Perhaps I'm being difficult, but I'm not deriving pleasure from documentaries the way I used to. I realize I'm speaking in generalities, please humor me.

I find the presentation of most modern docs so hyperdramatic and forced, it detracts from the underlying subject matter.

I would prefer if documentaries tried their best to collect and present information in a fascinating way, and present it as reasonably neutral as possible, with some leeway for the author's voice. I don't appreciate it when the superficial presentation constantly tries to cue me emotionally.

I really don't understand why I have to have violen symphony music playing like it's the eve of world war 3, and all the nukes are about to be launched, when I'm watching a documentary about snail parasites or particle collider research.

Even though it's different auditorially, to me it's the same principle as applying a laugh track to a comedy show. I don't need it suggested to me when something is funny, and I don't need to be cued by string orchestra music that something is serious or worrisome. Please trust me to make these judgments on my own!

I think all trends ebb and flow but this one seems to have taken root and it's doesn't seem to be letting up.

I wonder if other people feel this way, or if I'm just watching the wrong things?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BenLeMan@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The documentaries by Frederick Wiseman are very good if somewhat old now. But he had this extremely "neutral" style where it always seemed as though he was just showing things as they were, without even commenting on them. I liked the one about the hospital best, but Blind was also quite good. Otherwise, if you can stomach serious subjects, Claude Lanzmann's hours-long Shoah is one of the most poignant and simultaneously "dry" documentaries I have ever seen. Or so I remember; it's been a while.