opposite of cinema verite?

L

Lithos

Active member
I need some help here. I thought "direct cinema" (which professes to be more observational) was the opposite of "cinema verite". But I've seen the 2 terms used interchangably to describe a more realistic form of documentary. To me the definitions that i see for "cinema verite" are very vague. Can somebody help me by telling what kind of documentary wouldn't be "cinema verite". Examples would be great too.

Thanks,

-Lithos
 
Actually cinema verite is not a form of documentary, it is a movie making genre that borrows documentary film technics. Verite which comes from the french word Truth, put forth the idea that nothing should be fake, lighting should be natural, locations real, not sets, sounds and sound effects, etc... Which is basically what all documentary director have to deal with... Purist even insist that the characters of the film be none -actors... Direct Cinema is an extension of cinema verite, it is a form of cinema where even the crew must be hidden from its subjects as much as possible as to not alter a performances.
 
The two terms are actually VERY close in definition. Verite' and Direct Cinema' both believe in very un-obtrusive camera crew and shots that just flow together like a documentary would. Basically, both styles attempt to capture "real-life" actions and reactions without too much visual tinkering by the filmmakers.

The films of these types still have a story and characters, actors, etc. Although its very possible that the actors are non-actors with memorized lines to help aid in the natural "captured emotion" feel and not result in such polished performances.

The distinction between the two has to do with the filmmakers focus. The Verite' director, might focus on the very small almost seemingly mundane actions to help interpret the actors internal condition. The Direct-Cinema filmmaker might be less obtrusive and invisible to allow the action to unfold in front of the camera and focus on the exterior of an individual (s), to better help us, the audience develop our own critique of the recorded action.

And thank you. Its been a few years since I received my film degree. It feels nice to be able to dust off some of what I learned and make use of it.
 
thanks guys...very helpful.

the terms are used though with regards to documentary (ie the Maysle brothers). i guess though that the terms are not strictly documentary terms?
 
from wikipedia.

"It is useful to distinguish Direct Cinema from Cinema Verité. Typically, film historians have characterized the Direct Cinema movement as a North-American version of the Cinema Verité movement, an idea that crystallized in France with Jean Rouch's Chronicle of a Summer (1961). Cinema Verité uses the power of the camera to provoke and reveal. Direct Cinema, on the other hand, is more strictly observational. It relies on an agreement among the filmmaker, subjects, and audience to act as if the presence of the camera does not (substantially) alter the recorded event. In Direct Cinema, the filmmaker aims to be a "fly-on-the-wall" (the originators hated this term) capturing life as it unfolds, although such claims of non-intervention have been severely criticized."
__________________

although less intrusive, direct cinema (or ANY other camera presence) will change the nature of the subjects, their actions, their words, etc.... its important when doing a documentary to have ample time to spend with your subjects, as to get them at least relatively comfortable with your camera and gear.

(unless its a hidden camera show!! HAHAHAHHAHAHA!!!!HHAHAHAHA JOKES ON THEM!!!!!!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top