what is the difference between biography and documentary

What Is a Biopic? Definition, Examples & Historical Impact

• Documentary
• Auteur Theory
• Exploitation Films
• Coming of Age
• Kitchen Sink Drama
• Period Piece
• Portmanteau Film
• Slasher Film
• Slice of Life
• Spaghetti Western
• Blaxploitation
• Slapstick Comedy
• Social Commentary
• Non-Narrative Film

A biopic, short for biographical picture, brings real-life stories to the silver screen, immortalizing the tales of historical figures, celebrities, and unsung heroes alike.

It’s a genre that offers us a lens into the complexities and triumphs of a person’s life, often leaving us inspired or more informed.

In this article, we’ll jump into what sets biopics apart from other film genres, explore their significance in cinema, and highlight how they shape our understanding of history and culture.

Stay tuned as we unpack the art of biographical storytelling and its impact on audiences around the world.

WHAT IS A BIOPIC

What is a biopic.

There are many different types of films, but one type that is especially popular these days is the biopic.

A biopic tells the story of a person’s life or a significant event in their lives through film. Biopics can be dramatic, comedic, and even more rarely – documentary-style.

What Is A Biopic?

Biopics, short for biographical pictures, are a genre of film that dramatizes the life of a real individual.

These films go beyond mere factual recounting, weaving in creativity and dramatic elements to bring depth to the portrayal of a person’s life journey.

Often, they shine a light on notable figures who have had a remarkable impact on society, culture, or history.

The allure of biopics resides in their dual purpose – to entertain and educate.

Audiences get a glimpse into the events and personal experiences that shaped a historical figure’s contributions and legacy.

What sets biopics apart from documentaries is the focus on emotional engagement, drawing viewers into the world of the subject through compelling narratives and cinematic techniques.

Key Attributes of Biopic Films Include:

• A focus on a specific individual’s life story,
• A blend of factual detail with dramatized scenes,
• The casting of actors who often physically resemble the real-life subjects.

Films like  The King’s Speech  and  Lincoln  exemplify the genre’s power to immerse audiences in the personal struggles and triumphs of influential leaders.

Biopics don’t just retell history; they offer a cinematic interpretation of a life, fraught with all its complexity and nuance.

Our appreciation for biopics stems from their ability to humanize icons and present their stories with a unique artistic flair that resonates on a deeply personal level.

By engaging with biopics, we’re often invited to reflect on the vast tapestries of lives that have carved out significant corners of our collective consciousness.

Whether it’s  Frida  exploring the vibrant life of artist Frida Kahlo, or  The Social Network  depicting the controversial ascent of Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, biopics serve as a conduit for powerful storytelling.

They provide a lens through which we can explore the human condition, redefining our perceptions of the figures we thought we knew.

The Origins Of Biopics

Biopics stem from a long tradition of biographical storytelling that predates cinema itself.

Initially, stage plays and literature provided the primary means for exploring the lives of intriguing figures, honing a narrative artform that would later find its perfect canvas in film.

As the motion picture industry blossomed, filmmakers seized the opportunity to bring these complex, real-life narratives to the silver screen.

The inception of biographical films can be traced back to the early days of cinema.

The Story of the Kelly Gang , released in 1906, is often cited as one of the first feature-length biopics, dramatizing the life of the notorious Australian outlaw Ned Kelly.

This pioneer in the biopic genre laid the groundwork for future films to tell the stories of historical figures and icons.

Key Features In Early Biopics

The evolution of the biopic genre introduced several key features that became indicative of these types of films:

• Historical Context  – Biopics often set their narrative against the backdrop of important historical events to add authenticity and gravity to the protagonist’s story.
• Character Depth  – Early biopics put a strong emphasis on character development, striving to depict the protagonist’s personality, motivations, and struggles.
• Cinematic Liberty  – Filmmakers embraced the creative latitude to add drama and flair, weaving in fictional elements to highlight emotional truths over strict factual accuracy.

As storytelling traditions intersected with the expressive possibilities of cinema, biopics continued to evolve.

Directors and screenwriters found innovative ways to engage audiences with the defining moments and inner lives of historical figures, delivering experiences that resonate on both a personal and collective level.

The ongoing fascination with individual legacies ensured that the biopic remained a staple in the film industry, showcasing not only the accomplishments but the very humanity of those whose lives are depicted on the screen.

The Significance Of Biopics In Cinema

Biopics hold a mirror up to society, providing viewers with intimate access to the lives of influential figures and events that have shaped history.

Through meticulous research and artistic interpretation, these films offer an avenue for audiences to engage with the past in a deeply human way.

It’s not only about recounting events but also about exploring the psyche of individuals who’ve made a mark on the world.

By bringing historical characters to life, biopics serve as both educational tools and sources of inspiration.

• Highlight lesser-known aspects of famous personalities,
• Illuminate social issues through the lens of a single individual’s experience,
• Encourage viewers to reflect on their own lives in relation to those on screen.

The storytelling power of biopics is enhanced by their ability to resonate with contemporary issues.

While set in the past, the themes of struggle, innovation, and resilience remain evergreen, bridging the gap between then and now.

Films like  Gandhi  and  The King’s Speech  have not only entertained but also enriched our collective consciousness.

Also, the genre’s flexibility in narrative style allows directors and writers to explore various filmmaking techniques.

The use of visual elements, non-linear timelines, and dramatic recreations gives each biopic a unique voice.

As film historians, we recognize that the relationship between the featured individual’s life and the contextual history they belong to is pivotal in crafting a biopic that stands the test of time.

Biopics also contribute significantly to the legacy of their subjects, often renewing interest in their life stories and, in some cases, introducing them to new generations.

The cinematic portrayal of these figures can also catalyze discourse around their impact and the accuracy of their representation, ensuring that the dialogue around these iconic individuals continues to evolve.

Biopics As Historical And Cultural Artifacts

Biopics hold a mirror to the times they represent, offering reflections that go beyond mere storytelling.

They serve as historical and cultural artifacts, capturing the essence of an era or the spirit of a movement through the lens of an individual’s life.

Our fascination with history and culture is satiated by these films, which weave factual elements with artistic interpretation.

Watching  The Imitation Game , we’re not just learning about Alan Turing’s life, we’re diving into the complexities of World War II cryptography.

The influence of biopics extends into various domains, including education, politics, and social discourse.

By embodying the struggles and triumphs of real people, biopics encourage us to draw parallels with current affairs and recognize repeating patterns in history.

• They spur dialogue about past events and their significance today,
• They can challenge or reaffirm cultural beliefs and societal norms,
• They create a space for marginalized stories to be heard and understood.

Creators of biopics have a unique responsibility – to honor the truth while creating compelling cinema.

Films like  Selma  and  12 Years a Slave  bear the weight of accurately portraying the civil rights movement and the brutality of slavery, respectively.

While these films aim to entertain, their greater achievement lies in educating audiences, fostering empathy, and demanding reflection on the fabric of society.

Balancing entertainment with authenticity, contemporary biopics often blur the lines between documentary and dramatization.

This hybrid approach garners wider audiences, bridging the gap between those seeking knowledge and those simply looking for a powerful cinematic experience.

Biopics like  A Beautiful Mind  or  Bohemian Rhapsody  exemplify this trend, captivating viewers while shedding light on the intricacies of genius and the nuances of cultural revolutionaries.

We understand that the cultural imprint of a well-crafted biopic can be immense.

Its capacity to influence public perception and rekindle interest in historical figures or events is a testament to the genre’s potency.

By meticulously reconstructing the past, biopics provide potent stimuli for today’s conversations and tomorrow’s artworks.

The Power Of Biographical Storytelling

Biographical storytelling, often known as the biopic genre, unlocks a treasure trove of immersive narratives that engage audiences on a deeply personal level.

These powerful tales Help a profound connection between viewers and the subjects, allowing us to experience the world through the eyes of some of history’s most intriguing individuals.

The heart of biopics lies in their ability to humanize figures that have, until now, been confined within the pages of history books or the silent annals of time.

Our fascination with biopics stems from an innate desire to understand the human condition.

Films like  A Beautiful Mind  and  The Theory of Everything  provide intimate glimpses into the lives of extraordinary minds, spotlighting their triumphs and challenges.

Biopics have the unique capability to transcend time and place, crafting narratives that are both universal in emotion and specific in their cultural context.

• Biopics demystify the legend,
• They bring nuance to public perception,
• They uncover the threads that connect us all.

By delving into personal histories, biopics underscore the power of individual agency within the larger tapestry of societal progress.

Films such as  Selma  showcase the impact one person can have on the movements that shape our collective experience.

Through dynamic storytelling, the genre emphasizes the single person’s potential to enact profound change.

The rich canvas of biopics presents filmmakers with the opportunity to experiment with artistic expression, engaging in a dialogue between past and present.

Telling these stories through the audiovisual medium reinforces the relevance of forgotten or underrepresented individuals.

Whether it’s the color palette chosen to depict a period piece or the soundtrack that accompanies a protagonist’s journey, every creative decision serves to breathe life into once-distant figures.

Our understanding of heritage and identity is often expanded through the lens of biopics.

These films act as conduits for cultural reflection, offering insights into the complexities that define various eras.

Powerful narratives in  Lincoln  and  Gandhi  not only recount historical events but also encourage us to contemplate the broader implications of leadership, morality, and social responsibility.

What Is A Biopic – Wrap Up

We’ve explored the captivating realm of biopics and their profound impact on storytelling.

These films don’t just recount history—they breathe life into it allowing us to walk in the shoes of the remarkable individuals who’ve shaped our world.

Through the artful blend of fact and creative liberty biopics offer a unique lens on the human condition.

They’re not just films; they’re windows to the past and mirrors reflecting our shared humanity.

As we continue to seek out these stories let’s cherish the way they enrich our understanding of both the legends they portray and the legacy we carry forward.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main focus of biopics.

Biopics focus on humanizing historical figures, letting viewers see the world through their eyes, and showcasing the universal emotions and specific cultural contexts of their stories.

How Do Biopics Affect The Perception Of Historical Figures?

Biopics demystify legends and introduce nuances to public perceptions, revealing the shared human experiences that connect us across time.

What Do Biopics Offer To Filmmakers?

Biopics provide filmmakers with the opportunity to explore artistic expression while delving into the life stories of significant individuals.

Why Are Biopics Important For Understanding Heritage And Identity?

Biopics allow us to gain deeper insights into the complexities of different eras, thereby expanding our understanding of heritage and identity.

Ready to learn about more Film History & Film Movements?

Best Bane Quotes: Top Quotes From The Batman Character

How To Add VHS Effect To Video: The Complete Guide

Matt Crawford

Related posts, 12 best haskell wexler films: a visionary’s commitment to truth, 14 best george roy hill movies: the lighthearted storyteller, what is minimalist film the art of silence [complete guide, with examples], 20 best scarlett johansson movies: the diverse and captivating roles of a modern star, what are treasure hunt films adventures that spark the quest within, 5 best simone signoret movies: the sensual and provocative roles of a french legend.

Aw, this was a very nice post. Spending some time and actual effort to make a top notch article on how to make a biopic… but what can I say… I put things off a whole lot and never manage to get anything done.

Thanks for the kind words, Devin.

Check out our stuff on productivity!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

Registration is closed.

Pin It on Pinterest

What is a Documentary? | Definition, History, and Examples

There’s a saying that reality is stranger than fiction, but what if you could watch that reality play out, frame by frame?

Welcome to the real world, where documentaries tell raw and often unique stories.

