Part A:
Nanook of the North – The central subject of the documentary are the tribespeople. The main source of information provided is just the footage along with text on screen giving context. Although there is no voice over for sound, the music during certain scenes (such as the scene of the dead dogs) match the tone of what is shown. During that scene the music was dark and eery, hinting at what is going to be in the documentary. Three moments that stand out are the dead dogs, the people taking off their boots and clothes while still being outside in the cold, and lastly the baron shot of the people traveling on the sleds with nothing but snow in sight. These are important because they show dramatic and the most shocking parts of the documentary and how these people live.
Baraka – The central subject of the documentary is left vague. However, it seems that the central subject is people and the culture surrounding them in different locations around the world. Since there is very little voice over, vague and a wide variety of shots, as well as no text for context, it leaves the viewer to make their own narrative for what is being shown. Obviously it is about different people around the world, the context for what and why they are being shown is left unknown due to the lack of tools put in place to help the viewer understand. Important moments that stand out are the shots of the monkey sitting in some water, a large tribe of people doing a dance-type ritual, and lastly a shot of a person in medical clothes bottling/separating pills. The reasons why these stand out is because they are so different from one another that no real connection can be made other than that the film will be about a wide variety of things. They show nature, a third world image of people, and a modernized image of people as well.
Part B: Nanook of the North
Section 1: Setting up who these people are and how they live. (Giving context)
Section 2: Showing the starvation of the people and desperation for animals to eat.
Section 3: The winter time and how the people take refuge in igloos.
The transitions were mainly done by the black and white cards with text. Since it is a silent film, it is the only way to separate and give context as to what is being shown on screen.
The documentary is definitely in-between narrative and non-narrative due to there being no voices. It is narrative because there is text that explains what is happening and gives a story like feel to the clips on screen. However, the majority of the film is only the video of the Eskimos, leaving the viewer to just take in what they are seeing.
The reason why the film is understandable is largely in part to the text as well as the arc of how the clips are shown. The film is structured in a way that feels very linear and easy to follow, even without much context. It starts in the summer, gives explanation of who these people are, then it moves into winter and shows their hunger and how they hunt, and lastly it shows them building houses and surviving. If they put the beginning clips at the end instead, it would make the whole film less meaningful because the viewer wouldn’t really know who these people are and what is happening.
Part C:
Since this film was created in the early 1920’s the film making style is quite basic to what we are used to today. For example, the shots are mainly made up of basic cuts, framings, and techniques used with the camera. Also, since the entirety of the documentary is filmed in a snowy, freezing cold environment, the shots are all very bright due to the snow, as well as the black and white film. Also, the large majority of the shots are relatively quick cut with different angles for different perspectives. However, there are some shots that are over 10 seconds, such as when Nanook is canoeing around ice to show the real time and effort being put into what he is doing. Also, many of the clips are wider framed medium to long shots to show the actions of the people. However, there are close up shots to show some reactions and emotion of the people. All of the shots, since many are cut up are straightforward and create a narrative style sequence.
Part D:
Although it is not entirely possible to determine the true goals of the creators, I believe that their intentions were true in just showing how hard and different the Eskimo life is. However, in the beginning it did come off in a way where they were just showing these people as purely entertainment to a modern human due to the Eskimo’s “ancient” ways of living. For example, there is a section where it shows some people being amazed by a record player, looking at it like it is magic. While it does truly show how disconnected they are from civilization, it almost comes off to where it paints them as inferior beings that are just amazed at how great modern humans are.
The one person that would represent the movie would be the observer due to the fact that the camera crew had no influence on the Eskimo’s, as well as the fact that there was no dialogue, interviews, or “baited” pieces of film. The entirety of the documentary was just sitting back and recording how these people live.
There are no real ethical issues faced in this documentary besides the fact that it slightly depicts the people as laughably inferior. However, this was only a very small portion of the beginning of the documentary, making me believe that this was just a side effect of them just recording how they live.
Comments