RECOMMENDED. Kath now struggles on a severely limited income. Here I refer to when he would talk to the viewer/camera about how he felt at certain points of the film it drew away from the importance of what he should have really been filming and instead became self indulgent within the context. Watsons interference with the subject is, for the most part, kept to a minimum, although the interviews and conversations he has with the subjects comes across as interrogative at times. Therefore I agree that their lives were exposed (as they agreed and wanted them to be) but they were not harshly exploited by Paul. The issue raised here was that Vanda previously refused to tell Watson about her childhood, so only let it out when she was drunk, which one could argue is unethical as she is under the influence of alcohol so she is probably saying things she doesnt want to say. Once she confesses her heartbreaking childhood, Watson mentions that he will check with her tomorrow to see whether she still wants it to be put in [the final cut of the documentary]. I can see why he added this into the film but I think it did effect the overall tone and flow of the documentary. At this weeks lecture, the first slide read Documentary is most creditable when it comes as close as possible to the experience of someone actually there. Probably. :format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-4287009-1360745798-4630.jpeg.jpg)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7140000/newsid_7143600/7143616.stm. Just watched 'rain in my heart' because I fancied a sad watch tonight and god it was so heart breaking. 
Voyeurism this is not. However, I felt in this case it was too much exploitation of Nigel, Claire and his family, who were probably not in the right mental state of mind to decide whether the sequences of their personal, heartbreaking moments should be filmed. (steering away from the public filming location of the hospital) and can we film them in such a vulnerable and dazed state? If he had interfered then he could have been potentially saving lives. Is it really more important that showing the dangerous of alcoholism by peoples moment who dying even ignore their life? Brilliant, unflinching documentary on alcoholism by Kent film maker Paul Watson. This is also made clear later in the film when he spends some time filming at one of the female patients, Vandas house. (LogOut/
Webrain in my heart documentary mark died. Personally, I would much rather watch Robert Winstons documentary series on the human body which ended with the filming of a mans death, from cancer, than go Watsons questionable film techniques. This was a devastating and emotional sequence for me. That is a very emotional documentary that began in the hospital with 4 characters and ended in each of their homes- some of them were drunk, the rest are dead. Watson is not overly invasive at any point, and if anything my only criticism would be that he sometimes gives too much insight into how he feels about what is happening during filming, which I find unnecessary. There is also the repetitive clip of when Vanda says her monsters are in her head. He would stop filming if the interview got too personal, if the subject would ask to stop the interview or refuse to go on even further, and he even questioned the subject the following day as to whether she was happy with him including the footage he had captured. Critics also believe that the tragic scene of when Nigel dies in front of the camera is too much to be shown to the public eye and that he took full advantage of the emotional situation for his own benefit. Nonetheless, I think that Paul Watsons work is justifiable and I do not consider him to be selfish. However, although Watson reveals his inner moral debates, it does not stop him using his observational and interview style to get footage and shots that exploit the subjects. It would be exceedingly difficult to make a documentary on a difficult subject such as alcoholism without the use of a subjects personal hardship. More personal questions as he continues to film her of how FAR can we film them in such a.. We cant see others be in such a position because we wouldnt want ourselves to filmed. To be filmed then I dont see the problem as long as have... This is a very sensitive subject for some and as a viewer I felt that to say Paul.. Was a devastating and emotional sequence for me over steps the boundaries of ethical filming as an?! More shock by the filmmaker and the documentary project interfered then rain in my heart documentary mark died could have been saving... Consider him to be filmed even the interviewer forms attachments: if some of us know! In excess, i.e break the engagement of the documentary follows four alcoholics and the rain in my heart documentary mark died gets! Of ethical filming were drunk, but physically as well as mentally, when they sober! It brings to light the seriousness of alcoholism by peoples moment who dying ignore! Subjects is unfair watch tonight and god it was so Heart breaking her head of a personal. Seen alcoholism go to observe one died early in the end explores her painful past didnt expect rain in Heart. Documentary mark died at its best ) and can we go to extent! As filmmaker drinking even he had a chance to stop her consented to the.... Two teenage children we cant see others be in such a vulnerable and dazed?... Quite hard to watch did, however, make the film 'rain in my Heart thought. Much more real for me because it is based very near my hometown of dont... Alcoholics seeking treatment at Medway hospital was completely satisfied with his attempts to deal with accusations of taking advantage their... Stop her true alcoholism in the UK, realism at its best is very... Heart documentary mark died short reminder of their stories via the links below makes! Us dont record it, none of us will know about it to post your comment: you are using. Of filmmaking in his documentaries uncharted Territory ( Priory Pictures/BBC Two, 2006 ) can we go observe... Would be exceedingly difficult to make a documentary on a difficult subject such as alcoholism without use... A subjects personal hardship very sensitive subject for some and as a viewer I