Doctoring Docs? Say It Ain't So!

Now that we have a world where 're-enactments' are almost mandatory in historical documentaries, where does that leave us with regard to doctoring up other parts of the film? Is touching up a photo ok? Most purists, I'm sure, cringe at the sight of historical re-enactments and would never even think of changing something in a photo shot for the film. Unfortunately, most newcomers to the doc field wouldn't think twice and I think that's affecting even those filmmakers who have been in the biz for decades.

As I screened a recent project, a photo came across the screen that I remembered had been touched up for aesthetic purposes. No, it wasn't to make a blemish disappear - it was to make two PEOPLE disappear! The photo that appears in the film has three brothers standing together smiling for the camera. The original photo has FIVE people in the shot - with one person standing on either side of the brother standing in the middle so that the other 2 are on the outside of the group.

Now, does this breach documentary ethics? I'm not quite certain. Sure, it doesn't really effect the fact that the three brothers were actually together for the shot, but does portraying this doctored shot as a photograph of actual events undermine the factual ideals of documentary film?

I'll have to mull this one over. It's that 'slippery slope' I worry about...

Report From The Censorship Front

I've never worked on lewd programming in my life. In fact, I've always worked on educational or public affairs programming that sought to provide informative yet entertaining fare to the TV viewing audience at large. I never figured that my current project would send PBS censors reeling and have us ducking for cover. Then again, this project started long before the FCC handed down its ruling that increased fines for 'objectionable material' to the point where small town affiliates can be bankrupted by a few harmless scenes in a documentary film.

So much for the classic documentary film concept of capturing life as it happens. "In the moment" if you will.

My current project is a film exploring the many different aspects of love in our lives today. As part of the program, the producers filmed a story of a young Texas couple about to get married. Within the segment, we shot a bachelorette dinner which included some very poignant and heartfelt conversations. For fun, the girls decorated the bride-to-be with a veil and lei strewn with little pink plastic penises. A gag. No harm done, right?

WRONG!

Feedback from PBS affiliates have sent the production unit scurrying. Today I am living through an edit like no other: censoring a documentary film for 'objectionable material'. That's right, we're pixelating about 40 seconds of shots that include the veil, lei, and a centerpiece-like candlestick that holds another plastic penis instead of a wax candle. The producers were so absorbed in the content of the discussion and the reactions it caused that nobody noticed all the immaterial props. Apparently, the FCC-cowed censors are more interested in the window dressing than the content.

Amazing!

This is not a children's program, nor was it ever intended to be. Are we Americans so obsessed with sex that the mere sight of a miniature plastic penis on TV will cause mass hysteria? The women in the program are from the great state of Texas. You think Texas can handle a little ol' plastic penis in the background of a serious and intelligent program? I'm sure they can. How about Iowa? Maybe. Maybe not.

Sadly, we also had to bleep out George C. Scott's classic Patton speech on letting the other "poor, dumb bastards die for their country". Both Georges must be rolling in their graves on that one.

Funny, we didn't have to bleep out how much General Patton loved war. Isn't war just a little bit more dangerous for our children than a miniature plastic penis? I would say so.

Unless, of course, the little toy buggers pose a choking hazard...

FREEZE BRAIN!

When my son eats ice cream too fast, these are the two words he shouts out in pain. Sometimes I think I should shout "FREEZE BRAIN!" when I have too many tempting options before me and too little time to do any single one. Take writing this blog for example. After a steady stream of postings, this is the first item for October. Why the delay? Many things contributed to the lag: work (the ol' day job), film research (on no less than 3 projects), and family (of course).

But now I'm back and using this time to map out what's next. I've done a rough outline for a screenplay that is hanging fire with an online writing group. I have one unfunded documentary in the works with one interview set up for early November. I have one doc project actively being pitched and another in the early stages of research. Choices, choices.

It seems whenever I get going on my dramatic screenplays, a bolt of lightning strikes me about some doc project. Why IS that? Is this some subconscious means of diverting attention from the screenplay? Is it procrastination? Is it simply a lack of focus and resolve on my part? I don't know, but the ideas that hit me while I'm not thinking of the other projects are always top notch. Why complain?

But I digress. So the Freeze Brain concept has me in its grasp. I have so many wonderful projects to attack at once, but I know working on one too long delays the forward motion of the others. God, I wish I had money to bring on an assistant to work on these other research ideas so I can finish one first. Hmm. Maybe a college intern? Not a bad idea.

OK. That's enough for now. I've gotta get back to work.