I can understand how to other viewers, this film may be seen as a breach to ethics within filmmaking, with how Watson gets so close with his vulnerable subjects, however, I feel that Watsons approach is what makes this film such a powerful observation. There are only so many times we would need to see this clip before it becomes useless to the narrative, and is only trying to evoke fear in the audience as they start expecting, or even demanding, for the situation to suddenly become worse. Most Popular Now | 56,514 people are reading stories on the site right now. Although we see Paul telling Vanda that he will ask her later whether he should use this footage in the film, we do not know if he actually did it. All Watsons subjects agreed to being filmed whilst they were drunk before the filming commenced, and so the question is not should Watson have kept filming?, but rather should Watson have included that part of the footage?. Nigel, 49, has been dry for ten years, but the damage he has inflicted on his liver is irreversible. It is one of overwhelming sickness and reduced privacy/independence. I also believe Watson tried his best to tackle these accusations, baring in mind that overdoing it throughout the documentary could appear to undermine the actual traumas of the patients and their families. One particular scene is the funeral of Nigel, a man who lost his life due to the addiction. Otherwise it would not have been so real and touching and would not have had such an effect on those who watch it. Half a bottle of vodka on the train to work at the age of 17 began Mark's journey into alcoholism. As Watson edits his film himself he gets to choose what stays in the final cut, therefore raising other ethical issues as he may have only chosen to show the subjects at their worst and in very emotional states. For before the revealing of the alcohol, Watson greets Vanda by pecking her on the mouth and cheek. Watson intrudes on his film, importantly (and rather unromantically, when we consider the idea of immersive movie magic) shows him forging all the social contracts with his subjects at the start. I also at times found it hard to watch due to the harsh reality of the subjects lives. An example could be when Vanda talks about the monsters in her head, one of the monsters being her abusive father, that pushed her into the terrifying world of self-harm. I felt as if he cared for her wellbeing. One of them, Nigel Wratten, was shown unconscious, dead in all but name, while his wife made her final farewell;. Hes film is an observational style and he stand back from the nature, but he needed to concern how he react when he encounter with ethincal problem. I think to use the word exploitative to describe the techniques used by Watson to film Rain in my Heart upon his subjects is an unfair judgment. I find that this question of whether his action are ethical or not comes into play more at the moments when he simply stands back whilst the subjects continue to drink. At this weeks lecture, the first slide read Documentary is most creditable when it comes as close as possible to the experience of someone actually there. The edit involves numerous repeats of dialogue from the patients, which is played at random and juxtaposing episodes, some even without the visuals which make it seem part of the dialogue (for example, when Vanda slams the phone down in anger). That both are now vulnerable because they/we are putting ourselves forward to talk about something that is often bypassed. This is also something Watson shouldnt go into. Thus, having the camera in front of them made me feel that there was a sense of pressure on them to fulfil a certain image of an alcoholic. This can be seen when Watson is speaking to Toni about her addiction, something that Toni profusely denies she is. Also just to confirm Gillingham is a pretty shitty place to grow up in, so the documentary comes across as very sincere. Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. He also gained the trust of his subjects to the extent that Vanda confined in him regarding her abuse as a child, and Nigels wife wanting Watson to be there when she said goodbye to him. As with the film, this documentary presents some uncomfortable and hard to bear realities. So I guess Im not satisfied with his attempts to explain himself during the film, but only because I think he didnt need to in the first place. The film probably brought him a lot of attention (both positive and negative), which means hes profited from filming his subjects problems. This was mostly due to the fact that obviously he was filming people with huge vulnerability in their lives, therefore he was careful not to portray the situation as taking advantage of. That he doesnt so anything to stop them drinking is a part of their own agency, and I believe shows more respect than if he had intervened. You can watch a short reminder of their stories via the links below. This shows how relationships are built up when filmmaking and how subjects and even the interviewer forms attachments. Rain in my Heart (Full). Sometimes during the film I felt like I wanted to intervene in order