Documentary+Analysis

Davis Guggenheim's Storytelling Revealed Visual & Audio Track The plot of the //Waiting for Superman (WS)// is interspersed with interviews of different individuals who have connection to education in varied ways. Davis Guggenheim uses these interviews as a justification to his points of concerns with the educational system. From experts in education, to parents, to children, and finally to entrepreneurs, Davis interviews each in an attempt to convince his audience that the solution to the education crisis lies in the creation of privately funded schools where all students have a fair chance in attending regardless of social economic status and ability. During the interviews, the camera splits time between the person being interviewed and video that will support their statements. Sometimes, this involves seemingly live shots of action and sometimes this involves archived footage. When archived footage is used, the purpose is to remind the audience of the mistakes made in the past in public education, and that while the viewer may desire an idealized 50s style education system, we are left to work with a less than ideal system. The interviews in //An Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman// (//IT//) are driven by the documentarians themselves, not relying on outside experts to offer solutions to the problem. As educators, they are the experts who can explain not only the reason behind the educational crisis, but also the ways in which the crisis should be resolved. Also brought into the film, is footage of parents expressing their anger and disappointment in the school boards who continue to let the problems increase and in the charter schools who promised a miracle but produced the opposite. This is meant to elicit angry emotions from the viewers towards the school board for being the cause of education failing. It also strives to point out that the promises made by these charter schools are empty, which is apparent with the interviews of parents who have bad experiences with these schools.

Interestingly, both documentaries choose to have their interviews narrate the plot of the documentary. In //WS//, the Voice of God narration style is chosen in order to have a faceless, mysterious guide take us through the journey of finding a “better” education for our children, our future. The reason for this guide being mysterious and faceless is to make the viewer feel like they are there with him discovering, exploring, and finding that there is a problem with education that needs to be addressed, and the viewer can help in this problem. The whole point is to make the viewer feel like they are finding the answer and not being influenced, guided, or pushed towards Guggenheim’s answer, private corporation funded charter schools. However, //IT// has most narration done onscreen through almost an interview style. The purpose of Cavanaugh and Marelli narrating onscreen is to express to the reader that they, as educators, are the experts, and create an element of ethos within the viewer, trust them because as teachers, they know what the problems and solutions are dealing with education.

The narrator of //WS// is Davis Guggenheim, also the documentarian, who created //An Inconvenient Truth//, a controversial documentary that looks at former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and his journey to educate the population about the severity of climate change. Because of Guggenheim’s success with this film, the documentarians for //IT// chose to mock Guggenheim’s reputation as a documentarian by using a play on words of his two previous documentaries as the title of their own film. The word inconvenient is used to portray the idea that the film made by Guggenheim glossed over the uncomfortable part of the problem. It is uncomfortable to hear the truth, and the unrevealed truth behind Guggenheim’s film is that he had tens of millions of dollars of private money pumped into the charter school system. The narrators for //IT// made sure to point this out. It is convenient to believe that the corporately funded charter schools will fix every problem that we have in the field of education. It is inconvenient, and it means that we do not have an answer to our problem, if the corporately funded approach will not work. The main narrators of //IT// are Julie Cavanagh and Darren Marelli. Each of these narrators are in agreement of what their message is, but each portrays the message in a different way. Marelli seems more angry with the supporters of charter schools and the board members because they allow charter schools. Much of his speech is discussing his anger, and little deals with how public education can work. Cavanagh is just as angry, but she appeals more to viewers because of her inspirational story of public education working for her.

In //WS//, Guggenheim uses lighting to increase an emotional response from his audience. An example of this occurs when one of the parents is interviewed about the strains she feels as a parent who desires the best education available for her daughter, Bianca. When Guggenheim interviews her, she is questioned about her daughter's future and educational concerns while she is in front of a iron-barred window inside of a dark, creepy room. Right after that shot we see a panned out shot of the same room in which the mom and daughter are reviewing the day’s lessons. Differently this time, the room is bathed in warm light with highly polished floors. A lighting change such as this is employed to give the audience a sense of the doom and sadness that a child with no educational choice is forced to face every day. Guggenheim ropes his audience into the stories further by his usage of changing scenes. Consistently, the footage shown shuffles between interviews, archived footage, and action footage of the subjects. While the shuffling does not feel rushed or fast paced, the shuffling does allow the audience to remain engaged and interested, especially in the stories of the young children. By the end of the film, the audience is left begging for a faster shuffling of the scenes so that we can see whether the child has finally received a yes to the school of promise. //IT// tells their story mostly through archived footage. This leaves a viewer less as a participant and more as someone watching from the outside. With the exception of interviews with Cavanaugh, the audience does not have a hero to root for in //IT// like we do in //WS//, which has us rooting for the children. While the choice to use such elements may not have been intentional, the decisions made lead the audience to question the professionalism of //IT//. The footage shown, regardless of the validity of the message, comes across to the viewer as harsh, loud, and angry. In fact, the only portion of the film that portrays a positive look at public educators, comes through in interviews with Cavanaugh.

