Here is the research for my documentary
1. Making a murderer 2018 (S1 E01)
The Genre for this documentary is an Expository documentary, with the sub-genre of Crime. It targets fans of true-crime, mystery, and people who have been / know someone who have been wrongly convicted, as well as people against the police force The representations in this include the police force being shown in a bad light due to messing with a case unjustly, big strong criminal-looking bearded man actually kind, gentle and wrongly convicted, white person being a target of the police force, diverting from usual stereotypes of colored people being targets. I really liked the intro credit sequence, it had a lot of foreshadowing of the documentary and was also very intriguing cinematically. There wasn't much about it i didn't like, the scenes introduced me to the story really well and i was intrigued. The first hook hyped me up as well.
2. Life in a Day (2020)
The genre for this documentary is an Observational/Performative Documentary, with the sub-genre of Lifestyle. It targets people with philosophical interest as well as people who dive into the lives of cultures around the world and daily behaviours of humans in different stages of life. May be interesting for people in the medical field as well. The representation here includes peoples' general lives that they may have forgotten about going through, lives that they will experience and would anticipate since its things that most people go through. I liked how it really showed in detail peoples' private lives that viewers normally don't see, since most content on the internet these days are more-or-less acted out to fit a certain audience. It is genuine and may be interesting for people who wonder whether the way they live their own life really is considered 'normal' by society's standards or not. I didn't like how I wasn't really able to see a direction in the documentary, making it seem more like just some other YouTube compilation, which actually kind of fits with the fact that its a YouTube original but not exactly chronologically a typical documentary.
3. Gordon Ramsay Uncharted (2021)
This documentary follows the genres of Travel & Food. It targets food lovers, people who follow celebrities (in this case Gordon Ramsay being the star appeal), people interested in culture, people whose culture is being represented (Indonesians), Its representation includes Indonesian people, specifically people in the rural areas of West Sumatra. As it showcases mostly the rural and tropical areas of Indonesia, one could say it shows the country in a good light, having little to no pollution that most people would see in big cities. Others would say this gives false expectations for people coming to Indonesia, as not all areas of Indonesia look like that, or even to say that it makes Indonesia look like a severely underdeveloped country due to the lack of industrial innovation shown on camera. I liked how it utilized lots of drone shots and establishing shots, it showed Indonesia in a beautiful manner, although rather sugar-coated when compared to the rest of Indonesia. I love the showcase of different cuisine as he enters the royal palace, not diverting into other things like architecture but going straight into what people came into the series looking for. The activities shown at the start were a bit unnecessary for the food genre, but very interesting for those who follow Gordon Ramsay and his activities.
4. American Vandal (2017)
The genre for this documentary would be a Mockumentary, having the sub-genre of High-School and Comedy. The target audience for this series would definitely include highschool students, fictional crime fans, as well as people who enjoy watching mockumentaries. The cinematography of this show is mostly comprised of handheld shots, lots of stereotypical behaviour in highschool students, categorizing to the dumb jocks, 'loser' nerds, etc. Lighting and focus properly used to convey the center of attention of each scene - quiet background in Dylan's home (focus on Dylan), long shot on parking lot to show the amount of cars affected by the dicks, dark room in the strings scenes to focus on the board and investigating teams' expressions. The editing in this show includes the heavy use of slow-mo shots to emphasise panic as well as tranquility at different times. Very slow paced, although lots of sudden cuts to new scenes make the switch really apparent, keeping the audience engaged into more plot points. A lot of different effects were done using the sound, such as dramatic music building up in scenes where Dylan realises how unreliable his alibi is.
- Interviews: Heavy use of interviews as the main star, Dylan. is always being interviewed by either the school board or the narrator, as to get his view on this whole situation. People involved interviewed a lot as well. Since this true crime mockumentary is shot as the case continues, a lot of the content is interview based since the story usually uncovers the more you get people involved to talk.
- Narrator: Narrator is someone slightly involved in the case, as he has relations with the main subject Dylan by being in the same morning show crew. The narrator speaks more than half the time to clarify and compile information to the audience.
- Message: don't go so far with pranks that you'll have the whole community against you when it suddenly costs a fortune as a consequence
- Opinion: Very entertaining, as plot points just continuously follow up.
5.
