Here's a part of the documentary and will help illustrate what I discuss below.
A documentary about a font. I know what you may be thinking: How could this seemingly minute subject be explored interestingly in a feature length documentary? Well, turns out there is quite a bit too say about one of most famous font-types in modern times. Nevertheless, the documentary also isn't just an exploration of Helvetica. I would consider it a film about graphic design with the font as its main focus. I seemed to learn more about graphic designer's opinions about type face in general than just Helvetica's history, impact, etc.
In any case, I feel this documentary did an excellent job at showcasing TONS of examples (some would consider this 'B-roll' actually A-roll) of where Helvetica is found without being monotonous or repetitive (i.e. signs, logos, posters, etc.). So, I decided I would analyze how exactly Gary Hustwit and his editor achieved this effect and what elements are at play in those sequences.
1. Pauses/Segue
First off, these sequences act as brief pauses between the various interviews and segue between them. It really allows the viewer to take in what was just said and relate it to the character of this documentary - Helvetica. I feel that without these pauses, the documentary as a whole would risk being monotonous with the majority of dialogue/information being traditional-style interviews. As mentioned before the sequences do a nice job at segueing into the next 'topic.' It feels like we are taken out of the office and/or design studio environment into the environment outside were Helvetica actually is and lives.
2. Music
The majority of these sequences have music. The music really creates a strong sense of continuity, which is really helpful because of the varying shots. I also feel that the music fosters meditation on each shot individually as well as how they relate to one another and the documentary as a whole.
3. Variation/Recognition Aspect
One of the main reasons the segue sequences are not monotonous (or at least for the most part) is because of the variation in shots. Although we're seeing the same font-type over and over again, every shot is different. They each have their character about them. I also found myself searching for Helvetica in every shot. Obviously, it was easy to do but it kept me engaged and interested in any case.
4. Relationship with Content
Another use for these sequences is its relationship with the designers and experts' knowledge and opinions. After I heard commentary about the font, I tried to apply what I heard to the plentiful shots of its real-world application. For example, one of the main things the documentary touches on is how Helvetica is modern, clean, and unbiased. The unique thing about Helvetica is that it has a look of impartiality and lack of innate expression, a response to atrocious chaos of the Second World War. The sequences really were necessary is allowing the viewer to then see Helvetica and think about it in certain ways (framed so by the interviews that preceded each montage).
Although these sequences really breathe life into the documentary as a whole, strong interviews and nice flow as well as an interesting subject matter really made for an excellent documentary.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Good pinpointing of how those sequences work. I'm wondering about a couple of other reasons they work: (1) grouping/scene building, and (2) rhythm of editing. You can see both of these play out in the clip you posted.
ReplyDeleteThere are clear 'scenes' if you will: the world cup billboard being pasted up. The Berlin zoo. The highway. The building that looks like a crossword puzzle. Even if it's just two shots together, they are connected, and together make a mini-scene.
Second, those shots that don't have that scene element often have something else going for them: a little featured moment, a reason for the in point and out point on the cut. It's a door opening and closing. Someone walking in front of the subway sign. A motorcycle going by. Something that drives the cutting, the choice of where to start and where to stop the shot: the featured moment.
A caveat from me: I really enjoyed this film, and loved about the first two-thirds of it (granted, it's been a couple of years). But at a certain point, the b-roll rising to the level of a-roll got old for me, and it went back down to b-roll, or z-roll for me. Did this ever happen for you, or were you captivated the whole way through?