Research

 This is the research blog for my project.

(This is the template I used)

1. What sub-genre of crime documentary would you catogorise this as? 

2. Who is the target audience?

3. What typical documentary Conventions were USED? 

4. Did it conform or subverted documentary expecations? 

5. How did it create suspense using camera, sound, mis-en-scene, & edit?

6. What parts of the opening did I find inspiring?

1. What sub-genre of crime documentary would you catogorise this as? I would call this sports crime as a sub-genre

2. Who is the target audience? likely people who have an interest in sports; and also especially those who are 18 years or above because of the age rating being 18+

3. What typical documentary Conventions were used? well the biggest one in my eyes were the non-diegetic narration on scenes/shots of the stadium, along with the actions of the scallywag and fans being drunk and hanging out around the stadium

4. Did it confromn or subverted documentary expecations? it conformed by using the mentioned Conventions I said, but it subverted it by the fact that the sub-genre is sports, which is not a typical sub-genre for documentaries.

5. How did it create suspense using camera, sound, mis-en-scene, & edit? Over-THe-Head shots of cities, but through static security screens, which gives off a 'something special is being monitored' kind of effect. shoulder-shot of a security camera guy watching screens showing their audiences outside the building, followed up by a close up of his eye, which gives the effect of seeing what it's like from the POV of one man watching a big event or the large effect an audience has; a 'me vs them' effect or 'me vs the event' effect, seeing a different perspective of the sports event from a detached, and not so festive view than usual. Slow tense camera cuts, to bring tensions and suspense and importance to every piece of evidence shown about the event. Intense music to make the event feel more impactful or tense.

6. What parts of the opening did I find inspiring? I like how it twists the typical festive and exciting parts of a public sports event, by having a more detached point of view of them instead, which gives a new POV.

1. What sub-genre of crime documentary would you catogorise this as? I think it might be mystery crime...? I don't think there might be a sub-genre at all, though If I were to pick one... Familial Crime? Relationship Crime? Mystery/Who-Dunnit Crime?

2. Who is the target audience? probably young adults, those who are interested in crime & mystery and uncovering the hidden truth beyond what lies on the surface.

3. What typical documentary Conventions were Used? quick cuts between various types of scenes, such as victim/security-higher-up interviews, to backgrounds of houses/neighborhoods where the crime scene happened, important documents (that are also zoomed in towards selected important law-related words), and some of these scenes involve non-diegetic subtitles of audio being played of 911 calls between a victim and the 911 Pick-up caller.

4. Did it conform or subverted documentary expecations? I'd say it conformed to the typical crime documentary formula. Only one thing I'd say is different is that the sub-genre is 'unique', if you can even call it that.

5. How did it create suspense using camera, sound, mis-en-scene, & edit? close-up shots of papers with selected law-related words (or other types of content related to the story or crime such as online roommate pricing) but also CUs of potential crime doers or people involved with the crime, then there's also long shots of of buildings, cities, and and houses. Theres tense music, but also theres edits/cuts between audio lines of people describing the criminals positively pre-crime. For MES, the old, low quality pictures of criminal line-ups add to the whole crime/law/mystery theme this show has going for it. 

6. What parts of the opening did I find inspiring? It's interesting. There's not a lot of specific parts to say about it.

1. What sub-genre of crime documentary would you catogorise this as? Murder Mystery Crime

2. Who is the target audience? Young adults, interested in mystery & crime related content. I would mention a specific numerical age range, but at this point I don't think documentaries about tragic crimes are exactly... kid friendly, to begin with. 

3. What typical documentary Conventions were USED? Stuff such as a general contrast between innocence vs 'the dark truth', very intense, 'glitchy' edits and visuals, use of practical evidence like images of victim/crime-doer i.e. security footage or images of the past.

