Jazz on a Summer’s Day, Directed by Bert Stern, performances by Louis Armstrong, Mahalia Jackson, Chuck Berry, Chico Hamilton, Dinah Washington, and Anita O’Day, New Yorker Films / Raven Films / Galaxy Productions, 1960

Bert Stern, once a leading fashion photographer of the 1950’s, uses the documentary film Jazz on a Summer’s Day to document the events of the 1958 Newport Jazz Festival, and bring the festival’s legacy to a wider audience. Stern was best known for his portraits of Marilyn Monroe and the publicity stills featured in the ad campaign for Stanley Kubrick’s film Lolita; yet following his time serving in the Army in Korea, specifically in the motion picture division, he came to know and appreciate film, and became infatuated with the idea of making a documentary. Though Stern did not know much about jazz, he watched narrative and fiction films such as Charles Walter’s High Society and Alexander Mackendrick’s Sweet Smell of Success to gather information about the culture and genre of jazz. While not entirely true, Stern envisioned that, prior to his documentary, jazz “was something downstairs in a dark room,” and with the creation and hopeful screenings of the film in tandem with Stern’s celebrated, glamorous style of photography, he could bring jazz’s culture, music, and stars into the conversation. 

Despite Stern’s utter lack of jazz knowledge, Jazz as a Summer’s Day is ultimately a beautiful and iconic documentary. Stern implements much of his photographic practices and techniques in the film, he uses long lenses, shoots into the stage lights, and infuses the film with the rich color palette of his famous photos featured in Vogue and Harper’s Bazaar. He situates the viewer completely within 1958’s Newport Jazz Festival by providing shots of both performers, audience and even boats passing on the water nearby; yet, he removes the viewer from reality with an alluring dreamlike effect obscuring structures, time, mundanity, and most importantly, the municipal park in a lot behind a Newport high school in which the festival took place. Stern was all about “glamour,” and there was nothing glamorous about the festival. But the best art is born out of limitations. Rather filming wide shots of audience and performers together, as festival documentaries often do, Stern took to tight closeups which held for unusually long takes. The shots made it impossible for viewers of the documentary to understand the set-up of the festival and instead created a sense of intimacy between the filmgoers and Newport’s musicians. He does the same with those in the festival’s crowd, placing the documentary watcher in a group of people dancing, crying, singing, talking, etc., all while cementing intimacy between those at the festival and those watching the film. Occasionally he cuts from crowd and performance sequences to shots of extra musical footage to call back his aspirations of a more controlled, scripted feature film. Often the sequences bare an air of fakery, cutaways to house parties and people driving in fancy cars; the more topical of these cutaway shots, such as that of Chico Hamilton and his band rehearsing in a dark, bare living room, feel authentic and further the feeling of intimacy that Stern builds throughout the film. 

This film fits very well into the study leading up to the creation of the music documentary I intend to create during senior project. Jazz on a Summer’s Day uses the documentary style of direct cinema, a style which I plan to bring into the documentary about Z and Elijah. Rather than documenting a festival, I will be filming the creative processes of writing and recording an album, yet both documentaries are/will be centered around jazz and the love for said style of music. The musicians in Jazz on a Summer’s Day are recognizably famous, and are participating in performances that were already aimed at an audience, whereas Z and Elijah are not accustomed to being observed and documented in film, and will also be performing for each other and themselves rather than audience, partaking in an act that seems to be more exclusive and personal. While I intended to emulate some Stern’s techniques, specifically the use of direct cinema, how his camera captures personal expression through playing jazz music, and the speed and editing style of jazz music captured by an observational camera, I must factor the aforementioned differences between subjects and stories in mine and Stern’s documentaries in order to create a movie that is not exploitative or intrusive to those, Z and Elijah, who are not celebrities.

 

Original Cast Album: Company, Directed by D.A. Pennebaker, musc by Stephen Sondheim, performance by cast of “Company,” Castle Drive / Talent Associates-Norton Simon / Docurama / Leacock-Pennebaker, 1970

Original Cast Album: Company is a documentary in which the actors and musicians involved in the Broadway musical Company participate in a marathon recording process of the musical’s songs to create its original cast recording. The film features the musical direction and compositions of Stephen Sondeim, the performances and songs of Elaine Stritch, and others in the orchestra and cast. The film is directed by D.A. Pennebaker, in which he implements the observational and direct cinema technique he was best known for.

