Pre Production - Research Into Presenters of Autobiographical Documentaries

In this blog, I am going to further my knowledge of the presenters who create autobiographical documentaries and go on a journey of some sort. I started by looking at Stacey Dooley Investigates: Shot by my neighbour. This is an episode from a larger series in which Stacey looks into a subject, that may be somewhat taboo or obscure, and make the general public aware of this issue. Like a lot of the documentaries I have studied, it is aimed at a younger audience. It is broadcast on BBC Three which has a target demographic of 16-35. This is useful as this demographic is who I am aiming my documentary towards.

While Stacey does start the documentary with a voiceover, we quickly see her on screen doing a PTC. This helps the viewer understand the topic matter before they get to know the presenter. However, most of Stacey's documentaries are aimed at a specific audience as we mentioned, so many people would have already known her before the documentary started, hence we do not need a large introduction for the presenter. This will be a little different for me as I have not made many presenter-led pieces before so I may need to introduce myself a little more than Stacey so that the audience is aware of who I am and what I am about. As I have seen in the large majority of my research, she also addresses the person behind the camera, most likely the producer, instead of talking to the camera. This feels much more authentic and less staged. I had already made my mind up, that I would address the producer rather than the camera because I feel it enables the viewer to see more of the story. When you address the camera it feels like the whole story has been manufactured and planned. On our various test shots, we have seen that addressing the camera did not work and felt like it was being forced, which would be hard to control throughout.

The use of General View shots to show the movement of time is more relevant to my understanding of the role of director rather than my role as a presenter. When talking about a topic it may be hard to find super-relevant footage to show. Showing a town centre is a common way of moving time along and allowing the presenter to do a voiceover, filling the viewer in on information that may have been missed. This is something I feel I had struggled with in previous projects, as I never seemed to have enough footage to use when a voice over was needed. Sometimes that footage does need to be relevant to the subject being spoken about, but sometimes just a GV of the relevant city can help move the story along. I have included this in my research, shared with my team, so that we make sure to capture similar footage, even if it not used.

Facial expressions seem to be something that makes interview scenes particularly powerful in presenter-led documentaries. When you see an emotion in the presenter, you are brought into the story by them and you start to understand them better. This is a way for presenters to share feelings with viewers without saying anything. It has been shown that in many circumstances, silence is more powerful than noise so a simple gesture can evoke emotional response in the viewer. This is something I may struggle with, especially right away. It may be hard to read my emotions in certain scenes and I need to be able to share my feelings with the viewer, otherwise a potentially strong element of the story will be lost. One way I may be able to overcome this issue is by doing extra test shoots and reviewing the footage to see what happens when I speak naturally. This will allow me to learn from my mistakes and improve as a presenter, and hopefully show the person I really am. 

Something I disliked in Stacey Dooley Investigates was the number of times we saw the presenter walking on screen. A lot of the shots used to transition scenes were done by the presenter aimlessly walking around. I personally do not think this is a very good way to transition and it got very repetitive after the first couple of times. While walking between scenes can be a great way of moving the story along, it happened far too often in this documentary. It also wasted time we may have been able to spend bonding with the characters she was meeting. They could have used an L Cut here and instead of her walking, we could see her meeting up with the next group of people, giving them more time on screen. Once again, as a presenter, you are told where to walk and what to do, but as a director, I see this approach as slightly lazy. They are clearly planned shots trying to fill a gap, but they happen too frequently and it becomes apparent that this is their main, possibly only, way of moving the story along outside interviews. The voiceover on scenes like this do work well, as it gives the viewer information they may not have, but I personally feel they should have tried to be a little more creative when transitioning between scenes.

I feel Stacey always handles the interviews she does really well. She always tries to find common ground with the interviewee, even if they are on the opposing side. This enables her to speak her mind and ask the questions that she really wants to. By trying to have an emotional connection between herself and the interviewee, it allows them to open up and show their side of the story. This is a slightly different tactic to Louis Theroux for example, as he goes in with a very blunt question and almost tries to trigger a response from the interviewee. Both are effective, but I think I can learn more from Stacey as, in my documentary, the issue is not one of opposing or controversial views so I won't be speaking to people on differing sides of an issue. I need to have that connection with the interviewee to enable me to get the best out of them and help me relax into a role relatively new to me.

