April 11, 2016

Dear Division 16,

Tomorrow we are attending a documentary film screening along with a claymation workshop with the Reel 2 Real Film Festival.

We will be viewing short documentary films from Egypt, the Netherlands, Canada and Australia.

Please peruse the information at the following links, which connect to the topics we will be watching on Tuesday.

Information on the Rights of the Child:  http://www.unicef.org/rightsite/484_540.htm

Information on China’s one child policy: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy

Information about Egypt’s 2011 Revolution: http://www.youngzine.org/article/egypts-new-revolution

Information from the SPCA about humane conditions for farm animals: http://www.spca.bc.ca/animal-issues/campaign-issues/canadas-standards-for-farm-animals.html

Information about synesthesia: https://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/syne.html

For your post today, please write a short comment about our discussion in class today about documentary films.

In your response, please comment on whether you think it’s appropriate for a documentary to take a position on an issue or circumstance.  Please explain your thinking (why or why not?).  Try to include the terms “subjective” and “objective” in your response.

I look forward to your response!



  1. Amythest

    I subject to have an postion on an issue or circumstance in a documentary. I subject because if it is a really bad and important issue it could be with the government or with our prime minister and the documentary creators/ producers know some stuff that the public doesn’t know and the people who are apart of the issue don’t want the public to know about it, but the documentary reveals a lot of information. For how ever long the documentary is aloud to stay up all of the public who see the documentary will know then they could write about the issue and put it on the Internet and same thing it will get taken down and people will see it.

  2. den10@sea43

    For most documentaries I think that they are biased because they want to prove a point our rase awareness around the topic so people with think that it is absolutely wrong but sometimes they also have solutions to. There are not many things that humans talk about or want to talk about these days!

  3. The Baconator

    I think that it is fine if a documentary takes a position in an issue because basically all documentaries are bias. They are trying to raise awareness and give knowledge. The people that make documentaries believe in something and want other people to think like them about that subject. People watch documentaries to learn specifically about that topic and that is what the makers want.

  4. 14A Dinosaur

    I think it is appropriate to have a stance as documentary maker because I would make it on an issue I was passionate about for a reason. For example, you might want to get your point across to people about preventing a certain pipe being built, or a certain animal becoming extinct. This would make my documentary subjective because I would want to make a certain point to help solve a problem. However, if I made an Objective documentary, I think it would cause less contoversy, and if someone got mad it would be because of their own conclusion. Another problem about subjectivity is that some of the facts might not be entirely true, and if they’re not true you could be blamed for posting lies. A subjective documentary might not include information that is contrary to its goals.

    Subjective: you are coming from a certain point or angle. It’s personal.
    Objective: you are coming from all angles. It’s factual.

  5. Smallbrowndog

    I think it is fine for the documentaries to be biased against something because everyone has their own opinion and that is perfectly fine. The people that are making these documentaries are trying to make money so they would get more people watching because the audience wouldn’t have someone saying that one thing is better than another. It could well be but supporters of that thing wouldn’t want to watch it. Also if they did that they wouldn’t get as much money as maybe they would if they weren’t showing biased views that other people may not agree with.

  6. Purple Pickle

    I think a Documentary should try to be objective around what there talking about because Documentary films aren’t supposed to judge on what information there trying to give you, but… in some circumstances it’s okay for a Documentary to be subjective because they might be trying to give out information that’s actually harmful to other living things & the environment, that’s when it’s okay to be subjective because you’re trying to warn people and give them information that they shouldn’t do because it’s harmful along with giving them other information on the topic the Documentary that’s maybe just a fun fact or a fact that’s objective.

  7. super cheese cake

    I would prefer a documentary that does not contain personal thoughts because that could make the viewer confused about what they should choose and cannot choose. And they will lose the ability to choose fairly since their minds are confused from the documentaries. The documentaries might also enhance their personal stance subjectively about and make the viewers to lose their ability to think objectively.

  8. Crazychicken lover

    1# i think that a documentary would be better with a opinion because theyre are only 2 things that make up documentaries, nonfiction and opinions without those two it would just be a normal movie. Documentary are made to prove things. Its not a act, they want to show a certain opinion. Without opinion there wouldnt be a point of makimg a documentary because they want to prove something. A normal movie doesnt really have a opinion, it isnt really biased because it trys to portray how the movie is like. Its not really made to persuade people and not really a drive for change. I would prefer a documantary with a biased detail because if you have watched a documantary it has lots of biased details because they dont show everything. I would say it would be objective.

  9. the Dude

    What we talked about in class about documentaries is that we can never really know the truth because scientists are always finding out new things. For example, say there is a species of animal that is near extinction, it is not possible to know exactly how many animals are left because we would have to count each one individually. Documentaries are mainly something that is meant to be fact, but sometimes this is not true because the director may have a particular view on the subject. In my opinion, most documentaries should be unbiased. They should strive to tell the truth. However, some people have different ideas about what the truth is. For example, if you are a good person, biased, but saying your opinion, and you go to a war-torn country as a photographer and realize the leader is doing bad things. You put that into your documentary and make the leader look bad. This is not just being biased, this is more telling the truth. Say for example that in the United States and all across the world every different person has a different view on Donald Trump. Some people say he is going to save the world, and others say he is going to burn it to the ground. It all depends on opinion, and who you are talking to.

  10. smeagaleater10

    I think that it is not appropriate for a documentary to be subjective on any certain topic. The main reason for people to be subjective would be a certain attraction or disgust to the topic. Also, if a documentary is subjective it can give the people who watch it the wrong impression on the topic. If the people who make the documentary tried to make their film more objective it would help people make more educated decision. There are also subjects that have more pros than cons or vice versa, for those topics they may seem subjective but it is just good decision by the creators.