While most scenes of //WS// had only diagetic sound present, //WS// consistently created mood with its use of non-diagetic music at intentional times. For instance, when President George W. Bush is shown in archival footage in regards to No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the footage is accompanied by cowboy music, thus mocking him. The footage then merges to include NCLB co-author Senator Ted Kennedy, the music morphs to a patriotic, soothing, hopeful toon. This is a weapon that Guggenheim employs throughout his story to accentuate the meaning of his words. At times, the weapon leaves us screaming for a solution, such as when Guggenheim mixes both diagetic and non-diagetic sound at the end of the film during the lottery scene. The non-diagetic sound is suspenseful, eerie, and ominous. //IT// also uses both diagetic sounds mixed with non-diagetic music behind the narrator and the images presented. For example, when there is a scene shown of people protesting, it has the diagetic sounds of people yelling. This is used for the purpose of showing the anger of the people fighting for their public education. It is also used to make it more real. It is not merely a small problem you have heard about; it is now something that is effecting families and neighboorhoods across America. The non-diagetic sounds are in the form of music. It is the same music that is played behind both the voice of the narrator and the images with no sound. The fact that they chose to use the same music throughout the film requires the viewer to pay attention to the details of what is being shown and read the signs and graphs as they appear rather than focus on the music. It is there to move the film along and not be the center focus of attention.

**Graphics **
While these two documentary films oppose each other in the perspectives they offer of the educational crisis in this country and its potential solutions, they both frequently employ graphic strategies to bolster and express their positions. As might be expected, Guggenheim's highly produced //WS// features more refined graphics than the low-budget //IT//, but each provides ample material for analysis.

**Text**: Though it is sometimes easy to overlook something as seemingly straightforward as the font and text color chosen for a documentary, filmmakers must consider the effect such choices will have on the viewer. Given the serious subject matter and tone of these two documentaries, each one utilizes text that creates a sense of confidence--one that simply states, "these are the facts." Anthony is one of the students followed in //WS//, while Lydia is a parent interviewed in //IT//. As these clippings show, each filmmaker chose a text style that would be considered fairly traditional by most (if not all) viewers. It's important that their work is taken seriously, so a professional, unadorned text is utilized to support the credibility of those behind the film. Viewers would certainly be less likely to seriously consider the perspective of the film if loopy, childish text accompanied the interviews. Really, the only noticeable difference is that the text from //WS// is sans-serif, while the //IT// filmmakers chose a serif font. That distinction does not alter the effect each one has on the viewer; both portray a matter-of-fact stance that aligns with the purposes of the films. It is worth noting, however, that //IT// features several instances where the viewer sees nothing on the screen except text.