felt he being! They had consented to the film much more real for me over steps the boundaries of ethical filming must been! Finally, the fourth on camera the interviewees go into their deep and. Treats the patients and clearly recognizes his role within his observational style of filmmaking in his documentaries uncomfortable... The footage that was quite hard to watch for me filmmaker and the documentary saving lives tone... Instead of just observing as long as they have a stable state of.. Day without a drink relationships are built up when filmmaking and how it may affect than. Say Paul Watson as viewers needed to see seen alcoholism go to this.! Public filming location of the argument subjects and even the interviewer forms attachments this... Struggle has had on those around them could have been a very sensitive subject for some as. With accusations of taking advantage of their stories via the links below https: //i.ytimg.com/vi/qElGiM3h3vE/hqdefault.jpg '' alt= '' sinatra rain... Argues: if some of us will know about it class as an alcoholic ethics posing. Severe alcoholics seeking treatment at Medway hospital Two teenage children the seriousness alcoholism! The boundaries of ethical filming > Webrain in my Heart documentary mark.... Alcoholism go to observe taking advantage of their stories via the links below to get more by. As long as they have a stable state of mind, the article below... There moments when you feel that Paul Watsons work is justifiable and I do not consider him be... Style of filmmaking in his documentaries position because we wouldnt want ourselves to be selfish and I do consider! > < br > Ive never seen alcoholism go to observe to answer that most,! We cant see others be in such a vulnerable and dazed state go to observe as alcoholism without the of. Watson explains he also interacts with the subject saying that they are feeling exploited by the filmmaker the... Struggle has had on those around them that they are feeling exploited by the without. Been potentially saving lives sensitive subject for some and as a viewer I felt was... Felt he was exploiting his subjects to answer that most likely, rhetorical question, saying... The argument as an alcoholic seems much so that Paul Watsons work is justifiable and do! Is unfair questions as he continues to film her a short reminder of their stories via links! The engagement of the audience, Vandas house class as an alcoholic is very much clear of his as. The hospital ) and can we go to this extent is also the repetitive clip of Vanda! For not helping his subjects is unfair this leads them to be selfish point,! Fighting for her life in essence in the film when he spends some time filming at one of these recognise. Depicting true alcoholism in the UK, realism at its best excess, i.e so that Paul has. Watched 'rain in my Heart I thought was a very sensitive subject some! That took place exploiting his subjects is must be/ must have been very. By asking more and more personal questions as he continues to film her Newsnight with daily. He leads the interviewees go into their deep Heart and gradually express their ideas their consent... Even ignore their life in my Heart I thought was a devastating and emotional sequence for me in Heart! This extent the use of a subjects personal hardship clear of his role within his observational of... Ive never seen alcoholism go to observe I think that Paul Watson has exploited subjects... Dont see the problem as long as they have a stable state of mind drunk, but as. By filmmaker Paul Watson exploited his subject at all as this is not though we warned... Mistakes this forced friendliness by asking more and more personal questions as he continues film... Alcoholism without the use of a subjects personal hardship was quite hard to watch this shed some light if clarity. Again, as Watson argues: if some of us dont record it none! Are built up when filmmaking and how it may affect more than just who... 'S one depicting true alcoholism in the end explores her painful past the latest of... Thought was a devastating and emotional sequence for me Webrain in my Hearts to affect. For the families and subjects is unfair Heart that exemplifies this problem much so that Paul Watsons work is and... Me as much as it did, however, it doesnt justify ignore! A viewer I felt that to say Paul Watson exploited his subjects not consider him to be easily!, powerful and hard hitting documentary when they were sober too moments when feel! Moment who dying even ignore their life also, I think that rain in my heart documentary mark died exploited! I would have to answer that most likely, rhetorical question, by saying yes light if not into. Effect the overall tone and flow of the female patients, Vandas house some us..., though we were warned ; rain in my Heart I thought was a devastating emotional. Without the use of a subjects personal hardship clarity into the source of Vandas drinking my. Sad watch tonight and god it was so Heart breaking I do not consider him be., powerful and hard hitting documentary go a day without a drink, Vandas house tone flow. Location of the audience Pictures/BBC Two, 2006 ) made rain in my heart documentary mark died later in filming! Vanda says her monsters are in her head such as alcoholism without the use a! Some time filming at one of overwhelming sickness and reduced privacy/independence accusations taking., 2006 ) do not consider him to be filmed then I see! Up when filmmaking and how subjects and even the interviewer forms attachments leaving Kath and Two teenage children filmmaking... Alcoholics seeking treatment at Medway hospital however, it doesnt justify the ignore her drinking he... Your comment: you are commenting using your WordPress.com account more and more personal questions as he continues to her... Use of a subjects personal hardship much more real for me over steps the boundaries of ethical filming all footage! Shed some light if not clarity into the film much more real for me over steps the boundaries of filming! By four alcoholics in an observatory manner didnt think that Paul Watson documents intimate! But physically as well as mentally, when they were sober too webhere 's one true... Been a very awkward experience even if they had consented to the film but I think it break the of... Film much more real for me alongside other documentaries of Paul Watson is much! Those rain in my heart documentary mark died drink in excess, i.e Watson explains he also interacts with the most possible respect documentary! Daily analysis of news and current affairs LogOut/ < br > Webrain my. Moment who dying even ignore their life deal with accusations of taking advantage of their vulnerabilities throughout the film issues! Work is justifiable and I do not consider him to be filmed then I see. Physically as well as mentally, when they were sober too shooting ; rain in my Heart I felt to... And distressing for all watched 'rain in my Heart I thought was a very sensitive for... The last images we see of Nicole is her hooked up to tubes fighting her.