  11. DancingPorcupine

    I think that documentaries with objective or subjective points of view are good depending on the topic of the documentary. I think that documentaries have to be subjective if they are about politics or other things that everyone has to pick a side for because you are trying to persuade people to have the same opinion as you, but for documentaries about things like a specific sports team I don’t think it matters because that is not something that everyone cares about where as politics is something that everyone gets involved in. I do think that all documentaries have a subjective point of view even if that isn’t really the thing that the documentary is trying to focus on.

  12. The Bean

    The main purpose of non-fiction should be to share knowledge, because once someone has that knowledge, they are able to formulate an opinion which is arguably more important then the knowledge. But If someone is still objective and just learning about an issue for the first time, and they’re being informed only about the negative about say whales in captivity, then they’re automatically going to start thinking that sea world is a horrible place. This does make sense though because I would guess that most documentaries are created by people who are probably pretty subjective and probably have lots of reasons why. If people want to create films to inform people of what they believe in and what they think is important then by all means they should be aloud to. But that doesn’t mean they can’t show all the sides of the issue to make sure that people can think about what they’ve seen without being subjective. I think that this is also something commonly seen in politics as well, especially during elections. Some parties will make promises about more specific issues that most of the public probably don’t know about to take advantage of the more objective voters who may be less informed.

  13. Rouge

    I think that for a good documentary to be made it has to show background information and new learning to share with the viewers so that we can have enough knowledge to make an informed opinion on that matter. I also think that documentaries should show an opinion or preference from the view of the film maker so we can see what they were thinking when they were making the film. The documentary makers should be subjective in the film because they care about the film and its message or awareness that they are sharing with the public. However I also think that documentaries shouldn’t be too subjective before they give the audience a chance to think about the information that they are taking in. Sometimes it might be better for the film makers to take a more objective approach to the film and then later weave their opinions into the documentary. I believe that documentaries purpose is to bring audiences information and non-fiction in a multi-media and creative way, sometimes the non-fiction part is taken over by very strong opinions or biases towards the topic, but sometimes the opinions add to the film in an amazing way.

  14. Ginger

    I think that it is quite important for documentaries and other informational videos to be subjective, one way or another. I think that the best documentaries are made by people who are passionate about a particular subject. Passionate filmmakers are more likely to make subjective documentaries because they will be hoping to convince viewers of a particular point of view. I think that documentaries that are subjective are also more interesting to watch, because they let you see into a little part of the filmmaker’s mind. If documentaries just showed information about a topic and no opinions or debates, it could be a very boring documentary. Even documentaries that are solely made to teach us about a specific animal, for example, could be subjective if the filmmakers and directors show us how the animal is becoming endangered, invasive or harmful.


    I think that documentary’s should be subjective because when they are they probably will be more interesting because they are giving you there side and opinion. If documentary’s where only objective they wouldn’t be that interesting.

  16. Joaquin

    I think it is better for a documentary to be objective.Because when documentary’s are objective they tell the story from the person perspective not some r person random that was there.

  17. Sr.Fruitcake

    I think that most documentaries are subjective because often documentaries are made to protest or to educate people on problems or situations in the world. I think it is highly appropriate for documentaries to be subjective because in my opinion it adds to the documentary when there is a specific opinion or point of view in place. A objective documentary would be unusual but could be interesting depending on the context or topic. I think that documentaries are more entertaining and compelling when they are subjective and not objective. I would like to see someone make a full length documentary that was objective, I think this would be quite the challenge.

  18. Soccerboy123ABC

    I think that it is appropriate for documentary makes to be subjective because they are making it because it’s a passion of theirs not because someone is forcing them and they really care about what their doing which makes them do a better job on the film and really go into detail about what their trying to say and giving a reason and proof with it so that people really understand their complaint or point . I think that when they compare it makes really good informational videos because they just choose a random family to compare and they get the families to say what they want and I think that they have to be subjective because they made it for a reason.


    I think that is definitely okay for the producers of a documentary to take a position. For example, in the film “Zoe”, the position of the filmmaker was that using only cage free eggs would help be more humane. Chickens deserve better then a cage the size of a scrap paper’s perimetre. Having a bias enhances the film because you get a more specific perspective on peoples’ views. For example, the film on Luke Wallace definitely showed a bias because it seemed to support his protests and the film was more interesting to hear him want to protect the coastline where he lived.

  20. Koshka2

    The documentary are all really powerful, no matter what happens things can change the world like how Zoe save most of chickens life. No matter what notting is FAIR. Even if you make some kind of bet, NO, it’s still not fair no matter what, it’s also use full that we get to know what’s happening around the world rather the the news, which doesn’t even show you the whole world. Know the city’s and town could be a ton of knowledge. Do as the city.

  21. GamingPickle84

    most documentaries are subjective because they need to show an opinion so people will get what it is trying to tell
    so I think that documentaries have to be subgective.
    but the documentaries they chose at the film festival where very objective like with the one where the girl had synesthesia
    they didn’t say it was bad but it still had some cons
    I think documentary about a place or thing would be more objective then a documentary about a person

  22. Arcticowl

    i think its appropriate for documentary films to have a issue or circumstance. Because most documentary films show issues and circumstances and how we can fix them. Or people that want to change the world and are inspired by things.There are lots of different types of documentary films. All have a purpose of being there because they want people to see them, so they can reach out and help them solve these problems or help.Documentary films should have a issue in them so it can make us feel emotional so we want to learn more and maybe help.There are so many problems in the world some small some big but if we take even the smallest problem it helps.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s