Paris Is Burning (Jennie Livingston, 1990) is a documentary that gives viewers a look into the lives of marginalized people struggling to find and express themselves and find a community to support them along the way. It depicts them as they experience the conflict between the grim reality of hardships and the beautiful fantasy they find in ball performances, the conflict that shows a range of experiences and emotions: courage, support, love, envy, freedom of expression, and acceptance. At the ball, no one is judged and everyone is welcome, able to show themselves as they are and proud of it. The soundtrack shifts from disco to pop to quieter interviews, echoing that acceptance of diversity. However, it is very different outside the ball, as it is dangerous for them to be themselves, which can be seen when one of them is killed unexpectedly. Paris Is Burning lets us see the pride, hope, and creativity in this community, while also depicting the real struggles they face.
The style of the film (a documentary) makes it feel like we are a part of the times. It seems to us to be a completely accurate/objective representation of reality (although it isn’t because documentaries are subjective). The mise-en-scène feels real, with people outside on the bleachers, in small apartments, or walking through the streets. The setting and props, such as wigs, mirrors, sewing machines, and clothes, tell the stories of people. You feel you observe what is real because of the use of handheld shots and natural lighting. The performances feel authentic and honest because they do not look staged. The movie’s editing connects interviews and ballroom scenes, going back and forth between close shots of someone getting ready and wide shots of people dancing and posing. This juxtaposition shows how the community lives in the dual worlds of harsh reality and magical fantasy.
The cuts are often elliptical, skipping time and details, but keeping the message close to the film’s main themes. The voices we hear sometimes do not match the images. For example, an interview is played over a ball scene, which is a nondiegetic sound or a sound bridge. It blends. The voices carry across time and space, showing that the ball is both fantasy and real life. The diegetic sound of cheering, sewing machines, and laughter mixes with nondiegetic music and creates a natural flow, making us feel a part of the moment.
The section titles appear on a black screen in big white dramatic letters — “Children,” “Legendary Children,” “Realness.” These are graphic inserts, like announcements on stage. They set the tone for what comes next, functioning as acts in a play. The camera framing with close-ups of faces, hands, or eyes adds intimacy, but the distance in some scenes shows respect and is not intrusive (no feeling of voyeurism). Life unfolds before our eyes in all its aspects, ordinary and beautiful. Livingston doesn’t show an interviewer and does not narrate the story; people speak for themselves. The film feels genuine and full of respect, love, and pride for the chosen family that celebrates differences.
One thing that I noticed was that, at first, people dressed up to fit in as middle-class or “successful” types, such as dressing up as business executives. However, over time, they started to dress up to look more like celebrities or models instead. Stars like Marilyn Monroe were seen as the epitimy of beauty (the “ideal” woman of the time). This shows how much of an impact pop culture has on how we dress, act, and perceive others. The film shows how people at the ball scene tried to copy the styles and attitudes they saw in the community, blending their dreams with the world around them, showing that they could become whatever they wanted to be.
Questions:
What was a themes did you notice while watching the film?
Do you think that the message is always the most essential aspect in documentary films?
Leave a Reply