#documentary analysis

This was a response to a mock question which I shall detail shortly; I added some corrections from the improvements that I made after the fact which will be written in bold

“Tower” released in 2016 is an interesting take on a documentary with the usage of animation with footage in order to tell the story of the shootings that took place on August 1s, 1966. Using rotoscope techniques with the black and white grainy footage this is not like most documentaries as it uses the animation within it to add to the storytelling aspect, this reconstruction is not with a dramatic film with actors and follows its own aesthetic but still manages to honour the subject matter. 

The animation in “Tower” comes with a lot of variety and adds to the scenes by adding in colour to people while still having that black and white film as the background, sometimes taking that colour away to focus on the character shown on screen, having colour only on important bits of the scene (for example the blue sky one of the victims detailed being shown vibrantly while everything else is greyscale) and the red with the white silhouettes when a person is shot for impact and to cleverly not show the full detail of the person actually being shot. This usage of rotoscoping is very interesting as it still needs to use actors to act out what is then drawn over so going the extra effort to not just use the actors’ footage and instead committing to rotoscoping is very much appreciated. The rotoscoped animation is achieved by filming actors in front of a green screen so that video is then drawn over by animators that makes the style and the animation of the people look realistic with the attention to detail with the lines.

Fast movements in the animation have this jagged look in between frames for the affected parts to simulate the motion’s blur instead of drawing out the part as normal which makes it more stylised and exaggerated. The whole usage of animation in this film causes most things to be exaggerated from using lines and solid colours to simplifying backgrounds for the people to stand out more. The fact should be noted that this documentary actually highlights the heroic acts of people within this horrible situation rather than the shooter, whose name is mentioned only once in passing in the entire film. Tower is an interesting documentary that tells a complex story about the deeds of people within the 1966 shootings by using animation that is rotoscoped by animating over actors in order to make this exaggerated but aesthetically fascinating piece that is moving and interesting.

MERMAIDS: The Body Found | Written by Charlie Foley and Vaibhav Bhatt | Produced by Darlow Smithson and Tom Brisley | Released May 27, 2012

     There are a lot of conspiracies about the existence of underwater creatures resembling man, or more often referred to as mermaids. The documentary entitled “Mermaids: The Body found” tells us a story about a group of scientists who made efforts trying to uncover where the mysterious sounds from the underwater recordings came from and if there really were evidences that aquatic humanoids exist. The documentary is informative for it not only told a story of the experience of the scientists, but it also presented evidence as to why these scientists stand by their claims. The documentary also tried to seek answers to some questions regarding aquatic humanoids that really satisfies the audience’s curiosity.

     The issue is highly controversial for not only does it attract the curious audience but it seems to present accurate evidence and facts including the organizations involved with the research. In the documentary, there was a part where the research had to be cut off when the government confiscated all of the scientists’ research materials. Also, the government was so keen into hiding information even from the beginning where a child found out about the mysterious figures, was visited by an organization’s personnel and was asked not to disclose information but the child kept the evidence in pictures in his phone. This entailed us to ask why the government would be so keen into taking down this type of research if it did not stir up controversy. More so, the documentary claimed the involvement of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, an American agency that aims for scientific discoveries in the oceans and the atmosphere.

     In the documentary, it showed numerous events of whale beachings occuring in different places. The scientists, upon examination, deducted that the recordings had something to do with the events. They at first thought that whatever created that sound on the recordings scared the whales but in the end, they concluded that those who created the sound killed the whales and the bodies simply washed up ashore. The claims, again, are highly realistic and whoever watches the documentary would certainly believe the claims.

     Sadly, the documentary has been found out to be fake. All those involved, including the scientists who claimed to have been researching about the mermaids and the mysterious recordings, were actors and actresses. Although it was proven to be a hoax, the documentary has still provided materials such as the mysterious sounds present in a recording gathered, the incidence of the whale beaching and the aquatic ape theory.

     The documentary would certainly give an impact to general audience. If not, probably those who would be classified as a mix of believers and non-believers of the existence of mermaids. Those who believe would find their source of certainty that their claims are backed-up. But probably to their dismay, the documentary is a hoax therefore would not contribute to their claims.

     Like previously stated, the documentary was a hoax. The people involved were actors and actresses, and that no such events have really happened unless proven otherwise. If you are to watch the documentary, you also need to have proper knowledge about the claims of the existence of mermaids. You have to know about NOAA, the organization and how it claims to not really be involved in the documentary and to its proposed research, and as to why the people involved in this documentary still push through with researching about the existince of aquatic humanoids.

     Although some were fake, the evidences given could really lead to actual discovery. Even if the documentary was fake, the airing and the amount of hits and stir it received could influence scientists to actually research about the issue and maybe prove that the aquatic humanoids really exist or not. The evidence such as the “bloop” or the mysterious sounds in the recordings, since it was real, would be a powerful instrument for the scientists to further investigate upon and maybe the aquatic ape theory, which stated that apes adapted into the waters having let them develop tails and gills in order to survive the waters, would not be a theory anymore.

            Documenting the life in the Philippines, BBC focused on different places and cultures. With the development of technology, BBC was able to come up with a documentary like this using it’s video camera and other recording devices. BBC was able to interact with the farmers in Banaue and because of their curiosity, they were able to interact with the farmers. They were also able to talk to people in the North Cemetery, leaving a surprised feeling in their faces when they found out that other people reside there. Next, they went to experience the life during the Black Nazarene. They saw how passionate the devotees were despite of the stampede that was happening. Afterwhich, they went to Marcos residence, learn more about Martial Law and then continued to explore the different places in the Philippines.

            The documentary is presented in such a way that it has a connection to its viewers. One thing that caught my attention was that the documentary focuses on real experiences and for some point, it was not scripted. I like the fact that BBC took absolute effort to really visit those places and took time to know more about the Philippines. BBC was able to capture the way of living of the Filipinos, which really amazed me now caring whether it has a positive or negative connotation in the Philippines.

            As a Filipino, you would wonder why the documentary was created or what is its purpose of showing it publicly. As Filipinos, the documentary serves as a signal that we should really do something to make our country better. A cemetery will never be an appropriate place for people to live and obviously, we, especially the government, should do something about this like providing home for them or at least help them find a home. Certainly, it’s quite understandable for young people in Banaue if they want to work in Manila when they grow up because it’s part of their dream; however, they should still consider developing their native land. It would be a waste if no one will be left in Banaue because Rice Terraces is considered to be a tourist spot in the Philippines and it is such a waste if it will not be given enough treatment for it to remain worth visiting. The documentary will also serve as a reflection on how the Philippines has become throughout the years, how corruption grew into a disaster and how we can improve ourselves. This documentary benefits everyone as we will all have an overview on how Philippines is a beautiful and at the same time a problematic country.

            There are many ways on how to interpret the documentary, either you take the positive or the negative side of it. Taking it positively would mean that you appreciate the beauty in the Philippines and you can sense hope in the happy faces of the Filipinos despite all the hardships they are going through. Taking it negatively means that you focused on the problems that the Philippines is facing right now and most probably, you are thinking of a solution on how we can conquer all these problems. For me, I am taking it on both sides because I saw how the documentary portrayed the positive and negative effect in the Philippines. I learned that corruption really kills not only a single person, but also the entire country. If it weren’t for corruption, Philippines might have been one of the richest countries or even at least have a better standing compared to what we are now.