Okay, so last week I was interested in seeing what route our documentary was headed, and I have to admit, I'm pretty pleased with our trailer. I feel that the direction we're headed is anything but easy, but it's still worth it to go that extra mile to make a worth-while film that doesn't cut any corners. Our topic is kind of difficult to do any bashing without making us look bad as well. We definitely have to use sensitivity when we're talking about the Special Education Program here, but we can't be over-sensitive either. It's a challenge to find a balance between the two.So last week we discussed the major differences between documentary directors' film styles, mainly contrasting the works of Michael Moore and Sacha Baron Cohen. Moore and Cohen both have unique styles of portraying a film the way they want a viewer to believe it. Moore utilizes this technique through careful wording and editing to trick the viewer. Cohen, on the other hand uses personas to trick the participants rather than the viewer. Cohen cleverly disguises release forms to fit the character he's portraying in order to get the participant to sign off on using their footage. Once he has permission, he creates scenarios using stereotypes and generalizations to put the participant in an uncomfortable position. In class we discussed whether or not this was really more ethical than any practices Moore uses in his films.
The one thing that is so similar between the two of them is their tendencies to give their audiences less than the entire story. Moore doesn't ever give you more than one side of an argument, and Cohen fails to mention to his victims that he's an actor. So with that being said, why do we tend to sympathize with one more than another? It really goes back to the motives behind the film. When someone is put in an awkward situation from Cohen's cleverness, it's funny. When someone is attacked on camera because of their political background, it's just plain mean.
ys and why a potentially innovative airline came crashing down. The marketing was unique, but not nearly as effective as the marketing team had hoped. It left most consumers asking "What are you selling us?" Then we looked at Tupperware and how its marketing ca
mpaign created high demand for the product. The idea that one could get rich selling Tupperware had hundreds of ladies lined up to eagerly go door to door selling their product. What seems like a laughable strategy is what launched the company into the multi-million dollar range.We were just assigned a project that has look closely on what sells. We are to investigate a store, look at its layout, pay attention to the music, and look for reasons why they place certain products in places. In interested in seeing what similarities stores will have with each other as well as figuring out who's doing what right/wrong. This week I'd like to find out what we as consumers aren't paying attention to that companies deliberately are throwing out in front of us as marketing ploys.
Sources:
Brownie Wise. Photograph. Bouldernet. Web.
Sacha Baron Cohen. Photograph. BangitOut! Web.
Song Airlines. Photograph. Fsdome. Web.