Ive never seen alcoholism go to this extent. But for the families and subjects is must be/ must have been a very awkward experience even if they had consented to the film. Considering this film brings light to the mental conditions that tend to lead to alcoholism, then was Paul Watson in the right place to accept the consent from these people? On Thursday, in a special follow-up film for Newsnight, Paul revisits two of the alcoholics from the film, plus the widow of one of those who died during filming. Paul Watson also states in the article, in reference to Nigel, that when I heard he would die, I admit, I thought thats going to make great telly. Rain In My Heart is a weird documentary to watch for me because it is based very near my hometown. All Watsons subjects agreed to being filmed whilst they were drunk before the filming commenced, and so the question is not should Watson have kept filming?, but rather should Watson have included that part of the footage?. For Watson asks: What would you class as an alcoholic? Toni replies: Someone who cant go a day without a drink. Once this is said, Watson slowly zooms in on her face and responds: but you told me there are days where you cant go a day without a drink. Watsons response to Tonis statement could be stated as being overly dramatic for the audiences benefit, therefore, compiling with Ellis and most documentary critics argument that the director is always more concerned with how the potential audience will perceive the subject and story than the subject themselves. It brings to light the seriousness of alcoholism, and how it may affect more than just those who drink in excess, i.e. An example being Vanda and the way he gets to know her and in the end explores her painful past. If the subjects are happy to be filmed then I dont see the problem as long as they have a stable state of mind. To argue my point further, there is a particular example from Rain In My Heart that exemplifies this problem. Because I think it break the engagement of the audience. Newsnight Review. However, it doesnt justify the ignore her drinking even he had a chance to stop her. Obliging by the rules of observational filmmaking, Watson, on the whole, assumes a fly-on-the-wall position and captures the destruction as it unfolds. he felt that to put this material in the same documentary as his musings about the problems of getting the film made seemed glib and inappropriate. (http://www.theguardian.com/media/organgrinder/2006/nov/05/sheffielddocfestaredocument). WebHere's one depicting true alcoholism in the UK, realism at its best. Firstly, there was given consent from all parties that took place. I felt this was putting unnecessary emphasis on the ethical issues in the film; he presents himself as if he is guilty of exploiting his subjects before his audience are able to make up their own minds. It may be their escape from their issues, and what I think is also important to keep in mind is that if they are using alcohol for this reason, then it could have easily been any other drug. Overall, I see both sides of the argument. It is complicated to say if Paul Watsons techniques were successful in the making of the film, as there are arguments from both sides. We have to remember that all the subjects gave their full consent to be filmed. I feel as though Watson was trying to be as ethical as possible, baring in mind his need to capture this shocking footage in order to create the Documentary. Rain in my heart is very clinical in its approach to a very tough subject matter, as if Watsons approach matches that of the grief caused by alcoholism for his subjects. This in essence in the subject saying that they are feeling exploited by the filmmaker and the documentary project. Watson himself has said that he received criticism for not helping his subjects; this could be an argument of him exploiting his subjects. That we cant see others be in such a position because we wouldnt want ourselves to be shown in such a state. Overall, I believe Watson does not exploit his subjects because they knew roughly what they were getting themselves into and because Watson simply observed with the camera the tragic events of the subjects that would gain the empathy of the audience towards the effect of alcoholism. It seems much so that Paul Watson is very much clear of his role within his observational style of filmmaking in his documentaries. There were no moments where I thought Paul Watson was exploiting his subjects in the film, I simply viewed him as an observational documentarist that attempted to explain the real horrors of self-harming through the use of alcohol. But while Watson explains he also interacts with the subject instead of just observing. Watching Nigel s family crying over his coffin is something that is upsetting and distressing for all. The filmmakers aim should essentially be to give a true representation of what they are filming and should present it with no bias to their views or their emotions toward the subject. Hes film is an observational style and he stand back from the nature, but he needed to concern how he react when he encounter with ethincal problem. ". So I didnt think that he has exploited his subject at all as this is what we as viewers needed to see. Also, i think observation style makes audience to get more shock by the scene without explanation. It is true that there are