First of all, this is a murder case, so there is a suspense throughout the film for the audience to watch. If this is a love story or a historical story, will this oral method be equally successful? There are indeed documentaries about oral history, but the social influence is not great. More people are doing oral history by their own strength. In this respect, Morris was very successful. Although he was also an oral documentary, he chose a very good theme.
In addition, the second difference between this documentary and the oral history documentary is that only one or a few participants in the oral history are speaking, but this case documentary can present the statements of representatives from different aspects, lawyers, witnesses, Defendant, police, friends. . . It is also very convincing to be able to bring the participants to the front of the camera for in-depth interviews.
Third, at the very end of the film, the most crucial suggestive witness testimony can be obtained, which achieves the effect of reversal. The little boy said at the end: He was guilty, because he let a homeless me stay on the street late at night instead of letting me stay. In fact, the opposite of this sentence shows that the 28-year-old defendant did not kill. He was just offending the little boy with antisocial personality.
Fourth, the way of narration. The whole structure of the story is unfolded in a way of flaring up. But the whole story is repeated continuously. But every repetition of the story adds new information. Let’s start with the pros and cons to describe what I did that night. Then the police explain their connection to the case. Then the two people will state their own statements about the case. Then the police stated their opinions, and then brought in more detailed information such as lawyers, other witnesses, and other people's suspicions and evaluations of these later witnesses. Just like a tree-shaped narrative structure, from the top to the last fan-shaped information, the audience is constantly attracted by the newly presented information, and then guesses with the director what the real facts are.
Fifth, photography. Close-up faces are fine, but the top of the head is always cut off. Generally speaking, when interviewing, the top of the head will keep a little distance from the border. The composition of this film not only cut off the top of the head, but also did not follow the one-third photographic composition method. During the interview in this video, the people were all placed in the middle of the screen, not a bit to the right. Maybe this is what the director can create and play an emphatic role.
Sixth, music and lighting are a plus.
View more about The Thin Blue Line reviews