Upon embarking on the filming process of Original Cast Album: Company, Pennebaker was unsure if a narrative within the events being filmed would come to a head. He imagined the best way to approach filming Company’s recording session would be to shoot as much footage as possible. With this Pennebaker is able to capture and convey the effort, the frustration, the exhaustion, and the struggle of people creating and perfecting a piece of music. Direct cinema and quick paced editing accurately situate the film’s viewer in the studio. The documentary is packed with action, edited so there is not a moment for contemplation, this way the film conveys the emotions within the recording studio at the time. Because most of the musical Company had already been made, Pennebaker is able to focus on the minor details, and through his and the cast’s focus on details, rampant stress is documented and authentic personalities shine. With the use of direct cinema, Pennebaker created a movie that perfectly captures and wraps the viewer up in a moment in time, without ever being sentimental. To this Original Cast Album: Company is as full of life and relevant as it was at the time of its release. 

Original Cast Album: Company and Pennebaker’s work is vital to the creation of my documentary, because it is this film along with Pennebaker’s Don’t Look Back that first allowed me to understand and appreciate direct cinema. His work is also vital to creating my direct cinema documentary as Pennebaker is widely regarded as one of the “godfathers” of this technique. Specifically in regards to Original Cast Album: Company I intend to pull many stylistic choices and elements from this film as both my documentary and Pennebaker’s center a group of people recording an album in a studio. I intend to turn to his uses of framing and space that create a feeling verging on claustrophobic and help to heighten the actions that take place. I also look towards Pennebaker because though his camera observes and does not interact with his film’s subject, he creates a collaborative project and space outside of filming. This is something that I know I must focus on to create Z and Elijah’s narrative within the film, rather than my own interpretation of what is documented.

 

Schneider, Bernice K., DIRECT CINEMA: Filmmaking Style and its Relationship to “Truth”, September 15, 1989, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Masters Degree of Science in Visual Studies

Bernice K. Schneider writes in her thesis DIRECT CINEMA: Filmmaking Style and its Relationship to “Truth” about how direct cinema, both observational and participatory, relate and are able to convey “truth.” She continues and finishes her thesis touching on the ways she implemented her findings in her own film Harlem. Schneider’s thesis closely examines the philosophy of and techniques used in observational vs. participatory/interventionalist direct cinema documentaries. She also explores how filmmakers pursue discoveries and truth to define their perceptions of reality, and how ultimately filmmakers define their own personal realities, despite the intentions of seeking that of others/their films’ subjects.

In Schneider’s thesis she examines how truth is conveyed through a noninterventional and observational approach by looking at the documentaries of Richard Leacock. The thesis provides historical context for this approach to filming documentaries, discussing the network and news documentary programs of the 1950s and 60s that featured limited and censored sources of information, leading to an increasing distrust of an “official voice.” The widespread television documentaries of the 50s often felt authoritarian, with omniscient narrations by newsmen, and the average viewer felt no connection to such media as the media’s techniques were often deceiving and repressive and perpetrated ideas of networks. Yet, networks and media hung onto the title of “truth.” During this time, Leacock and other observational documentarians thought up a revolutionary and representative idea for a new sort of documentary which focused on things that the “common folk” actually cared about and related to, and most importantly revealed truth in the world. These noninterventionist documentaries lacked any script and filmed/observed real people in situations as they were unfolding. Observational cinema was supposed to bring reality and authenticity to the screen, but Schneider brings up the notion that when people are cognizant of being observed by a camera, their behavior changes in accordance with the presence of the camera. Though observational cinema documents real people, it does not document behaviors that would have existed without the filmmaker’s presence. Schneider also posits that the observational documentary does not rid cinema of ominscense as it nearly forces viewers to identify with the camera/filmmaker, as they are the one who is learning and finding their truth. The thesis poses the notion that intimacy and a personal connection between the filmmaker and the subjects of the film can help to alleviate the gaze forced up the subjects and the audience, and also brings up techniques and philosophies of participatory cinema and the cinema verite movement of the French to discuss “solutions” to the problems that observational cinema encounter. Participatory cinema understands the impacts of the presence of the camera, and combats that by allowing a documentary’s subject to address the camera and more regularly inserts the filmmaker directly into the film. Participatory cinema also allows the experiences of a filmmaker’s self discovery to happen before the camera rather than behind it, forcing the audience to infer what has been discovered. But the participatory direct cinema documentary faces a similar problem to that of the observational documentary as it accepts what plays before the camera as “truth”, despite the presence of the camera altering “reality”. France’s cinema verite documentaries finally find a solution to this issue by accepting that a camera and filmmaker create a new reality for a film’s subjects. However, the techniques and final forms of cinema verite films are very distinct and differ from observational and participatory documentaries.