But what exactly defines a documentary, and how has this genre evolved over the years? If you’ve ever pondered these questions or harbored dreams of creating your own documentary, you’re in the right place.

Stay with me as we explore the question: “What is a documentary?” and go over some iconic examples!

What is a Documentary?

So, what is a documentary? At its core, documentary filmmaking is about capturing reality. It’s about taking life’s raw, unscripted moments and weaving them into a narrative film that informs, inspires, and sometimes even challenges our preconceived notions.

Unlike fictional movies, which are born from the creative minds of writers and directors , short form and feature length documentaries stem from the world around us. They aren’t afraid to capture real-life stories, explore authentic emotions, and shed light on the truths that often go unnoticed in our daily lives.

Documentary films showcase the power of truth in storytelling, from heartwarming tales of triumph over the odds to insightful cultural explorations.

As an aspiring filmmaker, embracing documentary filmmaking means not just directing a film but curating a slice of reality for your audience to experience and learn from.

A Brief History of Documentaries

Documentaries, as we know them today, have been a century in the making.

They originated in the early 20th century when filmmakers began using a movie camera to capture reality and tell real-life stories. The first documentaries were silent newsreels , showcasing events of significance and public interest.

As technology evolved, so did the documentary genre , with sound introducing a new dimension to cinematic storytelling. Over the decades, documentaries have weathered various social, political, and cultural changes, each era adding its own unique touch to the genre.

Over the decades, this genre has not only acted as a mirror to society but also as a catalyst for change, shedding light on hidden truths and echoing the voices of the unheard through an observational style.

From the gritty war documentaries of the mid-20th century to the insightful social commentaries of the ’60s and ’70s, to the point-of-view factual film of the ’90s and ’00s, and onto the intimate character studies of today, the evolution of this genre is a testament to the adaptability and resilience of this form of narrative filmmaking.

Characteristics of a Documentary

Now, let’s take a look at some of the aspects of documentary film production that are unique to documentaries.

1. Factual Basis: Unlike fictional narrative films, documentaries ground themselves in reality. They offer a lens into real events, experiences, or phenomena. While creative liberties might be taken in presentation, the essence remains rooted in fact. This makes them a trusted source of information and insight.

2. Objective or Subjective Perspective: Every documentary filmmaker faces the choice of presenting an objective overview of their subject or intertwining their personal interpretations. An objective point of view in documentary film strives for unbiased reporting, while subjective ones echo the filmmaker’s sentiments, beliefs, or personal experiences related to the topic.

3. Research and Preparation: Before a single frame is shot, documentary filmmakers invest countless hours in research. This might involve reading, interviews, archival footage, or firsthand exploration of the subject. This foundational work ensures that the content presented is accurate, well-informed, and comprehensive.

4. Narrative Voice: The voice guiding a documentary can vary. It might be an unseen narrator providing context, experts in the field offering insights, or subjects of the documentary sharing their personal stories. This narrative voice guides viewers through the documentary’s journey.

5. Cinematic Techniques: While they are about real life, great documentaries employ filmmaking techniques and a cinematic style to enhance their storytelling. This can include artistic camera angles, mood-setting lighting , and thoughtful editing to emphasize certain points or emotions.

6. Real Footage and Interviews: Authenticity is paramount in documentaries. Utilizing real footage – whether historical clips or freshly filmed content – and conducting genuine interviews lends credibility and immediacy to the narrative film.

7. Emotional Engagement: Beyond just relaying facts, successful documentaries resonate emotionally. They have the power to evoke a range of feelings, from outrage to empathy, ensuring viewers remain invested in the subject matter. One way to support the emotion in a scene is to add music –  you can hire a composer, use AI music software , or license instrumental cues or songs from artists.

8. Ethical Integrity: Documentary filmmakers bear the weighty responsibility of portraying reality. This necessitates respecting the privacy and rights of those filmed and avoiding misrepresentation or oversimplification of complex issues. Ethical considerations are critical for documentary makers, ensuring that the truth isn’t sacrificed for sensationalism.

9. Reflective: Reflective documentaries break the “fourth wall”. Filmmakers might openly discuss the process of making the documentary, their challenges, biases, or dilemmas. This transparency fosters a deeper trust and connection with the audience.

10. Educative Intent: At their core, many documentaries aim to enlighten. Whether it’s introducing viewers to an unfamiliar culture, shedding light on historical events, or explaining complex issues, the educative intent ensures that viewers walk away with newfound knowledge or understanding.

11. Social Commentary: Documentaries often serve as a mirror to society, reflecting its triumphs, flaws, and complexities. Through in-depth exploration, they can catalyze discussions on societal issues, potentially driving change or advocacy.

12. Engagement with Reality: Unlike fictional films and reality TV, where scenes are staged and rehearsed, documentaries thrive on spontaneity. Whether it’s capturing unscripted moments, raw emotions, or unforeseen real life events, this genuine engagement with reality sets documentaries apart, offering viewers a genuine glimpse into the nuances of the world.

Types of Documentaries

Documentaries come in a variety of styles, each with its own unique approach and focus. Here are some prominent types:

• Expository Documentaries: This is perhaps the most recognizable style for many viewers. Expository documentaries aim to inform and/or persuade by directly addressing the viewer with voiceover narration. They present a particular perspective or argument, often using a “voice of God” narration that’s detached from the visuals but guides the viewer’s understanding of them. Films like March of the Penguins fall into this category.
• Observational Documentaries: These are also known as “fly on the wall” documentaries. They aim to simply observe the world around them without any interference or manipulation from the documentary filmmaker. With little to no narration, the camera acts as a passive observer, allowing events to unfold organically. An example of an observational documentary is Grey Gardens by the Maysles Brothers.
• Participatory Documentaries: In this style, the filmmaker actively engages with the subject matter, often becoming a part of the story themselves. This direct involvement allows for a personal and dynamic insight into the narrative. The films of Michael Moore, such as Bowling for Columbine , are the most famous examples of this type.
• Poetic Documentaries: These types focus on experiences, images, and mood rather than a linear narrative. They prioritize visual associations, tonal or rhythmic qualities, and poetic juxtapositions to evoke emotions. Early documentaries, like the work of Soviet filmmaker, Dziga Vertov, employed this style.
• Reflexive Documentaries: These documentaries draw attention to their own making process and challenge the idea of objectivity in filmmaking. They might address the audience directly, discuss the process of capturing footage, or reflect on the nature of documentary filmmaking itself. Jean Rouch’s Chronicle of a Summer is a pioneering documentary film in this style.
• Performative Documentaries: This type emphasizes the filmmaker’s own involvement with the subject matter, often using personal experiences to provide context and insight. They are a more subjective interpretation of the world, prioritizing emotional engagement over objective facts. The Fog of War by Errol Morris is a blend of participatory and performative styles.
• Investigative Documentaries: As the name suggests, these delve deep into particular topics, often uncovering new information or shining a light on injustices. They require extensive research and often involve uncovering hidden details, scandals, or truths. Films like Blackfish and Making a Murderer can be classified under this category.
• Historical Documentaries: These focus on the historical record, providing a detailed account of past events, often using a combination of reenactments, photos, and expert interviews. The World at War series and Ken Burns’ many documentary series, like The Civil War , exemplify this style.
• Mockumentary: This is a hybrid genre, combining elements of documentary and comedy to create a fictional story that appears to be real. This is Spinal Tap , a hilarious take on rock band documentaries, is a classic mockumentary.

Iconic Examples of Documentaries

Documentaries have given us remarkable viewing over the years, each leaving a significant imprint on culture and society. Here are ten of the most famous examples, each of which not only showcased exemplary filmmaking but also ignited conversations, inspired change, and provided profound insights into various aspects of human existence:

Nanook of the North (1922)

Often regarded as the first full-length documentary, Robert J. Flaherty’s Nanook of the North offers a captivating glimpse into the life of an Inuit man and his family as they grapple with the harsh realities of living in the Canadian Arctic. Though the film provides a rare insight into the lives of indigenous peoples, modern audiences should be aware that certain scenes were staged for dramatic effect, highlighting early tensions between documentary authenticity and storytelling.

Gimme Shelter (1970)

Directed by Albert and David Maysles along with Charlotte Zwerin, Gimme Shelter is an electrifying and controversial documentary that chronicles the infamous 1969 Rolling Stones concert at the Altamont Speedway in California, which resulted in the stabbing death of a young black man by the Hells Angels, who were hired as security. Beyond being a concert film, this documentary raises poignant questions about the counterculture of the 1960s and the dark side of the hippie dream.

Harlan County U.S.A. (1976)

In Harlan County U.S.A. , filmmaker Barbara Kopple captures the raw and intense struggle of Kentucky coal miners during their 1973 strike against the Eastover Coal Company. Through her lens, viewers are plunged into the miners’ world, facing violence, intimidation, and brutal working conditions. The film stands as a testament to the resilience and determination of the American working class, earning it an Academy Award for Best Documentary.

The Thin Blue Line (1988)

Errol Morris’s The Thin Blue Line is not just a documentary; it’s a meticulous investigation. By dissecting the wrongful conviction of Randall Adams for a police officer’s murder in Dallas, Texas, the documentary film presents a potent commentary on the flaws within the justice system. With its innovative use of dramatic reenactments and probing interviews, the documentary directly impacted Adams’ eventual release from prison, showcasing the potential real-world implications of documentary filmmaking.

Bowling for Columbine (2002)

In Bowling for Columbine , filmmaker Michael Moore delves deep into America’s complicated relationship with firearms. By examining the tragic events of the Columbine High School shooting, Moore sparks a broader conversation about the nation’s cultural and political landscapes. This provocative exploration, which blends Moore’s characteristic humor with a serious examination of gun violence, positioned the documentary film as a trailblazer in activist documentaries and earned it numerous accolades.

March of the Penguins (2005)

Luc Jacquet’s March of the Penguins transports audiences to the frozen expanses of Antarctica, where they journey alongside emperor penguins on their epic migration. Narrated by Morgan Freeman, this nature documentary resonated with viewers worldwide, transforming these flightless birds into symbols of endurance and love. The film’s immense commercial success underscored the potential of wildlife documentaries in mainstream cinema.

An Inconvenient Truth (2006)

Al Gore’s passionate and informed presentation forms the backbone of An Inconvenient Truth . This groundbreaking documentary successfully pushed the conversation about climate change into global parlors, intertwining hard data with a sense of urgency. Winning multiple awards, it demonstrated the role of documentaries in galvanizing public opinion on pressing environmental issues.

Man on Wire (2008)

Man on Wire is a gripping chronicle of Philippe Petit’s audacious high-wire walk between New York’s World Trade Center Towers in 1974. Seamlessly blending archival footage with reenactments, director James Marsh captures the exhilaration and danger of Petit’s unauthorized feat. Beyond the physical act, the documentary film serves as a tribute to ambition, artistry, and sheer human spirit.

Blackfish (2013)

Gabriela Cowperthwaite’s Blackfish offers a scathing critique of the marine park industry through the tragic story of Tilikum, a captive orca at SeaWorld. Highlighting the psychological and physical toll of captivity on these majestic creatures, the film ignited global discussions about animal rights and led to significant changes in practices at marine theme parks, particularly SeaWorld.

Won’t You Be My Neighbor? (2018)

Morgan Neville’s heartwarming documentary Won’t You Be My Neighbor? celebrates the life and legacy of Fred Rogers, the gentle soul behind Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood . By highlighting Rogers’ enduring message of love, acceptance, and understanding, the documentary film underscores the transformative power of kindness in media and its lasting impact on generations of children.

