Saturday 24 November 2018

Pre Production - CASE STUDY: DRIVEN - THE BILLY MONGER STORY

CASE STUDY: DRIVEN - THE BILLY MONGER STORY

A recent BBC 3 documentary came to my attention which was "DRIVEN - THE BILLY MONGER STORY". Not only was this a documentary about motorsport and someone who let nothing get in their way, but also one shot and filmed in a way very similar to what I was planning. This is perfect research going forward for my documentary.



The majority of documentaries that I have been researching, give us a flash forward to an important moment later on. Knowing this, it slightly threw me off when this one started with a background history of Billy growing up and his progression through the motorsport ladder. This was mostly formed of archive footage, of which a lot was professionally filmed by ITV4's content team. This background knowledge is very important as some viewers will not know Billy's story and this style of storytelling enables them to grasp a better understanding of him and his personality through this material. As motorsport is a niche subject they needed to try and show a more relatable side which is why they focussed on Billy. This research definitely made me think carefully about how I should start my documentary. I had been convinced that I should start with a flash-forward but after seeing this it did make me think of ways I could use flashbacks at the start. One way is me sitting in my Diary Room explaining my past, but I am not sure that this would engage the viewer enough. I also lack any high-quality material from 15 years ago, and therefore, even though this scene in the Billy Monger show is beautifully crafted, I don't think it is an idea I want to take forward and use in my project.



Something that this documentary did which was different to the majority that I have researched, is that the contributor directly addresses the camera on multiple occasions. There are similar shots for his sister, mum and dad which all recall past memories, much like my Diary Room sequences. Personally, I am not a fan of them looking directly at the camera as this breaks any sort of illusion that what is being said is spontaneous and natural. These scenes made me as a viewer feel uncomfortable because it felt they were speaking at me. I think that if you want a contributor to appear natural you should have them looking off to the side of the camera, towards a producer. Direct to camera speaking does have its positive aspects though, one of which is that it is very personal. The reason most filmmakers do not do this for interviews with contributors is that it breaks the feeling of reality and feels too scripted or pre-planned. Viewing this scene has not changed my opinion on how I could film my Diary Room sequences. Through my reference material and research, to get the directorial approach that I am going for, we want to shoot the contributors looking towards a producer, so the viewer is left "eavesdropping" on the conversation which feels much more natural. I get why they did this style in the Billy Monger documentary as they want the viewer to take note and evaluate themselves, but I personally feel these scenes would have had more of a positive impact on me if they were directed towards someone off camera.



The voiceover in this documentary really works well as it is done by Billy himself. In similar documentaries, like the Chris Hoy to Le Mans one I looked into, there is a Voice of God which creates a disconnect between the viewer and the main contributor. Even though Billy's voiceover lacks a little enthusiasm, it works much better than a VOG as we connect to him as a viewer so much more. This reinforces my choice of doing the voiceover myself in my documentary. I had contemplated a VOG, but from the reference material that I have seen, it never works as well as when the presenter/contributor does it themselves. Through my research I now know I want my documentary to be voiced over by me, but we will try and limit the amount of voiceover to avoid creating the impression that there is a presenter. The voiceover is in the script, but we know that what is actually said will change as we progress. We have also made sure to allocate time right at the end of our documentary for voiceover work.



The vast amount of actuality sequences enable us to connect with Billy in his documentary and we basically live his life throughout the film. This enables us to go deeper into his attitude to everything and we learn about his situation through things he does. Of course, some of the context is brought to us through voiceover and PTC, but a large part of it is through these sequences where he is just living his life. Watching this really helped me understand how I can bring a sense of uncertainty into my project. My script as written didn’t give the viewer the sense of "is it going to happen?" So, after watching this I have gone back to my script and changed it to create that uncertainty in actuality sequences. For example, I might get told by a trainer "You need to lift a 40kg weight otherwise you will not be strong enough to race". This scenario sets itself up for a succeed or fail moment later on. I need to have a few of these placed throughout the documentary so the viewer can engage with my challenge and see what I am doing to overcome them, rather than just simply being told.



