Documentaries involve improvisation, so you must often revise as you go. Making a directing plan is useful, however, because it’s one more plank in the all-important development work before you leap into the fray. Work on a computer so you can read, think, and revise over a period of time. Don’t forget to compile those life-saving “do not forget” lists of tasks and ideas (see this book’s Web site, http://directingthedocumentary.com for downloadable re minder lists). Plan to cover expository information, crucial to the coherence of any story, in multiple ways so you have options in postproduction.
Get all the conceptual help you can by using Projects 2-DP-4 Advanced Working Hypothesis 2-DP-6 Advanced Proposal Helper
Get all the help with content and style you can by using Projects 2-DP-1 Dramatic Content Helper and 2-DP-2 Style and Content Questionnaire.
People seldom imagine the sheer organization a film takes or see that asking you to switch filming to another week will cause you difficulty.
(Note: Numbering refers to list on page 370.)
This is fatally easy to decide superficially. Deciding who is in struggle is easy, but deciding what really is at stake—for your participants, for those around them, or for society at large—takes a lot of hard, careful thought. It’s not enough to list issues—you must decide which is paramount. This is the key to giving your film the definition and clarity it needs to be effective.
As shooting evolves, the film’s purpose and identity often subtly change, so keep watch.
Who and what are pitted against each other? In what hierarchy might these oppositions play out? Their prominence and strength depend very much on how you capture them and how you orchestrate them later during editing. This gives muscle and sinew to your drama. Right now you need to be fully aware of what’s available to work with.
Once you know the main oppositional forces in your film, you must ensure they meet in confrontation. A documentary does not reach its potential if its racketeering landlord never meets the tenant association that wants heat in the winter and rats evicted. You may have to finagle things to make confrontations happen.
Documentaries sometimes fail to bring their opposing forces into confrontation, and this leaves the audience feeling cheated.
Who, among those in the film, must we specially understand and sympathize with? How will you take us inside these emotional viewpoints? What changes in thinking and feeling do you want us to experience as we follow the story? What should we feel and think by the end?
Most importantly, what are your attitudes as the Storyteller toward the story you are telling—is it “an endlessly repeating cycle” or “a small-town tragedy”? Is it a “Frankie and Johnnie ballad” or a “defeat snatched from the jaws of victory” type of tale? Is it a tragedy, farce, tall story, or cautionary tale? Don’t just give us a record of events and leave your tale to find its own nature. How you shoot and edit your story should give it a clear, exciting identity as a type of story. Whichever it is, tell it with style, panache, and gusto. To do this you must adopt a storytelling role rather than work from your modest, retiring self. Michael Moore has said he was terrified in Bowling for Columbine while confronting Charlton Heston over the National Rifle Association’s stance. Taking on social icons comes no more naturally to him than it does to you or me; he does it because he feels someone must. Can you do likewise?
You alone can give identity to the Storyteller behind your documentary tale. Failing to develop one is like letting a computer read your children’s bedtime story.
Every film stands on the shoulders of those before it. Your documentary’s antecedents will suggest ideas or approaches that can enrich it and take your film farther.
Your film parallels works in other art forms such as music, opera, theater, folktale, or mythology that pursue a similar theme, tell a similar tale, or use a similar form. The parallels you find can help intensify your work and move it toward the universal.
Documentary’s greatest handicap is its tendency toward the parochial. Only if you develop more universal themes will yours cross local boundaries the way fiction films do.
During preproduction, the director of photography, sound recordist, and director should check out locations for problems. See Chapter 9, Camera Equipment and Chapter 10, Lighting, for the fundamentals.
Whenever possible the cinematographer scouts locations ahead of shooting. What problems do they pose?
The first thing a sound specialist does in a new location is to clap her hands, once and loudly. She listens for the attack and decay of the hand clap. Ideally, they are rapid. If the room is live (reverberant) there will be an appreciable comet’s tail of sound reflected and thrown around the room. This concerns her greatly, and she may ask for an alternative venue. Take such advice seriously, because sound reflectivity of particular surfaces can make the difference between sound that is usefully dry or not reverberant and one that is unworkably hollow and reverberant (see sound theory in Chapter 11, Location Sound).
When in doubt, record representative dialogue in dubious sound locations and roughly edit the results together. You will quickly have the measure of your problems. The sound recordist will also be concerned with:
Typical intermittent sound intrusions might come from:
Be aware that shooting interior dialogue with doors and windows closed can be trying in hot weather.
Careful shooting takes longer than you ever imagine possible. Even a simple 20-minute interview may take 3 hours to accomplish, given that you often must socialize with participants when you visit their homes.
Estimating how long each type of scene takes to shoot comes with experience. A 30-minute documentary can take between 3 and 8 working days to shoot, depending on:
Schedule two or, at the most, three sequences in a day’s work unless you are using available light and are certain that what you want is straightforward. Avoid overly optimistic scheduling by making best-case and worst-case estimates and allotting something in between.
Whether your shooting is drawn out or compact, make a draft schedule and solicit comment from the crew.
Give everyone a printed schedule before each day’s shooting. Time spent planning and informing is time, money, and morale saved later. An under-informed crew stops taking initiative and waits around for instructions.
In each schedule include:
Expect trouble and you won’t be disappointed. There’s a reason why film-making is so often described in the language of military invasion.
One luxury peculiar to the independent filmmaker (and there are few) is that you can shoot follow-up material over a long period. Independent filmmakers tend to work as a group and on multiple projects, so occasionally deploying a crew for follow-up is not difficult. Returning at 6-month intervals for a couple of years may capture real changes. Reality shows, which borrow from documentary, accelerate change by putting contestants under extreme tests of endurance, strength, or ingenuity.
