Styles, Philisophies and Genres

Styles and genres do not only apply to filmography, but photography, games design, etc. We will look at this from a filmmaking perspective, but the same theory applies to many areas. Some have specific styles or genres within respective areas, such as platform games, 8-bit, stills portraiture, etc., but there's considerable overlap.

Style vs Genre

A film’s style refers to the techniques a director uses to create a movie (or entertainment in general), and it can include themes, sound, dialogue, cinematography and lighting. A film’s genre, on the other hand, is a definitive category based on its narrative elements. Filmmakers can structure their stories to the framework of a genre by including familiar patterns, themes, motifs and conventions. A motif is a recurring subject, theme, idea, etc., especially in a literary, artistic, or musical work. It can relate to the theme or be the dominant or central idea itself. Concepts like betrayal and forgiveness can be motifs, for example, but so can particular images and sounds, such as trees or bells. The term convention refers to the commonly occurring elements within a certain genre of film. These genre conventions can refer to characters, props, themes, plot lines and much more. Conventions are what make a type of film easily recognisable and define it as a particular genre.

The key distinction between these terms is that identifying the film style involves analysing production techniques, while identifying the film genre involves analysing narrative elements. There isn’t a direct relationship between these terms, though movies of some genres may have more common styles directors use.

When you watch a film, you might notice its characters, actions, and visuals have a common theme. These combined elements can form the film's style or determine its genre. Researching the different styles and genres producers use in films can help you successfully visualise your story and connect with your audience. 

What is a philosophy? Philosophical movements

Styles and genres affect the type of theme, but philosophy is the underlying nature of the narrative. Philosophy of film, traditionally concerns itself with the reflective study of the nature of film, aiming to spell out what film is, whether it is an art, how it differs from other arts, and so on.  The same philosophical movements apply to many types of photography, too.

Let’s delve deeper into each of these categories (links are left in for a deeper exploration of the source material):

1. Absurdism: Absurdism in film is often characterized by narratives or situations that are seemingly pointless or without logical sense, reflecting the philosophy’s assertion of life’s inherent meaninglessness9. It’s about the use of humour, nonsense, and the representation of purposeless actions. In photography, absurdism might be reflected in images that challenge our expectations or that juxtapose incongruous elements. Absurdism in film and photography often involves creating content that confronts the viewer with a simple philosophical truth: that nothing has any meaning and everything can be deconstructed and reduced down to the point where its base elements appear to have no connection at all. A notable filmmaker who employs absurdism is Yorgos Lanthimos.

2. Existentialism: Existentialism in film often deals with questions about the purpose of life, personal freedom, and the struggle of individuals to exist and find meaning in a seemingly indifferent universe. In photography, existentialism might be reflected in images that capture the human condition or individual emotions. Existentialism in film and photography emphasises the individual, the subjective, the irrational, the imaginative, the personal, the emotional, and the visionary. It often explores themes of freedom, responsibility, and the meaning of life. Filmmakers like Stanley Kubrick, Francis Ford Coppola, and the Coen brothers have explored existential themes in their works.

3. Modernism: Modernism in film and photography marked a significant aesthetic change in photographic output as well as a shift in the way in which photography was produced, utilized, and appreciated. It encompassed trends in the medium from the early 1900s through to the 1960s. Artists like Alfred Stieglitz and Paul Strand were key figures in this movement.

4. Nihilism: Nihilism in film and photography often involves creating content that reflects the philosophy that life is meaningless. Television shows such as Bojack Horseman and films from the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) such as Spiderman: Homecoming, often have a noticeable trend of nihilistic narratives and characters. 

5. Photorealism: Photorealism in film and photography involves the realistic recreation of an image through another medium, often aiming to recreate the look and feel of a photograph. Artists like Richard Estes and Joe Coleman are known for their work in this style.

6. Postmodernism: Postmodernism in film and photography often involves creating content that rejects long-held beliefs regarding objective reality, value systems, human nature, and social progress. It is founded on the idea that nothing is new in art - that everything is recycled.  In cinema, Postmodernism brought with it darker kinds of films that viewed the world with a hint of detached irony. Postmodern movies aim to subvert highly-regarded expectations, which can be in the form of blending genres or messing with the narrative nature of a film. Postmodernism in film and photography often involves a critique of the idea that there are objective truths. It is characterised by a departure from the language and constraints of traditional art, such as painting. Filmmakers like David Lynch and Quentin Tarantino are known for their postmodernist works.

7. Realism: Realism in film and photography involves creating content that represents a clear reflection of the real world. It often focuses on everyday people, settings, and situations.

8. Romanticism: Romanticism in film and photography often involves content that emphasizes individualism, emotion, nature, and even political ideologies. It often portrays human subjects as they really existed in all their flaws, suffering, and imperfections.

9. Stoicism: Stoicism in film and photography often involves narratives and characters that endure discomfort or hardship while remaining calm, even-keeled, showing no emotion, and without complaint.

