How have they constructed our conceptualisation
of reality (or at least what we recognise as being real at the visual level)?
Biressi and Nunn (2005) state that “realism depends on notions of suffering, raw experience and personal struggle as emblem of the real” (p.36). As human beings, we tend to look for things or people that we can identify ourselves with. Reality TV and/or documentary-styled television shows are particular genres that viewers tend to identify with the most; due to its closeness to realism. Biressi and Nunn (2005) mention three different documenting styles that help portray the lives of ordinary people; such as, Direct Cinema, cinéma vérité, and Free Cinema. Direct Cinema refers to the relationship between a director/filmmaker and the viewer. A single camera is used to capture footage from a particular point of view, so that viewers can experience what a filmmaker is trying to convey by being one with the camera. Background noise, or ambience, is not edited out to enhance the experience. Cinéma vérité is the style of a filmmaker appearing in their film, interacting with film subjects; for good or for worse. Biressi and Nunn (2005) state that the difference between Direct Cinema and cinéma vérité is that the former is done for the purpose of an unplanned climax, while the latter cuts to the chase, showing its expected climax to the audience. Free Cinema is more of a raw take on the other two styles. Hand cameras are used more, and “real locations” are shot at. In relation to that statement, Biressi and Nunn (2005) report that ‘Free Cinema’ styled documentaries are of a lower budget than the average film, and instead of shooting on set in a studio, “real locations” such as outside on the streets is more of a preferred location.
Cathy Come Home, directed by Ken Loach, was a BBC television play that aired in England in 1966. It was centred on Cathy and her ordeals after her husband’s injury; leading to his inability to continue working, eventually losing his job. Homelessness is the main issue in the film, and although it has fictional characters, the issue of the film is non-fictional. I would describe this film to be a cross-breed of Free Cinema and Direct Cinema. Certain angles and “real locations” are what link to the former, while the latter is the style of the film. Cathy narrates the film, making it seem even more real. The issue of ‘homelessness’ is such a human problem, that the reality of it appealed to the masses.
The three styles that Biressi and Nunn talk about are what I believe to be different structures of how we viewers see reality in a visual sense. The closer to reality a documentary is and the contents it contains, the successful it is in reaching out to viewers.
Biressi, A. & Nunn, N. (2005). Real lives, documentary approaches. Reality TV: realism and revelation. (pp. 35-58). London: Wallflower.
Biressi and Nunn (2005) state that “realism depends on notions of suffering, raw experience and personal struggle as emblem of the real” (p.36). As human beings, we tend to look for things or people that we can identify ourselves with. Reality TV and/or documentary-styled television shows are particular genres that viewers tend to identify with the most; due to its closeness to realism. Biressi and Nunn (2005) mention three different documenting styles that help portray the lives of ordinary people; such as, Direct Cinema, cinéma vérité, and Free Cinema. Direct Cinema refers to the relationship between a director/filmmaker and the viewer. A single camera is used to capture footage from a particular point of view, so that viewers can experience what a filmmaker is trying to convey by being one with the camera. Background noise, or ambience, is not edited out to enhance the experience. Cinéma vérité is the style of a filmmaker appearing in their film, interacting with film subjects; for good or for worse. Biressi and Nunn (2005) state that the difference between Direct Cinema and cinéma vérité is that the former is done for the purpose of an unplanned climax, while the latter cuts to the chase, showing its expected climax to the audience. Free Cinema is more of a raw take on the other two styles. Hand cameras are used more, and “real locations” are shot at. In relation to that statement, Biressi and Nunn (2005) report that ‘Free Cinema’ styled documentaries are of a lower budget than the average film, and instead of shooting on set in a studio, “real locations” such as outside on the streets is more of a preferred location.
Cathy Come Home, directed by Ken Loach, was a BBC television play that aired in England in 1966. It was centred on Cathy and her ordeals after her husband’s injury; leading to his inability to continue working, eventually losing his job. Homelessness is the main issue in the film, and although it has fictional characters, the issue of the film is non-fictional. I would describe this film to be a cross-breed of Free Cinema and Direct Cinema. Certain angles and “real locations” are what link to the former, while the latter is the style of the film. Cathy narrates the film, making it seem even more real. The issue of ‘homelessness’ is such a human problem, that the reality of it appealed to the masses.
The three styles that Biressi and Nunn talk about are what I believe to be different structures of how we viewers see reality in a visual sense. The closer to reality a documentary is and the contents it contains, the successful it is in reaching out to viewers.
Biressi, A. & Nunn, N. (2005). Real lives, documentary approaches. Reality TV: realism and revelation. (pp. 35-58). London: Wallflower.
I think it is quite accurate to describe that we have conceptualized reality TV as something that involves raw emotions and down right human misery. At least for me personally, my conception of what is reality TV is something that shows strong enough emotions that just by viewing the show, I can feel myself being in that situation, like the game show Fear Factor. While watching the show and seeing contestants eat unbelivable things, my own gag reflexes gets triggered as if I am also in the show. And the use of 'Free Cinema' surely makes Cathy Come Home that much more believable although we know that the characters are fictional. The film style enhances the suffering from homelessness even more so and as you've mentioned, brings the viewers closer to the plot of the show and the characters and creates a successful bond between the show and the audience.
ReplyDeleteHi Olivia,
ReplyDeleteGood post and a insightful analysis of conceptualisation of reality tv. I think that you draw on some really good points about the documenting styles and how this is used in Cathy come home. I like the way that you mentioned that 'as human beings we tend to look for things or people to identify with'. I think that you draw on a good point in that this may be a reason as to why viewers delight in the pleasure of reality TV. I also like the fact that you covered in Cathy come home the idea that 'homelessness' is a real issue in that a documentary as such depicts or draws in real issues of society and doesn't rely on scripts to make it real. You have summed this post up well when you state that "the closer to reality a documentary is and the contents it contains, the successful it is in reaching out to viewers".I agree with this as it makes it more real to watch and is what I think reality TV should be about. Well done on a good insightful post :)