The Observational Mode (Response #4)

The observational mode, the second documentary mode presented by Nichols, is exactly what it sounds like: observation. The expository mode leans on interviews, a voice-of-God, and a heavy-handed director who prompts questions and utilizes explanation to interpret what’s seen or heard. Observation is just the opposite. The filmmaker consciously takes a step back and attempts to blend in in order to capture a more authentic experience without an overt explanation or justification for what is seen. Of course the filmmaker’s voice is still heard in observational films through the editing and the framing, but the voice becomes subtler and quieter than the expository director and encourages the audience to form their own conclusions and interpretations.

While important in every mode, the ethics of filmmaking seem to be under particular scrutiny in the observational documentary. The goal in this mode, as stated previously, is to blend in and capture a social actor or event in his or its most organic form. The presence of a camera is, of course, an affecting factor in anyone’s behavior. Because of that, filmmakers may go to great lengths in order to convince their subject that the camera is not watching them. Not knowing that you’re being filmed may produce a more natural “performance” but it can also lead to legal complications involving privacy and portrayal. Shows like “Candid Camera” and “Boiling Point” are enjoyable precisely because the subject doesn’t know they are being recorded. Once they find out they are usually embarrassed, knowing that they would have behaved much differently if they had been aware of the camera.

There is also an argument that observational filmmakers hide behind the camera and film tragedy instead of helping to relieve it. Journalists in particular are accused of this as they film and photograph victims of war and disaster. The famous photograph of Omayra Sanchez, the young girl who died in a mudslide in Colombia in 1985, is a prime example. Photographer Frank Fournier took the picture after officials and professionals had already declared that there was nothing more they could do to save her. That did not stop a large percentage of the public from attacking Fournier for his thoughtless exploitation of this young girl’s tragic death. On a lesser scale are the photos of children in dangerous/painful/funny situations. Other viewers often comment on the parents’ apparent lack of concern for the safety of their child and then jump to extreme conclusions about their parenting abilities.

These accusations, however, often pale in comparison to the information these documentaries bring to light. Both Primary and The War Room follow politicians and their campaign efforts on their way to becoming the president of the United States. The process was long enough and important enough that it became clear that none of the subjects minded or even noticed the cameras any longer. Most notably in The War Room, the workers on the campaign trail are willing to sacrifice their reputation to further Clinton’s chances as office. Most social actors would be tempted to alter the way they appear, use different vocabulary, better manners, or wear different clothing. But James Carville and George Stephanopoulos don’t seem to be in anyway tempted to act differently for the camera.

This shows that over time it can become easy for a filmmaker to go unnoticed which, naturally, leads to a plethora or moral and ethical questions.