Schineider’s this was eye-opening for me as it talked much of the philosophies of the techniques behind different types of direct cinema. I intend to keep in mind the problems posed by such techniques as I decide how I will film and structure my final documentary. I do not intend to implement much of cinema verite’s techniques into my movie and imagine it will be difficult to insert myself into a film that follows the creation and recording of music, something I have little relation to and hope to not distrust. This leaves me with observational cinema as the default. I will acknowledge the problems that so often occur with this sort of filmmaking but hope that my friendship with Z and Elijah, as well as a comfortability in front of cameras that exists now because of constant documentation, however was not so prevalent at the time of Schineider’s thesis, will prevent such issues from arising.

 

Mamber, Stephen, Cinema Verite: Studies in Uncontrolled Documentary. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 1978

Cinema Verite: Studies in Uncontrolled Documentary written by Stephen Mamber is one of the first full-length critical studies of American cinema verite and direct cinema documentary techniques. The book deeply analyzes the filmmakers who pioneered in these genres and the films and techniques they used and created.

Mamber uses this book to establish American cinema verite, or what film critics and cinephiles have come to label today as direct cinema to differentiate it from its European counterpart, as its own genre of film rather than an offspring of documentaries popular prior to the 70s. Mamber first introduces documentary filmmaking as a whole and the concepts used by early filmmakers such as Dziga Vertov, Robert Flaherty, Cesare Zavanttini, Georges Rouquier, Jean Renior, and Siegfried Kracauer. He then turns to closely looking at films directed by direct cinema pioneers such as Robert Drew, The Mayles Brothers, D.A. Pennebaker, Richard Leacock, and Fredrick Wiseman. Through close examination of the films of each of these directors Mamber illuminates the techniques, structures, and philosophies used in direct cinema documentaries. The film by film analyses allows the reader to fully understand what he establishes as fundamental to direct cinema as well as makes concrete the understanding of direct cinema as its own genre of film.

I plan to read this book to learn more about specificities within direct cinema films and what makes the genre so important and unique. I think this book will help me make my documentary as it is essentially a comprehensive guideline of how to create a direct cinema film, as well as help me answer my essential question. Mamber’s book was written in the mid 70s, technology and media has changed significantly since publication. Deeply learning about the incentives behind and necessity of direct cinema in the 60s and 70s will help me to understand if direct cinema documentaries still have use in today’s world.

 

I Am Trying to Break Your Heart, Directed by Sam Jones, music and performance by Wilco (Jeff Tweedy, John Stirratt, Leroy Bach, Glenn Kotche, Jay Bennett), Cowboy Pictures / Plexifilm, 2002 

I Am Trying to Break Your Heart: A Film About Wilco is a 2002 low budget, black-and-white documentary film by director Sam Jones, following the American alt-country rock band Wilco through the creation and distribution of their fourth studio album Yankee Hotel Foxtrot. 

Through Jones’ cinema verite documentation of Wilco’s recording process, he not only provides insight into the band’s life behind the scenes, but also inadvertently exposes the workings of a profit-driven music industry. Jones takes an observational approach to this documentary, yet Wilco takes a more participatory approach, often speaking directly to the camera and putting on performances furthermore creating a new reality for the camera, Jones, and the audience to see. This participatory approach on the band’s part removes any exploitative feelings that often accompany an observational documentary. The film feels authentic but not intrusive.

I plan to watch this documentary to learn more about how a film can capture the creative process of writing and recording music. This is not something that I’ve seen in many other films so I will use this as inspiration for different shots, editing techniques, etc., that can be implemented in my own documentary.