Documentary Comparison

Nanook of the North is known as being the first documentary, making it significant in the evolution of the media. During the documentary, director Robert J. Flaherty follows Nanook, an Inuit man, and his family as they go about daily life. The documentary is in an observatory style as the director barely interacts with the people and simply allows them to go about their days. It also has elements of participatory mode as the director occasionally stages scenes to suit the frame. Nanook and the Innuits are intrigued by the film making technologies as, in their life styles, this technology is alien to them. Due to the limitations of film making tools in 1922, Flaherty had to use black and white footage in a 4:3 aspect ratio which dates the project but also adds to the experience as this style reflects the life style of the indigenous Inuit people who have no access to updated society. This documentary would have been played in front of a large audience in a dark film and was a revolutionary insight into the lives of others. Watching content like this as a group taints the experience as it forms a sense of togetherness in the experience that is moderately hard to find elsewhere.

Nanook of the North is particularly remarkable as Flaherty had to film it twice due to the initial footage being destroyed accidentally when he returned home to edit it. Furthermore, the film itself consists of atmospheric background music to support the current mood in frame along with black and white footage that would occasionally display text to describe to the audience what was happening. Back at this point, synchronized sound was a dream and the audience would take longer to process the information. This was because they had not been presented forms of media like this before whereas now we process shots far quicker as we are proficient in viewing media because we do it in our everyday lives.

My major criticism of Nanook of the North, as a 21st century viewer, is the fact that each shot lingers for way too long and the overall documentary would’ve been more engaging if it picked up the pace. Shots that would take over 10 seconds could often be whittled down and still display the same point. This silent film is designed to be melancholic and a reflection of the life and challenges of a people who many don’t know too much about. This story is perfectly told by Flaherty as he spent a lot of time, 16 months, with this indigenous family and really connected with their society to tell their tale in truth. Sadly, Nanook died shortly after the film was made so there is a level of tragedy that haunts the final documentary. To a western audience, Nanook of the North is eye opening and insightful, with various establishing shots and close ups on Nanook and his family to present a connection between them and the audience.

On the other hand, Time is a 2020 film that adopts the same black and white, occasional 4:3 aspect ratio style but for a majorly different affect. This tells the story of a woman whose husband was locked in prison for 60 years following a bank robbery. She too was imprisoned but only spent 3 years there and now tells her story of life without her husband. This is an intriguing theme for director Garrett Bradley to explore as it hinges on moral justice and emotional trauma. This documentary is particularly impactful as it follows an African American’s experience with this issue, leaning closer to her emotional trouble and commitment to family rather than lingering on the crime that was committed. The black and white and switches in aspect ratio continue to tell her story due to their unconventional use whereas Nanook of the North had to work with ‘primitive’ film making techniques to be made.