You must secure permission to film in a location in writing before you start shooting (Figure 24-1; see also Figure 7-1 in Chapter 7). A film of mine was once held up for a year after getting written permission to film an exhibition in a synagogue. Although I had secured permission for the building, the traveling exhibition’s owner, after hugely enjoying himself presenting exhibition items to the camera, later denied he had ever given me permission to film.
All events on private property (which may include a city transportation system) must be cleared by the relevant authority unless you care to risk being
taken to court for invasion of privacy. This risk rises as you or your company become worth suing. Sometimes—and this is a great hazard to investigative journalism—a malicious party will initiate legal action as a pretext for obtaining a court injunction that will block your film from showing.
Anything unrestrictedly open to public entry and view (such as the street, markets, public meetings) may be filmed without asking anyone’s permission. Handheld cameras count as newsgathering and are protected under freedom of speech; however, cities often restrict street filming from a tripod or other camera support system. This arises from a film crew’s potential to become a spectacle that blocks or disrupts traffic flow. Accordingly, you must get police permission and perhaps pay for a cop to control traffic or wave away troublesome bystanders. Once you put up the tripod, you technically speaking cross into the big time, but there may be nobody around who cares. Chicago is still film friendly, while in Paris and New York the honeymoon is long over. To film at any urban location, you must work through a special division of the mayor’s office or state film commission. They require proof that you carry the relevant liability insurance in case your activities cause injury.
By tradition, documentary makers often shoot first and ask questions later, knowing that if somebody takes exception, the combination of ideals and poverty will probably lead to nothing more than an irritable dismissal. This solution gets risky in authoritarian countries where the authorities identify cameras as engines of subversion. Moving images from a phone camera can provide powerful, instant, and worldwide evidence of wrongdoing, as the Burmese government discovered after beating up monks who were peacefully demonstrating. The Los Angeles police department went on trial before the world for the Rodney King beating. Years of asserting police brutality had gotten black people nowhere until the evidence was inarguable. Two minutes of footage shot by the alert owner of a camcorder changed history.
In this document the signatory releases to you the right to make public use of the material you have shot (Figure 24-2). You ask for the signature immediately after shooting. To soften the predatory nature of the request, you may want to give the person, say, 24 hours in which to call you to discuss anything they might want to retract.
Permission problems or legal hang-ups happen when people imagine you can find fame or fortune from selling footage of them. Practice explaining the reality.
Al Maysles asks people to sign, one after another, under a common declaration in an ordinary notebook. Signing seems less momentous when they can see that others have signed before them. Other documentarians—Fred Wiseman reputedly among them—secure a record of agreement by asking participants to say on-camera that they give permission to be filmed and that their name and address are such and such. A verbal release, however, is no protection against someone who decides at a late hour to pull out, sending an entire project down the drain with a whoosh. Participants know that you can, if challenged, always play their footage in court. Note that neither a verbal release nor a signed document protects you against charges of slander or deception.
Whichever means you use, get personal releases signed in the euphoria immediately after the participant’s filming. No signature is valid without the $1 minimum legal payment, which you solemnly hand over as symbolic payment. Minors cannot sign legal forms themselves and will need the clearance of a parent or legal guardian.
You can’t get, nor do you need, releases from all the people who appear in a street shot, which contains what anyone in lawful transit might see. So you normally seek signed releases from speaking participants only. Securing the release prevents participants from pulling out arbitrarily or from hitting you up for money once they know that the work you’ve invested in depends on their contribution.
For all film-related legal matters, consult Michael C. Donaldson’s highly readable and comprehensive Clearance and Copyright: Everything the Independent Filmmaker Needs to Know, 2nd ed. (2003, Silman-James). These aspects are of particular interest to independent documentary makers:
Documentaries depend on good-faith exchanges captured, not checkbook journalism. Only pay participants for what you’ve cost them (electricity, say), but do leave something for people in need.
Fiction filmmakers pay actors, but documentary makers don’t normally pay their participants, even when they have quite large budgets. This is because paying someone means you are potentially purchasing the truth you want to hear. For the audience this reduces or disables your film’s credibility. There are a couple of exceptions to this.
If you engage a history specialist, such as Harvard’s Henry Louis Gates, Jr., to host and help create a series like PBS’ African American Lives series (2007 – 2008, United States), you will expect a great deal of his time and expertise and must, of course, compensate him for it. You’d also pay an honorarium to each of the celebrities he interviews in order to reserve some of their precious time and respect their status. The sums involved would all be decided through delicate negotiation during the proposal stage for the series. Some might do it free out of friendship for the host. You would emphatically not pay a politician or other public servant. The correct stance is always predicated by the public perception of your action—do you endanger our trust in your film by paying or not paying? Could payments change what we learned? Are they appropriate in the circumstances?
If you film destitute hurricane victims telling your camera what their lives are like or if you show the desperate daily life of an African AIDS sufferer who cannot afford medicine, you’d have the heart of a stone if you didn’t give a small sum to help out as you left. If you come from the wealthy First World and your career is being enhanced through portraying suffering in the Third World, the least you can do is compensate those with so little to give but who give it in a generous spirit anyway. Ten dollars is little enough to you but may be a week’s income where you are filming. What’s significant is that you give it freely afterwards; it is not a precondition for filming.
Whatever issues you face, go to The D-Word Web site at www.d-word.com and expect to find your problem discussed in their extensive archives. It’s free, and very welcoming.