The Impact of Documentaries on Society

Documentaries have long been recognized as a powerful tool for social change. They offer a unique platform to shed light on important issues, challenge prevailing narratives, and inspire action. By capturing real-life stories and presenting them on film, documentaries can make complex issues more accessible.

Social Change Through Storytelling

One of the most significant impacts of documentaries is their ability to drive social change through storytelling. As noted by Hotdocs , there is a rich history of documentary films being used by community groups and social movements to advance their causes. Whether it’s raising awareness about climate change or advocating for human rights, documentaries can be a powerful catalyst for change.

Educating Audiences

In addition to driving social change, documentaries play a crucial role in educating audiences about critical global issues. As our world becomes increasingly interconnected, understanding these issues has become more important than ever. Documentaries tell important stories that can help us make sense of these complex realities.

Building Connections

Documentaries also provide an opportunity to understand and connect with the world. According to ONE , they offer a way for us to gather together and engage with issues on a deeper level. This can foster empathy, break down barriers, and bring people together in meaningful ways.

Influencing Attitudes

Documentaries have the remarkable ability to generate powerful audience responses while advancing the objectives of exceptional organizations. They educate individuals and shape attitudes, making them a powerful tool for advocacy and education.

Driving Measurable Impact

Finally, documentaries are increasingly being used to drive measurable impact. This involves defining what kind of impact a documentary can achieve and seeking tangible results. This shows the growing recognition of the power of storytelling to effect real-world change.

In all, documentaries have a profound impact on society. They inform, educate, inspire, and drive social change. Whether you’re a filmmaker or a viewer, there’s no denying the potential of documentaries to make a difference.

Final Thoughts on Documentary Production

Documentaries offer us a lens through which we can explore, understand, and connect with the world around us.

They are a powerful medium that can evoke emotion, provoke thought, and inspire action. From capturing raw human experiences to shedding light on social issues, documentaries can transform our perspectives and challenge our preconceptions.

Whether you’re an aspiring filmmaker eager to tell your own stories or a curious viewer looking to expand your horizons, delving into the world of documentaries can be a richly rewarding journey.

Remember, every documentary started as an idea, a curiosity, or a passion. Who knows? Your unique perspective might just lead to the next groundbreaking documentary. So go ahead, pick up that camera, start asking questions, and let the world see through your lens.

Common Questions About the Documentary Form

What is the main purpose of a documentary.

The main purpose of a documentary nonfiction film is to inform, educate, and provoke thought by presenting real-life situations or events in a compelling manner. It aims to create awareness, change attitudes, and potentially cause people to take action, striving towards societal betterment by giving voice to important, often unknown stories.

What is the difference between a documentary and a movie?

A documentary presents factual information, stories, or events with the intent to inform, educate, or raise awareness, often using real-life footage and interviews. In contrast, a movie, especially a fiction film, is primarily a work of creative storytelling. It’s created from scripted scenarios and character performances, aiming to entertain, inspire, or artistically express ideas.

Neil Chase is a story and writing coach, award-winning screenwriter, actor, and author of the horror-western novel, Iron Dogs.  Neil has won over 100 international awards for his writing and filmmaking, including the prestigious FilmMaker’s International Screenwriting Grand Prize Award & the ScreamFest Best Screenplay Award. His directorial-debut feature film, Spin The Wheel, is currently in post-production. Neil believes that all writers have the potential to create great work. His passion is helping writers find their voice and develop their skills so that they can create stories that are both entertaining and meaningful. If you’re ready to take your writing to the next level, check out his website for tips and inspiration!

View all posts

You may also like

What is an indie film the heart of..., what is a trope in movies recognizing common..., what is a feature film a comprehensive guide..., what does a producer do (in film), why is the first episode called a pilot, executive producer vs producer | 8 key differences....

Film Festival Documentary

Reflections on Contemporary Documentary Cinema

Documentary Personality vs. Biography

The symbiotic relationship between biography and personality.

Stream of Love dir. Ágnes Sós, 2013, Hungary Genre: Character-Driven Observational

There is something that strikes me as typical of Stream of Love – typical of a distinctly European approach to television documentary that’s pitched somewhere between observational and character-driven forms. From its editing to its composition and approach to transitions, it exemplifies the well-made doc in many ways. In my research, I’d like to tease out how I see these are ultimately different narrational approaches that happen to overlap in a continuum of popular practices in documentary today.

Setting aside the issues of categorization, though, I find Stream of Love instructive for what it says about documentary character. The documentary follows a number of Hungarian-speaking peasants living in Transylvania, Romania as they discuss romance and sexuality. Again, we have a film at partial battle with its (justifiably catchy) logline :

Love and desire fill the minds of villagers in a Hungarian speaking village in Transylvania, Romania, even in their old age. Time has stood still here, and although most of the village’s inhabitants are elderly, they are refreshingly young at heart. Feri, for example, is an incurable romantic. Way past his 80th year, he’s still making moves on the village’s 25 widows – although he claims that only two or three of them are really worth the effort. And the women speak plainly when sharing their most intimate thoughts and dreams to the camera. Stream of Love is funny, surprising and heartwarming, revealing how these tragicomic tales prove the ancient game of love and romance is still being played in this remote village, with its aura of bygone days.

There are elements of this, but two layers of pathos challenge the feel-good ethos. First, the characters are responding to the twin changes of feminism and the sexual revolution, which if not exactly fully foregrounded in village life nonetheless have raised the consciousness of women that patriarchal culture never maximized their sexual needs – and led the men to feel a sense of historical loss of traditional sexual norms. Second, the women in particular feel that just as they come into sexual consciousness, the opportunities for expressing it have been denied by their age.

So, like many documentaries, the characters come to stand in for something broader, more historical. And like character-driven docs, Stream of Love accomplishes this standing-in quality by treating character testimony as expository “expertise.”

Yet questions remain. What exactly is the social dynamic in the village? One of the men, Feri, says at the beginning that widows outnumber the widowers by a considerable number, which sets up an expectation that the documentary will be about the village’s dating culture (and maybe a metaphor for aging villages themselves). But any sense of this is oblique.

Ultimately, the film finds such dynamic, engaging characters (and gets them to open up about sexuality, which might not have been easy to do), but it offers little sense of biography. The viewer learns little of their lives other than their discussions of their romantic and sexual pasts (and present-day shots of their doing typically peasant work of farming and cooking). Of course a documentary cannot depict the entirety of a characters life and sometimes there are practical and ethical reasons of respect not to tell too much about a social actor. In any case “biography” in a film is a construct, the inclusion of non-instrumental details, along the lines that Barthes discusses as the Reality Effect in literature. But as a spectator, I can’t help but think there’s a symbiotic relationship between (expository) biography and (charismatic) personality. The character-driven funding infrastructure privileges personality as a selling point for a documentary, but biography is what allows the documentary and its thesis to breathe.

• 1-800-611-FILM
• Industry Trends

What Does Biopic Mean? Examples of Great Biographical Performances

Biopics, or biographical films, play a significant role in storytelling and cultural representation. From preserving historical events and figures to celebrating diverse stories, a well-executed biopic can capture the essence of complex, interesting individuals.   

What Does Biopic Mean?

“Biopic” combines the words “biographical” and “picture” and refers to a film that dramatizes the life of a real person. Biopics capture significant achievements, challenges, and personal aspects of political leaders, musicians, artists, athletes, and scientists. Biopics can be informative and entertaining, shedding light on the complexities of real-life personalities. Exceptional biopics have also earned accolades such as nominations and awards at film festivals and prestigious award shows .

A few examples of well-known biographical performances include:

Sofía Vergara, Griselda (2023)

Griselda, the latest biographical crime drama miniseries on Netflix, delves into the captivating life of Griselda Blanco, the notorious Colombian drug lord known as the “Godmother of Cocaine. Portrayed by Sofía Vergara, the miniseries directed by Andrés Baiz and written by Doug Miro and Ingrid Escajeda follows Blanco’s rise in the Miami drug scene, showcasing her relentless pursuit of power and wealth, which ultimately lead her to paranoia, betrayal, and tragic downfall.

Sofia Vergara, known for her comedic roles, delivers a career-defining performance as Griselda Blanco in her first Spanish-language project. Her portrayal highlights her versatility and depth as an actress, as she skillfully embodies the complexities of this compelling and multifaceted character, earning well-deserved acclaim. The main cast includes  Matthew Bellows , a faculty member at NYFA Los Angeles, portraying DEA Special Agent Bob Palombo, NYFA Miami Acting for Film alum Sally Nieves, and  Orlando Pineda , an NYFA Alum, who plays Dixon Blanco, Griselda’s eldest son.

In a recent Q&A with NYFA, Pineda described his experience preparing for his role in the film.

“I read absolutely everything there is on Griselda Blanco and her legacy, including family, business, and private life. I worked on my character’s intentions, motivations, obstacles to build an arc, I asked my dad (retired General in Colombia’s Military) so many questions about that world and all of that helped me find the essence of Dixon, who is a very different persona from myself.”

Header image via Netflix.

David Oyelowo, Selma (2014)

Directed by the iconic Ava DuVernay, Selma follows Martin Luther King Jr.’s campaign to secure equal voting rights. Following the epic march from Selma to Montgomery, this film is considered one of the best movies about Martin Luther King, Jr ., offering a powerful and poignant portrayal of the civil rights movement and King’s pivotal role. The film won an Oscar for Best Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures, Original Song.

Kingsley Ben-Adir, Bob Marley: One Love (2024)

Bob Marley: One Love, hitting theaters on February 14, 2024, is a cinematic celebration of the reggae legend’s life. Directed by Reinaldo Marcus Green, the film stars Kingsley Ben-Adir as Bob Marley and Lashana Lynch as his wife, Rita. The biopic traces Marley’s journey from overcoming adversity to becoming a trailblazer in reggae music. Ben-Adir, known for roles in One Night in Miami and The Comey Rule, masterfully embodies Marley’s persona, tackling the challenge of adopting Jamaican patois.

The film unfolds in 1976 Kingston as Marley plans a peace concert amid political turmoil. It follows his move to London after surviving an assassination attempt and recording the iconic “Exodus” album. Flashbacks provide glimpses into Marley’s formative years, capturing his Rastafarian beliefs reflected in influential songs like “Redemption Song.” The movie succinctly encapsulates Marley’s enduring influence and cultural impact through his timeless music. NYFA Filmmaking camp alum Michael Gandolfini stars in the film as Howard Bloom.

Natalie Portman, Jackie (2016)

In Jackie, May December , star Natalie Portman portrays Jacqueline Kennedy. The story follows the aftermath of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination and provides an intimate look at Jackie’s grief and strength. Portman’s compelling performance earned her critical acclaim, capturing the nuances of Jackie’s complex emotions and resilience during one of the nation’s most tragic moments. The film was nominated for three Oscars.

Bradley Cooper, Maestro (2023)

Maestro , a biographical romantic drama, explores the relationship between the American composer Leonard Bernstein and his wife, Felicia Montealegre. Directed by and starring Bradley Cooper, the film is based on a screenplay co-written by Cooper and Josh Singer. NYFA Guest Speaker Carey Mulligan plays Montealegre.  Image via People.

Lex Scott Davis, Toni Braxton: Unbreak My Heart (2016)

Based on Braxton’s book Toni Braxton: Unbreak My Heart a Memoir and her hit song, this biopic stars NYFA alum Lex Scott Davis as Toni Braxton. Directed by Vondie Curtis Hall, the film shows the life of the famous singer. Using the book as source material, the biopic has Braxton’s own spin on it, providing a raw and in-depth view of her life.

