Catfish
Catfish is a 2010 American performative documentary directed by Henry Joost and Ariel Shulman, involving a young man, Nev, being filmed by his brother and friend, co-directors Ariel and Henry, as he builds a romantic relationship with a young woman on the social networking website Facebook. The film was a critical and commercial success, even inspiring an MTV reality TV series, Catfish: The TV Show.
Which type of documentary mode is Catfish, give examples as to how you know this?
I would consider Catfish to be two different documentary modes, this being Participatory and Perfomative. Firstly my reasoning behind Participatory is because throughout the whole documentary we can see the direct engagement between the filmmakers and the subjects. The two filmmakers, Henry Joost and Ariel Shulman play a large part in most of the documentary, including the fact that they continually ask question to the main man, Nev, for example asking him about the text messages between the two subjects. They are often seen within the documentary as well, playing a part and adding commentary from behind the camera. The reasoning behind why I would call this a performativite documentary is because the documentary has a large part in emphasizing the emotional and social impact on the audience. Throughout the documentary we have a close relation to the main subject Nev and nothing is hidden from the audience this brings a large emotional impact to the viewer as we could feel some relation to what he is going through. Nearing the end of the documentary the film also compares how the events of the documentary to our lives and how 'catfishing' could be something we go through on a day to day basis.
Explain your understanding of the films title 'Catfish'. What roles did Yaniv and Anglea play in each others lives?
From my understanding the name Catfish came from when Nev was visit from inactivity. In oring Angela. Her husband Vince tells Nev and the filmmakers about a problem when live cod were shipped to Asia from North America, and the flesh ended up gross and mushy from inactivity. In order to keep the cod active, according to Vince's story, the fisherman started putting catfish in with the cod to the at their tails and keep them active. Vince implies that Angela is like those Catfish because her life would be "dull and boring if we have someone nipping at out fins'. I would describe Yaniv and Angela's relationship plainly almost as a rollercoaster. We witnessed there relationship going through its high's when they first began talking over the internet, then through its deceptions when Nev began to become suspicious of Angela's identity although also in a turn of events there bond seems to get strong again at the end of the programme For Nev I think Angela's role in his life was something that he found exciting, we had to consider how Nev felt, meaning that he had finally interacted with someone that he liked and connected with therefore for him it became moving. I feel this is something that most of us can relate to which is why we become so responsive to his emotions meaning that when he met the real Angela we felt angry in the same way he did. I think Nev went through different emotions near the end of the film but didn't know quite where to stand with Angela and how to act around her, because part of him to could only of though of the fact this woman was misleading him but on the other hand he and us as the audience felt sorry for her as we begin to unravel her real life. On the contrary, I feel that Angela, although has a different side of the story, does have the same first emotions to Nev, of the attachment and warmth that he brang to her. At the end of the documentary it was plain to see that Angela was scared and afraid of showing her emotions nonetheless when she began to see how Nev was just the same person to who she was talking to and didn't want to push her away, she opened up. At the credits of the film we're also told that Angela and Yaniv are still friends and often to stay in contact.
In what ways is Catfish similar to or different from other documentaries you have seen?
In one way or another Catfish is similar to most documentaries, meaning how it goes through a series of events that make the storyline intriguing and something that we want to continue watching, we find out about a story and goes through its high and lows and see thing that cling us on for example the revealing of who Angela was or the intense moments when we find out about who really sings the songs she sent. Yet compared to the documentary modes I think this is something quite unique, the documentary goes a lot further in depth and personal to Nev and I think this is what made the documentary so popular and relatable. Most documentaries I have previously seen are filmed in a 'professional' manner whereas catfish looks quite amateur and spontaneous.
The has been some debate over the authenticity of the events in Catfish. How does that affect the way you feel about the film? Do you think the film intentionally blurs the line between documentary and drama?
The debate over the films authenticity was surfacing even before the film was released. Questions about whether Catfish was 'real' were asked to the filmmakers in multiple interviews. In an interview with MTV, Henry Joost and Ariel Shulman were asked how they felt about the controversy and the people claiming it is fake to which they responded - 'It is a documentary in that it's something that actually happened and we filmed it and none of it is staged or fake' & 'I think what people are reacting to a lot is, the filmed is edited. We can't put out a 250 hour movie, so were making decisions and streamlining the narrative and presenting what we feel is the clearest representation of what happened, but its real' Despite this even after the film was realeased on September 17th 2010, there was still a large controversy towards it. After I had watched the filmand even before I knew about the debate I knew I felt what I should toward it, the reaction of shock and disbelief to that somebody could of done that sort of thing as Angela did appalled me. Later on after finding out about the discussion of its legitimacy it, did doubt how I first felt about the film, I questioned as to why the story would of been made up and why the would of lied about something that could potentially be so serious. It surprised me that the way it was played of was so realistic that I although I didn't want to believe it was fake, I couldn't help but think so. Once you hear that it is fake you seem to just pass of how you feel about the film when you first saw it and now look at it as just another fiction film. With the presentation and way that the film is filmed it is quite evidently a documentary. I can clearly signify multiple codes and conventions that are within it for example we know that despite the fact it has accused of being fake as far as we know all the footage is real, there are elements such as the use of text and titles, such as when the location is showing up etc, the labels tend to be believed unquestioningly and are a quick way of conveying information. I think that the documentary has just about reached the balance of documentary/drama, it is quite climatic but doesn't bring out to much to make us believe that is a fiction drama.
How is the making of the documentary as much a part of the film as the main storyline?
Like Joost said in the interview with MTV, the making of the documentary is what makes it effective and what gives it the clearest representation of what happened. The making of the documentary can build the main story line, so that us as the audience can be brought through the same journey as Nev was, but in a briefer way.
No comments:
Post a Comment