As the majority of interviews are clearly set up before the Stacey Dooley documentary starts filming, it allows her as the presenter to have prior knowledge of the subject matter and personal issues before she asks questions. This enables her to immediately connect and understand the tone for each question. For example, she speaks slightly differently towards the good people than the bad, whereas Louis Theroux speaks to everyone the same, which also has its benefits. However, having prior knowledge of your interviewee will be vital for myself as a presenter as it will allow me to be more confident when asking questions. As I am relatively new to presenting, that will be a massive boost for me, because I need to be comfortable in that role.

Something I admire about Stacey is her commitment to the story and how she puts herself into potentially risky situations to get the best and most honest version of the story possible. The whole documentary was leading up to an interview which had been cancelled multiple times throughout the film, so we started to wonder if it was ever going to happen. But she is put into the back of a van and taken to a discreet location to do the interview. This shows the big personal risk she is willing to take to share the story. This shows how important the story is to her personally. I admire that dedication to telling the story. While my documentary does not feature anything as risky as what Stacey did, it shows me that, as a presenter, you need to be emotionally connected to the issue to demonstrate its importance to the viewer. I hope this will show in my documentary as I have a massive passion for motorsport and if I conduct myself like I do in the rest of my life, I hope that passion will shine through.

The ending in Stacey Dooley Investigates is somewhat weaker than I would have expected. The Voiceover provides a strong message but the final piece to camera feels slightly out of place. It ends on a cliffhanger which does enable the documentary to have the "watercooler" effect and get people speaking about it. However, from the presenter's point of view, I feel like I would want to have a more meaningful ending than a slightly dull PTC which resulted in a slightly confusing and not very hard-hitting conclusion. This shows me that as a presenter the ending is probably one of the most important parts. I am developing some ideas about possible thought-provoking endings which I hope will trigger an emotional response from me after the race is complete. Overall, I feel the ending should be powerful and leave you either with questions or a specific conclusion. The problem with the Stacey Dooley documentary is that it didn't really do either very well.

DRIFT QUEEN
The second documentary I looked at was Episode 1 of "Drift Queen" Created by Red Bull Media House. This documentary is relevant to our subject matter of motorsport which allowed me to strike some greater similarities than in Stacey Dooley's series. The general idea of the documentary is to follow the presenter (Becky) on her journey into racing drift cars. We get shown her history of racing as a child along with chats with her father which help cement the story. I will mostly be looking at this episode from the view of learning more about presenting. However, at the same time, I want to understand more about how they structured the narrative.

The documentary starts off with a voiceover by Becky introducing the story and her history and experiences with the sport. She also highlights what the aims of the documentary are at the very start. This enables the viewers to engage with the story and allows them to understand the point of the documentary. I think this opening scene allows us to know the presenter right away. We start to form an opinion of her as she opens up about her experiences. I definitely learned that in my script I need to go further into detail about what is going to happen in my documentary. In my original draft of the script, I did not allow enough explanation which could easily lead viewers to be confused as to what the film was all about. Through understanding this I have adjusted the script to include more information in the introduction. As a presenter/contributor this will be vital in enabling the viewer to connect with me and actually care about the story I am trying to tell.

My problem with the Drift Queen opening voiceover, however, is it is delivered in a very unnatural way and seems rather forced which left me as a viewer slightly bewildered and gave me the wrong impression of her as a presenter. The voiceover was not rushed but it seemed almost like she was shouting at us. It is forced upon the viewer rather than engaging the viewer in the story. The voiceover still gives us context to help move the story along, but the delivery was off-putting, even when watching for a second and third time. This is a great lesson for me as a presenter. The tone of the documentary needs to fit the voiceover that is produced after all the filming is complete. At first, I did not feel a connection with Becky as the opening voiceover was so bad, but as the story evolves, it allows us into her life and we make that connection with her. This is an important lesson as people could form their opinion in the opening minute and get the wrong impression. I will work hard with the team to ensure the tone is consistent throughout which will enable the viewer to be emotionally invested in the story and me from the very beginning.

While the opening voiceover has a lot that could be improved on, the first piece to the camera we see is much better and allows us to start to see the real personality. She does not directly address the camera in this sequence, but I know from her previous work, as a YouTube content creator, that she normally does. However, this is understandable in this scene, as she is driving. The documentary definitely could have taken two approaches. It could have not acknowledged the camera (like we are doing) or it could directly address the camera enabling the viewer to feel like they are more involved in the creation. The reason that I feel this works well for DRIFT QUEEN is that the series omits a lot of the personal side of the story and we are not as emotionally invested in Becky as I am hoping to be in my documentary. Therefore, as we do not delve far into Becky's life, we are invited into the discussion, not through questions posed, but rather through being directly told information and then deciding if we agree or not. The reason I want to differ my route and filmic style and presentation is that our story is more about my story and my dreams rather than the event itself. DRIFT QUEEN focuses more on the action and less on the personal story and uses its direct PTC’s to try and involve us. I want to create less of a forced connection between the viewer and the presenter, and one that develops as the presenter does on screen.