Taraji P. Henson, Octavia Spencer, Janelle Monáe, Hidden Figures (2016)

Hidden Figures tells the untold story of three African-American women mathematicians—Katherine Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan, and Mary Jackson—who played pivotal roles at NASA during the Space Race. The film sheds light on their remarkable contributions, breaking barriers of both race and gender, and celebrates their resilience and brilliance in the face of adversity. Their achievements, crucial to the success of historic space missions, are finally brought to the forefront in this inspiring narrative. The film was nominated for three Oscars.

Austin Butler, Elvis (2022)

Austin Butler, recipient of a Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Drama award for his role in Elvis, brought the famous singer’s legacy to life. The movie was filmed in Gold Coast, Australia, with the assistance of some hardworking NYFA Australia students . The film itself garnered eight Oscar nominations, including Best Picture. The nominations carried a bittersweet tone for the Elvis team, as Lisa Marie Presley, the real-life daughter of the legendary singer, tragically passed away shortly after the Golden Globes ceremony that year. Image via IMDB.

Ana de Armas, Blonde (2022)

Directed by Andrew Dominik, Blonde stars Ana de Armas as Marilyn Monroe. The film, which received an NC-17 rating, delves into the complexities of Monroe’s life, examining both her public persona and private struggles. Per Variety magazine, Ana De Armas received a standing ovation for her performance. The film received one Oscar nomination.

Salma Hayek, Frida (2002)

Directed by Julie Taymor, Frida stars Salma Hayek as the iconic artist Frida Kahlo. The film explores Kahlo’s tumultuous life, art, and relationships. Hayek’s compelling performance captures Kahlo’s passion, pain, and unapologetic spirit, offering a visually stunning and emotionally resonant portrayal of the celebrated Mexican painter. The film won two Oscars for Best Music, Original Score, and Best Music, Original Song. Image via IMDB.

Jennifer Lopez, Selena (1997)

Selena is a biographical musical drama film directed by Gregory Nava. The movie chronicles the life and career of Tejano music superstar Selena Quintanilla, played by Jennifer Lopez, showcasing her rise to fame, cultural impact, and tragic death at a young age. The film received critical acclaim for Lopez’s performance and portrayal of Selena’s legacy . It remains a poignant tribute to the iconic singer, capturing the essence of her spirit and her lasting influence. Lopez was nominated for an Oscar for Best Performance by an Actress in a Motion Picture – Comedy or Musical.

A documentary rather than a traditional biopic, RBG focuses on the life and career of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The film highlights her impact on gender equality and the law. Through interviews, archival footage, and a nuanced portrayal of her legal battles, RBG offers a comprehensive and inspiring look at Justice Ginsburg’s enduring legacy as a trailblazer for women’s rights and a champion for justice. RBG was shot by director of photography and NYFA Documentary and cinematography instructor Claudia Raschke . The film was nominated for two Oscars.

Rami Malek, Bohemian Rhapsody (2019)

Bohemian Rhapsody depicts the journey of the rock band Queen and their legendary frontman, Freddie Mercury . This film joins a rich tradition of biopics centered on renowned musicians, such as Ray, Walk the Line, La Vie en Rose, Get on Up , and Straight Outta Compton. Starring Oppenheimer actor Rami Malek as Freddie Mercury, the film won four Oscars, including Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role. Malek, who is the son of Egyptian immigrants, beat out several other established actors for his first Oscar.

Madina Nalwanga, Queen of Katwe (2016)

Queen of Katwe follows Phiona Mutesi, a Ugandan girl from a slum who becomes a chess prodigy. Lupita Nyong’o stars as Phiona’s mother. The film highlights Phiona’s remarkable journey in chess and explores her family’s resilience, determination, and unwavering support, making it a heartwarming and inspiring tale. Image via Business Standard.

Benedict Cumberbatch, The Imitation Game (2014)

Benedict Cumberbatch stars as Alan Turing, a mathematician who played a crucial role in breaking the Enigma code during World War II. The film, titled The Imitation Game , delves into Turing’s genius, personal struggles, and the impact of his groundbreaking work on modern computing, offering a poignant tribute to his legacy. The film won an Oscar for Best Writing, Adapted Screenplay.

Additional Biopic Films 

• Erin Brockovich (2000)
• Cesar Chavez (2014)
• Wild (2014)
• Get on Up (2014)
• Malcolm X (1992)
• The Iron Lady (2011)
• The Pursuit of Happyness (2006)

Bring Characters to Life at NYFA

Ready to step into the shoes of an icon or fictional character? Learn more about making your own film or performing in a film or television show in one of  NYFA’s filmmaking  or  acting for film programs !

What is a Documentary (Fully Explained)

By: Author Paul Jenkins

Posted on Published: December 8, 2021  - Last updated: August 9, 2023

Categories Documentary , Filmmaking , History , Society

A documentary is a film or television program that informs or educates its viewers about a particular topic or issue. Documentaries can be entertaining, informative, and inspiring. They offer a unique and powerful form of storytelling that can capture the viewer’s attention and provoke thought and discussion. Documentaries can explore any subject matter, from historical events to contemporary issues to the human experience.

What Exactly Is a Documentary?

If you’re like me, you have a lot of ideas in your head. In that case, documentary is the perfect film form for you!

Documentaries are a powerful tool for preserving history and stories for future generations. A good documentary film preserves, teaches, and entertains.

Documentaries are usually well researched, planned, and executed. Documentaries connect viewers to the story and the subject. For me, every documentary is a narrative film because it either tells a story or uses one to make a point.

The Origin of the Word ‘Documentary’

The word “documentary” comes – via the word ‘document’ – from the Latin word “ docere ,” which means “show, teach, cause to know.”

A documentary film is a nonfiction film that attempts to provide evidence of something. In this, it differs from a fiction film where nothing needs to be proved, but everything needs to make sense!

Documentaries Can Be About Anything

Many people think that documentaries are only about nature and animals, but in reality, documentaries can be about almost any subject.

For example, a film about the life of Martin Luther King Jr. would be considered a documentary because it tells many facts about his life that the public may not have known before seeing the film.

Documentaries are produced in a variety of styles, but they all have one thing in common: they’re real. They show the world as it really is, not as it should be or as someone wants it to be.

There’s a quote by Albert Maysles (one of the most influential documentary filmmakers) that says,

As you’re shooting, you have a very good idea of what’s the good stuff we’re shooting. But there’s no planning. When you get into it, you have some hunches. You have to have some hunches as to what kinds of things may develop. But then somehow, as you film, you drop those things because something much more interesting takes place.” ALBERT MAYSLES, interviewed by gothamist

The Purpose of a Documentary Film Production

A documentary film is different from other types of video productions. It’s a non-fictional feature film intended to document some aspect of reality, primarily for entertainment purposes, for teaching, or as a historical record.

A documentary can be either scripted or unscripted, but the subject is completely real. It focuses exclusively on truthful events and real people.

It’s usually about a specific subject, person, a real event, or topic and allows the audience to see it in a way they didn’t before.

The best documentary doesn’t just tell you about something, it lets you experience it.

These films are designed to give viewers insight into the subject in order to inform and entertain them at the same time. A documentary can draw inspiration from other genres such as drama, comedy, horror, romance, or action but is not made in the same way as them.

Many documentaries deal with controversial topics and sometimes offer alternative viewpoints on current issues and events.

There are many types of documentaries, such as historical documentaries that deal with events from the past, how-to documentaries that offer practical advice on a particular topic, and exposé documentaries that deal with social issues such as discrimination and poverty.

To accomplish this, the filmmaker must use empathy to convey an understanding of the subject. The film “must breathe life into its characters and convey a sense of their individuality.”

At the same time, the filmmaker presents his or her own subjective point of view, while keeping in mind the overall narrative arc.

What Documentaries Do

A documentary film is often created with a specific goal in mind.

• It attempts to shed light on a topic or present a fact.
• In most cases, its purpose is to inform or entertain.
• A documentary can also serve as an alternative history that educates and enlightens the viewer.
• Documentaries usually feature real people in real situations.
• A documentary sometimes reports events in quasi-real-time from beginning to end.

Documentaries aren’t fictional.

Feature-length documentaries are usually 60 minutes or more in length and are produced for broadcast on television, for distribution on DVD, and for release in movie theaters. These films often include re-enacted scenes and interviews with experts.

Short documentaries are generally 30 minutes or less in length and are usually broadcast on television, distributed online, or shown in movie theaters.

Often documentaries try to highlight an issue or show some form of injustice. For example, an environmental documentary is about the environment and how we can protect it. Some documentaries are narrative films and depict events in the style of a story.

The Origin of the Documentary Film

The idea of a documentary genre has been around since 1898 when Polish filmmaker Boleslaw Matuszewski discovered the potential of film for recording facts and archiving them as such in his book Une nouvelle source de l’histoire (A New Source of History).

He’d recorded surgical operations in Poland and Russia in 1896.

With Frank Hurley’s South (1919), which documented the 1914 Shackleton Trans-Antarctic expedition, documentary filmmaking began in earnest in several countries in the 1920s.

After that, the documentary form became one of rapid and deep experimentation.

The Elements of the Documentary

Documentaries usually include interviews, narration, and sometimes short re-enacted scenes that explain what the interviewees are saying, but aren’t necessarily part of the actual events.

Documentaries often have an off-screen narrator who explains the context of the film and occasionally gives his or her opinion.

• They’re shot primarily in non-studio locations and are intended to be realistic and accurate.
• Making documentaries is often a collaborative process. Collaborators include interviewers, camera operators, sound technicians, lighting operators, editors, and directors.
• A good documentary should provide a considerable amount of information about a subject.
• A good documentary is more than an interview with a person. It should be a thorough study with an in-depth examination of the subject.
• Documentaries are usually well researched, planned, and executed. A documentary script is subject to constant change throughout the entire production cycle.

As filmmaker Errol Morris puts it

What interests me about documentary is that at the beginning you don’t know how the story you’re researching with the camera is going to turn out, and the story only develops as the film progresses. errol morris

Essential Documentary Elements and Gear

Subjects : The people at the center of a documentary’s story. They’re either interviewed on camera or their words may be read by an actor.

Film cameras : the equipment used to capture the subjects on film. A documentary filmmaker can use any camera, from a professional camera to a high-tech handheld device.

Archival footage : footage that’s been stored for a long time – often a very long time – and is being used in a new context. For example, if you want to make a documentary about the Dust Bowl in the 1930s, you could show old newsreel footage from that time.

Re-enactments : Scenes that aren’t filmed as they actually happened, but depict what probably happened. To better understand this concept, think of World War II films II, in which actors/actresses play soldiers in battle scenes. These are re-enactments, even though they’re usually based on true events.

Interviews : Conversations between filmmakers and their subjects (or between subjects themselves) that are recorded on camera and used.

The Keys of Documentary Production

Making a documentary involves capturing real-life events and presenting them in an interesting way. Here are the important points:

• The Story : A good documentary needs a compelling and relevant narrative to engage the audience.
• Research and Accuracy : Thorough research is necessary to ensure the information presented is accurate and credible.
• Visuals : Using captivating visuals, like interviews, footage, and animations, helps convey the story effectively.
• Narration : A well-written and engaging narration guides the audience through the story.
• Structure : A clear and coherent structure is important, including the beginning, conflict, climax, and resolution.
• Production Techniques : Using effective camera movements, shots, and sound design improves the quality of the documentary.
• Ethics and Responsibility : Documentaries should present the truth and maintain ethical standards.
• Editing and Post-production : Selecting the best footage, arranging it properly, and adding music and effects enhances the story.
• Distribution and Marketing : Finding an audience through marketing efforts and film festivals is crucial.

