Online Response #4: The Observational Mode

The Observational mode of documentary—that with “no voice-over commentary, no supplementary music or sound effects, no inter-titles, no historical reenactments, no behavior repeated for the camera, and not even any interviews” (Nichols 172, 173)—is “exhilarating to some film goers, [and] infuriating to others,” due to its ambiguity (Barnouw 231).  Lacking the directness of the Expository mode, the Observational allows the audience to make conclusions.  None of this is to say that it lacks coherence or does not have structure.  Whereas Expository mode uses voice-overs as evidentiary editing to tie together disparate shots, Observational mode uses masked interviews as one means to construct and contextualize its narratives. 

Nichols explains masked interviews thusly: “the filmmaker works in a more participatory way with his subjects to establish the general subject of a scene and then films it in an observational manner” (177).  The filmmaker is off-screen and unheard, while the subject is featured and answers the question the audience doesn’t hear.  Masked interviews largely shape Lonely Boy, as Paul Anka explains the physical toll necessary to become a teen idol (starting at 7:15), followed by some flattering remarks by his manager, Earvin Felt.  Without these masked interviews, the audience is left only with shots of adoring fans, a scene in which Anka changes backstage, and some concert footage—scenes that together are a little too ambiguous to give any sense of a narrative. 

Not that all documentaries that use the Observational mode similarly utilize masked interviews—Primary, for example, brilliantly renders the frenetic pace of a political campaign by maintaining a greater degree of ambiguity than Lonely Boy.  Masked interviews are more seldom as the cameras follow both candidates on their various stops in the state of Wisconsin.  The audience mostly hears stump speeches from Senators Kennedy and Humphrey while seeing—not hearing from—the attendees.  At moments, though, a masked interview illuminates what the people of Wisconsin really think of this primary race.  Following a radio interview with Humphrey, the interviewer—presumably after being asked by the filmmakers what he thinks about his odds—goes on to say that he doesn’t think Humphrey has a chance. 

Masked interviews have been conventionalized to the point of becoming a hallmark of mockumentaries.  In the following compilation from The Office, Michael Scott offers an explanation, not unlike Paul Anka, that gives a context for the “real” footage shown.  

Not coincidentally, The Office differs from traditional sitcoms in its lack of canned laughter; it lets viewers decide when to laugh, which proved disconcerting to some.  Christopher Guest also uses masked interviews in his films.  In this clip from Best in Show, Guest—also the actor—satirizes the masked interview by giving completely useless information.  

In this case, obviously, the interview is constructed, as is the entire film, but it’s not far off from a masked interview in an actual documentary, which constructed though it is, gives some cohesiveness to the looseness of an Observational documentary.