THE WILD AND WONDERFUL WHITES OF WEST VIRGINIA

The subjects of the Crafting Truth chapters you read last week and are reading this one focus on Authority and Responsibility and how those terms apply to documentary making. With that in mind, please watch the polarizing and provocative The Wild and Wonderful Whites of West Virginia on Netflix Instant and tell me as specifically as possible what you think the director Julien Nitzberg's approach to the material is? Is he being Responsible in his portrayal of the White family? If so, how? If not, how not? And how does Nitzberg (a friend of mine from college who I might try and get to Skype in to our class) show Authority in this film - or does he? Please answer these questions and remember to provide an example of two from the film itself to support your claims.

Additionally, I'd like to know what (or whose) interest you think this film serves. What impact might it have on those watching it (like you)? Does it take into account the welfare of the people represented? If so, how? And finally, is the film Authentic or not? If so, how? If not, why not?

I look forward to hearing everything you have to say about this, especially in terms of Responsibility, Evidence, Authority and Authenticity - by no later than 9 am on Wednesday morning, of course.

THE HOUSE I LIVE IN

The beginning of Chapter 3 in Crafting Truth (which you're reading this week) states that "Authority forms part of the complicated ways by which documentaries represent nonfictional reality."

For this week's post, please watch Andrew Jarecki's 2012 documentary The House I Live In on Netflix Instant and let me know what you think, especially in relation to how successfully (or unsuccessfully) the film has been authored. In particular, does the director's first-person approach make the story he's telling more convincing? Does the director's personalizing the narrative provide a fresh spin on a pressing social issue or do you feel it ultimately overwhelms the importance of the crisis he's trying to examine?

I look forward to reading how you sort this film out - what you liked, what you didn't like, and what it meant to you. Write whatever you'd like, just be sure to address the concept of authority and how it impacted your feelings about this piece of work.

And remember, your in-depth, inspired comments about The House I Live In need to appear on this blog by no later than 9 am on Wednesday morning.

Have fun!

THE IMPOSTER

For this week's post - and as a follow-up to our conversation in class about truth, authenticity and evidence - please watch The Imposter on Instant Netflix. I encourage you to write whatever you'd like in your response, but please address the following questions in the body of your comments:

• What visual and aural techniques does the director Bart Layton utilize to draw the audience into the story he's telling? Explain what those techniques are, and let us know whether or not you thought they were effective and why.
• Some of the most compelling films we watch, be they fiction or non-fiction, allow us to form our own impressions of the truth of actual events. That said, tell us what you think happened to that missing boy Nicholas Barkley. And why do you think his sister Carey recognized Frédéric Bourdin as her brother and continued to do so even after she was told he wasn't?
• How did the director combine fictionalized elements and recreate interviews with "real" interviews and actual footage that was recorded over thirty years ago? Was it seamless or did the interplay draw attention to itself? Please explain.
• Furthermore, was the juxtaposition of "real" and recreated images compelling to you? Were there any flaws in the approach that took you out of the story? Or, considering this film is largely about lying and deception, was the director just letting "form follow function" by using the aesthetics of his craft to challenge the viewer to always think about the variety of ways we as filmmakers try to capture "the truth"?
• Finally, can something that's been recreated still be "authentic"? If so, how? If not, why not?

Feel free to do some research on your own to inform your opinion about what you saw. For example, you can read the New York Times review of the film here and a really interesting feature about it here. 

Remember to write your response in a separate document and then cut and paste it into the comments section of this post. Sometimes longer comments get cut off here, in which case you might have to post your thoughts in two parts. Be sure your post shows up here no later than 9 am on Wednesday morning - and have fun putting your response together! I really look forward to reading what you write!

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO SEE?

Bill Cunningham New York

Welcome to our class blog everybody! For this - your first post - please spend a bit of time looking through all of the amazing documentaries available on Netflix Instant. Find 5 feature-length (approximately 75 minutes or over) docs you'd like to watch this semester, and choose 1 of the 5 to watch this week. We'll be posting a list of Netflix Instant docs we recommend you watch on to our Moodle class page soon, but first we want you to explore the site and tell us what you think.

In your comments to this post, please including the following:

• The names of the 5 docs you chose (and a brief reason why you chose each one)
• A logline of 1-2 sentences describing the doc you chose to watch this week
• 1-2 paragraphs explaining what you did and/or did not like about your chosen film and why 

Also, because the first chapter you're reading this week in our book Crafting Truth is about authenticity, I would also like you to briefly address in your comments how truthful or untruthful you thought your chosen film was. Did the filmmaker(s) convince you the story being told in the film was accurate? Were the "characters" and the subject matter represented well and fairly? If so, what did the film do - aesthetically, narratively or otherwise - to convince you of its realness? If not, what could the film have done to make it more believable and "trustworthy"?

Please remember to write your response in a separate document and then cut and paste it into the comments section of this post. Sometimes longer comments get cut off here, in which case you might have to post your thoughts in two parts.

Finally, your comments must appear on this blog by no later than Wednesday morning, September 11th at 9 am (24 hours before class), so get going! I'm super excited to see which films you choose and to hear your thoughts about them. Enjoy watching and writing, and we'll talk more about the assignment when I see you bright and early Thursday morning!