By following these guidelines, filmmakers can create engaging documentaries that resonate with viewers.

How Raw Footage is Gathered and Used

Gathering and using raw footage is a crucial part of making a documentary. Raw footage, also called source footage, is the unprocessed video captured by the camera during filming. It forms the foundation of the final documentary and greatly impacts the overall storytelling. Here are some key points about raw footage in documentaries:

• Filmmakers gather raw footage through interviews, observational footage, archival materials, and re-enactments.
• Shooting in RAW format provides more flexibility and control over the final look of the footage, especially in challenging lighting conditions or when combining footage from different locations or times.
• Raw footage is important for creating a compelling documentary. It serves as the building blocks for the story and allows filmmakers to craft a narrative that resonates with the audience.
• The quality of raw footage significantly affects the final product. It determines the level of detail, color, and lighting that can be adjusted during post-production.
• During editing and post-production, filmmakers select the best footage, arrange it in a logical order, and add elements like music, voiceovers, and visual effects to enhance the story.
• Raw footage can be color-corrected, audio-enhanced, and trimmed to remove unusable parts, resulting in a polished final product.
• Organizing raw footage effectively using tools like folder structures, tags, and collections streamlines the editing process and makes it easier to find relevant clips.

Understanding the importance of raw footage and using effective methods to gather and utilize it allows documentary filmmakers to create a straightforward and impactful final product that tells a compelling story.

Cinematic Style to Capture Attention

Cinematic style plays a crucial role in capturing the audience’s attention in documentaries. The following techniques are among those used:

• Establish a sense of place: Use establishing shots to immerse the audience in the environment and set the context for the story.
• Capture attention within the first few seconds: Show your documentary’s relevance to the audience immediately, using ultra-short cuts or visually striking images.
• Create a documentary shot list: Plan your shots in advance to ensure a smooth and visually appealing flow throughout the film.
• Design camera movements: Thoughtful camera movements can add depth and emotion to your documentary, directing the viewer’s attention.
• Consider camera lenses: Different lenses can create various effects, such as wide-angle lenses for establishing shots or close-ups for intimate moments.
• Be story-aware: Understand the narrative structure of your documentary and use visual storytelling techniques to support it.
• Use B-roll footage: Supplement your main footage with additional shots to provide context, enhance the story, and maintain the audience’s interest.
• Incorporate archival footage: Use existing footage to provide historical context or to support the narrative of your documentary.
• Create an engaging opening: The beginning of the documentary should capture the audience’s attention, set the tone, and arouse curiosity.
• Utilize various documentary techniques: Consider using voice-overs, interviews, montages, or re-enactments to convey information and engage the audience.

By incorporating these cinematic techniques, you can create a visually interesting and engaging documentary that captures the attention of your audience.

Capturing Attention by Addressing Issues That Matter

The documentary film is an art that shows reality on screens around the world. It delves into the deepest aspects of life on Earth to respond, entertain, and raise awareness of humanity’s existence.

A documentary presents a non-fictional fact in a cinematic format from which viewers can draw their conclusions.

A well-made documentary conveys the subject in a clear and interesting way.

Some documentaries are intended to be purely informative. Others are meant to be pure entertainment. However, good documentaries try to convey both entertainment and information in an effective way.

In most cases, a well-made documentary captures the audience’s attention and keeps them engaged. The best documentaries engage the audience in ways that make them think, feel, and learn.

A good documentary should be comprehensive and coherent.

Sometimes the director’s point of view is prominent, leading to conflicting points and opinions.

A Brief History of Documentaries

A landmark documentary film is Nanook of the North by Robert Flaherty, one of the very first documentary makers. Shot in the early 1920s, this silent film documents the life of an Inuk family in the Arctic.

The film combines footage from reality with reenactments.

In Russia, Soviet filmmaker Dziga Vertov did his best to experiment with the documentary form while staying just on the right side of the terrible Stalinist censorship. His 1929 film Man with a Movie Camera is considered one of the greats of cinema and documentary filmmaking.

Vertov was very concerned with what he called “film truth,” in which the camera’s ability to see differently from the human eye opened up previously closed possibilities of observation.

The Documentary Film Becomes Political

As the world moved toward war in the 1930s and political ideologies competed for public favor, the documentary world saw the emergence of a number of films that were either pure propaganda (such as Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will , which documented the 1934 Nazi Party Congress) or films that had a clear political message, such as Borinage by Joris Ivens and Henri Storck, which showed the deplorable conditions in the Belgian coal-mining area.

In America, New Deal productions such as The Plow That Broke the Plains (1936) by documentary maker Pare Lorentz emerged, while in Britain the educational documentary philosophy of John Grierson gained ground-his “creative approach to reality” is expressed in films such as Night Mail (1936, directed by Basil Wright and Harry Watt).

Grierson, incidentally, is said to have coined the term “documentary” when writing about Flaherty’s film Moana (1926).

Smaller Cameras Change Documentary

In the 1970s, smaller and lighter equipment enabled the emergence of a more observational style of documentary film.

The Maysles brothers’ film Grey Gardens , which documents the daily life of an eccentric mother-daughter couple in a dilapidated East Hampton mansion, is a good example.

Meanwhile, American director Fred Wiseman became known for ‘Direct Cinema’, documenting a series of abuses at Bridgewater State Hospital for the Criminally Insane in films like Titicut Follies (1967) among many other films of the genre.

Both Direct Cinema, and cinema verité (as practiced by French director Jean Rouch, among others) are characterized by a greatly reduced degree of involvement by the director in what occurs in front of the camera. Direct Cinema abhors it entirely; whereas cinema verité allows for the precipitation of an event by the director.

Modern Documentary Film Examples.

In recent years, there’s been a trend toward essayistic documentaries-such as An Inconvenient Truth (2006) and Food, Inc. (2008) – and personality-driven films, especially by American filmmaker Michael Moore, such as Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004).

Since streaming services such as Netflix have gained prominence, there’s been a trend toward populist documentaries and series such as American Murder and Tiger King .

The role of documentary as a tool of political and policy investigation has declined significantly and has been replaced by the investigation of crimes and celebrities.

The Types of Documentary

There are many different types of documentaries, with and without narration, with and without fictional elements or reconstruction. One of the characteristics of documentary film is its incredible dynamism over time.

Some of the main types of documentaries are:

• Fly-on-the-wall (observational documentary).
• Investigative
• Poetic documentary
• Travel films
• Natural history
• Compilation films – beginning in the 1920s, with films such as The Last Cigarette
• Scientific documentaries
• Participatory documentaries – the Morgan Spurlock film Super Size Me is a participatory documentary
• Representational
• Expository documentaries
• Performative documentaries
• Reflexive documentaries
• Hybrid documentaries – where truth games are used to challenge assumptions about facts
• Docufiction – where fictional elements are shown alongside facts

Related: What is an Expository Documentary

The Importance of Documentary Film

Although many professional documentaries have been taken in a populist direction by the increasing power of streaming services, documentary film still plays an extremely important role in society.

It’s one of the few mediums that can provide viewers with an insightful and holistic emotional and factual experience, revealing truths that have previously remained hidden from them. Therefore, documentary films can raise people’s consciousness in a way that few other art forms can.

Documentaries shape and anchor our collective memory, or at least they’re a major player in that process.

Related: Why is Film Important to Society

A documentary teaches us more about the world around us.

Documentary making is a powerful tool for preserving history and stories for future generations.

It can give us a unique perspective on the lives of people in the past.

A good documentary film manages to inspire compassion in its viewers.

But that doesn’t mean documentaries are perfect. They can be manipulated and controversial. Sometimes they’re plagued by poor quality, bias, and an inability to be objective.

Documentaries are important, however, because they’re a vehicle for many interpretations.

Related: Why Documentaries Are Important

Some Great Documentaries to Watch

Some excellent documentaries to check out include:

The Civil War (Ken Burns, 1990)

Bowling for Columbine (Michael Moore, 2002)

Inside Job (Charles Ferguson, 2010)

Our Disappeared (Juan Mandelbaum, 2008)

Capturing the Friedmans (Andrew Jarecki, 2003)

Grizzly Man (Werner Herzog, 2005)

Documentary vs. Biopic: Which Is Better, from 'Dog Day Afternoon' to 'Welcome to Marwen'

Truth is stranger than fiction. But is it always better?

On November 22, 2019, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood , the acclaimed Tom Hanks -starring biopic about Fred “Mister” Rogers drops in theatres to warm all of our hearts. It comes just one year after Won’t You Be My Neighbor? , the acclaimed Fred “Mister” Rogers documentary that dropped in theatres the summer of 2018 to warm all of our hearts. Now I’m no grumpus. I want as much Fred “Mister” Rogers content as people are willing to give me. But it is curious that we’re getting a fictionalized version of the man so soon after such a culture-grabbing, supposedly definitive take on him. What can Marielle Heller ’s drama show us about him that Morgan Neville ’s documentary didn’t already?

This line of thought led me to a broader question. What form of film is more effective at exploring the ins and outs of a true subject: a documentary or a biopic? Are there certain parts of a subject’s psychological profile that are better suited to a fictionalized treatment? Are historical contexts better served for the journalistic approach of a doc? What can each form of film teach us about how we tell real-life stories? To tackle these questions, I decided to compare and contrast five real-life stories given both a documentary and biopic, and see which work is ultimately the most effective.

It’s time… for the Documentary vs. Biopic Battle Royale.

The Dog vs. Dog Day Afternoon

John Wojtowicz knew exactly who he was. And in The Dog , Allison Berg and Frank Keraudren ’s co-directed documentary about him, we see Wojtowicz tell us exactly who he is in straight, blunt, often shocking detail. You likely know the main bullet points of his story — he robbed a New York City Bank to get enough money to pay for his gay lover’s sex change — from Sidney Lumet and Al Pacino ’s masterpiece Dog Day Afternoon . But to hear Wojtowicz tell it himself, in an emotional tenor somewhere in between “an old buddy telling war stories” and “a monster about to rip your fucking head off,” makes for a captivating, complicated viewing experience. Wojtowicz will tell you straight up that he’s a “pervert,” a hedonistic man who marries multiple people of different gender and sexual orientations and refers to him all as his “wife”, just before telling you he’s a “Goldwater conservative” who was happy to go to war. He flips through wild, loaded statements with no regard for sensitivity. As a result, sometimes the raw power of what he’s saying gets inadvertently muted. It’s surprising to watch him be flippant about something raw the first few times — but then it just becomes “how he speaks.” Similarly, Berg and Keraudren’s lack of editorialization, a nice extension of their subject’s POV, causes some pacing issues in the last half, with moments flowing unnaturally into each other, and about six to ten different ending “buttons” in a row. Despite all this, I highly recommend The Dog . It’s utterly fascinating — and thanks to Berg and Keraudren’s thorough, ten-years-in-the-making approach, it turns not just into a rehash of one crime, but a treatise on New York, the burgeoning LGBTQ movement, mental health, sexual freedom, familial love, and the terrifying allure of fame.

