Emily's Blog

As i mentioned in the previous post about what I wanted to get out of the studio, I am currently also partaking in the course “True Lies: Documentary Studies.” I believe this class and the documentary we had to watch this week is a perfect option for this post as it reflects on non-fiction content and the art of documentaries.

Forbidden Lie$ is an Australian documentary which tells the story of Norma Khouri who published a “non fiction” book called Forbidden Love in 2003, only for it to be based on lies rather than the truth. Claiming to live in Jordan, Norma centres her book on the honour killing of her best friend “Dalia,” who was killed in the hands of her father for loving a man of another religion. Dalia was killed in order to cleanse the family name and hence, Norma wanted to avenge her death by getting justice and changing the laws that allow for these acts to take place.

However, that is what Norma wants YOU to believe. This documentary uncovers the lies and deception that Norma created in order to create personal gain. I won’t give everything away, however, it becomes very easily for you to soon tell what is truth and what is false when it comes to Norma. Like Elmyr from “F for Fake,” Norma is displayed as a con-artist with sociopathic tendencies. However, unlike Elmyr who admitted to committing fraud, Norma only admitted to small parts of the lies she created, and when she did, she made sure she could justify why she did it in order for people to sympathise with her. Norma displayed no remorse for what resulted from her actions, but rather only cared for herself and her image in the end.

This documentary takes on a very traditional documentary form, using interviews, re-enactments and following a ‘chronological order of events’ structure. What was interesting was the use of incorporating Anna Broinowski, the director, into the second half of the film as she appears on screen rather than off. However, unlike in F for Fake where Olson is a main subject and uses on-screen narration, Anna is shown just interviewing Norma, specifically in their time in Jordan when she becomes frustrated with the continues lies generated by the main “character” in her documentary. In many occasions, you can see the reality of the director becoming annoyed with the little progression that is occurring because of set backs. In this case, the set back was Norma, who was leading them on a trial of deception without letting them know until AFTER her actions had consequences. I believe showing this frustration was a great element in regard to showing the real effects Norma’s lies had on the people around on her. In terms of creating non-fictional content, this was perfect for adding to the authenticity.

This documentary also has a controversial and abrupt ending which for many viewers seemed not needed. Norma, at the end of the entire ordeal, told Anna and her audience that she had been sexually abused by her father as a child. This is confusing as earlier in the film, her father was interviewed alongside Norma in their journey through Jordan and seemed to have a good relationship with his daughter. It is here where the film ends, and text tells the audience watching that this was proven to be false. In fact, Anna in an interview after the creation of this documentary, revealed that she didn’t believe Norma’s father was even her true dad, as she was so good at lying.

Forbidden Lie$ was not only interesting to watch, but a great example of non-fictional content I can consider while working within my studio, Real to Reel.

Where do I begin with this film?

F for Fake truely confused but intrigued me throughout its entire duration. To define this film as non-fiction (for the first hour at least) is non-debatable, yet to try and define exactly HOW it displays itself as non-fictional is difficult. The film uses interviews with the true people who they discuss, hence, becoming like a documentary. Yet, it also incorporates the director as a significant part of the film. His narration dictates the direction of where the film proceeds to go. It continues to go from non-fiction to fiction through these techniques.

The film’s main purpose and contention was to uncover “fakes”; specifically con artists who create counterfeit paintings in order to grow personal gain. While the film goes on to speak about not just Elmyr de Hory but other subjects such as Clifford Irving and Oja Kodar, every new story is always linked back to Elmyr and his deception.

In terms of other film techniques, I was surprised by the choppiness in the editing, especially at the beginning of the movie. The fast cuts, the quick zooms and almost random stills or pauses of the shot were unique aspects which I believe were used to add to the authenticity the film wished to create.

I, however, don’t quite understand the portrayal of Oja and why it was so dramatic at times. I can see why the film chose to strongly sexualise her as she was their only female subject and they needed to show how men perceived women back in the 70’s and link that to their fictional story of Picasso. Yet it almost become uncomfortable to watch her be displayed in such a distasteful manner. The montage of men looking at her lasted for way too long, however, maybe this was the intention? Maybe Orson Welles, one of the directors, felt that it had to be uncomfortable in order to showcase how Oja herself may be feeling. Yet, I find myself believing this may not be the case as this movie was created in the 70’s, not in our recent decade.

From reflecting upon the studio prompt and the intention behind “Real to Reel,” I believe this course will encourage and motivate myself as a media student to learn about non-fictional content and what it truely means to create something based on truth. As a lover of documentaries and exploring factual ideas and stories, I am yet to dabble in creating something based on this interest. My favourite form of documentary series is based on true-crime. I’m not sure if this says anything about me, but yes I love learning about serial killers and what motivates them to commit such unlawful acts of violence.

In terms of my goals for this semester in this studio, I really hope not just to improve on my practical skills (which are a bit rusty since being on a three month break) but try photojournalism. I once wanted to be a photojournalist during high school as one of my biggest inspirations is social media photojournalist Sjana Elise. I wanted to travel the world and take photos of what I saw, and reflect on the stories behind them, just as she did and continues to do. However, the reality of becoming successful through such a practice was too slim for me to feel comfortable pursing it. Hence, when I saw we would be touching on photojournalism and photographic essays, the younger version of myself squealed in delight. At least this way, I can see if I enjoy being behind a camera as I already know that I love to write and reflect.

