Dissertation: Traditional Nature Documentary Research & Decision

Introduction

As mentioned in my Tutorial Feedback post, myself and Kath decided it would be significant to use a traditional nature documentary so that I have an example of a 'beneficial' documentary, plus can be used as a direct comparison against my other chosen example Blackfish.

Why a Nature Documentary?

The key reason I decided to use a nature documentary is purely because of it's huge success not in just recent years, but since documentaries were beginning to become popular. It provides a clear example of a traditional documentary - it remains completely realistic, very factual and is simply gratifying to watch for both entertainment and escapism reasons. All of these conventions can be argued that is what a traditional documentary should consist of - which makes it perfect to use as a contradiction compared to my other 2 examples (Blackfish and Benefits Street) which clearly tackle these traditional aspects.

Which Nature Doc is the Best?

Of course, choosing the right example is quite difficult to choose on the spot, due to the wide variety of nature documentaries which have been produced, particularly in recent years. It may seem ideal to use a nature doc which has been presented by the iconic Sir David Attenborough, however I've decided to conduct some research to choose which one in particular is the most traditional and more importantly most effective documentary to use.

The only limitations on which documentary can be used is that the documentary must be in the recent years, meaning it must be 2005 or newer.

Frozen Planet (2011)

Frozen Planet is a British nature documentary 7-part series which explores life and environment in both the Arctic and Antarctic. The series was produced by Vanessa Berkowitz, the same producer who produced the successful and iconic documentaries The Blue Planet (2001) and Planet Earth (2006). This would be a very effective example as it is also narrated by the iconic David Attenborough which almost alone is a traditional convention for nature documentaries, not forgetting that it's content too is  too conventional. Nonetheless, this would be almost directly compatible with Blackfish as this too has a section which documents on killer whales, enabling me to create a direct comparison within my dissertation. 

Frozen Planet is also a modern documentary making it more suited for comparison, and when watching it is clear how this is a prime example of showing that traditional documentaries do still exist, and that documentaries haven't evolved into a new modernised and controversial genre. The series also was awarded 4 Emmy awards in the US in 2012 and 3 BAFTAs, with awards ranging from 'Outstanding Nonfiction Series' to 'Best Photography: Factual', which helps to show its success. The series was also rated a high 9.1/10 on IMDB, making it in the top 10 nature documentaries of all time (according to IMDB)

Planet Earth (2006)

Also highly successful as its newer sister program Frozen Planet, Planet Earth too is a considerable example to use for my dissertation. Remaining just as traditional as Frozen Planet, this 11 part series explores a different biome or habitat on Earth, one for each episode. The program became so successful it was aired in 130 countries in under a year, leading it to reach a massive 9.5/10 rating on IMDB - being the highest rated documentary according to IMDB.

Nonetheless, the success of this documentary alone helps to convey traditional documentary aspects as the popularity of this series has almost made this iconic of nature documentaries - topped off by the fact that it is narrated by David Attenborough. The series took a massive 5 years to make which all paid off once the documentary was awarded 14 awards, 4 of which were Emmys including 'Outstanding Cinematography for Nonfiction Programming' and 'Outstanding Music Composition for a Series'.

Human Planet (2011)

Compared to the previous two examples, Human Planet follows a more niche and unique market as this documentary instead focuses on the nature of humans. However, this is still a nature documentary which can be argued to be traditional due to it still conveying the same conventions as the previous examples - just on humans instead. For example, the purpose is still to celebrate the meaning of life, gratifies entertainment and escapism needs and so on.

Nonetheless, this 8-part documentary was filmed in dozens of locations around the world, including deserts, jungles and rivers. Such documentary would be ideal for my dissertation due to it it's , and may even seem more suited to my dissertation as it could allow me to show how modern documentaries can remain traditional however in a unique and diverse way.

This British-produced documentary too was very successful - it received a 9.2/10 rating on IMDB and won 2 awards - 1 BAFTA (Best Editing Factual) and 1 Emmy (Outstanding Cinematography - Documentary and Long Form), showing how this would be a reliable example to use.

Monkey Kingdom (2015)

Brand new for this year, Monkey Kingdom too is a niche documentary. Created by Disneynature, this documentary follows the life of 2 monkeys - a mother named Maya, and a son called Kip. The main problem with this documentary is that it may not be entirely traditional - the narrative creates a disruption and dramatises the documentary by showing neighbouring monkeys taking over their home, which may question the documentaries realism due to this disruption having the chance of being forced. 

Nonetheless, the documentary still conveys elements of realism throughout despite this being a Disney production (as Disney rarely makes realistic productions) - the life of the 2 monkeys doesn't seem force and it is clear that the documentary celebrates the life and nature of monkeys. Furthermore, this could be an effective example due to the documentary literally being brand new, and showing how modern documentaries are still real and arguably traditional. 

The key problem with this however is it's fictionality - this may seem the least realistic compared to my other examples which isn't helped by the fact that it is created by Disney. Lastly, this could conclude how documentaries are now being marketed not only to celebrate awareness of the nature of monkeys, but are now being investigated  into major companies like Disney which give documentaries their own market and touch.

Final Decision: Frozen Planet (2011)

After researching what the most popular and successful documentaries are, I have decided to use Frozen Planet as my chosen example. This was a tough decision between this and Planet Earth - they were both highly iconic and successful nature documentaries which both show traditional conventions in documentaries - they celebrate the life of nature, provide plenty of factual information, and more importantly a wide variety of entertainment which allows the audience to escape from their everyday lives and allowing them to relax.

Human Planet however is a highly significant example particularly because of its uniqueness, however I feel that this niche market effects its conventionality as a traditional nature documentary, making it less effective to use as I need something which clearly shows what a traditional documentary is. This is the same for Monkey Kingdom - although clearly modern and entertaining, the fact that Disney has produced this documentary reduces its effect of being a traditional documentary as this is more of a one of production from Disney.

Nonetheless, the key reason I chose Frozen Planet over Planet Earth is purely because it is slightly more modern in terms of production age, and it enables me to create a direct comparison with Blackfish due to it having a section on killer whales themselves. Such comparison will enable me to see whether there's a  direction diversion in cinematic techniques (i.e. camera shot sizes, etc) thus allowing me to briefly conclude differences in terms of cinematic conventions between traditional and non-traditional documentaries.