Response to "Fate of the Cinema Subject"

In "The Fate of the Cinema Subject," David MacDougall introduces questions that never usually enter a film viewer's mind: What becomes of a film's subject once the film is complete, and what the experience of being filmed is like for the subject. MacDougall then proceeds to go into great detail analyzing the relationships between the filmmaker, his subject and his audience. He also explores the many ways in which a film can be misinterpreted or a film's subject viewed in the wrong light.

While reading this piece, two things, among many others, stood out for me. Firstly, I came to the conclusion that it is very hard to rely on a film for facts. The reason for this is, as MacDougall points out, that a filmmaker can't help but mold his film into what he wants it to be. MacDougall makes a point of mentioning the "unconscious rearrangements" that filmmakers make to their films. Who can tell the difference between the truth and lies just by viewing footage that is given to them? How can a viewer be sure that the filmmaker didn't edit his footage in order to push across his point of view alone? If a filmmaker really does develop such a strong bond with his subject, whether positive or negative, how can he maintain an unbiased attitude? All this is crucial to how the cinema subject is portrayed, and could certainly help in deciding his fate.

The second thing that stood out for me in this piece, is how a film can be looked upon so differently depending on the party involved. This is especially true of the filmmaker and his audience. MacDougall points out that for the filmmaker, his film is a smaller version of something much bigger. The filmmaker shoots hours and hours of footage, but most of it winds up on the cutting room floor. Therefore he looks upon it as a sort of memoir of his total filming experience. MacDougall then continues to say how the film is something big for the viewer. The film viewer doesn't know anything about the footage shot, and therefore viewing the film is like discovering something new.

I think that MacDougall's overall point is that no matter what your goal is through making a film, it can always be misinterpreted, or just viewed differently, by others. Everyone has their own opinion, and if people can get opposite messages from the same film, they can view the film's subject in opposite ways. This leads me to conclude that although not always possible, the best way to get the facts about something is to seek them out yourself.