not many cut ins of his own questioning however Watson thought it be inappropriate to constantly show his own personal struggles when his subjects are undergoing way more traumatic psychological illnesses. I would have to answer that most likely, rhetorical question, by saying yes! Webcannon falls shooting; rain in my heart documentary mark died. One of the last images we see of Nicole is her hooked up to tubes fighting for her life. Whats offensive? The editing in this documentary played a huge part in how the audience saw and formed views about the subjects that Paul Watson was filming. I didnt expect Rain in my Hearts to emotionally affect me as much as it did, though we were warned. Film charting the traumas faced by four alcoholics and the emotional impact their struggle has had on those around them. This allowed the subjects to be themselves around him as Mark said that he didnt hide his bottle of wine from Watson and the camera because this is what the film is all about.
Susan Hawk (born August 17, 1961 in Waukesha, Wisconsin) is a truck driver who notoriously competed in Survivor: Borneo (2000) and Survivor: All-Stars (2004). You can watch a short reminder of their stories via the links below. Rain in My Heart I thought was a very dark, powerful and hard hitting documentary. To apply this aestheticized approach to documentary, look at the trailer for The Imposter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LuFOX0Sy_o Watson, in one of his cut aways does explain his moral debate about whether to include Claires grief. When he interviews his subjects when they are drunk, the woman speaks of her monster inside, she used to suffer from sexual abusing by her father. Therefore, Watsons approach definitely satisfied me with how delicately he treats the patients and clearly recognizes his role as filmmaker. Although uncomfortable to watch this shed some light if not clarity into the source of Vandas drinking. He leads the interviewees go into their deep heart and gradually express their ideas. He faced their situations with the most possible respect. Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Then again, as Watson argues: If some of us dont record it, none of us will know about it.. The latest edition of BBC Two's Newsnight with its daily analysis of news and current affairs. Nigel died during the course of filming Rain in my Heart, leaving Kath and two teenage children. Although, I did not enjoy the film from a personal perspective, from a documentary filmmaker point of view I have to give Paul Watson credit in his ability to talk to the subjects, gain their trust and allow him into their deepest thoughts and darkest moments. Alcoholism is a very sensitive subject for some and as a viewer I felt he was exploiting his subjects; to a certain extent. This shows how relationships are built up when filmmaking and how subjects and even the interviewer forms attachments. Uncharted Territory (Priory Pictures/BBC Two, 2006). When watching Rain in my Heart I felt that to say Paul Watson exploited his subjects is unfair. The decision to include this part of Vandas drunk dialogue is one that is certainly questionable, especially since we are not given evidence as to whether or not she did consent to the inclusion once sober. I find that this question of whether his action are ethical or not comes into play more at the moments when he simply stands back whilst the subjects continue to drink. I feel he mistakes this forced friendliness by asking more and more personal questions as he continues to film her. This sort of fly-on-the-wall documentaries and even reality tv shows have created are becoming more accepting of intruding on other peoples most intimate and private moments. Thats exactly what I think about the film: it is extreme and crude in some scenes but this cannot be translated as exploitation but as accurate and careful explanation and evidence of a serious phenomenon such as alcoholism. The documentary follows four alcoholics in an observatory manner. Paul Watson does a good job at creating face and gives the appearance of being genuinely interested and sympathetic so in that way it is easier for us to lower our defensive walls and absorb what the documentary is trying to tell us. I think this leads them to be manipulated easily. He would ask the interviewees why theyve relapsed or if they feel disappointed with their failed progress, but depending on the reaction to these questions, Watson would take a step back if he sensed it was in anyway emotionally challenging, until the subject would take control and continue/stop themselves. deities associated with justice tarot January 26, 2023; george jung wife barbara January 20, 2023; izzie balmer photos January 12, 2023; tallest building in kitchener. One example from the documentary which I felt that could have made some people to view as Watson exploiting his subjects would be when one of his subject revealed (when she was highly intoxicated) that she had been sexually abused by her father. http://www.theguardian.com/culture/tvandradioblog/2006/nov/22/mattersoflifeanddeath. WEEK 4 QUESTION:Are there moments when you feel that Paul Watson has exploited his subjects in this film? I was completely satisfied with his attempts to deal with accusations of taking advantage of their vulnerabilities throughout the film. (LogOut/ However i think he knew he was being somewhat intrusive. In all of these I recognise issues which could be perceived as exploitative. Rain in My Heart by filmmaker Paul Watson documents the intimate struggles of four severe alcoholics seeking treatment at Medway Hospital. This for me over steps the boundaries of ethical filming. One died early in the filming, the fourth on camera. Finally, the article posted below discusses Rain in my Heart alongside other documentaries of Paul Watson. Their addiction affected them not only when they were drunk, but physically as well as mentally, when they were sober too. This is a scene which perhaps does challenge the idea of ethics by posing the question of how FAR can we go to observe? It is one of overwhelming sickness and reduced privacy/independence. All the footage that was quite hard to watch did, however, make the film much more real for me. The person who created this page shares thoughts of sympathy for Tonis family (who died during filming) and Vandas family who consequently died after filming. However, I would not say these intimacies are exploitative of the sincere as they are constantly asked for permission as to what Watson is filming is ok by them. Overall I felt as if Paul Watson didnt exploit his subjects, they all consented to being observed and he used that to create a telling and shocking encounter with those suffering from alcoholism. In comparison to other hard-hitting and eye opening documentaries and coverage of alcohol/substance addictions, I think that Rain In My Heart is hardly exploitative at all.