It was interesting watching Dog Day Afternoon after The Dog , as so much of The Dog and Wojtowicz’s decisions are made in direct reaction to the cultural phenomenon of Dog Day Afternoon . Directed by film master Sidney Lumet and starring film master Al Pacino as the Wojtowicz avatar, the tense, real-time film narrows the broad scope of The Dog into the bank robbery and nothing more. At times, the film plays like a procedural thriller elevated by the mastery of craft of everyone involved (if you’re a David Fincher fan unfamiliar with this film, watch it posthaste). Pacino’s take on Wojtowicz (his character’s name is Sonny Wortzik; a brilliant first name choice, given that Sonny’s terrified, pleading eyes make him seem like a son in search of a father) is markedly different than the man I just got to know. Since Wojtowicz was given control of the narrative in The Dog , his brash confidence was placed front and center. Here, with a more objective camera from Lumet, we see Pacino often try and be confident, only to have his subconscious mannerisms betray him. Some moments did ring authentically Wojtowicz — the film takes care to mention Sonny’s status as a Vietnam vet and Goldwater conservative, and Sonny’s brief justification of his swearing (“I speak what I feel, you know?”) felt straight from Wojtowicz’s mouth. Whereas The Dog is explicitly interested in examining all of America, Dog Day Afternoon ’s social temperature-taking occurs on the margins. When Sonny’s lover Leon ( Chris Sarandon ) arrives to speak on the phone with Sonny, he’s framed front and center — but behind him, out of focus, is a homophobic cop laughing. Ultimately, Lumet’s film shows what Wojtowicz himself was likely afraid to show. Lumet’s dedication to psychological and formal realism reveals a lot of truth that not even a documentary could muster.

Final Verdict : Dog Day Afternoon , for its masterful pacing, psychological objectivity, and rewatchability factor.

When We Were Kings vs. Ali

What do you first think of when you think of Muhammad Ali ? There’s quite a lot to the man formerly known as Cassius Clay — his raw charisma, his loudly determinate activism, his mannerisms in the ring that can truly and accurately be described as floating like a butterfly and stinging like a bee. All of this and more is on display in When We Were Kings , the Academy Award-winning documentary about Ali’s famed Rumble in the Jungle with then-heavyweight champion George Foreman . But when I think about Ali, I first think about the rope-a-dope. It’s a boxing tactic invented and perfected by the man, in which he lets his opponent land a bunch of early, minor hits and tire himself out. Then, Ali lands just a few blows and knocks the now-fatigued fighter to the ground. I find it fascinating — and I’ve never once seen it happen. When We Were Kings , directed and co-edited masterfully by Leon Gast , lets this moment happen in real time. And after a lean feature noted by its ruthless cutting of moments to the bone, watching Ali suddenly shift from defense to offense and knock down the heretofore unstoppable-seeming Foreman is astonishing. The rest of the movie astonishes, no doubt. But it’s all rendered in quick jabs, designed, perhaps, to tire the viewer out before its final blow. Gast is a master of the montage, blending images together with equal parts craft and casualness — at one point, he even merges two diegetic soundtracks together for maximum immersion/confusion. I found these moments to be incredibly effective — but when the film lands on more traditional talking heads (especially from the problematic, intellectual pontifications from Norman Mailer and George Plimpton ), it does slow things down. Still, Nast yields oft-breathtaking results that even land hits on Ali himself. When Ali speaks of the joys of bringing black excellence like James Brown to Zaire in an attempt to remind African-Americans that being African is worth celebrating, it’s rightly captivating and inspiring. But when Gast reminds us, via his punchy editing, that this is all happening thanks to the funding of miserable dictator Mobutu Sese Seko , it forces the viewer to question the ethics of the whole affair — and even of watching the documentary itself.

In some ways, Michael Mann ’s Ali , starring an Oscar-nominated Will Smith in the title role, plays like When We Were Kings stretched out into a moody, ambient-leaning slow motion. The opening 25ish minutes, in particular, borrow some of the wild usage of montage and music from the doc -- just with a lot less clarity, purpose, and immediate context. Mann stages a prolonged musical performance from Sam Cooke ( David Elliott ) and cuts between lots of disparate, in media res moments from Ali’s life. But if When We Were Kings cuts images to the bone, Ali cuts images and leaves a ton of meat, gristle, and fat -- and then refuses to tell you what kind of meat it is. Jamie Foxx ’s entrance as cornerman Drew Bundini Brown is, in particular, nonsensical in its attempt to reach at high drama without any attempt at establishing a base reality. The word “reach” came to mind a lot while watching this film, especially in Smith’s performance. He is, no joke, one of my all-time favorite movie actors, and the idea of him teaming up with Mann to depict Ali (who publicly endorsed Smith) excited me to no end. But his take on the icon both reaches counterintuitively toward a sketch-like impression while also feeling strangely held back. Smith seems to be deciding to show no emotion in his face when playing Ali -- the moments of performance that do pop (like a lovely winter-set scene late in the picture) pop because Smith allows himself to actually emote and tap into what makes him naturally effective as a performer. And when Smith is forced abruptly into more traditionally written and staged “biopic scenes” (Ali and his dad fight! Ali says quotes we all know and love! Ali triumphs in the Rumble in the Jungle!), it feels less like a breath of fresh air and more like another bafflingly obtuse decision from Mr. Mann.

Final Verdict : When We Were Kings , handily, in the first round.

Man on Wire vs. The Walk

Man on Wire is electric. If you don’t consider yourself a fan of documentaries, this might be the one to make an exception for. Director James Marsh wisely structures and paces his film like a narrative heist picture, with an oft-intense score, interviews with “inside men,” and the meticulous description of a crackerjack plan. But the film certainly isn’t depicting your average heist of money or jewels, or any “object.” It depicts the heist of… air? Building ownership? Or is it actually an anti-heist? Not an attempt to take something, but an attempt to put a sense of love, romance, art, or whimsy into an otherwise neutral space? If I can’t exactly nail down Philippe Petit ’s mission statement in erecting a wire across the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and then walking across that wire, he certainly can. Marsh puts his subject at the center of the doc, and it yields delightful results. Petit is animated, intoxicating to listen to, and contagious in his enthusiasm. He discusses the most life-threatening, death-defying of stunts with ease and wonder. He’s a child in the best way, a person who thought of an inherently childlike idea and chose not to stifle his dreams with a dosage of “adult realities,” but to see it through no matter what. He even gets the notoriously gruff NYPD somewhat on his side — in some delightful archive footage, one cop delivers a press conference where he calls Petit a tightrope “dancer,” making sure to know that he’s not a “walker,” because what he’s doing is much more of a performance than just “walking.” You know what? If Petit can, for just one moment, turn the gruffest of gruff cops into an advocate for artistry and romanticism, than his wirewalk did its job and thensome.

The Walk is the Across the Universe version of Philippe Petit’s story. It’s a twee visual odyssey full of manufactured whimsy, overly romanticized pontificating on the importance of love and life, and a candy-coated view of what “France” is like. And… I think I lowkey loved it? I can’t lie to you -- many parts of this film are rough. Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Petit with eerie blue eyes, a strange wig, and a truly bonkers take on a French accent that changes from scene-to-scene. He’s introduced speaking directly to camera from the Statue of Liberty, in a likely attempt to try and capture the raw appeal of the real Petit’s direct addresses in the documentary. But it is just a lot to take in at once, especially when coupled with Robert Zemeckis ’ insistence on stuffing this staging -- and frankly, just about every sequence’s staging -- with show-offy, garish-on-purpose CGI. Zemeckis’ vision is “extra” throughout, with the elder statesmen of smart Hollywood spectacle ( Back to the Future , Who Framed Roger Rabbit ) tapping into his unbridled inner child to try and find the sickly sweet core of Petit’s story. Ya want slick CGI-assisted one-take transitions? Ya want an Alan Silvestri score that slinks unsubtly with Cliff’s Notes versions of “jazz” and “France”? Ya want some of the most cartoonishly stupid cops ever committed to celluloid? You got it all and thensome. And yet, despite all of these objectively cringe-inducing contrivances -- or, in fact, because of them -- I grew to really enjoy the heck out of this picture. Was it Stockholm Syndrome? I’ll never be self-aware enough to know for sure. But the sheer glee of everyone involved -- and the straight-up fun of seeing the heist elements of the doc played out it full -- got me, goshdarnit. The film’s final moments alternate between visual splendor (that damn titular walk works, honey), quiet pathos (the last line and shot, especially), and out-and-out bonkers-ness (the damn bird is wild, honey). They’re an effective summary of the film’s charms and flaws, and make the case that the flaws are the charms.

Final Verdict : Man on Wire makes the walk much more handily, but I won’t stop thinking about The Walk ’s oddness for some time.

Marwencol vs. Welcome to Marwen

Marwencol is fascinating, heartbreaking, complicated, and beautiful. It made me cry at my desk! My coworkers were like, “Are you okay?” and I was like, “He’s just trying to deal with his feelings with dolls!” and they were like, “We don’t fully understand that thought out of context, but it’s good that you’re in touch with your feelings!” and I was like “Thank you!” Directed, edited, and produced by Jeff Malmberg , Marwencol tells the story of Mark Hogancamp , an alcoholic who was beat savagely outside of a bar when he drunkenly told his attackers he enjoyed cross-dressing. Hogancamp was in a coma for nine days as a result of the attack. When he awoke, he had barely any memories of his previous life. To cope with this horrifying trauma, he created a new world -- of dolls. Hogancamp repurposed Barbies, GI Joes, and other finds from his local hobby shop to create the town of Marwencol, a place home to symbols of Hogancamp himself, all of the important people in his life, and even his attackers. Hogancamp recontextualizes what he understands about his life (some of which is irrevocably changed or buried; he is no longer interested in alcohol after the attack) by staging these characters in World War II vignettes of military might, camaraderie, and good old-fashioned Nazi-killing. Or, at least, Hogancamp wants these vignettes to feel “good old-fashioned.” By turning his real-life attackers into cartoonish Nazis who are routinely decimated by the doll-Hogancamp and his allies, he is attempting to reclaim his identity, to literally conquer his trauma. But there’s so much buried inside of Hogancamp. It can’t be that simple. Sometimes it’s seen in brief bursts of bubbling anger by Malmberg’s stationary camera, sometimes it’s seen in Hogancamp’s Nazis torturing doll-Hogancamp in ways paralleling his real-life injuries. It’s tempting to read this documentary as a triumph of a man over his demons through art -- especially when we see his work featured in a swanky New York gallery -- but the truth is just so much more complicated. Hogancamp’s mission statement for his world is simple: “Everybody be friends with each other. Everybody got along. Nobody was against anybody else. Didn’t matter what clothing they wore.” While his art doesn’t make that statement 100% true for the world, or even his own world, it makes the case for the inspiring, present-tense, noble struggle of self-betterment in whatever way you need.

Welcome to Marwen is a freaking weird-ass movie. Not many people liked it upon its 2018 release — it has a scant 35% on Rotten Tomatoes and grossed a miserable $13 million worldwide off of a $39 million budget. But you know what? I’m happy to go to bat for this freaking weird-ass movie, this wildly idiosyncratic, tone-hopping, bonkers-CGI-assisted drama from Robert Zemeckis (was Zemeckis just binging documentaries lately?). I find the artistic decision to dive into the actual miniature world of Hogancamp’s creations to be inspired. Zemeckis’ take on Hogancamp (played by Steve Carrell , who’s not going for a direct impression but still finds notes not even seen in the doc) is that his reliance on fantasy is equal parts inspiring and inhibiting. As such, opening sequences in the world of Marwen (why lose the ‘col’? Who knows!) zip with crackling energy and fun, genre-skewing action and set pieces that remind you how good of a visual director Zemeckis is. But as the film goes on, these sequences become more and more menacing, filled with realities that Hogancamp just can’t get away from, and must reckon with. It’s an impressively unique rendering of a wholly unique journey. However — Zemeckis’ wild take on the material does yield some wonky, sometimes icky results. Zemeckis’ staging of Hogancamp’s attack — an out-and-out hate crime against a cross-dressing man — is loud and melodramatic, threatening to cross the line of tastefulness. In fact, much of the film’s real-world drama is “loud and melodramatic” when a gentler touch might yield better results, and pop more against the contrast of the fantasy world sequences (one sequence in a courtroom made me laugh out loud, and it was definitely not supposed to make me laugh out loud). Finally, while I understand that the film’s POV is subjective through Hogancamp’s eccentricities, some of the depiction of women is… not great! Which is interesting, because much of the hypersexualization and objectification (quite literally) of the women in Hogancamp’s story is also depicted in Marwencol , but didn’t bump me as being problematic. What was Zemeckis missing? What nuance about Hogancamp’s relationship with sex and sexuality did he accidentally smooth over?

