Advertisement
At the Kansas City Star’s TV Barn blog, Aaron Barnhart examines MSNBC’s strategy of devoting as much as a third of their schedule to “documentary” programming. Barnhart takes issue with the channel’s use of the word “documentary” to encompass content as disparate as, on one hand, Witness to Jonestown (an original production of the newish MSNBC Films combining new interviews with ample footage from NBC’s archives) and Dear Zachary (which MSNBC Films acquired in partnership with Oscilloscope straight from the festival circuit); and on the other, the schlocky stuff that makes up the bulk of their “Doc Blocks,” like the Lockup series of Dateline-style exposes set inside various North American prisons, and the COPS knock-off Caught on Camera.
Amazingly, when Barnhart went to Michael Rubin, who programs all of this stuff for the network, and asked, “What’s the deal?” Rubin basically went on the defensive. Not only did he call Lockup specifically “a jewel,” but he insisted that MSNBC’s viewers make no distinctions between high-brow and low-blow non-fiction content. As he puts it:
“I work in a new world,” said Rubin, a veteran of network news going back to the “West 57″ show on CBS. “I look for everything my viewers are interested in. They’re as interested in the inside of a prison as much as they are interested in Dear Zachary or Supersize Me (the Morgan Spurlock film also acquired by MSNBC).
“They’re interested in going somewhere they can’t get to on their own, whether it’s inside a prison or the story of Dr. Bagby. No matter what film we do, the viewer is guaranteed to be an eyewitness. Our tastes span the full spectrum — and so does human interest.”
What I find interesting about this (and potentially dangerous) is that once the assumption is made that in the “new world,” COPS rip-offs are equivalent in the eyes of the audience to documentaries with loads of film festival acclaim –– ie: when what many of us consider “art” is invited to sit at the table with “trash” –– what’s to stop a “jewel” like Lockup from crossing over to the realm of art? And, of course, there’s the question we always, always come back to: what are we going to do about The Hills?!?
Kevin Buist
FLAME + CITRON Review
Christopher Campbell
Happy Halloween Links. Today in Film...
Brandon Harris
5 80s Literary Adaptations Worse Than...
Kevin Kelly
John Krasinski, Brief Interviews With...
Karina Longworth
SpoutBlog, Now Available in Book Form
Paul Moore
October 31, Karina’s Last Day
Lauren Wissot
Sasha Grey Interview
We’ve had a bit of trouble getting this episode to go through the iTunes feed, so we hope this re-post will fix the problem. The original post, with episode description and embedded player, is here.
filmcouch-114
This is, yet another (!), thought provoking post that I can’t let pass by. MSNBC is perhaps trying to change the meaning of “documentary” because (in my view) they are an audience driven, advertiser supported, commercial broadcaster. On the other hand, Cinema Eye Honors is also trying to change the meaning of “documentary” by emphasizing “non fiction filmmaking” and focusing on excellence in filmmaking craft. There may well be films that would be awarded a Cinema Eye Honor that could play MSNBC. But there would be few films in their “doc bloc” that would make the Cinema Eye short list. Honoring filmmakers for “excellence in the craft of non-fiction filmmaking” is the right thing to do, but it may have limited impact without building an audience for their work simultaneously. Can Cinema Eye take on MSNBC?
Bob Alexander (who sponsers A.J. Schnack’s fest coverage and seems to single handedly support his site) makes no bones about the bias of the Cinema Eye Honors. Schnack should only be so forthright and straight forward and make no excuses about it.
http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/archives/2008/12/dp30_man_on_wir.html
T. Holly, I’m confused. What do you consider to be the “bias” of the Cinema Eye Honors? And what does that post on Poland’s blog have to do with this discussion, other than that you similarly hijacked it in order to throw accusations at AJ Schnack?
Close-minded much?
I’m all for widening audience interest and access to documentaries but it seems like MSNBC Films is really watering down their own brand by lumping in the Caught on Camera and Lockup franchises with festival purchases.
This disagreement in the comments section above illustrates there’s no single definition or expectation for docs.
Hi T. Holly! I thought we were pretty much above board on the Cinema Eye thing. I didn’t say anthing we haven’t said elsewhere. But maybe we need to be more explicit. A good resolution for the New Year? Best wishes, all.
[...] Karina, responding to a Kansas City Star column by Aaron Barnhart, takes a look at MSNBC’s use of documentary as cheap off-hour programming and asks a useful question about [...]
I’d argue that audiences *do* make a distinction between well-made documentaries and exploitative schlock. This simply sounds like spin and a pretty transparent version of it, as well. But I also applaud the efforts of the Cinema Eye awards in educating the audience and promoting films that viewers might not encounter otherwise.
To follow up, I’d agree with Erin D that this is a bad strategy for MSNBC if they ever want to be taken seriously as a news network.
But what if the exploitative schlock is so well crafted? Under the heading, Goldstein’s Oscar Criteria, at Hollywood-Elsewhere (Karina gets mad if you plant the link) I pressed Glenn Kenny into service and asked, Ah Glenn, maybe you could go to the Cinema Eye Honors this year and lend a critic’s voice. (In my mind’s eye,) Cinema Eye became Bert Parks channeled through Sarah Palin this year, to wit ,”Another thing is the extraordinary craft in the film, particularly in the cinematography and editing, which creates this sense of fragility and beauty.” What? When you’re done shaking your head, heed the rally to “realize the movement” and lay claim to the genre’s “return to its roots” via a “Nonfiction New Wave.”
MSNBC is right. Apart from sex,violence is the only thing that sells well.
T. Holly wrote (both here and on Jeff Wells site, in a context that made no sense): “Cinema Eye became Bert Parks channeled through Sarah Palin this year.”
I don’t know what that means.
Claim your “space between truth and fiction, between documentary and narrative”, embrace “stylistic tool(s)… especially… animation and graphic design”, claim your award.
The problem isn’t what makes a good film or who votes. The problem is the categories: Debut Feature, Graphics and Animation, Cinematography, Editing, Production, Audience Choice Award, International Feature, Direction, Nonfiction Filmmaking. Someone needs to think it out better.
Wonder if Jennifer Venditti will vote this year, being that she’s a filmmaker.
http://www.cinemaeyeawards.com/awards/voters.html