4. Did it conform or subverted documentary expecations? Conform

5. How did it create suspense using camera, sound, mis-en-scene, & edit? contrasting edit by having the video start with innocent potrayals; i.e. static shots of a woman in a field looking down at a pool peacefully, old static videos of the victim still alive doing a cooking activity while the camera has shaky movement, giving a personal/'humane' effect, etc... then it cuts to (using various transitions too, like TV static or glitches, or sudden cuts) scenes involving stuff like interviews and reports, which are often accsociated with impersonal content and news, which heavily contrasts from the seemingly life-enjoying characters from before. This gives the type of effect that whatever innocent thing the viewer had previously seen has now become dark, darker, yet darker...

6. What parts of the opening did I find inspiring? It's decently captivating. but again, nothing too special, not as much as the sports one at least.

1. What sub-genre of crime documentary would you catogorise this as? Murder/'Whodunnit' mystery

2. Who is the target audience? It's rated 16+, so it's likely at least for teenagers. Teens-adults who like mystery and crime, and suspenseful media where the identity of the crime-doer is a mystery

3. What typical documentary Conventions were USED? Suspenseful music, mysterious imagery, case details, 'glitchy' visual effects, cliffhangers, etc...

4. Did it conform or subverted documentary expecations? OK so I don't know if the intention was to subvert, but I like how unlike most crime docs, it shies away from showing too many crime scenes, and is intentionally vague by just... mostly using establishing or medium shots of buildings and houses, but with mixed with every other media element used in typical crime docs.

5. How did it create suspense using camera, sound, mis-en-scene, & edit? Starts off with establiing but also close up shots of the house at night, with slow zoom/push in to said shots, while narration or recording of a call between a victim & a 911 caller, which immidiately brings a certain intense attention to a seemingly regular house. Said call also has its moments where it syncs up with the tense music playing, which adds to the suspense, but also cleverly adds impact to each LINE. As the music gets faster, it syncs up with more shots of practical evidence and images surrounding the crime scene which were added, so yeah it adds to the suspense. It then pays off by having the final 'act' of the suspension build up involve this time have interviews with the head investigator discussing his suspension, then followed up by lines from an investigation from Ms. Pan herself; as a bonus they also edited her lines to say 'I lied', which can give a twisted connotation or hint that she might not be the most... trustable person out there, despite seeming like a victim.

6. What parts of the opening did I find inspiring? I already explained it in question 4, but I enjoy how it intentionally keeps the actual crime scene visually vague & mysterious, and the audience can only guess based on inference through buildings, which is a unique take.

1. What sub-genre of crime documentary would you catogorise this as? Mystery/identity fraud

2. Who is the target audience? Young adults who enjoy mystery related content

3. What typical documentary Conventions were USED? Suspenseful music, mysterious imagery, case details, interviews & comments, etc...

4. Did it conform or subverted documentary expecations? Slight subversion as this trailer wasn't as 'glitchy' or dramatic as your typical documentary trailer, it was more subtle and even 'child-like', fitting for the victim it focusing on.

5. How did it create suspense using camera, sound, mis-en-scene, & edit? Interview with a guy that has a normal medium shot, but then suspense truly begins when it's a lower angle shot with his face hidden but he is holding a paper (gives connotations of importance & mystery), then it cuts to an old image of the daughter with her daughter, but as the interviewer narrates Nad mentions something wrong with the father, it immidiately transitions to a bunch of quick cuts of more old images of her as she gets older per image, showing that she had a long history of innocence specifically, which fits the juxtaposition of what actually happened to her later. Then after the intro we are given more knowledge about her father, but it's through negative connotations as he is told by the narrator of his crimes + shots of crime evidence, folders, and greyed out images, which have a sort of 'impersonal & objective' connotation, removing the emotional innocence the daughter once had. It ends off with tthe third act of the trailer having faster cuts between more crime evidence like the news or certain locations, all while syncing with the faster tense music, which builds and adds up to the tension.

6. What parts of the opening did I find inspiring? I like how it has a more 'child innocence' vibe and theme to it, more unique than other trailers.

Self-Reflection: IT WAS SO TEDIOUS TO GET THIS DONE ON A THURSDAY NIGHT AMONG OTHER THINGS, but I'm glad it's over. I feel like I would hate this blog less if it weren't for number 5 needing more time, analysis, and rewatch. Next project, I need to get this done immidiately so no more delays.