Final Verdict : Marwencol is obviously superior -- but don’t count out Welcome to Marwen as an unorthodox dessert.

The Times of Harvey Milk vs. Milk

As a snapshot of LGBTQ history, an examination of systemic homophobia, a sobering reminder of how far we need to go, and an inspiring reminder of the powers of fighting hope, The Times of Harvey Milk is an essential watch. The content examined within needs to be disseminated and shared to everyone in America. It’s beyond important. Unfortunately, director Rob Epstein ’s usage of form leaves a lot to be desired in modern eyes. It’s slowly-paced, gravely narrated by the legendary Harvey Fierstein , and relies a lot on the tired-and-true/ Ken Burns formula of talking heads and panned in photos. In other words, it feels like an overly didactic, educational film. Its techniques work against the fiery charisma and active progressiveness of Harvey Milk , San Francisco’s first openly gay supervisor who was shot and killed by disgruntled supervisor Dan White . We get a lot of folks talking about the magnetism and unorthodox tactics of Milk, but it so often backslides into that classic storytelling maxim about telling not showing. When Epstein shifts primarily into a mode of archival footage about halfway through the film, its filmmaking quality ratchets up noticeably, matching its content with aplomb. And its content, I will reiterate, is absolutely necessary for everyone to experience -- we need this sobering reminder of violent homophobia, of social unrest, of the importance of representation, and of the need to keep fighting. But for too long, Epstein hampers his subject with an unnecessarily generic approach.

An Oscar-winner for its leading actor ( Sean Penn ) and screenwriter ( Dustin Lance Black ), Milk is, on paper, your average milquetoast prestige picture — a work Cleve Jones ( Emile Hirsch ) might call a “bourgeois affectation.” And yet, the film succeeds handsomely — thanks in part to director Gus Van Sant ’s no-frills brand of formal integrity. While the color palate of the work is beautifully stylized, the rest of the film simply frames its actors in clean compositions and lets them act. It gives the work a sense of immediacy you’d find in a documentary while subtly promising the audience they’re in controlled, masterful hands. And Black’s work absolutely devastates with its casual authenticity. His screenplay, thankfully, allows Milk’s inherently tragic story to retain a sense of life, vitality, and humor. Its psychological focus is remarkably nuanced when it comes to Milk himself. While we often see him in an exterior, public role (like his beyond powerful campaign speeches or parade appearances), I found the quieter, more private moments where Milk forces a smile even with himself or closest friends to be the most revealing -- and the scene in which he finds the body of Jack Lira ( Diego Luna ) is utterly devastating. If I have one criticism of Black’s screenplay, it would be the too-neatness in its examinations of Dan White’s ( Josh Brolin ) murderous actions as being the result of his closeted gayness. White’s real-life actions were chaotic acts of terror, and I applaud Black’s decision to try and render a recognizable pattern out of chaos. But the “they’re gay themselves!” justification of homophobic behavior can feel overly reductive at best, and insensitively sympathy-inducing at worst.

Final Verdict : Milk , for its mastery of craft and ability to translate Milk’s humanity -- but the historical context afforded by the documentary cannot be ignored.

The Autobiographical Documentary

• First Online: 31 October 2019

Cite this chapter

• Laura T. Di Summa 4  

2350 Accesses

In this chapter, I critically assess the ability of autobiographical documentary to convey an authentic portrayal of the self and analyze the cinematic means through which autobiographical documentaries may be able to do so. I compare and outline the chief differences between autobiographical documentaries and literary memoirs and assess the ways in which cognitive analysis of film and post-structuralist accounts within film theory and documentary studies have dealt with the distinction between fiction and nonfiction. I lastly consider new avenues of autobiographical expression such as the ones potentially offered by social media, blogs, video diaries, personal websites, and so on.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Smith Magazine Six Words Memoir: accessed March 19, 2017, http://www.sixwordmemoirs.com/

Karl Ove Knausgård, My Struggle , trans. Don Bartlett (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009).

Sidonie Smith and Julie Watson, Reading Autobiography: A Guide for Interpreting Life Narratives (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010), 167–168.

Carl Plantinga, “What a Documentary is After All,” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism , Vol. 63, No. 2 (Spring, 2005): 105–117.

Noël Carroll. “Fiction, Nonfiction, and the Film of Presumptive Assertion: Conceptual Analyses,” in Engaging the Moving Image . (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), 193–224.

Trevor Ponech, What is Nonfiction Cinema?: On the Very Idea of Motion Picture Communication (Boulder: Westview Press, 1999).

Bill Nichols. Introduction to Documentary . (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2001).

While it is inevitable, when discussing the autobiography, to refer to this debate, its treatment in this chapter is rather scant and succinct. For a more comprehensive treatment of the debate, the reader should refer to Vitor Moura’s chapter, which appears in this section of the anthology (SECTION + PP).

Most of my examples are taken from North American autobiographical documentaries. While partial, my choice is motivated by the strong connection between the theoretical issues covered by this chapter and by their intimate connection to the evolution of this genre both in relation to historical contingencies and in relation to the technology and cinematic possibilities that are at the basis of the emergence of this sub-genre.

I am here loosely referring to Noël Carroll’s characterization of narrative connections as erotetic. See Noël Carroll, “The Power of Movies,” Daedalus Vol. 114, No. 4, The Moving Image (Fall: 1985): 79–103.

David Velleman, for example, challenges the requirement of causality and favors, in its place, the idea according to which narratives find their “rhythm” and organization thanks to a mechanism of “emotional cadence.” David Velleman, “Narrative Explanation,” The Philosophical Review Vol. 112, No. 1 (Jan., 2003): 1–25. See also, in relation to narrative and autobiography David Velleman, “The Right to a Life,” in On Life Writing , ed. Zachary Leader (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).

See, for instance, Maggie Nelson, The Argonauts . (Minneapolis: Graywolf Press: 2015).

Paul Arthur, “The Moving Picture Cure: Self-Therapy Documentaries,” The Psychoanalytic Review , 94 (2007): 865–885.

Laura Marcus, Dreams of Modernity: Psychoanalysis, Literature, and Cinema . (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014).

Such as concern is equally urgent in several other autobiographers, from Lotjie Sotherland’s obsession with her mind to Chantal Akerman’s films, which, she claims, are based on nothing but her own feelings. See, for example, Charles Warren, “Fiction and Nonfiction in Chantal Akerman’s Films,” in The Philosophy of Documentary Film: Image, Sound, Fiction, Truth , eds. David LaRocca & Timothy Corrigan (Lanham: Lexington Books, 2017), 495.

Robert Sinnerbrink, Cinematic Ethics: Exploring Ethical Experience Through Film (New York: Routledge, 2016).

Polley relies on re-enactments but also on the testimonies of friends of her mother, her siblings, her father, and so on.

Karen Hoffman, “Deceiving into the Truth”: The Indirect Cinema of Stories We Tell and The Act of Killing , in The Philosophy of Documentary Film: Image, Sound, Fiction, Truth , eds. David LaRocca & Timothy Corrigan (Lanham: Lexington Books, 2017), 525.

George Winston, Claiming the Real . Documentary: Grierson and Beyond , (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008) and Dirk Eitzen, “When is a Documentary?: Documentary as a Mode of Reception,” Cinema Journal , Vol. 35 No. 1 (Autumn 1995), pp. 81–102.

Gregory Currie, “Visible Traces: Documentary and the Contents of Photographs,” 285–297. See also Gregorie Currie, “Documentary Traces: Film and the Content of Photographs,” in The Philosophy of Documentary Film: Image, Sound, Fiction, Truth , eds. David LaRocca & Timothy Corrigan (Lanham: Lexington Books, 2017).

Plantinga “What a Documentary is After All,” 105–117.

Keith Dromm, “Understanding (and) the Legacy of the Trace: Reflections after Carroll, Currie, and Plantinga,” in The Philosophy of Documentary Film: Image, Sound, Fiction, Truth , eds. David LaRocca & Timothy Corrigan (Lanham: Lexington Books, 2017), 413–429.

Winston, Claiming the Real . Documentary: Grierson and Beyond , 202.

Warren, “Fiction and Nonfiction in Chantal Akerman’s Films,” 501.

Winston, Claiming the Real . Documentary: Grierson and Beyond , 230.

Christopher Cowley, ed. The Philosophy of Autobiography (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2015).

Jim Lane, The Autobiographical Documentary in America . (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2002), 11–32.

Auteur theory , albeit stemming in France, found a fertile ground in the New York movement of the 1960s and 1970s and specifically in the work of Andrew Sarris who is largely responsible for the “Americanization” of auteur theory and for its North American success. Andrew Sarris, “Notes on Auteur Theory in 1962.” In Film Theory and Criticism , eds. Leo Braudy & Marshall Cohen (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 451–454.

Alexandre Astruc. “Du Stylo à la Caméra et de la Caméra au Stylo,” L’Écran Française , March 30, 1948.

Timothy Corrigan, The Essay Film. From Montaigne, After Marker (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 15.

Bill Nichols, Speaking Truth With Film: Evidence, Ethics, Politics in Documentary (Oakland: University of California Press, 2016), 99. See also: Bill Nichols “The Question of Evidence.” In Rethinking Documentary: New Perspectives, New Practices , eds. Thomas Austin and Wilma De Jong (Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw Hill, 2008).

Nichols, 1999.

Nichols, Introduction to Documentary , 149–153.

While Nichols has softened his view on the importance of evidence, the message has not fundamentally changed. In Speaking Truths with Film , where he considers irony, paradox, and fictive techniques, sobriety seems to prevail. What prevails, in these films, is the desire to communicate something about the subject and something about how the subject interacts with everyday reality, no matter its uncertainty or the rhetorical stratagems it hinges upon.

Noël Carroll “Nonfiction film and postmodern skepticism.” In Post-Theory: Reconstructing Film Studies , ed. David Bordwell and Noël Carroll (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996), 293.

Michael Renov “First Person Films: Some Theses on Self-Inscription.” In Rethinking documentary: New Perspectives, New Practices , eds. Thomas Austin and Wilma De Jong (Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw Hill, 2008), 42.

Michael Renov, The Subject of Documentary , (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2007), 110.

See also: Jon Dovey, Freakshow: First Person Media and Factual Television (London: Pluto Press, 2000).

Jason Wood (ed.), Nick Broomfield: Documenting Icons (London: Faber and Faber, 2005), 229.

Think, for example, of the 2010 “Global Lives Project” or of new technologies such as Florian Thalhofer’s Korsakow, a software for interactive narratives and at how fast their popularity is growing.

Clay Shirky, Cognitive Surplus. Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age . (New York: Penguin Press, 2010).

Bibliography

Arthur, Paul. 2007. The Moving Picture Cure: Self-Therapy Documentaries. The Psychoanalytic Review 94: 865–885.