I am also in this semester taking the course “True Lies: Documentary Studies.” From the first week I can already see the connections between these two classes, and it will be interesting to see how I can take knowledge from that class and put it towards my practice in this one.

I had so much fun working with three-point lighting and discovering the ways it can ultimately transform your shot. Of course, I was aware of the importance lighting has in a film shoot, especially in dark or boring spaces, however, I didn’t realise the importance each different light could make, depending on its position. My favourite light would have to be the back/hair light as it essentially created more dimension to the shot.

As seen in the video we were instructed to watch before class, it take’s the subject of the shot and separates them from the background. It provides that extra dimension, so they aren’t seen as lost in what appears behind them. While the sun can become an amazing asset in film making, I remembered from what Paul mentioned that a lot of “natural light” you see in movies and television shows is faked by extremely powerful and bright lights outside the set. I find it so fascinating that this can be achieved.

As you can see in the still’s shown, Nelson looks overexposed and dull in the lighting from the room in the picture. Yet, on camera, it tells a completely different story. The green in his hair has become more vibrant, the shadows on half of his face create amazing definition. It’s exciting how great lighting can affect the mood of the shot you desire to create.

As Paul touched on in class, setting up lighting and camera’s and audio equipment, all in one space, can become chaotic and messy. Leads are everywhere, people are everywhere. However, amongst it all, we seem to all know our roles and get the job done which is an element I really appreciate about film making.

Something we had yet to work on in regard to shot construction was camera movement, so when we got to chance to finally give it a go, it was exciting nonetheless.
In a group with Aria and Grace, we used a colourful backdrop to concentrate on our pans, follow throughs, zoom ins etc.

In my first edit, I focused on matching up clips and timing myself and Grace walking up the stairs. Aria was hand-holding the camera for this, and the result was great. However, it did help me realise how hard controlling the camera can be in regard to holding it yourself instead of using a tripod for stability.
It reflects back to the clip from a movie Paul showed in class, where shots were constructed with the camera operator HOLDING the camera while almost RUNNING to follow the subject in the shot. It looked clumsy and awkward to watch. Hence, I can say now I definitely prefer the use of a tripod, although holding the camera is easier in regard to quick pans and follow throughs.

My second edit is much messier as it focuses more on other shots and movements we did, rather than having them match up. It showcases more our experimentation.

In all honesty, we basically constructed every shot possible we could possibly do in terms of capturing someone walk up and down that staircase. Looking back, I really liked the shot where the focus on characters switched from Aria to Grace, as Grace walks past and up the stairs.

Although not included in the edit, a test shot with Paul in it focused on him going down the stairs but disappearing out of frame for a second before coming back in to continue down the other flight of stairs. I really liked that shot as it shows that the camera doesn’t need to follow the subjects every move for the shot to be effective.

The scene I have chosen to deconstruct this time is from the 1976 film adaption of Stephen King’s novel Carrie. It is quite different from the movie Juno in almost possibly every aspect besides them both being teen films. Drawing off elements of art cinema, Carrie features supernatural abilities within a high school setting, drawing on teenage issues such as puberty, bullying and romance as the film centres around the prom. The film is more disturbing than frightening in my opinion. Director Brian De Palma’s style is also notably different and unique, which also encouraged my decision to choosing this scene.

In this scene, Carrie is in class and surrounded by class mates and her teacher whom is reading a student’s poem. The student is revealed to be Tommy Ross, a popular athlete who eventually later in the movie goes to take Carrie to the prom. The scene opens with a close up on Carrie’s hand, copying down the poem word for word. What happens next is a zoom out, which in many cases, is avoided during shot construction. However, De Palma includes frequent zooms throughout his film, so much so that they seem unnecessary and random at times. However, I believe this one works as it establishes Carrie’s like for the poem, as well as then zooming out to establish where she is and where the voice is coming from.

The shot is then dragged out to be quite long, panning around the students until turning around to focus in on Tommy and become a medium close up. When the teacher announces Tommy’s name, a whistle is heard, assumingly from outside. It’s almost as if it was used to demonstrate Tommy’s athletic nature, yet the teacher goes on to speak of his “home runs” right after which leads me to think, was it necessary?

The most extraordinary shot, however, is the double focus on both Carrie and Tommy that De Palma constructed. Tommy is seen at a close up, while Carrie is shown over his shoulder at a mid-shot. De Palma is famously known for his shots using a Split Focus Diopter, which is a half convex glass attached to the camera’s main lens. It helps create that double focus, and in the case of this scene, capture the emotions and reactions of two characters at once. You can even notice the blurry line in the scene through Tommy’s hair. I think this shot is brilliant as I don’t recall seeing it done so well. As Carrie announces her admiration for the poem and Tommy is seen as bothered by her doing so, the shot shows the division between both character’s personalities and personas.