenon gives this account by enlisting four issues. The first one is that: he uses the criterion of letting Dylan do it through-away- this is when he explicitly critics the media in what was called a press interview. He also does this indirectly- by outrageously responding to episode printed ob him in the press. To add on, he further permits the visuals to reflect the saying by Dylan in an opposite way. Lastly, he uses abortion tactics, where he does not openly contemplate to or condescend the reporter. All this are form of technological understanding that the documentation gives to the observers (Ellis, 2011, pg76). Most importantly, another consideration of this documentation in the airing of the movie is that the technology used here is market as one of the best in the 1960s. This is because, both the presentations and recording of the truth was due to the fact that there was a good accessibility that was made by the use of the lightweight cameras and not forgetting the innovations in the technology that involved recording (Pennebaker, 1968, pg45 ). According to research, it is affirmed that both the director and the cameras did understand the unobtrusive acting as a type of “fly on the wall.” They eschewed such cueing techniques on this commentary perfectly, the interviews, the tittles just to sample, but a few. According to cinema experts, they illustrates that the technique made it possible for the observer to analyze what was going on behind the scenes in a precise manner (Ellis, 2011, pg56). Generally, the documentation was made with the total; observation of the technological use, where the observation was made to understand the whole, story in style. This made the film to be in a position to give out considerable critiques on technology. This documentation is a thorough analysis and use as well as critique of the media. Michael Moores Roger and Me This movie, according to analysis they asserts that it is true good to0 be true. However, no matter the content or the happenings in this movie, the truth is that it has used a lot of technology prior to its development (Stephen, 2012, pg67). The author, according to reliable sources is too smart in the section of analysis, which have arrested right in his essence. One of the main noted incidences of the movie is that the directors created a sequence of events directly. This did happen in what the experts call as a flint in a manner that portrayed a one on one casual fashion implications of documentary (Roger & Me. 2009, pg, 56). There, the technology used here is a one-to-one casual fashion. The opening and the closing of the boondoggle of, what the expert call as an auto world amusement park, before the GM layoffs showed a presence technological advancement. Here, technology to its level is perfectly portrayed. Generally, it is equally pertinent to say that technology in this film to the stage. Apart from the above, it can as well be noted that this film also illustrates juxtaposition of the images. This is the main aspects that almost all filmmakers usually use. They are fond juxtaposing images and so this documentary was not an exceptional. However, as per the reliable sources it was a one-camera shoot (Adler, & Widener, 2007, pg 15). Interestingly, at times it can be hard for a one-camera film to portray pictures perfectly; however, this movie counters the above by illustrating perfect positioned images that an observer if not keen cannot understand the difference. Only film produces can get this aspect well, however it is not an easy task to make the above evaluation. Hereto, in this film no one can fail to note that he literally takes ironists and satirists that came because of liberties with the material for generation then through this he made his point of sarcasm as well as deft timing. All this is a manipulation of ideas by the use of technology. In as much as people might say that this movies were created some time back, the truth is that the presence of technology for movie also dates later than the staging of this document. They literally used technological tactics to air out their ideas that are formulated mostly of images. It is further of no offense to note that the movie is centered of the Detroit and Flint and however according to Michael, he laments that in as much as the movie was centered on the above aspect (the Flint and Detroit), and the same industry right now is in worst shape. The use of technology in this movie hide many issues, however its needs someone to watch it repeatedly to get the real picture of everything. For instance the movie has much of satire, this is seen when the Author inserts an emotional point in the movie. This movie was not supposed to be an objective review of some issues; however, some people might think that is the notion being brought forth here. This is basically a twist made on the film by the use of cameras, and then the editing doe to suit the confusing criterion above. Generally, as any professional might look and consider, the truth is that the movies is full of satirist. The above movies that is the “Dont look Back,” by Bob and “Roger and Me” by Michael portrays a sense of technological manipulation. It is as if the movie was made with a person who was technologically upright (Stephen, 2012, pg78). Despite the use of one Camera in one of them, still the whole movie comes out as if many or several cameras staged it as of today. Secondly, both movies are portraying a