Documentary Film Analysis Assignment
Just as the accomplished musician listens to lots of music, so should the serious filmmaker watch as many films as they can. The objective of this assignment is to begin training your eye to be critical when watching films. Being able to both watch a film and analyze it, while still enjoying it, is an art in itself. This makes it necessary to watch the movie that you are reviewing at least twice. The first time you watch it you can keep a note pad and jot down some basic information. While watching your selected film for the first time, you should mainly relax and enjoy the movie without thinking too hard about it. You can think harder on the next and subsequent viewings. In order to really complete this assignment well, I suggest you watch the film at least twice. The first time, to let the experience “wash” over you–take in the big picture, take written notes here and there, take mental notes. On the second (or third) viewing, pay more attention to details, take more detailed notes, pause, rewind, playback, analyze. Many excellent films on DVD include a commentary track that you can turn on and listen to while watching the movie for the second time. The documentary “When The Levees Broke” is an example of a film that has a commentary by director Spike Lee. The commentaries are spoken either by the director, principle actors, film critics, or a combination of the above. While watching the film and listening to the commentary you’ll often find them very interesting in their discussion of film craft, acting, or directing. When the commentary track is available, you are bound to get some useful information that you can include in your paper. If you do so, be sure to cite the DVD as a primary source in your bibliography. You should cite this anyway as the film is the primary source of your research.
Where to access the film you choose? http://netflix.com
is a great resource, with over 40,000 titles available as DVD’s that can be mailed to your home or streamed online. There’s also the local library where you can check out DVD’s for free or very cheaply, or local stores such as Blockbuster or Video Signals.
Where can I conduct research? The best place to start is http://www.imdb.com/ the internet movie data base.
This is a marvelous search engine; where you can find director and actor biographies, story synopsis, full credit lists, and more. There are also many Wikipedia articles on films and film making, or just conduct a general Google search on your film.
What’s the difference between a REVIEW and an ANALYSIS? The primary difference is that a review is more of an opinion on whether the reviewer likes or doesn’t like a given film. While it is backed up by reasons, it does not usually go so deep as to look at technique and content. An ANALYSIS is deeper than a review and picks apart a film in greater detail, gives more examples from the film used in discussion, provides research into the making of the film, and may include interviews with directors, actors, producers or writers. While most analysis provide opinions, this is often secondary to an in-depth
analysis of a film.
Selecting a film to analyze: At the top of this blogpost is a collage made up of a few film posters along with logos or images from television documentary series. Try Netflix or these sites: http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/ or this excellent blog listing 50 top documentaries with trailers! http://www.thedocumentaryblog.com/index.php/2010/01/05/the-documentary-blogs-top-25-documentaries-of-the-decade/
You can also ask me for ideas or suggestions, and you must speak with me about which documentary you plan to write about. When selecting your film to review, it does not matter if you have seen the film several times. The more you watch a film that you like, the better, because you often notice more things on each viewing.
I do not want a detailed summary of the story, rather, the points you make when answering the questions below should allude to parts of the story with the assumption that the reader has seen the film. Answer the following questions as best you can. Write in complete, detailed sentences. When giving your opinion, back that up with your reasoning, or use examples from the film you are reviewing. Speak with your peers and/or with me if you do not understand everything I am asking of you.
Your paper should be TYPED and DOUBLE-SPACED. If you follow the directions below it will be between three and five pages.
State the name of the film, who directed it, the principal actors, and who edited it. This information can be found by going to either of these websites: www.imdb.com
or www.netflix.com.
Topic: What is the main topic of the film? Describe in a few sentences who or what the film is about.
Acting: Are the characters, subjects believable? Do they do a good job in conveying the story? Why or why not?
Story? What is the main story? Was the topic a good choice? Why or why not? Do you think the director had a good focus or went too wide in telling the story? Is the film entertaining and informative? Is there something new and unique about this film, or is it banal? Was the director trying to prove or disprove a thesis? Provide reasons and examples for your answers given above.
Direction: Do you think the director did a good job of drawing out the storytelling ability of the people interviewed or presenting? Why or why not? What do you think the director’s vision was? Do you think it could have been handled better?
