DOKweb Content
www.DOKweb.net is a portal dedicated to East European documentary film. The news section provides up-to-date information on upcoming and just completed films, interviews with filmmakers and other documentary professionals, in-depth articles exploring the state of documentary filmmaking in various parts of the region, as well as insightful texts on current trends, funding, etc. The portal also boasts the largest published databases of completed and upcoming documentary films from Eastern Europe, an industry directory, as well as trailers and original video content. www.DOKweb.net is IDF´s key online project that provides comprehensive details on all IDF´s activities and links them with general information service.
Institute of Documentary Film’s Activities
Founded in 2001, the INSTITUTE OF DOCUMENTARY FILM (IDF) is a non-profit training and networking centre based in Prague, Czech Republic, focused on the support of East European documentary films and their wider promotion. Our activities support filmmakers through all stages of completion – development, funding, production, post-production, and distribution. We aim at individual filmmakers (tailored consultations), groups of carefully selected professionals with projects or films (Ex Oriente Film, East European Forum, East Silver, Doc Launch, etc.), broader professional community (East Doc Platform), as well as the general public (portal www.DOKweb.net). We closely work with key int. festivals, broadcasters, distributors, sales agents, markets, or training initiatives and serve as the GATEWAY TO EAST EUROPEAN DOCUMENTARY FILM.

HISTORY OF DOCUMENTARY FILM - INTERVIEW WITH GUY GAUTHIER

During the 8th Int. Documentary Film Festival in Jihlava, Guy Gathier as a member of the international JURY presented his new book “Le Documentaire un autre Cinema”, which was recently translated to Czech. The interview made on that occasion was published in DOK.REVUE – daily festival newspaper.

How did you start writing your book about documentary film? How did you select the films?

 

GG: I started writing this book a long time ago. Since that time I’ve written other books. I wanted, at the time, to concentrate on the fact that documentary film was not recognized as an art; that works of art were categorized by how they integrated the imprint of the author’s personality.  I saw many documentaries, but I didn’t go about it in a systematic way. I used random screenings and television programs. Throughout this hunt for documentaries I kept careful notes. And from these notes, I started to structure my book.

 

In your book you hardly deal at all with documentary film from countries like Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, as well as countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

 

GG: You’re absolutely right. References to those cinematographies are either completely missing or very sporadic. There are two reasons for this. On the one hand, I wasn’t able to get some films, as was the case with Czech cinematography. I knew that Chytilova, Passer and others had shot documentaries, but these films weren’t available in France. On the other hand, in Latin American countries and many Arabic lands, documentary does not have a continuous tradition. Often we see it only in limited time periods. And when I was writing the book, for example, the current and very interesting stream of Iranian documentaries whose leading figure is Abbas Kiarostami didn’t exist yet. I would structure it completely differently today. Otherwise I am now concentrating on French work. Some months ago I published the book A Century of French Documentary Film.

 

How do you understand contemporary documentary film? Do you fundamentally differentiate documentary and fiction film?

 

GG: Today documentary has developed to the point that countless variations exist. At first documentaries were short films. Today they usually last several hours, and short film production is dominated by fiction films. Documentary can be descriptive, it can simply record reality, but it can also take the form of an essay. Like, for instance, Michael Moore’s much-talked-about Fahrenheit 911. And moreover, for me, terminology isn’t that important. This difference is easy to see in Nicholas Philibert’s film To Be and to Have (2002). He was accused of staging events for the camera, but the film is nonetheless documentary, because after the film crew leaves the village continues to exist. Individual characters exist and appear in the film in their real social roles. For instance, if you were to film a baker at work, of course he wouldn’t act totally naturally, but he would also never stylize his performance into what would be, for him, a foreign role. If you were to cast Alain Delon in the role of the baker, it would be something different. He could play that role well and believably, but it would only be a starting point for the dramatic construction of a story.

 

David Cenek

Translated by Alice Lovejoy