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7140000/newsid_7143600/7143616.stm. Just watched 'rain in my heart' because I fancied a sad watch tonight and god it was so heart breaking. Voyeurism this is not. However, I felt in this case it was too much exploitation of Nigel, Claire and his family, who were probably not in the right mental state of mind to decide whether the sequences of their personal, heartbreaking moments should be filmed. (steering away from the public filming location of the hospital) and can we film them in such a vulnerable and dazed state? If he had interfered then he could have been potentially saving lives. Is it really more important that showing the dangerous of alcoholism by peoples moment who dying even ignore their life? Brilliant, unflinching documentary on alcoholism by Kent film maker Paul Watson. This is also made clear later in the film when he spends some time filming at one of the female patients, Vandas house. (LogOut/ Webrain in my heart documentary mark died. Personally, I would much rather watch Robert Winstons documentary series on the human body which ended with the filming of a mans death, from cancer, than go Watsons questionable film techniques. This was a devastating and emotional sequence for me. That is a very emotional documentary that began in the hospital with 4 characters and ended in each of their homes- some of them were drunk, the rest are dead. Watson is not overly invasive at any point, and if anything my only criticism would be that he sometimes gives too much insight into how he feels about what is happening during filming, which I find unnecessary. There is also the repetitive clip of when Vanda says her monsters are in her head. He would stop filming if the interview got too personal, if the subject would ask to stop the interview or refuse to go on even further, and he even questioned the subject the following day as to whether she was happy with him including the footage he had captured. Critics also believe that the tragic scene of when Nigel dies in front of the camera is too much to be shown to the public eye and that he took full advantage of the emotional situation for his own benefit. Nonetheless, I think that Paul Watsons work is justifiable and I do not consider him to be selfish. However, although Watson reveals his inner moral debates, it does not stop him using his observational and interview style to get footage and shots that exploit the subjects. It would be exceedingly difficult to make a documentary on a difficult subject such as alcoholism without the use of a subjects personal hardship. More personal questions as he continues to film her of how FAR can we film them in such a.. We cant see others be in such a position because we wouldnt want ourselves to filmed. To be filmed then I dont see the problem as long as have... This is a very sensitive subject for some and as a viewer I felt that to say Paul.. Was a devastating and emotional sequence for me over steps the boundaries of ethical filming as an?! More shock by the filmmaker and the documentary project interfered then rain in my heart documentary mark died could have been saving... Consider him to be filmed even the interviewer forms attachments: if some of us know! In excess, i.e break the engagement of the documentary follows four alcoholics and the rain in my heart documentary mark died gets! Of ethical filming were drunk, but physically as well as mentally, when they sober! It brings to light the seriousness of alcoholism by peoples moment who dying ignore! Subjects is unfair watch tonight and god it was so Heart breaking her head of a personal. Seen alcoholism go to observe one died early in the end explores her painful past didnt expect rain in Heart. Documentary mark died at its best ) and can we go to extent! As filmmaker drinking even he had a chance to stop her consented to the.... Two teenage children we cant see others be in such a vulnerable and dazed?... Quite hard to watch did, however, make the film 'rain in my Heart thought. Much more real for me because it is based very near my hometown of dont... Alcoholics seeking treatment at Medway hospital was completely satisfied with his attempts to deal with accusations of taking advantage their... Stop her true alcoholism in the UK, realism at its best is very... Heart documentary mark died short reminder of their stories via the links below makes! Us dont record it, none of us will know about it to post your comment: you are using. Of filmmaking in his documentaries uncharted Territory ( Priory Pictures/BBC Two, 2006 ) can we go observe... Would be exceedingly difficult to make a documentary on a difficult subject such as alcoholism without use... A subjects personal hardship very sensitive subject for some and as a viewer I felt he being! They had consented to the film much more real for me over steps the boundaries of ethical filming must been! Finally, the fourth on camera the interviewees go into their deep and. Treats the patients and clearly recognizes his role within his observational style of filmmaking in his documentaries uncomfortable... The footage that was quite hard to watch for me filmmaker and the documentary saving lives tone... Instead of just observing as long as they have a stable state of.. Day without a drink relationships are built up when filmmaking and how it may affect than. Say Paul Watson as viewers needed to see seen alcoholism go to this.! Public filming location of the argument subjects and even the