The New York Times recently published the article “Where the Real Action is” on the nominations for Documentary feature category for this year’s Oscars. The ideas brought up in the article are interesting and contribute to our study of the nonfiction film genre. An excerpt:
This year all five nominees are politically charged, four are about war, and amazingly, only one feels like homework. Spurred by global conflict and by technology that allows filmmakers to turn out movies in months rather than years, these works carry urgent messages. With their pointed arguments, though, this year’s nominees also raise an inescapable question: Can they have any real political impact?
“Where the Real Action is,” by Caryn James (The New York Times)
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
I just saw “No End In Site”,” one of these nominated war documentaries (the one matching the screenshot), and I found it quite intriguing how while it did not feel like “homework,” I still learned a lot about the conflict in Iraq which has given me a whole more “enlightened” perspective on current events. The whole film is told in a chronological narrative about the US occupation in Iraq yet builds off of key testimonials and video clips that make it more than just reading a textbook. Documentaries such as this one also work amazingly well to ignite a little passion in the viewer; a real desire to see reform and a genuine distaste for current situations. It’s like a documentary makes a historical narrative as exciting to the general public as it would to the most avid history professor. Isn’t that the point of a documentary? To show something real to real people hopefully in a way that resonates? Anyway, “No End In Site” is quite successful to that.
Haha, I just saw No End In Site so I felt compelled to share my thoughts about it in a hopefully relevant manner to the intention of this blog entry. I guess it’s a result of that whole post-movie mania syndrome..