Although we cut Sherman’s March short, it was one of my favorite films we have watched so far this semesters (fluff). It was so incredibly down to earth and this is what made it enjoyable. Too often we are fed the extraordinary and great feats of “heros” and what have you however this film follows one guy on his very ordinary day to day interactions. We hear him talk on the camera just like any other person, even the people he films talk as if they aren’t being filmed. The camera is a simple bystander to the everyday conversations that Ross has with people around him. Because we are given such an ordinary look into interactions, we are drawn in further. Listening to their snippets of conversation is voyeuristic and brings out this tendency in us. We want to listen to what they are saying and what to know all the intimate details.
We also hear Ross in voice over’s which lends another dimension to the sound and the movie. We know what is happening inside of Rosses head, we hear his thoughts. Now we not only get to hear his interactions but also his thoughts. The sound begins to cover all bases, it pervades and nudges us into a sort of trance, wondering what will happen in Rosses somewhat ordinary journey. We also hear Ross speak to the camera after a certain event. So in a way, past, present and future are all covered by the sound of Rosses voice. Voice over, conversations and monologues create a narrative with sound and give us everything we would want to know. Whatever the picture doesn’t show, sound will tell us.
Although most of the sound trends discussed in Altman’s chapter, “Conventions of sound in documentary films” seems like common sense or something we would all know. One stylistic tendency caught my eye more than others and seemed to apply to Sherman’s March well. ”Location sound in Documentary” (221). ”Ambient sounds compete with dialogue” (221). This is something I noticed in Sherman’s March, often times the sounds of nature or the room noise around Ross would make words hard to understand. Rather than this being a negative thing however I think it allows the user to concentrate harder on what is being said and therefore able to draw more meaning from it. What also comes to mind with this room vs. dialogue aspect, is in many of Godard films he will have street sounds drown out dialogue completely. The reading discusses how this isn’t acceptable in Hollywood films but I think that it can add a certain dimensionality or make a certain scene more interesting…if realism is your sort of thing.
We cut it short, but its readily available for you to view. I now regret not showing the whole thing, but obviously I'm trying to cover too much..
ReplyDeleteAgain, your engagement with the readings here is a bit minimal - i'm hoping for more as you go on. Some awkward grammar, typos, etc.
It would be useful to be more specific in your analysis of the films by focusing on a scene or two, describing what happens and why it flips the idea of documentary on its head. Ross confessing to the camera in his civil war uniform, for example...the whole Sherman's March premise about scorching the south and how thats undercut by the action in the film.