Butchart's Ethical Responsibility

Although the best reasons for “going to the movies” are to be entertained and eat popcorn, understanding a film is actually quite complex. Movies are not only a reflection of life, they also have the capability of shaping our norms, values, attitudes, and perception of life. Through the media of film, one can find stories of practically anything imaginable and some things unimaginable. Movie-makers use their art to entertain, to promote political agendas, to educate, and to present life as it is, was, or could be. They can present truth, truth as they interpret it, or simply ignore truth altogether. A movie can be a work of fiction, non-fiction, or anything in-between. A film is an artist’s interpretation. What one takes away from a film depends upon how one interprets what has been seen and heard. Understanding film is indeed difficult.

Although convincing the audience that the rhetor is intelligent does not mean that they can be fully trusted. An essential part of establishing ethos is assessing the rhetor’s ethical appeal. This approach appeals to the audience’s ethical judgment, this can be in the form of a passionate delivery or even a simple claim that matter is unjust (Jasinski, 2001). The rhetor fails to provide any limitations or alternative evidence to the example studies given. There was a lack of mutual ground for both sides of the argument, even though this was an advantage in persuading, the improper approach caused questionable trust in the rhetor’s work. Additionally, the rhetor establishes credibility by the publication of the artifact. This video was published

Those who pursue social science research (documentary work) walk quite a fine ethical line. Works of all types- from film to research studies to photography and videography including daily news stories- are open to criticism for the versions of reality they produce for their audiences. Indeed, there exist academic and professional guidelines explicitly itemizing set standards of practice for various mediums, for example- broadcast news stories, magazine articles and documentary films. And although they may have been meticulously outlined, these standards simply cannot account for all who make up the intended viewer or readership. Described as the study of human interaction and how it functions in society, social science research possesses an ethical dilemma that exists in large part because of an unavoidable subjective nature that can never be fully separated from the undertaking. American author and child psychiatrist, Robert Coles, contends this notion in his book

Everyday experience, suggests Edgerton, like documentary, arises from the interplay of two realms; one hidden and one perceived. This duality, encompassing both the darkroom of the film developer and dark theater where the film is screened, pertains not only to documentary but to life as we live it. Masked by our “inherent inability to see,” and curled inside timescales we cannot untangle, a bizarre world plays out, contained by, yet isolated from that which we live in (Edgerton. 1970 1-2). Nevertheless, this domain remains intimately connected to ours, accessible only through the lens of ongoing technological advancement. Similar to the convoluted relationship between adjacent timescales, documentary and truth also share an

Theorist Vsevolod Pudovkin claims that narrative films are mainly a “product of construction” and cautious compilations of “selections of images that have been shot” (Renée).

The author of this article, a woman named Megan K. Fox, describes several documentaries and how they showed bias in presenting evidence for the subject. She writes that it is extremely difficult for documentary filmmakers to remain objective as, even unconsciously, we become partial towards our existing views on the topic. Fox makes it clear what the most common ways we fail to be impartial in documentaries are, including making the subjects aware they are being filmed, failure to explore already biased topics, and issues with making decisions on what to edit after filming ends.

‘There are…two kinds of film makers: one invents an imaginary reality; the other confronts an existing reality and attempts to understand it, criticise it…and finally, translate it into film’

As independent documentary film in developing ethical question is, "why are you doing, after finish can bring which change" questions will also bring documentary theatre creators of the play. Although we recognize that theater to documentary material processing, present it is the charm of theatre art forms of diversity, but for those audience who do not to participate

Furthermore the interviewer who is controlling the audio and the camera will also be writing down key concepts in the conversation as a way of us being able to remember the essential things afterwards. When preparing this kind of interview the ethics of conducting this kind of method is essential. A focal point within these problematics are in four fields which are: informed consent, confidentiality, consequences and the role of the researcher (Kvale & Brinkmann 2009: 68).

2. Rabiger's argument about "Behalfers" working in self-interest when promoting someone else's point of view was enlightening. It is easy to see making a film and giving a voice to the voiceless as selfless charity, when it is often, in fact, a self-aggrandizing act. As such, it is important for the filmmakers to give the subjects a say in the way that they are presented, so their image is not distorted by the filmmaker's self-centered perspective.

Memoirs of a Geisha is a women’s film. In a way that all its leading roles are played by women and from a woman’s point of view. The two most typical stereotypes for Asian female is represented in the film: the Madame Butterfly and the Dragon lady. Chiyo or Sayuri portrays the Madame Butterfly, the heroine of the film. Madame Butterfly is a term that derail from an opera by Giacomo Puccini, that tend to describe Asian women as submissive and weak.

“ To you it’s a film, to them it’s a reality”; the translated poster headline of the award winning observational war documentary Armadillo (Metz, 2010), a captivating film, shadowing a platoon of soldiers as they fought the Taliban in the Helmand province of southern Afghanistan. A controversial and sensitive topic, in which director and filmmaker Janus Metz endeavoured to depict the brutalising effects of war, with a character driven and emotional story embedded through out. With such impact surrounding a film, one may note the importance of film structure, camera work, sound, narration and graphics. The following essay will explore such features, in which are commonly identifiable in observational documentaries. In addition, one may evaluate their influence in portraying the story and creating a foundation for which the audience may experience emotional realism.

Ideal subjects for documentaries according to the direct cinema ethos were: 1) A person who is interesting; 2) A person who is in an interesting situation which s/he cares deeply about; 3) A subject where a conclusion can be arrived at in a limited time; and 4) A subject where there is easy access to events.

We can define ethnographic film as the type of film that encompasses ethnographic understanding, with the main considerations in the analysis being how the standards and the goals of ethnography are approached and the way information is presented in comparison with written ethnography (Heider, 2007). In this essay, we will attempt to illustrate the potentials and the limitations of two selected films for understanding different cultures.

Movies provide the audience with a unique experience. Not only do they entertain, they allow the audience to explore their own preconceptions. The most vital preconception that movies allow the viewer to explore and interact with is the definition and formation of knowledge. For centuries man has grasped for the true definition of knowledge. In this struggle many have fought for a unifying definition, this great conflagration of discourse and study did not lead to a unified definition of knowledge. Moreover, it leads to the question that still beats in the hearts of the philosopher and the