to stop what the interviewees were struggling with while telling their stories. However, that would ruin his fly on the wall style of filmmaking. Anyway, audiences (including us) will always question whether a subject who is having their whole life pried open for viewing could be a victim of exploitation. He witnessed some horrific scenes throughout filming and only once (that I can recall) did he step in to hand Mark a sick bucket and express disappointment to Venda for her choosing to buy a bottle of vodka. Watson most definitely fulfilled what he set out to do and in order to do that, I feel he had to push the boundary as far as he did to achieve this hard-hitting documentary. Critical and disbelieving responses after giving personal information in a safe space, can cause as much pain and loneliness as the original abuse. He says My job is to explain, not entertain. Although it could be argued that this footage is showing Vanda what she is like when she is drunk, I would say that her answers might have been different if she was sober when she was asked them. Overall, I see both sides of the argument. What is interesting about this documentary is that when Paul Watson went to visit Vandas home and saw that she had relapsed, he admitted that he does develop emotional ties to the subjects that he is filming, but that he has the ability to stand back. - My Last Drunk Home About Us Alcohol Abuse Affects Your Health Alcohol Abuse Affects Others My Last Drunk Alcohol Abuse Rain in my Heart (Full). Twenty-nine when he appeared in Rain in my Heart, Mark was living on his own in an untidy flat that closely reflected his own state. Firstly there is very little music (it sounded like the grating pop track at Nigels funeral was actually being played live on a stereo) The camera work seems to lack precision and is only there for immediacy. As much as rain can cause happiness, there are times when this phenomenon can cause distress. Another point in this film is when Paul Watson films a drunk subject who discusses the, monsters in her head, which she previously was not ready to do. Print this design in the 3.5 x 5" size. Finally, the article posted below discusses Rain in my Heart alongside other documentaries of Paul Watson. Ive found this good review of the film on the internet: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661761/. After drinking heavily, people are definitely not in a normal status, which lead to a question that in what situation Paul Watson get the consent from these alcoholics. Rather, this extreme showing of suffering is an eduction, to open the spectators eyes to this disease and its effects. My beautiful wife, Denise . Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com. We have to remember that all the subjects gave their full consent to be filmed. He leads the interviewees go into their deep heart and gradually express their ideas. Watson observes the subjects but chooses not to intervene but to simply probe the subjects including their families. At first, I believe, Watson had every intention in trying to, in the most effective way possible, try and exploit his subjects. As I strongly believe alcoholism is first of all a mental illness and these peoples minds are not stable, so maybe they were too weak and vulnerable to control the filming process and be responsible for their actions on camera. In one scene we hear Watson as whether or not the information he is receiving from one of the subjects would be appropriate to include in the finished product. Thats exactly what I think about the film: it is extreme and crude in some scenes but this cannot be translated as exploitation but as accurate and careful explanation and evidence of a serious phenomenon such as alcoholism. The card is easy to customize with your wording, font, font color, paper shape options and choice of six paper types. This allowed the subjects to be themselves around him as Mark said that he didnt hide his bottle of wine from Watson and the camera because this is what the film is all about. Outside, the sparrows on the roof Are chirping in the dripping rain.Rain in my heart; rain on the roof; And memory sleeps beneath the gray And the windless sky and brings no dreams Of any well remembered day. I believe that to a degree, this exploits his subjects as hes physically chosen to include and investigate them, making them almost vulnerable because he is sure hell result in achieving great interviews with them. I believe he does ask himself sincere ethical questions and that he answers them truthfully. This is a scene which perhaps does challenge the idea of ethics by posing the question of how FAR can we go to observe? He just tried to observe that and filmed everything as it is, while they I assume from the very beginning had agreed to be filmed in any state they are. On Thursday, in a special follow-up film for Newsnight, Paul revisits two of the alcoholics from the film, plus the widow of one of those who died during filming. In the moment where Vanda passes out from over drinking, and we see Watson check her pulse, to me I felt as if he was concerned, he didnt sit back and observe her