10. Surrealism: Surrealism in film and photography often involves creating content that explores the subconscious through imagery and symbolism. It often uses shocking imagery that jolts the viewer. Filmmakers like Luis Buñuel and David Lynch are known for their surrealist works.

Common Genres

A film's genre is a definitive category based on its narrative elements. Filmmakers can structure their stories to the framework of a genre by including familiar patterns, themes, motifs and conventions. The narrative is typically the deciding factor in categorizing a film into a genre. You can discover a film's genre by analyzing the story's setting, characters and representative content, such as storylines and themes. Typically, films within the same genre have similar moods and story elements.

You can also combine genres to create a subgenre that allows a film to be compatible with multiple. Genres and subgenres can change over time, and they characterize each other through their influence over distinct elements in a film. The combinations are seemingly endless, and there still are blends of genres that have yet to be discovered.

Common Styles

A film's style refers to the techniques a director uses to create a movie, and it can include themes, sound, dialogue, cinematography and lighting. All the aspects of production that provide value to the film and help determine how the audience perceives it goes into its style. You often can credit the film's style as a director's way to reflect the narrative or communicate a mood. They can guide the audience to notice important elements in the story and affect the way viewers experience the film. Common film styles rely on similar techniques, which can help you identify the style.

Many films follow at least one film style, and several are a combination of styles a director creates. Each style defines how the story's told to the viewer to make them feel a certain way. Here are the main film styles:

Within the general styles listed above, some of these have further classifications.

Poetic

First seen in the 1920s, poetic documentaries are very much what they sound like. They focus on experiences, images, and showing the audience the world through different eyes. Abstract and loose with narrative, the poetic sub-genre can be very unconventional and experimental in form and content. The ultimate goal is to create a feeling rather than a truth.

For filmmakers, this approach offers a valuable lesson in experimenting with all the elements of documentary filmmaking by finding creative compositions, challenging juxtapositions, and different forms of cinematic storytelling. A modern example of this would be Terrence Malick’s Voyage of Time, consisting of tons of ambiguous, poetic, abstract imagery. While there is some narration throughout the film, I would still consider the bulk of it – poetic.

Some examples of poetic documentaries include:

• Coal Face (1935) — Dir. Alberto Cavalcanti

• Fata Morgana (1971) — Dir. Werner Herzog

• Tongues Untied (1989) — Dir. Marlon Riggs

• Welt Spiegel Kino (2005) — Dir. Gustav Deutsch

Expository Documentaries

Expository documentaries are probably closest to what most people consider “documentaries.” In sharp contrast to poetic, expository documentaries aim to inform and/or persuade — often through omnipresent “Voice of God” narration devoid of ambiguous or poetic rhetoric. This model includes the familiar Ken Burns and television (A&E, History Channel, etc.) styles.

Those looking for the most direct form of documentary storytelling should explore the straightforward expository style. It is one of the best ways to share a message or information. If I had to compare this style with one type of modern genre or style, it would be the video essay. So think about something like Nerdwriter that covers a specific topic with exciting visuals and straightforward narration that makes points towards their argument.

A good example of a modern expository documentary film is Room 237. While not providing any talking headshots of the interviewees, we hear their voices as they discuss at length why they believe what they believe, providing the exposition and story to the audience. 

Some examples of expository documentaries include:

• The Plow That Broke the Plains (1936) — Dir. Pare Lorentz

• City of Gold (1957) — Dir. Colin Low and Wolf Koenig

• Waiting for Fidel (1974) — Dir. Michael Rubbo

• March of the Penguins (2005) — Dir. Luc Jacquet

Observational Documentaries (Cinéma Vérité)

Observational documentaries aim to observe the world around them. Originating in the 1960s alongside advances in portable film equipment, the Cinéma Vérité-style is much less pointed than the expository approach.  Cinéma Vérité's translation is 'truthful cinema'

Observational documentaries attempt to give voice to all sides of an issue by offering audiences firsthand access to some of the subject’s most important (and often private) moments. The observational style has been very influential over the years, and filmmakers often use it in other film genres to create a sense of realness and truth. One of the most famous examples of this is Harlan County, USA, directed by Barbara Kopple.

In terms of observational documentaries being a product of “cinema verité,” this is the best example I can think of. It’s raw, authentic, and the storytelling is immaculate as Kopple follows her subjects around with an objective view with a handheld approach and an empathetic lens. If you’re into this style of filmmaking, be sure you have a telephoto lens, as following the action and being ready at a moment’s notice to capture what’s happening is the key to making a good observational-style documentary.

One filmmaker has only made observational documentaries throughout his career, and he happens to make a film almost every year. His name is Fred Wiseman, and he might be my favorite filmmaker. Take, for example, his film, Boxing Gym, which is just that – a documentary of one boxing gym and all the people that come through it. You hear people tell stories and express doubts, fears, and failures, and you’re next to them for the whole ride.

The best way I can describe his films is “fly on the wall.” It’s not so much any one person’s point of view as it is an omniscient perspective, allowing the viewers to sit on the outside watching in. By doing this, the audience can come to conclusions and make decisions independently, forming narratives for themselves and leaving the film with only the meaning they understood.

