I believe that the film industry and in particular short films, have a duty to educate and inform as well as entertain. It is with this in mind that I set about researching the Suez Canal crisis of 1945 to 1956 with the aim of creating a biographical drama. Regularly referred to as “The forgotten war fought by the forgotten army” I wanted to present what it was actually like to be a soldier during this conflict.
I have conformed to the conventions of this genre by sticking to one subject, and exploring in detail throughout the whole short film rather than thinly covering various points. Whilst there are sub-plots that are touched upon, it is the direct experiences of my subject- Roger that form the central narrative. This approach was heavily influenced by the film Operator by Caroline. Throughout this short film we only concentrate on the conversation between the lady requiring help and the operator herself. A key element to biographical documentary is the topic and the interviewee. Roger is an engaging subject who communicates through a range of emotions when recollecting his memories of the conflict. This makes an effective documentary, and I was able to make choices through the micro-element of cinematography to reinforce that Roger is central to the piece, and also in terms of the second area of macro-elements; Representation by placing him front and centre. Always in focus and via a mix of close- up and medium-shots, this enables the audience to engage with him via his expression and movement, particularly the emotion shown in his eyes and his smile, but perhaps most in the moments of silence where he thinks. This is comparable with the range of emotions shown in close-up and medium shots in both Operator and The Fly to excellent effect in using the micro-element of mise-en-scene in character expression and movement to drive the narrative. These choice of shots dictate audience attention on him. We are not distracted by lighting set-ups, the décor of the room or his costume. Instead focusing on him and his story. A person that was there, lived through it and now is sharing his experiences. Unlike the short films studied, the representation is of an OAP, war veteran. This is rare in modern films due to target audiences and profit driven narratives. Films like Echo, The Ellington Kid and Slap are much more representative of younger generations.
Dialogue is the key area of sound not just in my film, but most documentary films. This is also key in Operator as the conversation drives the narrative forward rather than visuals. It is essentially the oldest form of storytelling to be listening to somebody and The Forgotten Soldier does that. When Roger tells the story of a fellow soldier who went through contrasting emotions as he was forced to stay longer in Egypt, he delivers it in a nonchalant way and laughs at the end, when we hear the laughter I chose to overlay this with his deep thinking and looking blankly into the distance and therefore portraying his actual response to the sad story. This makes the audience feel sad as they are forced to look deeper into the story finding a sad narrative that is buried beneath the upbeat appearance and ultimately a response that many soldiers had at the time, trying to keep upbeat and make the most of a potentially devastating situation they were in.
When creating my short film I wanted the conform to the editing conventions of the genre and continuing to represent Roger in a naturalistic way by using continuity editing and having long takes
of dialogue broken up with cutaways of old photographs, props etc. There is no need for any special effects, transitions etc as again this would distract from the key message. This again links well with Operator and the lack of any actual images/footage of the lady and her child, the fire etc. By creating warm lighting, it lingers on Roger therefore showing his warm character. Lastly, character expression also allows the audience to see Roger in a friendly, warm way.
It does however conform to a linear narrative of the 3 act structure allow for me to introduce Roger, hear his stories and finally conclude his thoughts with the delivery of “wars a horrible thing…” lingering on the mind of the spectator. This is similar to Echo, The Fly and Operator in the beginning, middle, end order, and opposite of Over as this film is presented in reverse. This almost gives the audience a sense of resolution at the end of his story, but perhaps this is just the tip of the iceberg of other ‘forgotten’ soldiers and their stories. If I was to create a non-linear narrative I believe it would have distracted away from the stories Roger tells and lose the raw emotion and opportunities for the audience to think for themselves. The short film ‘The Ellington Kid’ is similar in the nature of storytelling, but we physically see these events unfold. I believe it would have done Roger and others a dis-service in attempting to recreate the moments he discussed as happens in self-reflexive documentaries like Stories We Tell.
Instead, this hopefully leaves the spectator to think, to perhaps research more about it. So whilst being quite directive in his dialogue, in terms of Audience, spectators will naturally find the film Polysemic and individuals will read it at different levels.
When thinking about audiences, I was highly influenced by the short documentary film called A Place Like This by Tall Story Films. I, like other audiences, watched this from youtube on my laptop, I found this when researching other short films. I felt this best suited this short film as it allowed me to pause and engage in the short film, researching and learning about what he was discussing, his time at war. Therefore I felt that due to my short film being similar it was also benefit from being watched on small screens such as phones, laptops and iPads in order to allow the audience to pause and research rather being forced to watch it all the way through without stopping. This links with the film Over, where I and other classmates researched the real life events that inspired the film. We had not heard of the story in the news, as most of our age do not watch it, so the film was a way of engaging us, and telling this story. I feel that people would watch my film to both inform and entertain. My preferred reading was to hint to the audience to appreciate the older generation and ask questions about their past, they are usually overlooked and ignored in out fast modern society and are left behind. Their past allowed us to have the future and lives we have today therefor we should appreciate and give them a voice to tell their story. I would feel happy if people only took some of this perspective away and saw this only as entertaining or informative and not both. Although if the audience didn’t take anything from the short film and ignored it would be disappointing as they would be ignoring Rogers story and those who are similar to his, but I am aware that an audience is a collective group, a singular spectator may feel differently to my preferred reading but on a whole I hope for the audience collectively to see my perspective and intentions when creating my short film. When showing it to 10 people, 8 of them felt similarly to my preferred reasons and stated that it made them want to ask their own grandparents about their past.
In conclusion I felt that I successfully used the micro elements in order to fit the documentary conventions and entertain, my short film was educational and informative but also entertaining and engaging therefor I feel I achieved my aims on creating a successfully documentary short film.