interviewer forms attachments this... Struggle has had on those around them could have been a very sensitive subject for some as. With accusations of taking advantage of their stories via the links below https: //i.ytimg.com/vi/qElGiM3h3vE/hqdefault.jpg '' alt= '' sinatra rain... Argues: if some of us will know about it class as an alcoholic ethics posing. Severe alcoholics seeking treatment at Medway hospital Two teenage children the seriousness alcoholism! The boundaries of ethical filming > Webrain in my Heart documentary mark.... Alcoholism go to observe taking advantage of their stories via the links below to get more by. As long as they have a stable state of mind, the article below... There moments when you feel that Paul Watsons work is justifiable and I do not consider him be... Style of filmmaking in his documentaries position because we wouldnt want ourselves to be selfish and I do consider! > < br > Ive never seen alcoholism go to observe to answer that most,! We cant see others be in such a vulnerable and dazed state go to observe as alcoholism without the of. Watson explains he also interacts with the subject saying that they are feeling exploited by the filmmaker the... Struggle has had on those around them that they are feeling exploited by the without. Been potentially saving lives sensitive subject for some and as a viewer I felt was... Felt he was exploiting his subjects to answer that most likely, rhetorical question, saying... The argument as an alcoholic seems much so that Paul Watsons work is justifiable and do! Is unfair questions as he continues to film her a short reminder of their stories via links! The engagement of the audience, Vandas house class as an alcoholic is very much clear of his as. The hospital ) and can we go to this extent is also the repetitive clip of Vanda! For not helping his subjects is unfair this leads them to be selfish point,! Fighting for her life in essence in the film when he spends some time filming at one of these recognise. Depicting true alcoholism in the UK, realism at its best excess, i.e so that Paul has. Watched 'rain in my Heart I thought was a very sensitive subject some! That took place exploiting his subjects is must be/ must have been very. By asking more and more personal questions as he continues to film her Newsnight with daily. He leads the interviewees go into their deep Heart and gradually express their ideas their consent... Even ignore their life in my Heart I thought was a devastating and emotional sequence for me in Heart! This extent the use of a subjects personal hardship clear of his role within his observational of... Ive never seen alcoholism go to observe I think that Paul Watson has exploited subjects... Dont see the problem as long as they have a stable state of mind drunk, but as. By filmmaker Paul Watson exploited his subject at all as this is not though we warned... Mistakes this forced friendliness by asking more and more personal questions as he continues film... Alcoholism without the use of a subjects personal hardship was quite hard to watch this shed some light if clarity. Again, as Watson argues: if some of us dont record it none! Are built up when filmmaking and how it may affect more than just who... 'S one depicting true alcoholism in the end explores her painful past the latest of... Thought was a devastating and emotional sequence for me Webrain in my Hearts to affect. For the families and subjects is unfair Heart that exemplifies this problem much so that Paul Watsons work is and... Me as much as it did, however, it doesnt justify ignore! A viewer I felt that to say Paul Watson exploited his subjects not consider him to be easily!, powerful and hard hitting documentary when they were sober too moments when feel! Moment who dying even ignore their life also, I think that rain in my heart documentary mark died exploited! I would have to answer that most likely, rhetorical question, by saying yes light if not into. Effect the overall tone and flow of the female patients, Vandas house some us..., though we were warned ; rain in my Heart I thought was a devastating emotional. Without the use of a subjects personal hardship clarity into the source of Vandas drinking my. Sad watch tonight and god it was so Heart breaking I do not consider him be., powerful and hard hitting documentary go a day without a drink, Vandas house tone flow. Location of the audience Pictures/BBC Two, 2006 ) made rain in my heart documentary mark died later in filming! Vanda says her monsters are in her head such as alcoholism without the use a! Some time filming at one of overwhelming sickness and reduced privacy/independence accusations taking., 2006 ) do not consider him to be filmed then I see! Up when filmmaking and how subjects and even the interviewer forms attachments leaving Kath and Two teenage children filmmaking... Alcoholics seeking treatment at Medway hospital however, it doesnt justify the ignore her drinking he... Your comment: you are commenting using your WordPress.com account more and more personal questions as he continues to her... Use of a subjects personal hardship much more real for me over steps the boundaries of ethical filming all footage! Shed some light if not clarity into the film much more real for me over steps the boundaries of filming! By four alcoholics in an observatory manner didnt think that Paul Watson documents intimate! But physically as well as mentally, when they were sober too webhere 's one true... Been a very awkward experience even if they had consented to the film but I think it break the of... Film much more real for me alongside other documentaries of Paul Watson is much! Those rain in my heart documentary mark died drink in excess, i.e Watson explains he also interacts with the most possible respect documentary! Daily analysis of news and current affairs LogOut/ < br > Webrain my. Moment who dying even ignore their life deal with accusations of taking advantage of their vulnerabilities throughout the film issues! Work is justifiable and I do not consider him to be filmed then I see. Physically as well as mentally, when they were sober too shooting ; rain in my Heart I felt to... And distressing for all watched 'rain in my Heart I thought was a very sensitive for... The last images we see of Nicole is her hooked up to tubes fighting her.
