Grizzly Man came out in 2005, and is a 104 minutes documentary film; made by a German filmmaker named Werner Herzog. Herzog combines Treadwell’s footages with his own. Treadwell had a deep passion and love for the wild grizzly bears; he wanted to be able to form a deep connection with them, and protect them. Treadwell went away for 13 summers to an Alaskan reserve to live with the wild grizzly bears and for 5 did he bring a camera with him to film. They mentioned that Treadwell did not have a good past, and also mentioned that, because of it he did create different personas. His love for wild grizzly bears helped him find himself, and change for the “better.” I put quotes because, there are different opinions regarding if he was actually doing himself a favor or not. Treadwell did pass away due to a vicious bear attack, and there was also an audio recording of when the incident happened. In the documentary they did not let us hear the actual audio recording, however they did tell us briefly what they heard. Not saying I would enjoy hearing the recording, but I wished they included it in; it would be interesting, and it would fill my curiosity. I respect their choice however of not including it. People have said that Treadwell dug his own grave or did it to himself; my opinion on this is, Treadwell did fall into a dark hole in his past, and he did what he needed to do to get out of it, whether it is changing personas or living with the wild grizzly bears. He made a choice, it was his own decision, and as long he felt better, and happier with what he was doing, that is all that matters. We should not judge a person, when we do not know the whole story.

Harlan County, USA published in 1976, is a 104 minutes documentary film. It is about the 1974 strike of miners who worked at the Brookside mine in Kentucky. There were many miners, their wives, and children in this film. The miners and supporters wanted to join a union called the, United Mining Workers (UMW). The miners and their families were not being respected, and treated fairly. A lot of the miner’s health went down, they got the Black Lung Disease, and they weren’t being paid well for the amount of work they do, and the dangers to their well-being. Miners, their families, and supporters went on strikes, also known as the Picket Line. A lot of them got injured, and died as a result. In this film some of the things I saw were, how the mining system worked, a miner eating a snack underground, a daughter talking about how most of the conversations at the dinner table were about joining the union, and how she had to watch her father die from the Black Lung Disease. The songs in this film had a lot of meaning to them; most of them were about the miners, the union, and the disease. The women in this film not only were they taking care of the children, their family and chores, they were also taking actions in supporting the union and strikes. The women were interested in what their husbands were doing; they were willing to participate, and their concerns for their safety. There were a lot of strong, brave, women leading union conferences, and planning out strikes. It is really messed up how the miners were basically told to keep working until there is something wrong with their health. I remember in this film they showed from an autopsy a lung that suffered the disease, and when he rubbed it, it turned into paper flakes.

“Night and Fog” came out in 1955, and it was a short thirty-two minutes film. It was directed by Alain Resnais, ten years after the end of World War II in 1945. The text and voice over was written and read by Jean Cayrol. He was a poet and a political prisoner held in Gusen, a Nazi camp in Austria. I noticed they used color for present, and black/white for the past. They provided pictures/images, and videos as evidence. This film really got to me emotionally, with all the graphic images, videos, angles they shot, and the way the speaker spoke. A few examples of what I saw in this film were, a big mountain pile of women’s hair, scratches on the ceiling from the gas chambers, books of people’s names, and dead bodies with their heads chopped up in a separate pile. Even though this film was short, it was very powerful.

“Shoah” came out in 1985, and it was a long nine-and-a-half-hour film. Shoah in Hebrew means annihilation (Holocaust). It has no archival material, it was based on eyewitness testimony only. This film includes present day interviews with survivors, Nazis, and people who lived near camps; there were also translators in this film. You can tell the difference in emotion between the witness’s speaking and the survivor’s speaking. I did think the scene in the beginning with the singing, rowing in the boat surrounded by nature was beautiful. This film showed not only the interviews itself, but also audio while showing images or videos, and they showed some sort of map/blue print while the witness was giving him the rundown of what he saw inside the camps. Apparently, this witness worked there, but didn’t know exactly what was going on. I didn’t like the way the interviewer was pushing one of the survivors in one of their interviews (the man that was smiling a lot). I really liked how the man who smiled a lot showed such positive attitude even after what he has been through. This film did not get to me as emotionally as “Night and Fog;” then again, I didn’t get to see the whole film.

Overall, I did like both films, but I thought “Night and Fog” is a good representation of what a documentary should be.

This propaganda film was directed by, Leni Riefenstahl in 1935, and it was paid for by the German Nazi party. Some of the things they showed in this film were, how they clean themselves, cook, labor work, big ceremonies, and Hitler standing up in his car, while being driven down the streets greeting his people. This film showed a lot of people smiling and saluting him, and everything seems strict and in order. This film portrayed Hitler as a powerful and respected leader; his people makes promises to him, and obeys him only. However, this film is more than meets the eye; most of it was staged, knowing they were being filmed. I don’t think their daily lives is exactly as what we saw in the film, and because they wanted us to perceive Hitler as someone powerful and great; making his country great. It’s not like Leni Riefenstahl could add the other side to the story in the film, because she was being paid by them to make the film a certain way. Leni Riefenstahl knew what she was getting into, so even if she wanted to portray Hitler or Germany in another way, she couldn’t, and that’s something she must deal with. As for if this film should be banned or not, because it is banned in Germany. I can understand why people would want it banned, and why some people would think it’s okay to keep it; I’m neutral about this topic. Some examples to why people would want it banned, because it’s traumatizing, it leaves a bad taste in your mouth, ashamed of what their country did or what their people did, and to them Hitler is like Voldemort (he who shall not be named). Reasons why people would say it’s okay to keep it, because even though it takes you to a dark place, and bad memories, we can gain knowledge from it, and learn from it.

I thought this film was interesting, because you’re looking at the lives of other people. People that live in a whole other environment than you, and who’s culture is different than you. This film by Robert J. Flaherty, focused on the lives of the Inuit’s. It’s about showing what they do daily, how they survive, their struggles, and family. I find them clever, because they take advantage of the limited resources they can find to survive. For example, from hunting, building igloos, to substituting blubber for butter. They have many different methods of hunting their food. One example is, they find breathing holes that the seals need to come up and breathe, and they wait for them. Building igloos is hard work, and it’s so interesting in the way they build it. There’s different type of ice they use for certain parts of the igloo; for example, they cut out a clearer piece of ice to make a window or to reflect light into the igloo. They don’t have butter there, so the only thing that’s like butter for them is blubber from the seal. The thing about Inuit’s is they use everything they find to the max, so if they catch a seal, they will use up the seal whole; flesh to eat, skin to wear, blubber as butter, and their tails to play tug of war. A lot of the things they do are about technique, endurance, and patience. I feel like the only problem I have with this film, is the knowledge that Flaherty had a sexual relationship with the wife or one of the wives. Also, that not everything that he showed in the film is natural and accurate. Overall it was fun to watch, and I did learn a lot.