Narration: Do you think the narration was interesting, funny, believable, or was it stilted, contrived, boring? Is the narration spoken on camera and by voice over by one person, or is it an assemblage of many voices? Give examples.
Storytelling: What happens in the story? How do the sequences within each scene advance the story? How do the scenes advance the story? Is there an “arc” that the film follows within each scene and/or as the film advances through exposition, buildup of action, climax, and resolution? What is the climax? How well do you think the ending works? Could you think of a better ending?
Point of view: Is the point of view clearly stated, or do you think the film is more objective, leaving the audience to decide? Why do you think so?
Visual references: Did the director or editor use enough B-roll footage, news clips, charts, graphs, maps? Or was it too much talking heads? Give examples of what visual elements helped the story of if the documentary was lacking in a variety of visual elements.
Overall use of film elements: Did the director rely more heavily on one or more elements of film in telling the story? Which elements and how?
To answer this question, select three of the film language terms (listed below) and answer the questions. If the film you are reviewing does not make any outstanding use of any of these listed techniques, then pick three anyway and state your opinion as to why you think the film did not work. Make specific references to points in the movie that you are speaking about. In answering the questions give your reasons of why or why not!
Editing: Did the editor move you through time and space or did the movie drag? Was time followed in a linear form, or was time followed in a non-sequential way? Was there anything about the editing that was innovative, or was it too confusing? Was the film too long, too short, or just right? Does the sequencing make sense? Is there anything remarkable about the visual rhythm of the editing? Were the transitions effective? Was cutting effective? Were jumps in time or space acceptable, or not? Give examples from the film in supporting your argument about whether or not the editing helps advance the story along an arc that builds to the climax.
Cinematography/camera angle: Were the shots well framed? Were there many different shots, or was the photography basic, banal? Did shots serve a purpose, make a point about a character or situation? Did they give the viewer a good sense of place and time? Were the shots and sequences notable or basic? Does it matter? Did the director and editor rely on long takes with little cutting or lots of cutting? Would the film have been better or worse with lots of fancy angles and cutting? Or is the story more important to not be distracted by lots of fancy angles and cutting? In other words, in your opinion, what type of editing best serves the advancement of the story? Give descriptive examples.
Audio: Were there examples of multilayered audio–sound effects, music, and ambient sound? How were these elements used and to what effect? Was the construction of the soundtrack an effective use of audio? Was music used as a driving theme in the film, to make a point and underscore/emphasize a particular spot in the story, or was it more as filler, background? Give examples.
Camera Movement: Was camera movement used for any purpose or effect? Was this evident to the point of being distracting, or was it effectively used? Give examples.
Social/Historical context: Is there anything significant about this film in terms of history, art, or society? Does the film try to convince the audience of some point? Is the film made more to entertain or to capture an essence of something? Give reasons for why or why not.
You can insert film stills from the movie to help make your points. Film stills can be found at the imdb site or through google images.
Finishing up: Be sure to write a concluding paragraph! You’ve worked this hard to get this far, put the finishing touches on your work! Include a bibliography—cite the film you’ve reviewed and any Internet sources or magazine articles that you used for your research or images. If citing web sources make note of the date that you accessed them.























































Some of us just hung around and relaxed and after dinner everyone 

Every trip has its snags and we hit one when we arrived back at the main island port of Fajardo. Two of the trip leaders went to get our rented vans while the rest of us waited at the ferry terminal. The wait was longer than expected because one of the vans was infested with ants and we had to wait for a better van. The kids made good use of their time with several of the boys playing impromptu music. It turned out that we had to spend a good part of the day in Fajardo, but it was fine–we had lunch and found the local beach and met some people who had lived on the U.S. mainland. Finally an adequate van was delivered and we started off on the next leg of the journey. Our destination was 




