I was not a fan of the consistent blatantly staged sequences. I agree that it enables the film to be more stylistic and include some more unique angles, but not letting a story play out naturally dented its authenticity. They keep trying to build up this emotional connection between the viewer and the presenter and then detract from it in other ways. The planned and overtly staged interviews meant that we did not see the real Becky. The moment with her father is probably the most natural, it does a good job at trying to pull on the heartstrings of the viewer and show a purpose of the story, but it still felt too staged. This is a great lesson for myself as the presenter because I need to be able to open up to the camera in a natural way. Although I need to stay on track with the story, the viewer should be able to connect with me and the story better if it is pieced together through memories, rather than creating artificial situations.

For me, some of the strongest moments of Becky's presenting comes when she is directing herself towards the camera, by herself. This is when we open up to her and understand her a little more. While voiceover and staged interviews show a rather PR/Robotic side, when it is just her and the camera, we see her personality. I am not sure if this is because she is a novice at presenting or whether she does not feel in her comfort zone when around others. Her personality comes alive when she is alone on screen. This scene is also relevant to our documentary, as her pieces to camera are similar to our "diary room" sequences where I open up about my past and engage the viewer with our story. While they will be presented to the viewer in a stylistically different way, they get the same point across. I think this shows me as a presenter that I need to know myself and how it is best to capture my personality and emotions on screen. Speaking directly to a camera would be something I may struggle with as I am inexperienced. However, if it is shot like a chat, it will enable me to be in my conform zone a little more, which will allow the stories to be more authentic and naturally delivered on camera.

What slightly confuses me about the Drift Queen documentary was that the simple visuals (a piece to camera on a tripod in her room) are mixed with highly cinematic clips which seem like a rather sharp contrast. As a viewer, I was left confused as it went from lots of movement and very clever cinematography to some basic shots very quickly. I know you need a mixture of both in any documentary, but the way they are placed makes it seem like they had planned for the PTC's to be shot differently, as they are very basic. If they are meant to be a "dear diary", then editing effects such as classic tape layovers and some fake grain would at least allow the viewer to distinguish between the story moving forward and the recap of micro-moments throughout. From the role of a presenter, however, this scene is well delivered and the storytelling is clear. I can learn from Becky's natural delivery to the camera (in this scene) I know I will need to practice a lot before we start filming to ensure that I am fully "out of my shell" and telling my stories in the best possible way. This does not mean rehearsing stories, but working on my delivery so that the PTC's actually have weight and improve the story. Thinking about scenarios and saying the lines to myself and understanding different ways they can be delivered will help achieve the tone we are trying to create.

When Becky is alone speaking to the camera she has a great on-screen presence. I think the whole problem with this series is it is all "over-scripted". This enables no freedom within the story and makes the story and journey of the presenter worthless when the story is decided before the event starts. I don't think the issue in this documentary lies with the presenter, rather the scriptwriter and director which puts a huge emphasis on a strict order of events. I still enjoyed this series as a motorsport fan, but looking at it analytically, I was disappointed as it made so many rookie errors. Becky as a presenter turns into someone we do connect to, but not as much I would have liked. I think this is restricted by a very tight script which was not deviated from. I think the documentary could have been shot in a similar way but I would have liked the team to have let Becky show her character through more personal subjects, such as why she stopped competing in the first place?, what was her dads feeling towards her new passion?, why is she doing this now? Even touching on these subjects would have allowed for a better performance from Becky and a more personal story. I think if I allow myself to open up to the camera and share my stories, it will give the story more meaning. This is the whole reason for us including the "diary room" sequences in our documentary, but after watching this, I feel we should do even more recounting memories scenes, possibly some on location as well. These stories are the reason why the end goal has importance, so we want as many as possible!

Researching these two documentaries has allowed me to learn a lot about how to conduct myself and also shown me how I need to ensure natural stories come out rather than through scripted moments. These documentaries have also helped me understand how my roles as director and writer will affect my performance as a presenter. This knowledge will enable me to write a better script and ensure the final production is the story it deserves to be.