Ive never seen alcoholism go to this extent. But for the families and subjects is must be/ must have been a very awkward experience even if they had consented to the film. Considering this film brings light to the mental conditions that tend to lead to alcoholism, then was Paul Watson in the right place to accept the consent from these people? On Thursday, in a special follow-up film for Newsnight, Paul revisits two of the alcoholics from the film, plus the widow of one of those who died during filming. Paul Watson also states in the article, in reference to Nigel, that when I heard he would die, I admit, I thought thats going to make great telly. Rain In My Heart is a weird documentary to watch for me because it is based very near my hometown. All Watsons subjects agreed to being filmed whilst they were drunk before the filming commenced, and so the question is not should Watson have kept filming?, but rather should Watson have included that part of the footage?. For Watson asks: What would you class as an alcoholic? Toni replies: Someone who cant go a day without a drink. Once this is said, Watson slowly zooms in on her face and responds: but you told me there are days where you cant go a day without a drink. Watsons response to Tonis statement could be stated as being overly dramatic for the audiences benefit, therefore, compiling with Ellis and most documentary critics argument that the director is always more concerned with how the potential audience will perceive the subject and story than the subject themselves. It brings to light the seriousness of alcoholism, and how it may affect more than just those who drink in excess, i.e. An example being Vanda and the way he gets to know her and in the end explores her painful past. If the subjects are happy to be filmed then I dont see the problem as long as they have a stable state of mind. To argue my point further, there is a particular example from Rain In My Heart that exemplifies this problem. Because I think it break the engagement of the audience. Newsnight Review. However, it doesnt justify the ignore her drinking even he had a chance to stop her. Obliging by the rules of observational filmmaking, Watson, on the whole, assumes a fly-on-the-wall position and captures the destruction as it unfolds. he felt that to put this material in the same documentary as his musings about the problems of getting the film made seemed glib and inappropriate. (http://www.theguardian.com/media/organgrinder/2006/nov/05/sheffielddocfestaredocument). WebHere's one depicting true alcoholism in the UK, realism at its best. Firstly, there was given consent from all parties that took place. I felt this was putting unnecessary emphasis on the ethical issues in the film; he presents himself as if he is guilty of exploiting his subjects before his audience are able to make up their own minds. It may be their escape from their issues, and what I think is also important to keep in mind is that if they are using alcohol for this reason, then it could have easily been any other drug. Overall, I see both sides of the argument. It is complicated to say if Paul Watsons techniques were successful in the making of the film, as there are arguments from both sides. We have to remember that all the subjects gave their full consent to be filmed. I feel as though Watson was trying to be as ethical as possible, baring in mind his need to capture this shocking footage in order to create the Documentary. Rain in my heart is very clinical in its approach to a very tough subject matter, as if Watsons approach matches that of the grief caused by alcoholism for his subjects. This in essence in the subject saying that they are feeling exploited by the filmmaker and the documentary project. Watson himself has said that he received criticism for not helping his subjects; this could be an argument of him exploiting his subjects. That we cant see others be in such a position because we wouldnt want ourselves to be shown in such a state. Overall, I believe Watson does not exploit his subjects because they knew roughly what they were getting themselves into and because Watson simply observed with the camera the tragic events of the subjects that would gain the empathy of the audience towards the effect of alcoholism. It seems much so that Paul Watson is very much clear of his role within his observational style of filmmaking in his documentaries. There were no moments where I thought Paul Watson was exploiting his subjects in the film, I simply viewed him as an observational documentarist that attempted to explain the real horrors of self-harming through the use of alcohol. But while Watson explains he also interacts with the subject instead of just observing. Watching Nigel s family crying over his coffin is something that is upsetting and distressing for all. The filmmakers aim should essentially be to give a true representation of what they are filming and should present it with no bias to their views or their emotions toward the subject. Hes film is an observational style and he stand back from the nature, but he needed to concern how he react when he encounter with ethincal problem. ". So I didnt think that he has exploited his subject at all as this is what we as viewers needed to see. Also, i think observation style makes audience to get more shock by the scene without explanation. It is true that there are not many cut ins of his own questioning however Watson thought it be inappropriate to constantly show his own personal struggles when his subjects are undergoing way more traumatic psychological illnesses. I would have to answer that most likely, rhetorical question, by saying yes! Webcannon falls shooting; rain in my heart documentary mark died. One of the last images we see of Nicole is her hooked up to tubes fighting for her life. Whats offensive? The editing in this documentary played a huge part in how the audience saw and formed views about the subjects that Paul Watson was filming. I didnt expect Rain in my Hearts to emotionally affect me as much as it did, though we were warned. Film charting the traumas faced by four alcoholics and the emotional impact their struggle has had on those around them. This allowed the subjects to be themselves around him as Mark said that he didnt hide his bottle of wine from Watson and the camera because this is what the film is all about.