This example, from 18:35 of //IT//, is characteristic of the kind of whole-screen text used throughout the film. The filmmakers have retained the serif font but added red to highlight the words "Inconvenient Truth," playing off Guggenheim's highly popular climate change documentary. In addition to catching the eye, the coloring creates an effect that seems almost sinister, combining a touch of emotional appeal with its logical directness. Especially when contrasted with //WS//, there is a austere simplicity to these text frames that serves to support the credibility of //IT//'s message. The filmmakers seem to suggest that their position is so clearly correct that it doesn't need any dressing up with fancy editing or striking animation.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: 23px;">**Animation**: Guggenheim repeatedly uses animation sequences to illustrate the points being made in the film. The two clippings below are representative of the animation style seen throughout //WS//. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; line-height: 23px;"> <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: 23px;">These animation sequences affect the viewer in a variety of ways, but it is worth noting the particular style employed. Guggenheim certainly had access to the kind of budget that would allow him to use any type of animation he chose, so he clearly elected this style for a purpose. The sketches of the figures and buildings, though admittedly more sophisticated than a typical student's, evoke the kind of drawings that children might create. In this way, the filmmakers call to mind schoolchildren's behavior while addressing grave concerns about the education system. Doing so throughout the film ensures that the viewer keeps children at the fore of her mind, emphasizing the urgent need to address our education woes for the sake of the children. In addition to supporting the children-first mentality, the animated sequences also express a subtle idea that the filmmakers may not have intended. In an effort to represent pressing educational issues in clear, straightforward ways, they have dramatically oversimplified many aspects of education. As we see the first animation pictured above, we hear the words, "It should be simple. A teacher at a schoolhouse, filling her students with knowledge, and sending them on their way" (30:17). What Guggenheim fails to recognize is that educating kids is not simple, and suggesting that it is calls into question his credibility, undermines his purpose, and perpetuates society's belief that teachers have easy jobs.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: 23px;">**Maps**: Because they are addressing a problem of national scale, each of the documentaries uses maps to support it arguments. //WS// certainly uses them more often and perhaps more convincingly, and it is easy to tell which film had the larger budget. The first map shown below is from //WS;// the one below it is from //IT//. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%; line-height: 23px;"> <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;"> The first map (//WS//) represents the percentage of students proficient in reading. As you can see, the filmmakers have dramatically expressed the severity of these numbers by portraying the proficient readers as situated on a raised piece of land that ends in a straight drop-off. Not only does this representation polarize the data by splitting it into two categories--proficient and not proficient--but it also creates a sense of urgency. Even the proficient readers are at risk of falling off the cliff any minute! It's kind of hard to tell from this clip, but those are individual students holding up the percentage signs, which supports the filmmakers' point that very few students are proficient. Of course, we know that more than one student per state is proficient at reading, but even if they decided to show, say, 31 students to represent 31%, the effect just wouldn't be the same.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">The second map (//IT//) represents the SAT and ACT ranks of the five states without collective bargaining for teachers. It's clear from the clip that the //IT// filmmakers were working with a much smaller budget, but the simplicity actually serves their cause. The driving ethos behind //IT// is that their film represents the students, teachers, and parents who deal with the education system on a daily basis, and the austere graphics support that of-the-people feel they want to create.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">Version of Truth
<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">Documentary filmmakers create their films in order to provide viewers a particular perspective on an issue. Depending on the purpose of the film, that perspective could be from an insider and serve to expose what had previously been hidden, or it could be from an outsider and serve to elucidate what is too close to notice. There are, of course, multiple other perspectives that documentarians employ in their trade, but it is fundamental to understand that all documentaries are constructed with a purpose in mind. This means that, though the word documentary implies an unbiased, objective recording of reality, the filmmakers are continually making decisions about what footage or information they should include or exclude to serve their purpose.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">Viewing //IT// alongside //WS// yields some wonderful material for analyzing how filmmakers manipulate information in ways that support their own particular versions of truth. Without a doubt, the education system in our country needs improvement, and education reform has been a prominent political issue since //[|The Truman Report]//, issued way back in 1947. The publication of //[|A Nation at Risk]// in 1983 addressed the challenges facing the nation’s schools and, among other things, ushered in the era of standards-based education. With //[|No Child Left Behind]// and its twin sister //[|Race to the Top]//, we find accountability and testing at the core of the proposed solution. Clearly, the topic of educational reform is well-suited for debate, and these two documentaries provide great examples of how framing information affects how the viewer understands the problem.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">Charter Schools and the Role of the Expert
<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">//WS// wastes no time introducing us to [|Geoffrey Canada], a charismatic, Harvard-educated teacher who speaks eloquently about the educational challenges confronting our country. He comes across as a very likeable, intelligent guy—someone with whom you’d like to sit down and chat for a while. The filmmakers choose to withhold, however, the fact that Canada, while technically an educator, is currently president and CEO of [|Harlem Children’s Zone], a community center that offers educational support through [|Promise Academy Charter Schools]. However, a casual viewer of //WS//, due to its emotional intensity might actually make it through the entire film without really connecting Geoffrey Canada to charter schools.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">Conversely, //IT// is quick to point out the connection Canada has with charter schools, and the difference between the films is evident in the title that appears under Canada’s name graphic. The one on the left is from //WS//, the one on the right, //IT//. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">While WS features educational reform “celebrities” like [|Michelle Rhee] and [|Bill Gates], //IT// calls upon the expertise of everyday teachers, parents, and students. This separation between corporate reformers and regular people is emphasized by the //IT// filmmakers in order to support their argument that the charter school movement is simply a private sector, big business takeover of public education. The film’s multiple shots of protests and rallies serve to accentuate this division, creating a sense of civic unrest on the brink of revolt. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">media type="custom" key="20273874"

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">//WS//, however, bases the entire arc of its narrative on presenting charter schools as a kind of last hope for students whose circumstances—geographic or socioeconomic—are preventing them from achieving their full potentials. It traces the experiences of five individual students as they enter lotteries at different charter schools and hope to be among the lucky winners. All of the kids are polite and appealing, and the viewer can’t help pulling for each one. After all is said and done, one is accepted, one waitlisted (accepted eventually), and three aren’t selected. It is a very effective sequence of the film that affects viewers on a visceral level, leaving them thinking, “If there were just more charter schools…” <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">media type="custom" key="20274044"

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">That is, of course, the precise takeaway Guggenheim has constructed for his audience. //IT// tells a different story of charter schools through testimonials of parents of former students and data showing how student attrition connects to achievement reports. From stories of questionable discipline methods to instance of denied IEP services, //IT// paints the charter experience in a far different light. Taken individually, both films do a very effective job of presenting their respective viewpoints, but the most appealing version of truth is ultimately dependent on the viewer’s perspective. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">media type="custom" key="20274100"