Some examples of observational documentaries include:

• Crisis: Behind a Presidential Commitment (1963) — Dir. Robert Drew

• Salesman (1969) — Dir. Albert Maysles, David Maysles, and Charlotte Zwerin

• Hoop Dreams (1994) — Dir. Steve James

• The Monastery: Mr. Vig and the Nun (2006) — Dir. Pernille Rose Grønkjær

Participatory  Documentaries (aka interactive documentary)

Participatory documentaries include the filmmaker within the narrative. This inclusion can be as minor as a filmmaker using their voice to prod their subjects with questions or cues from behind the camera—or as major as a filmmaker directly influencing the actions of the narrative. In the example below, Michael Moore is directly influencing how his subjects react to his questions and, therefore, influencing the overall narrative of the film in a way I would label as participatory. But Michael Moore is a particularly complicated filmmaker.

There’s some debate in the documentary community as to just how much filmmaker participation it takes to earn a documentary the label of “participatory.” Some argue that, due to their very nature, all documentaries are participatory. Regardless, this style might be one of the most natural for those starting off. Louis Theroux has defined this genre (and reflexitive) with his involved, participatory style of documentary making. He regularly appears in scenes, conducting interviews, participating in events, etc. 

A modern example of this would be Free Solo. The directors, Jimmy Chin and Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi, often engage with the subject and give their thoughts and influence to the story. It’s a wonderfully insane look at how the filmmaker can now be so involved with the issue without it getting distracting. However, there are parts in the film where they even mention the fact that the crew being there shooting the documentary is going to affect the outcome of the story. Fascinating stuff. 

Some examples of participatory documentaries include:

• Chronicle of a Summer (1961) — Dir. Edgar Morin and Jean Rouch

• Sherman’s March (1985) — Dir. Ross McElwee

• Paris Is Burning (1990) — Dir. Jennie Livingston

• The Danube Exodus (1998) — Dir. Péter Forgács

• Supersize Me (2004) — Dir. Morgan Spurlock

Reflexive Documentaries

Reflexive documentaries are similar to participatory docs in that they often include the filmmaker within the film. However, unlike participatory, most creators of reflexive documentaries make no attempt to explore an outside subject. Rather, they focus solely on themselves and the act of making the film.  both types show involvement of the filmmaker, and usually make the cameraman and camera part of the film. However, the reflexive documentary mode presents questions and approaches topics with uncertainty, presenting a version of truth within a non-fiction format.

Put another way, Participatory does this by means of conversation with others and how the filmmaker chooses to portray their subject (distortion and misrepresentation sometimes occur, depending on the morality of a filmmaker), while the reflexive mode does this by engaging the filmmaker with his or her viewers. The reflexive documentary does not attempt to provoke intense emotional responses from the audience but encourages thoughtful consideration of the material. Since the subject matter is often the process of documentary filmmaking itself, a cinematographer will shoot behind-the-scenes-style footage of the entire film production process, including editing, interviewing, and post-production.

A good example of this style is the 1929 silent documentary Man with a Movie Camera by Soviet filmmaker Dziga Vertov. It’s a classic showcase of the creative — and quite challenging — images a true reflexive documentary can create.

A modern example of this would be Kirsten Johnson’s Cameraperson. This documentary is fascinating in its approach to telling a story about the filmmakers themselves. Only taking shots from cameras she’s used on jobs throughout her career, Johnson paints a portrait of what she sees as a filmmaker and who she is.

Other examples of reflexive documentaries include:

• …No Lies (1973) Dir. Mitchell Block

• Surname Viet Given Name Nam (1989) Dir. T. Minh-ha Trinh

• Biggie & Tupac (2002) Dir. Nick Broomfield

• Louis Theroux's Weird Weekends (1998) - Dir. Louis Theroux

Performative Documentaries

Performative documentaries are an experimental combination of styles used to stress subject's experience and share an emotional response with the world. They often connect and juxtapose personal accounts with larger political or historical issues. This has sometimes been called the “Michael Moore-style,” as he often uses his own personal stories as a way to construct social truths (without having to argue the validity of their experiences).

A more recent example of this would be something like Won’t You Be My Neighbor? A film about the life and legacy of Mr. Rogers. The film takes interviews, but also relies on old footage from the TV show, blending different styles and tones to deliver an emotional gut punch towards the end of the film that is in part a product of how the film is constructed.

Some examples of Performative Documentaries include:

• Drifters (1929) — Dir. John Grierson

• Night and Fog (1956) — Dir. Alain Resnais

• The Thin Blue Line (1988) — Dir. Errol Morris

• Bowling for Columbine (2002) — Dir. Michael Moore

Again, the performative, reflexive, and participatory styles can sometimes seem confusingly interchangeable. Nonetheless, the takeaways offered by these different styles can help inform your own documentary-style decisions as you choose the best methods to tell your unique stories.