Comparing Bowling For Columbine And Is The Man Who Is Tall Happy

1054 Words5 Pages

This paper investigates how Animated and Live-Action documentaries have used cinematic techniques to objectify and construct their own version of realism. This is conveyed through their use in documentaries such as ‘Bowling for Columbine’ (Moore, 2002), ‘Touching the Void’ (Aaron, 2003) and ‘Is The Man Who Is Tall Happy?’ (Gondry, 2013). Throughout this paper I will argue whether Animation techniques are too difficult to follow for an audience to engage with and whether documentaries as a whole are becoming revolutionised by Art and Graphic Designs. Exploring the construction of these techniques through Bill Nichol’s documentary modes by arguing that achieving a higher state of consciousness involves a shift in the levels of awareness and …show more content…

The voice-over is used as a stylistic device to reinforce the perspective of the author and encourage the audience to agree with the facts presented throughout. However, it could be argued that the exposition used throughout this documentary reveals exactly what argument is being explored but takes away the opinion of the audience as this technique can often be obvious, indirect, direct or …show more content…

The hypodermic needle theory in relation to Documentaries could be used to compare the stylistic techniques used between both Live-Action Documentaries. The idea behind ‘Bowling for Columbine’ (Moore, 2002) is supposedly based on the ideologies of ‘America’ as a country and their attitudes towards guns. Nevertheless, the theory suggests that the directors intended meaning is encoded based on their own ideologies and therefore, the audiences ‘decoding’ of the Documentary isn’t essentially needed because as a spectator, they are forced the message.

This is an apparent problem with ‘Bowling for Columbine’ (Moore, 2002) as Moore during the ‘After Columbine’ scene manipulates the representation of Charlton Heston using the NRA to present a villainous character in the eyes of the spectator. To contrast, ‘Touching the Void’ (Macdonald, 2003) breaks the conventions of a generic documentary where there is already a notion in place to claim that documentaries cannot contain scenes that were scripted, constructed or planned out by filmmakers. However, the artifice during the Documentary is used to make the scenes seem more ‘real’ and truthful to the