As Billy is playing the role of the contributor, but also to an extent the presenter, it means that he floats between being very formal and very relaxed when being asked a question from the producer behind the camera. I like the fact that Billy does everything, including the voiceover, but it is clear that he was not given a lot of time to perfect the voiceovers. The PTC and actuality sequences are really well presented and Billy comes off very well in these, but in the voiceovers, he did seem to struggle. This is definitely a case of Billy not having much experience resulting in inconsistencies. I would have liked it as a viewer if the commentary engaged us as much as the rest of the show does. It is also worth noting that a lot of the PTC sequences are shot as either a CU or a UCU meaning we have a very close look at Billy's feelings. This bold shot choice leaves the viewer no choice but to connect with his emotions. This was done to great effect as it is one of the few documentaries I have ever watched that I feel like I could feel his pain along with him and his family. While our documentary is not covering an issue as deep as Billy's, the choice of shots is still very important. I will be choosing the shot that I think is right for each scene, but it will need some creativity and quick reactions from the crew to capture them correctly. If they see a moment of particular emotion I would expect them to zoom in and get a shot which gives more impact, rather than staying on a wide shot if that was planned. It is clear throughout all of my reference material that movement of the camera does not matter so much provided the right emotions are captured on screen.




Through each sequence, we are able to gain a deeper understanding of each of the 4 main contributors. (Mum, Dad, Sister and Billy) These miniature character profiles of each person allow the documentary to have further meaning than if it was just Billy by himself. I found myself particularly connected to Billy's mother as she showed a wide range of emotions through the documentary. When these are shown it heightens the drama of the project and gives the end result more meaning. This allowed me to re-think my script and decide to add more personal moments between myself and my family in my script. I want the viewer to understand why this is important to me and one of the best ways I can show that is through my parent's emotions. I have already added a scene with my Dad at Brands Hatch where we revisit the location of my first ever motor race and after watching this documentary I am tempted to add a scene where I ask my Mum questions about my challenge. These extra additions should allow the viewer to connect with my story on an even more personal level.

An interesting technique used throughout is the use of pauses after some of Billy's statements. At first, you may think this is bad editing but when you think about it, these are moments of silence for the viewer to reflect on what has been said and take in that information. As some of what Billy says is very powerful, you need those moments of silence to fully understand the situation and, without them, the effect could be lost in the rapid changes between scenes. This documentary has undoubtedly made me question my script more than any other I have watched. Its relation to mine is almost uncanny and I can learn so much from it. After realising the power that these moments of silence bring us, I know that I need to allow some time after specific scenes. As I am writing the script, I am unsure exactly what will be said, but I can have a very good guess at where these moments will occur. Once again, it requires thought from the camera operators to understand this and not cut the recording as soon as the question has been answered. As the main contributor, it also makes me realise that I need to leave gaps after each question to allow for that silence. As I am new to the world of interviewing, it would be easy for me to jump in with another question, but thankfully I have seen this which has enabled me to learn that vital piece of information.



The last big thing that I noticed about this documentary is its use of sound. They spent a lot of time in the edit to make sure that the music is appropriate and heightens the impact in each scene. I would assume they had an idea of the music for some scenes, like the triumphant moment when Billy gets a podium on his return to racing following his crash. Only in the edit can you truly visualise the video along with the music you had in mind. It is something that we have learned throughout the university, but of course, it is even more prominent now. Sound design is so important as it can turn a good film into a great one and so on. Once I am able to see the recorded footage I will be able to visualise what music I think would work. Then as a team, we can decide what we should go with. This is something that in the scripting process, I can write as simply "Music". But over time and as I get an idea of how each scene will work within the wider context of the film, I can then decide which tone of music I should use.

I am so happy the Billy Monger documentary aired while I was in the pre-production process for my project. There are so many areas of this documentary that I have learned from, it has helped me transform my script, along with great guidance from my tutors. When shooting our documentary, I will be sure to keep telling my crew about specific scenes in this documentary, which will be a great reference for what they should film and how they should do it. My only main gripe with the documentary is how the "Diary Room PTC" is shot. I think looking directly into the camera is powerful and allows the viewer no choice to look elsewhere, but I think these shots feel intrusive, and almost feel too personal which I think negatively effects the documentary. If they were looking off camera it would create a more raw or real feeling, rather than staring at the viewer which seems rather forced and different to the rest of the documentary. They are not terrible sequences, but after viewing them, I would personally change them to off-camera sequences, I think it would allow the viewer to feel less intrusive and less awkward. It was a little too intense, especially regarding the subject matter.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Production - Major Project Evaluation

Overall Process The creation of "Dream Chaser" has certainly been the hardest challenge of my life. I took on board the responsi...