The Truth in Documentaries

Narrators are said to express their personal opinions, which negate subjects in the films. However, the audience still expects filmmakers to add their viewpoints from time to time to help viewers understand what is being shown. Frederick Wiseman, a professional on the observational documentary, who has made a point to keep personal opinions out of his films, states that movies are distorted. Frederick opted to keep out commentary from his films to continue his work objective and free from criticism from those with contrary opinions. Directors are tasked with decided essential facets of their films such as the subjects to include, where to put the camera, scenes to shoot, and those to cut out. What the audience gets from the film is assembled sequence of extended scenes about what people are doing and saying.

Through this, Wiseman allows the viewer to interpret the movie themselves. However, Wiseman admitted that despite using this approach, a sense of biasness still came through. What he thought about the subject matter is what was presented in the final scene. Studies established that biases and objectivity showed significant cultural differences between among independent documentary directors and journalists whose work is normally assisted by stand-ups, and narrations. The film appears honest, and one does not think that he is impartial in any manner. Creating a documentary needs thorough planning, directing, and editing skills, but Nick's ability is in the moments of silence. He creates recurring shots when he drives the state highways. In another scene, the camera points skyward to Michigan Woods where the interviewee lived.

Broomfield tries to remain objective and puts a lot of emphasis on Aileen. He is expressing personal opinions in every line and takes her word to be the whole truth. From the onset of the documentary, Bloomfield sets out to present Aileen as the victim of a rogue judicial system that does not care about mental states of convicts. In the end, Aileen refuses to talk about the crimes but chooses to only explain theories about secret surveillance of the judicial system. When Bloomfield asked her to comment about being called a killer, she concludes by saying a raped woman was executed. Nick Bloomfield's film analyses the relationship between the law and the media, highlighting the high level of corruption by the police.

It is set in a cool, and a calm scene. It looks at the terrifying state of the prison for the criminally insane at Titicut. Officials tried to block the film from being released, but they did not succeed in their plans. It is a small, abrasive, white and black picture and awkward. It is pure reportage, and the narrator does not narrate or include personal opinions as the story unfolds. If Wiseman could have decided to explain what was happening in every scene, it might have been misconstrued to mean impartiality. Hence, the only thing he did was to assemble scenes and set the film into motion. It is not difficult to understand why the director chose the title for the documentary.