certain thing in particular. For instance, the movie by Bob brings about a phenomenon of criticisms, and at the same time, the movie by Michael gives out a sense of satire at most. Therefore, the both portray give out a primary argument In both the movies, exaggeration bears the dominance. This is because; the movie by Bob brings about a gap between messages and media. Dylan complains that the media is not giving him fare treatment, and so pointing figures at the media (Stephen, 2012, pg34). Here, the point of exaggerated media blames can perfectly be seen since the main actor is blaming the media at a larger extent. The use of one camera brought about an exaggeration of image twisting. This goes a head to give a poor account of the film since when vied by filmmakers they understands easily the twisting. In the same way, the film by Michael goes ahead to exaggerate the fact that the movie is too good. The author here fails to give out a very clear account of natural phenomenon. A natural thing will never be too good, since it is naturally controlled by the nature. Therefore, the issue of using technology here has been widely exaggerated, a fact that should not be so. Therefore, both the movies bear a bigger point of irony or exaggeration. They are very pertinent and educative documentation, if they can cease portraying a sense of unreality (Wherle, 2009, pg108). In contrast, they are staged in a very different scenario. In addition, if that is not enough, the movie by Bob portrays a sense of a manager giving out an account of the worker in a hating scenario. Therefore, their messages are not very much related in any way, however the use if technological expertise is shown in both the movies more perfectly (Stephen, 2012, pg56). The staging scenery is a bit different yes, however in both the scenarios; technology has been implemented to hide the original level of the technology use. All have been made to look better than they really are. However, some how both the films have can portray what they really are, only if a person watching it is also a movie producer, however it is difficult to determine the real back ground scenario. According to experts, they affirm that a person watching the “don’t look back,” can easily understand its background if he or she decides to watch the movie repeatedly. This is what makes it difficult for a person to note the background scenario, since the real time for watching might be limited (Ellis, 2011, pg43). Generally, it should be considered that the movies although staged several years ago have acknowledged the use of technology of a heightened level. The criterion of cutting and editing of the film, is what has brought above a clear picture of how technology has proved pertinent in movie making and at the same time, it is that same thing that has so far gave the two documents a thought of them being criticized. The 16mm camera used in the production of the documentary makes the film to look cheap; improvement in technology has seen the filming industry grow exponentially. Consumers of film products demand that production to be of high quality, resolution, and clear. Improvement in technology and distribution through internet is revolutionizing this industry. Documentary is a critical in providing knowledge, entertainment, and informed learning. The genre is between entertainment, art, and journalism (Stephen Marek, 2012, pg45). However, the industry is risky since it is difficult to establish cash flow in sustaining the business. This is the challenging that the producer of this film faced; according to him, he worked under low budget, reliance to limited support from government, prohibitive costs on copyright obligations, and small license fees (Ellis, 2011, pg29). In essence, producer of the film skills is not enough to guarantee quality work, secure sufficient resources, infrastructure, set of skills, and creative freedom. Therefore, film producers need to have enough funding and support to produce quality products. Notably, another key issue to producers is innovation and creation of viable new value. A comparison of the documentaries points out key issues that are necessary for the industry; firstly, there is decease in the cost of distribution technology, digital specialty, and fragmentation of audiences (Ellis, 2011, pg56). Essentially, boring products will make audiences to frustrated, especially with narrow scope of ideas and poor quality of the products. In essence, consumers demand high quality products on their screen that engages them on the way of storytelling. Essentially, documentary is about real people and events that claim market owing to authenticity. Similarly, low production cot is essential in providing filmmakers an opportunity to establish their presence in the market. Bibliography Adler, D. A, & Widener, T, (2007). Satchel Paige: dont look back. Orlando: Harcourt. Eason, L, (2010). Dont look back: a novel. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Revell. Ellis, J. (2011). Documentary: Witness and Self-Revelation. New York: Routledge Pennebaker, D. ( 1968 , 02 24). Dont Look Back. Retrieved 05 01, 2014, from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061589/. Roger & Me. (2009). London: University of Waterloo. Wherle, J. M, (2009). Roger & Me. Teaching Sociology, 19(2), 296. Stephen Marek, ‎. B. (2012). An annotated guide to the documentary film collection. Evanson: Northwestern University. Read More