Both An Inconvenient Truth and Man on Wire are
documentaries. However, one holds interest far easier than the other, Man on
Wire. Why is this? It all has to do
with the non-diegetic elements, the way the information is presented, and the
subject matter.
The first reason that Man on Wire is more
entertaining, and keeps interest easier than An Inconvenient Truth is
due to the non-diegetic (all sounds besides dialogue) elements. In An
Inconvenient Truth, the only sounds that are present are Al Gore’s voice
and his audience, which are diegetic. The video below portrays this aspect of
Al Gore’s documentary.
No non-diegetic is used. This obviously doesn’t make for an
exciting documentary, especially if the viewer doesn’t like Al Gore’s voice,
which is pretty much all they hear. However, in Man on Wire there is
background music. Police sirens were in the background when they were talking
about the police after them, etc. It was a drastic difference, for the better.
The next reason that Man on Wire was more interesting
is due to the way that the information gets presented. As mentioned above, in An
Inconvenient Truth there is only Al Gore, and there really isn’t a plot to
follow. Man on Wire has both a plot to follow, whether or not Phillipe
will be caught, and Phillipe, Jean-Louis,
Phillipe’s girlfriend, “the Australian”, his two American accomplices; the list
goes on and on of those who talk to the viewer. Some of the people don’t speak English
either, so the viewer gets to read subtitles, though it isn’t like watching the
movie Hero where the entire film is subtitles. That fact ensures that
the viewer pays attention to the screen, making it more interesting.
The final reason that Man on Wire was more
entertaining than An Inconvenient Truth is that the subject matter was
more interesting. What keeps interest better, global warming or a man tightrope
walking between the twin towers? An Inconvenient Truth doesn’t stand a
chance.
Man on Wire definitely has much more going for it
than An Inconvenient Truth. Thanks to the non-diegetic elements, style,
and subject of the documentary, it wins hands down. That doesn’t mean that Al
Gore’s documentary is bad, it just needs the viewer to really be interested in
what he is saying.
Absolutely, the format of MOW is more inherently compelling than AIT. AIT feels more like something science teachers would make their classes watch whenever they had a substitute.
ReplyDeleteThere is SOME non-diagetic sound in AIT, but there isn't a lot. There is some during the Simpsons cartoon and also some very subtle scoring under the Gore personal narrative stuff.