I. Introduction
Title of the Documentary: Creep 2
Filmmaker/Director: Patrick Brice
Release Year: 2014
Duration: 1h 20mins
Brief Overview/Summary: A serial killer posing under the name of one of his victims releases an ad on the internet for a videographer to film his daily life. This movie follows the story of his “40th” victim’s pov through a handheld camera, for her documentary show.
II. Genre and Subgenre
Biographical, fiction
Philosophical, crime, murder mystery
III. Target Audience (demographic & Psychographic)
The target audience for this documentary would be people interested in fictional crime, as well as media texts that exhibit the unique behaviours of different people when faced with pressuring situations, media texts that make the viewers feel uneasy through the feeling of something being wrong, but not explicitly telling us that something is wrong. The 2nd movies targets an audience of above 13, who tend to be in the stage of their life where they learn more about people, maybe start being introduced to the thriller genre that gets their adrenaline pumping, maybe some who are interested in the features of a movie created in such a unique manner, especially on the point of view. Crime lovers have to see this movie as a must watch, as it diverts alot from the usual thriller genre conventions, especially when we would usually see it from a third person perspective, but instead we are immersed into the character that is the victim.
IV. Technical Elements
A. Visual Elements
Cinematography:
The camera work is what separates this movie from most others in this genre, as it follows the view of our victim character. The whole concept of the movie is found footage, where all we know is all the victim knows through their camera. We don’t have any background information, any establishing shots to give us an idea of what’s happening behind the victim’s back, and we don’t have a sense of control over the surroundings, some might say the camera work feels claustrophobic. This claustrophobic feeling is caused by the camera being always following the victim’s actions, sometimes while walking, not showing us the full picture, but the narrow view that the victim exhibits in dire situations.
The visuals of this movie aren’t very eccentric, as it consists mostly of “raw” “unedited” footage. This however, makes it seem more and more like a documentary that shows us the real point of view of the camera man. Some visual techniques are used, as a lot of the scenes in the woods are pitch black in the surrounding, which in normal thriller movies may have a bit of lighting to give the viewers an understanding of the situation, but in Creep’s case, makes us feel worried as to what we can’t see, etc.
Editing:
The choice of editing is the lack of editing. Since most of this film is based on “found footage” it gives us the feeling of having all of the information through the eyes of the victim. It does not cut out any significant parts for the sake of tensions, etc, as some of the graphic scenes also are shown directly to the viewer as if the camera wasn’t ready for it.
B. Audio Elements
Soundtrack and Music:
There is no music throughout the movie, as it is simply raw unedited footage coming straight from the camera. This makes it feel all the more real to the audience. Having no music also makes it seem like the composition of the film isn’t lying to us through manipulating our thoughts in an auditory manner.
Voiceover and Narration:
There is a bit of narration where the victim is speaking to the camera to lay out her thoughts, although this isn’t a voice-over it is in a way narrating her thoughts at the time, giving us updates as she finds out more.
Interviews and Soundbites:
As the victim gets more suspicious about the killer’s intents, she starts questioning him about his lies, etc. Although not intended as an interview, it does sort of give us a deeper understanding through his answers to the questions.
V. Meaning and Message
The central theme and message of this documentary is the naivety in the general public that can be exploited by people with a further understanding of human behaviour, such as serial killers and sociopaths, etc.
The filmmaker is the actor, and so a lot of the content is closely reviewed by the filmmaker, leading to a lot of the humour and uneasiness presented to the audience very much influenced by personal views.
The message was sort of something to see on the side, as the essential purpose was to make the audience feel a sense of uneasiness through the killer’s actions. This purpose was conducted very well, as a lot of the reviews on the internet would support.
VII. Personal Response
I was invested into the film, which rarely happens for me with documentary-style movies. I had watched a summary of the first film and was immediately convinced to indulge myself in the second. The effect that this movie aims to give was done really well, as it caused a lot of unnerving and uneasy feelings in my immersion that really made me appreciate the characters, the storyline as well as the production of the text.
What resonate with me the most is how through the first and second film, it clearly gives a message about how naive the people in the online community can be when in search for money and content. They continued to stay with this suspicious figure in his house, overnight even, and believed his words when they already felt the danger coming for them. Another factor that got me hooked on the series was the way it put me in the shoes of the victim, giving me an idea, even if just a fragment of what the victim was feeling in real time, not through angles showing her face, or music that was eerie, but through the sheer position she was in.