Article   Google Scholar  

Astruc, Alexandre. 1948. Du Stylo à la Caméra et de la Caméra au Stylo. L’Écran Française , March 30.

Google Scholar  

Carroll, Noël. 1985. The Power of Movies. Daedalus 114 (4, The Moving Image, Fall): 79–103.

———. 1996. Nonfiction Film and Postmodern Skepticism. In Post-Theory: Reconstructing Film Studies , ed. David Bordwell and Noël Carroll. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

———. 2003. Fiction, Nonfiction, and the Film of Presumptive Assertion: Conceptual Analyses. In Engaging the Moving Image , 193–224. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Corrigan, Timothy. 2011. The Essay Film. From Montaigne, After Marker . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cowley, Christopher, ed. 2015. The Philosophy of Autobiography . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Currie, Gregory. 2017. Visible Traces: Documentary and the Contents of Photographs, 285–297. See Also Currie, Gregorie, Documentary Traces: Film and the Content of Photographs. In The Philosophy of Documentary Film: Image, Sound, Fiction, Truth , ed. David LaRocca and Timothy Corrigan. Lanham: Lexington Books.

Dovey, Jon. 2000. Freakshow: First Person Media and Factual Television . London: Pluto Press.

Dromm, Keith. 2017. Understanding (and) the Legacy of the Trace: Reflections After Carroll, Currie, and Plantinga. In The Philosophy of Documentary Film: Image, Sound, Fiction, Truth , ed. David LaRocca and Timothy Corrigan, 413–429. Lanham: Lexington Books.

Eitzen, Dirk. 1995. When Is a Documentary?: Documentary as a Mode of Reception. Cinema Journal 35 (1, Autumn): 81–102.

Foley, Mary Ann. Forthcoming. Missing Links in the Study of Autobiographical Memory Appraisal: Appraisals of Scene Making in Recollection & Narrative Construction Processes.

Goldie, Peter. 2003. One’s Remembered Past. Philosophical Papers 32 (3, November): 301–319.

———. 2012. The Mess Inside: Narrative, Emotion, & the Mind . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Hoffman, Karen. 2017. “Deceiving into the Truth”: The Indirect Cinema of Stories We Tell and The Act of Killing . In The Philosophy of Documentary Film: Image, Sound, Fiction, Truth , ed. David LaRocca and Timothy Corrigan, 525. Lanham: Lexington Books.

Knausgård, Karl Ove. 2009. My Struggle . Trans. Don Bartlett. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Korsgaard, Christine M. 2009. Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity, and Integrity . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lane, Jim. 2002. The Autobiographical Documentary in America . Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Marcus, Laura. 2014. Dreams of Modernity: Psychoanalysis, Literature, and Cinema . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nelson, Maggie. 2015. The Argonauts . Minneapolis: Graywolf Press.

Nichols, Bill. 2001. Introduction to Documentary . Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

———. 2008. The Question of Evidence. In Rethinking Documentary: New Perspectives, New Practices , ed. Thomas Austin and Wilma De Jong. Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw Hill.

———. 2016. Speaking Truth with Film: Evidence, Ethics, Politics in Documentary . Oakland: University of California Press.

Olney, James. 1998. Memory & Narrative. The Weave of Life-Writing . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Plantinga, Carl. 2005. What a Documentary Is After All. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 63 (2, Spring): 105–117.

———. 2017. The Limits of Appropriation: Subjectivist Accounts of the Fiction/Nonfiction Film Distinction. In The Philosophy of Documentary Film: Image, Sound, Fiction, Truth , ed. David LaRocca and Timothy Corrigan, 113–124. Lanham: Lexington Books.

Ponech, Trevor. 1999. What Is Nonfiction Cinema?: On the Very Idea of Motion Picture Communication . Boulder: Westview Press.

Renov, Michael. 2007. The Subject of Documentary . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

———. 2008. First Person Films: Some Theses on Self-Inscription. In Rethinking Documentary: New Perspectives, New Practices , ed. Thomas Austin and Wilma De Jong. Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw Hill.

Sarris, Andrew. 2009. Notes on Auteur Theory in 1962. In Film Theory and Criticism , ed. Leo Braudy and Marshall Cohen, 451–454. New York: Oxford University Press.

Schechtman, Marya. 1996. The Constitution of Selves . Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

———. 2008. Stories, Lives and Basic Survival: A Refinement and Defense of the Narrative View. In Narrative and Understanding Persons , ed. Daniel Hutto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shirky, Clay. 2010. Cognitive Surplus. Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age . New York: Penguin Press.

Sinnerbrink, Robert. 2016. Cinematic Ethics: Exploring Ethical Experience Through Film . New York: Routledge.

Smith, Sidonie, and Julie Watson. 2010. Reading Autobiography: A Guide for Interpreting Life Narratives , 167–168. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Strawson, Galen. 1999. The Self and the SESMET. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6 (4): 99–135.

———, ed. 2005. The Self? Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

———. 2015. The Unstoried Life. In On Life Writing , ed. Zachary Leader, 284–301. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Velleman, David. 2003. Narrative Explanation. The Philosophical Review 112 (1, January): 1–25.

———. 2005. The Right to a Life. In On Life Writing , ed. Zachary Leader. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Warren, Charles. 2017. Fiction and Nonfiction in Chantal Akerman’s Films. In The Philosophy of Documentary Film: Image, Sound, Fiction, Truth , ed. David LaRocca and Timothy Corrigan. Lanham: Lexington Books.

Winston, George. 2008. Claiming the Real. Documentary: Grierson and Beyond . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Wood, Jason, ed. 2005. Nick Broomfield: Documenting Icons , 229. London: Faber and Faber.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

William Paterson University, Wayne, NJ, USA

Laura T. Di Summa

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

The Graduate Center, City University of New York, New York, NY, USA

Noël Carroll

Baton Rouge Community College, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Di Summa, L.T. (2019). The Autobiographical Documentary. In: Carroll, N., Di Summa, L.T., Loht, S. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of the Philosophy of Film and Motion Pictures. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19601-1_27

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19601-1_27

Published : 31 October 2019

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-19600-4

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-19601-1

eBook Packages : Religion and Philosophy Philosophy and Religion (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Message from SIG Chair
• News & Announcements
• Meetings & Other Events
• Key Initiatives
• Professional Development Opportunities
• Research Connections
• Biographical and Documentary Research (SIG #13)

Independent Filmmaker Contracts for Film Producers, Directors, Actors, Investors and Writers

From script to sales the Investor/Producer/Writer must protect her/his film, documentary, music video, stage Project investment from concept to distribution with IndependentFilmmakerContracts.com

Contract Categories

Differences between a documentary and a biography.

Question by Credo D’Janarc : Differences between a documentary and a biography? I have to do a documentary and a biography but I don’t know the difference.

Can someone tell me the difference?

Best answer:

Answer by cnn360coffeebubbles Biography is based on ONE PERSON..ONE INDIVIDUAL…who you had an interview with…. Someone who has made an impact someone (people), whose life you think may be worth sharing with others..

Barbara Walters used to do this..on LIFETIME TV..it was called BARBARA WALTERS’ INTERVIEWS OF A LIFETIME…

Documentary is based on a group of people or situation like Hurricane Katrina…People do documentaries on the “aftermath” of the Hurricane and how people are doing now…

What do you think? Answer below!

• Organizations
• Planning & Activities
• Product & Services
• Structure & Systems
• Career & Education
• Entertainment
• Fashion & Beauty
• Political Institutions
• SmartPhones
• Protocols & Formats
• Communication
• Web Applications
• Household Equipments
• Career and Certifications
• Diet & Fitness
• Mathematics & Statistics
• Processed Foods
• Vegetables & Fruits

Difference Between Memoir and Biography

• Categorized under Words | Difference Between Memoir and Biography

Memoir vs Biography

What is the difference between a biography and a memoir? Both biographies and memoirs tell the stories of a person’s life. They are generally found in the format of a book, which is where the original meaning is used, but it may also be observed taking the modern shape of a movie or video documentary. It might be said that you are “reading a biography of George Washington and then you will watch the movie, that is also a biography of his life”. You may also “read the memoirs of George Washington, that he wrote while fighting the Revolutionary War”. The differences between the usage of ‘biography’ and ‘memoir’ are technical, but important to know and understand for correct usage.

A biography gives a general account of the events of someone’s life. Most published or filmed biographies are about historical figures or famous people. A biography generally starts with a person’s childhood. It may even begin the telling of the story before the person was born, in order to better understand the person’s family situation or the events in the lives of the person’s parents. A biography ends with the person’s death, or if they are still alive, with a momentous event or current situation in their life. It chronicles or tells the events in their life in the order that they happened. It may have commentary, discussion or interpretation on the events in a person’s life, but it mostly focuses on factual or historical evidence. An autobiography is a biography that someone has written about their own life in a similar manner as a biography. This may be published while they are still alive or posthumously, after the person has died.

A memoir focuses on certain memories, experiences or particular aspects of someone’s life. It is less broad and less general than a biography. A memoir is written by the person it is about or written by a professional writer at the request of the person. Usually a memoir has more of a focus on emotions and feelings rather than merely an account of chronological events, such as an autobiography would tell. It may not be based on factual event as much as the person wanting their audience to understand ‘their side of the story’, or their perception of how they were affected by events. Because of this, there is also a more anecdotal, or story-like tone to the writing. It may also be that the person’s account is of a particular noteworthy or famous historical event that is based on their personal knowledge or experience, such as a soldier’s memoir about surviving World War II in a prisoner of war camp.

So when trying to decide whether a story about someone’s life is a biography or a memoir, keep in mind who wrote the story, what does the story tell, how it is written, and what the meaning or purpose the author had in mind when writing the story.

• Recent Posts
• Difference Between Hold on And Hang on - February 19, 2016
• Difference Between “Give it up” and “Applaud” - February 18, 2016
• Difference Between Condole And Console - February 17, 2016

Sharing is caring!

Read More ESL Articles

Search differencebetween.net :.

• Difference Between Autobiography And Memoir
• The Difference Between Autoethnography and Autobiography
• Difference Between Autobiography and Biography
• Difference Between Author and Writer
• Difference Between Legend and Myth

Cite APA 7 Hutchinson, A. (2016, June 8). Difference Between Memoir and Biography. Difference Between Similar Terms and Objects. http://www.differencebetween.net/language/words-language/difference-between-memoir-and-biography/. MLA 8 Hutchinson, Aaron. "Difference Between Memoir and Biography." Difference Between Similar Terms and Objects, 8 June, 2016, http://www.differencebetween.net/language/words-language/difference-between-memoir-and-biography/.

Leave a Response

Name ( required )

Email ( required )

Please note: comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail

References :

Advertisments, more in 'words'.

• Difference Between Center and Centre
• Difference Between Lodge and Resort
• Difference Between Authoritarian and Fascism
• Difference Between Advocate and Barrister
• Difference Between Advocacy and Lobbying

Top Difference Betweens

Get new comparisons in your inbox:, most emailed comparisons, editor's picks.

• Difference Between MAC and IP Address
• Difference Between Platinum and White Gold
• Difference Between Civil and Criminal Law
• Difference Between GRE and GMAT
• Difference Between Immigrants and Refugees
• Difference Between DNS and DHCP
• Difference Between Computer Engineering and Computer Science
• Difference Between Men and Women
• Difference Between Book value and Market value
• Difference Between Red and White wine
• Difference Between Depreciation and Amortization
• Difference Between Bank and Credit Union
• Difference Between White Eggs and Brown Eggs