In times of writers strikes and SAG AFTRA Walkouts, documentaries and other reality-ridden entertainment become increasingly valuable and mass produced. With the lack of new episodes of our favorite dramas and comedies, you might just end up watching that docu-series about GameStop – or hear Sylvester Stallone talk about his “Rocky” childhood. With the plethora of documentaries that appear daily on Netflix, it is important to be able to navigate your way through the different types. 

First I would like to discuss the question of what makes a documentary different from other films? For starters, the filmmaker tells us this. Through publicity and press, trailers and clips, documentaries are usually labeled and advertised as such. That is what initially sparks a difference on the outside of a documentary vs other feature films. Looking inside of the documentary, we see that the viewer believes that what is going on actually has occurred or at least exists. This takes place through the filmmaker capturing their data of their subjects, i.e. daily routines and the like on film. If this is not possible, or the filmmaker is researching an event from the past, documentaries will use other information, like charts, maps, animations, among other visual aids to help relay to the viewer their knowledge in the film even if the events they document are not currently occurring. This leads to the argument of staging in a documentary, either by having the subject perform something for the camera, like posing in front of something or re-enacting their daily routine. Some argue that the use of staging is unreliable and a manipulation of the audience, but the subjects are not usually taking part in activities they would not be doing normally. Sometimes actors may be asked to recreate events for a film, usually because it helps audiences to visualize what has occurred, and because it is impossible for cameras to film every person 24 hours a day. Biographical films, like Selma or Schindler’s List, are not considered documentaries because they take different liberties to the story, and they present themselves less as historical re-enactments and more as retellings of stories through modern lenses. 

There are many different genres of documentaries, like the David Attenborough narrated nature documentaries on the BBC, or the compilation films that take already existing media clips, like newsreels or other archival sources, to create a new film. There is Cinéma Vérité, meaning “cinema truth,” which is seeking the real and natural truth in front of the camera. Documentaries are not limited to just one of these genres. 

Different documentary narratives can make use of different genres. The “Categorical” form is a documentary narrative that makes use of categories to organize the film, recognizing simple patterns and creating sections in the medium. These sections and categories don’t need to hold a classical shape and form, they can be offbeat, abstract, and made interesting with film techniques through editing and cuts, punctuating sections with music choice, among other aspects of film. These films do not need to be a basic interpretation of the categorical documentary. The categorical form tends to take a stance on a subject, not in the same way as the rhetorical form, but through the filmmaker’s treatment of the subject, such as in Gap-Toothed Women when the filmmaker takes the stance that gap toothed women are presented as beautiful and should be cherished in society. 

The rhetorical documentary form addresses the viewer more so than the categorical. The rhetorical documentary has a goal, something to prove, not in a scientific manner, but as a matter of opinion. The rhetorical form appeals to a viewer’s emotions through firsthand accounts, presentation of arguments, and usually has the goal of persuading the viewer on a subject. While not scientific, rhetorical documentaries utilize statistics, polls, and eyewitnesses similar to the classic documentary type. Like the categorical form, this form recognizes and uses patterns in its presentation, in the form of argumentative dialogue and “evidence” provided on screen. This form tends to provide a “slippery solution” to the issues in the subject matter, as the problems that tend to be faced in these documentaries are not so one-dimensional and easily solved; otherwise there would be nothing to document.

A documentary I have recently enjoyed was Taylor Swift’s ‘Miss Americana’ (2019). This film in my opinion fits into the “Cinéma Vérité” genre of documentaries in a categorical form. It details several “eras” of Swift’s life leading up to her creation of her 2019 album “Lover”. It shows a stripped back view of Swift, not as the superstar we know her to be, but a normal person behind all of it with real feelings and a passion for music and songwriting. We get an inside look at her inspiration and music making process; what goes into making pop anthems that get screamed in stadiums and bedrooms everywhere. While that sounds like a cookie-cutter pop star documentary, Swift goes into heavy detail about her struggles with fame and the isolation she feels, especially when she has swarms of people waiting outside of her NYC apartment everyday, waiting for her to leave. In one heartfelt scene in particular,Swift is being told to “shut up and sing” after speaking out against homophobic legislation in her second home, Nashville, Tennessee. All this to say, Swift knows she does not have a normal life, and she shares that with her audience through endearing video clips and insights into her life in this documentary.