Having an Intrest in detective novels, Errol Moris an american documentary filmamker created the film A Thin Blue Line . I believe his attention in someone who was wrongfully accused of muder  brought out a good outcome for the accused , david harris . From 3 witness testimonies a man was being put to death . Discrediting all the testimonies without stating anything about them, morris let the audience decide how credible these witnesses really were. He also brought awareness without being bias on the ideology of police man . There way of thinking and purposely leaving out obvious irregularities in the statement of the partner of the killed policeman led to a wrong conclusion of david harris. I think he was trying to show the carelessness of the value of someones life.The actions of the people blaming Harris for the murder went against his rights of innocent until PROVEN guilty.The film was enjoyed on my behalf and persuaded me to want to see more of errol morris’s films.

Grizzly Man, Werner Herzog(1942) With it’s down to earth yet crazy images and footage of Timothy Treadwill, grizzly man has came to be my favorite documentary. With Werner Herzog editing, he brought some flaws and great moments Tredwill experienced while entering alaska .With just the footage alone i came to my own opinion of Mr Treadwill. Although obsessive, Mr. Treadwill was not selfish. I firmly believe he did his actions to relate to bears and gain exposure of the animal to further come up with ways to help the species. Being an animal lover i came to understand Mr Treadwills obsessive  behavior of his beloved bears. Nobody saw what he saw and nobody felt what he felt. One can only imagine what was going through Treadwills head but not judge negatively upon it. In the future i would like to take action to be a animal conservationist to help the endangered species. We live in a reality that  most humans are the ones either destroying the animals habitat or causing harm to the animal for our selfish wants. This document shed light on some problems us humans can cause or face when it comes to the animal kingdom.

Bill Nichols , author of Introduction to documentary explains how observational documentary de-emphasizes persuasion to give us a sense of what it is like to be in a given situation but without a sense of what it is like for the filmmaker to be there, too. Participatory documentary gives us a sense of what it is like for the filmmaker to be in a given situation and how that situation alters as a result.
Nichols defines an observational documentary as one that the filmmaker gives a sense of what it is like to observe the topic at hand rather then being active in front of the camera. As in letting social actors do as their own will without interrupting more of observing. Where as participatory the audience gets to see how the filmmaker reacts to given scenes. Even with their own personal experiences. The two modes are important because most documentary films choose one to illustrate their own ideas and choice of method for their film. In my essay I will be discussing which one I feel leads to stronger formed opinion from the audience.

While reading Sheila petty essay I learned a different perspective on how someone interpreted our assigned film for last week Tougues Untied. She focused a lot on the structure overall of the film.Overall as your watching a film you want to come up with one solid feeling or the one solid voice that you heard consistently throughout the  film because unless you take pauses throughout a film your required to take everything in and process it and keep repeating the same process while taking in all these images. My approach was thinking more about what images I previously seen and how it effected the next scene. For example when showing people mouths, the words being said can be directly leading to personal testimonies giving by people in the film. I noticed a lot of cause and effect. or bigger to smaller. As Marlon Riggs was trying to abstractly portray that is must all begin with an individual to help the community. I agree with Sheila when she says Riggs is crossing cultural barriers. Even though Marlon Riggs is specifically speaking on a specific group of people , people in general all effect each other and their emotions, we are all social human beings. So I applaud Marlon Riggs for mentioning Joseph Beams quote .

I appreciated the documentary because it embarked on a journey to show high schoolers doing their daily whereabouts in school. You can imagine the political, social and economical problems going on during the Vietnam war. How the war can effect a child or early adult going to high school. The best part is you can observe the differences on high school then and how your own days in high school were. A situation where a boy facing detention is speaking up and going against the teacher . The staff was a lot more engaged i feel with the students. A teacher and student relationship can play a vital role on the educational future of the student. In the auditorium one of the staff members read a letter of a student who passed away from the war. Filling up with tears, the women was deeply effected by the letter that was sent. To conclude i would say the documentary teaches and illustrates the behavior and activities of young adult attending high school. Its educational a fulfills its role.

Declaring  Triumph of the will as an exceptional piece of film would be the least someone can say . If you interpret all the fundamentals of film making I believe this film represents it entirely. But Of curse if you throw ethics in there it can change someone’s opinion . Why I throw ethics as a factor of changing someone mind its because it personally changed mine. When I found out the movie was banned from Germany it made me want to answer the obvious question as In why? Through my own critical thinking I believe it came from shame . Shame that the people fell into the traps of hell. How a whole country can look playful and enthusiastic and bow to the feet of their “savoir”. When he was a mass murderer. And I continue by saying I don’t blame the people.Where there is direction people will follow even though the direction was illuminated and painted a picture of right it was wrong. But just because you were led wrong doesn’t mean you cant acknowledge there was once harm done by you. I believe this film fits into the reflexive category as it calls questions to the conventions and methodologies of documentary film. It also falls partial in biography mode. Having part of Adolf Hitler’s life. Over all I feel the film shed much needed light to what was taken place with the people surrounding the world war and the holocaust, being such vital parts of world history. World history can be directly tied with leading doc film and their purposes.

Introducing yourself to documentary film can be unfitting at times. It circulates questions in your head while allowing your eyes to fixate on the image . Then its mind vs image. I enjoyed viewing and thinking about the film. It answered and stirred up many questions for me. I just thought we should have taken ourselves out of our 2017 shoes and watch the movie resembling  the first audience to view it . With this is dosnt lower your intelligence or guard some might say but rather give the liberty of the image to hit you with fresh new eyes and ideas. Then the film can be appreciated for what it wants to embody and represent. If i were the creator of the film i would feel very proud of the work that was made. It is a will forever be and imporant piece of history in film.