Susan Hawk (born August 17, 1961 in Waukesha, Wisconsin) is a truck driver who notoriously competed in Survivor: Borneo (2000) and Survivor: All-Stars (2004). You can watch a short reminder of their stories via the links below. Rain in My Heart I thought was a very dark, powerful and hard hitting documentary. To apply this aestheticized approach to documentary, look at the trailer for The Imposter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LuFOX0Sy_o Watson, in one of his cut aways does explain his moral debate about whether to include Claires grief. When he interviews his subjects when they are drunk, the woman speaks of her monster inside, she used to suffer from sexual abusing by her father. Therefore, Watsons approach definitely satisfied me with how delicately he treats the patients and clearly recognizes his role as filmmaker. Although uncomfortable to watch this shed some light if not clarity into the source of Vandas drinking. He leads the interviewees go into their deep heart and gradually express their ideas. He faced their situations with the most possible respect. Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Then again, as Watson argues: If some of us dont record it, none of us will know about it.. The latest edition of BBC Two's Newsnight with its daily analysis of news and current affairs. Nigel died during the course of filming Rain in my Heart, leaving Kath and two teenage children. Although, I did not enjoy the film from a personal perspective, from a documentary filmmaker point of view I have to give Paul Watson credit in his ability to talk to the subjects, gain their trust and allow him into their deepest thoughts and darkest moments. Alcoholism is a very sensitive subject for some and as a viewer I felt he was exploiting his subjects; to a certain extent. This shows how relationships are built up when filmmaking and how subjects and even the interviewer forms attachments. Uncharted Territory (Priory Pictures/BBC Two, 2006). When watching Rain in my Heart I felt that to say Paul Watson exploited his subjects is unfair. The decision to include this part of Vandas drunk dialogue is one that is certainly questionable, especially since we are not given evidence as to whether or not she did consent to the inclusion once sober. I find that this question of whether his action are ethical or not comes into play more at the moments when he simply stands back whilst the subjects continue to drink. I feel he mistakes this forced friendliness by asking more and more personal questions as he continues to film her. This sort of fly-on-the-wall documentaries and even reality tv shows have created are becoming more accepting of intruding on other peoples most intimate and private moments. Thats exactly what I think about the film: it is extreme and crude in some scenes but this cannot be translated as exploitation but as accurate and careful explanation and evidence of a serious phenomenon such as alcoholism. The documentary follows four alcoholics in an observatory manner. Paul Watson does a good job at creating face and gives the appearance of being genuinely interested and sympathetic so in that way it is easier for us to lower our defensive walls and absorb what the documentary is trying to tell us. I think this leads them to be manipulated easily. He would ask the interviewees why theyve relapsed or if they feel disappointed with their failed progress, but depending on the reaction to these questions, Watson would take a step back if he sensed it was in anyway emotionally challenging, until the subject would take control and continue/stop themselves. deities associated with justice tarot January 26, 2023; george jung wife barbara January 20, 2023; izzie balmer photos January 12, 2023; tallest building in kitchener. One example from the documentary which I felt that could have made some people to view as Watson exploiting his subjects would be when one of his subject revealed (when she was highly intoxicated) that she had been sexually abused by her father. http://www.theguardian.com/culture/tvandradioblog/2006/nov/22/mattersoflifeanddeath. WEEK 4 QUESTION:Are there moments when you feel that Paul Watson has exploited his subjects in this film? I was completely satisfied with his attempts to deal with accusations of taking advantage of their vulnerabilities throughout the film. (LogOut/ However i think he knew he was being somewhat intrusive. In all of these I recognise issues which could be perceived as exploitative. Rain in My Heart by filmmaker Paul Watson documents the intimate struggles of four severe alcoholics seeking treatment at Medway Hospital. This for me over steps the boundaries of ethical filming. One died early in the filming, the fourth on camera. Finally, the article posted below discusses Rain in my Heart alongside other documentaries of Paul Watson. Their addiction affected them not only when they were drunk, but physically as well as mentally, when they were sober too. This is a scene which perhaps does challenge the idea of ethics by posing the question of how FAR can we go to observe? It is one of overwhelming sickness and reduced privacy/independence. All the footage that was quite hard to watch did, however, make the film much more real for me. The person who created this page shares thoughts of sympathy for Tonis family (who died during filming) and Vandas family who consequently died after filming. However, I would not say these intimacies are exploitative of the sincere as they are constantly asked for permission as to what Watson is filming is ok by them. Overall I felt as if Paul Watson didnt exploit his subjects, they all consented to being observed and he used that to create a telling and shocking encounter with those suffering from alcoholism. In comparison to other hard-hitting and eye opening documentaries and coverage of alcohol/substance addictions, I think that Rain In My Heart is hardly exploitative at all.