PRACTISE ESSAY QUESTIONS + ANSWERS

Apply one filmmaker's theory of documentary film you have studied to your chosen documentary. How far does this increase your understanding of the film?

Asif Kapadia, the director to the documentary 'Amy', accumulated hundreds of hours of footage and edited this together to create this documentary on the life of Amy Winehouse. Asif Kapadia can be seen as a personal documentary filmmaker, as he invests so much time in making sure that the footage he edits, presents an unbiased viewpoint of Amy's life. Kapadia shares some characteristics that filmmaker Kim Longinotto presents in her work. Although Longinotto can be seen to be an observational filmmaker, due to not intervening with anything whilst she films, they both become so involved within their project that it reflects onto the spectator as they feel a more personal connection to the subject. Whilst Longinotto uses a voiceover to express her views, Kapadia uses the micro features within his film in order to present his opinion on the certain event occurred within the film. All the archived footage gathered by Kapadia, not only strengthens the spectator's understanding of Amy's life, but gives us a more personal interaction with her.; therefore, giving the spectator their own opinions on Amy without being told by the filmmaker. 

Kapadia's main objective with this documentary, is to show how Amy's personal life was horribly affected by her fame and publicity as she grew in popularity. He clearly shows this within the 'rise to fame' sequence around one hour into the film. Kapadia edits a number of pictures and magazine articles onto the screen in an attempt to express Amy's newfound fame. Kapadia uses quick cuts and hectic editing in order to show how truly sudden this new found fame was. The camera also tracks Amy walking around New York whilst being stopped to ask for autographs. Amy's facial expression express a sense of discomfort whilst she reluctantly takes pictures with people. This gives the spectator an uncomfortbale feeling as we witness first hand how some people take advantage of her fame too much, however we are unable to do anything about it. This reenforces the idea that Kapadia is a personal documentary filmmaker as he makes the spectator feel as though they are intruding on Amy's life through all this close personal footage of her. This differs to the documentary style of Kim Longinotto, where she uses long cuts and hardly edited footage to ensure that the spectator feels involved with what is going on with the subject. Although Kapadia does the opposite and use many quick cuts, they both use shot-reverse-shots and close ups of different people, to fully enhance the spectator's understanding of the emotions presented within the scene. Towards the end of the scene, Kapadia uses taken footage from paparazzi, where they are constantly taking pictures of Amy, despite her efforts to leave. The close up of Amy and the harsh flash photography in the scene, emphasises Kapadia's belief that the population are the antagonists to the story. This places the spectator to believe that they are constantly intruding on Amy's life, and that past intrusion ultimately lead to her death. This further emphasises how Kapadia's style of filmmaking, urges the spectator to understand her life more closely and to prevent the intrusion of someone's life in the future. 

This intrusion is further demonstrated within the Grammy sequence, in which we can clearly see Amy's live reaction to receiving a Grammy award and how she truly acts 'behind the scenes'. Kapadia uses footage of a handheld camera to give the spectator the view that Kapadia has of Amy. The camera zooms into Amy as she stand upon a stage looking upon the audience with a bland facial expression. Kapadia's aim within this scene is to present Amy as natural, but does so by expressing the facade she presents when accepting the award. Her facial expressions completely change when she goes live in front of the audience, emphasising how different she acts when she is knowingly being filmed. Having the camera zoomed into Amy during this scene, emphasises Kapadia's attempt to place the spectator within Amy's shoes and see her true reactions to what is going on within her life. Kapadia uses this archive footage in order for the spectator to gain sympathy for Amy and what she has had to endure with her fame. Therefore, there is a degree to which this is a relatively subjective film; Kapadia’s own interpretation of events, many years after they happened. The juxtaposition of the way that Amy acts onstage compared to the way she acts off live television, emphasises the conflict within Amy and how broken she has become due to her fame. We are only able to see this due to Kapadia's style of documentary filmmaking as this taken footage emphasises all aspects of Amy's life, whilst Kim Longinotto's style of filmmaking would only place the spectator to see the facade Amy has created, due to the knowledge that she is being filmed. 

In conclusion, whilst Longinotto expresses herself as a 'fly on the wall' observational documentary filmmaker who gives the spectator the same viewpoint as her, Kapadia lets the spectator have their own opinion on Amy due to the variety of shots that he uses throughout his film. Kapadia uses his micro features to not only express a certain view on Amy, but to increase the spectator's understanding of Amy in order for them to make up their own views on her.