The source of pseudo-documentaries should be the poses commonly used in documentaries. "There are no pseudo-documentaries in the world, and more posing will become pseudo-documentaries." This thing has existed since "Nanuk of the North" was shot. Nanuk's ice-breaking and seal-catching scenes are all about posing. It was shot, but this did not prevent "Nanuk in the North" from becoming the pioneering work of documentary. The long seal-catching shot in that period was later even used by Bazin as an example to illustrate his long-shot aesthetics.
It can be said that there is not much moral anxiety in posing since its birth. Ah, as long as the Nanuks did it before, now we can imitate it again. Most documentary genres that have upheld the "real aesthetics" for a long time, whether it is real movies or direct movies, it is also a joy to shoot with a swing.
Michael Moore is the most sober person. This fat man is very smart. He knows that the audience doesn't care about reality at all, all they want is the "real" feeling. Therefore, Michael Moore can pose freely, even at the expense of collage and tampering with materials to express his opinions. In the deepest part of Michael Moore's huge heart, he knew that he was actually a director of a feature film.
And if a documentary is filmed from beginning to end, it is strangely called a pseudo documentary.
This is nonsense. What is the difference between a 50% pose and a 100% pose? Essentially not. Even if it is not part of the posing, the documentary director can also use various modeling methods, editing, and sound processing to suggest, metaphor, and demonstrate.
Pseudo documentary? Well, assume it exists.
Back to "Man bites a dog".
Pseudo-documentaries were not new in 1992, but "Man Bites Dogs" was the first attempt to popularize pseudo-documentaries in a real sense, using documentary techniques to package a killer story.
When the film’s director Remy was interviewed in Cannes, he refuted many reporters’ claims that "Man Bites a Dog" is a hypocritical and unconventional violent film. Remy frankly said that his original intention was not to be violent. Discuss, but reflect on the carrier of documentary. Violent stories are just a type of strategy that is easy for the public to accept.
I agree with this statement. Stripped of the cloak of the pseudo-documentary, the story of "Man Bites the Dog" is absurd and bizarre. But every audience is willing to believe that "it happens all around us".
This is the formal power of documentaries, not reality, but the feeling of reality. As long as it meets our expectations, experience or hearsay. Even if no one has ever been to the Arctic Circle, as long as someone tells us that Nanuk did it before, coupled with natural light effects, fixed camera long shots, and de-plotting expressions, we can believe that it is absolutely true. . As long as the modern society feels more and more insecure, coupled with natural light effects, long lenses, handheld, filming and communication of crew members, realistic blood and brains, de-plot expressions, impromptu lines and events, we You can immerse yourself in the feeling that Benoy really killed a hundred people, and the child will not let it go.
reality? That's just a style.
The real power of "Man Bite Dog" comes from this. The collision of the extremely real form and the extremely false content is a great irony to the documentary itself. And throughout the film, carefully designed scenes and shots, especially black humor, are an excellent reflection of this theme.
"All movies are drama in the final analysis", I like this sentence.
View more about Man Bites Dog reviews