in a blackened out state, he checked on her, he was her responsibility at that moment. I think it is not proper for observational documentary, Watson deliberately shows his audience of certain moments to lead them into a certain emotion, which i think might be too subjective. Thus by showing footage of the real physical and psychological effects of alcoholism Watson allows for the audience to build up that empathy for the subjects on screen. A prediction such as this can alter the way she behaves and this documentary is no longer just an observation of her progress. My main criticism of the film is Watsons commentary on the events and decisions made during filming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjy8Z1hK2wY fromSchindlers List, Set to music, shot in thegorgeous shadows of black and white, and perfect balanced frames. Play over 265 million tracks for free on SoundCloud. He made it clear through out the film that he was never sure whether he should be filming his subjects or whether he should, at some points, be turning the camera off. There are so many implicit positives such as the awareness it gives people of the truth about alcoholism, its broadcasting the problems in society like a fresh scar, so audiences cant ignore or forget what they have learnt. In order to inform and have an impact on the audience, enough to make them think before undergoing any dangerous activity illustrated in the documentary, the use of empathy is crucial. The editing in this documentary played a huge part in how the audience saw and formed views about the subjects that Paul Watson was filming. It is true that his documentary can be judged and considered as an observational one: the filmmaker lets the interviewee talk about his or her problems and express all his or her weaknesses. Registered User. However, as an observational filmmaker, Watson has a certain obligation to the truth. WEEK 4 QUESTION:Are there moments when you feel that Paul Watson has exploited his subjects in this film? That we cant see others be in such a position because we wouldnt want ourselves to be shown in such a state. Rain In My Heart is a weird documentary to watch for me because it is based very near my hometown. So all these people dont mind being shown in their most vulnerable state on national TV and even Watson at times ask the subjects if they would like him to turn the camera off. I do not believe that Paul Watson was dealing with the accusations successfully, but I also do not believe that he was making this film completely selfishly. Rain In My Heart is a 2006 documentary about alcoholism. As the director said himself My job is to explain, not entertain. Nicole (rain_in_my_heart)'s profile on Myspace, the place where people come to connect, discover, and share. Twenty-nine-year-old Mark consumes two bottles of vodka per day. Nigel died during the course of filming Rain in my Heart, leaving Kath and two teenage children. I feel like Rain in My Heart must be a controversial documentray in terms of how dealing with the ethics in this film. And it tells us a lot; it is educational, eye opening and informative. Although the documentary is very intimate, in both its setting and the framing of the subjects as the yellow-y and fatigued skin of the subjects is shown through close ups. It was arguably and subtly manipulative how he often said would you like to carry on? as he was probably aware that the answer would be yes due to the state of the interviewees. June 27, 2015 by webadmin Watch on YouTube Watch on Brilliant, unflinching documentary on alcoholism by Kent film maker Paul Watson. And it is also a good example to discuss the ethical issues in the documentary. By the time she married at 18 she was a serious drinker - the marriage didn't last, nor did a succession of jobs despite her being able to speak at least two other languages. He is good at capturing facial expressions and touching moments, though he constantly replays repeated footage to create a moment. One ethical issue that could be introduced at this point is how certain filmmakers victimise their subjects. Stream "I've Got Rain In My Heart" by The Fresh Experience on desktop and mobile. Kath now struggles on a severely limited income. This is seen in the film when Watson is speaking to one of the patients, Vanda, one of the few who agreed to, as Watson describes it; let him intrude into filming their hell. Watson explains to Vanda, whilst she is still a patient in hospital, that when he comes to interview her again at her house he will not be able to help her, he will take a spectator approach. There is also the repetitive clip of when Vanda says her monsters are in her head. Watson is not overly invasive at any point, and if anything my only criticism would be that he sometimes gives too much insight into how he feels about what is happening during filming, which I find unnecessary. 2 . For one the subjects were extremely vulnerable which raises the question on whether they were in the right state of mind to consent to being filmed and telling their story. Its probably doing far more good than bad, just in terms of getting the reality of alcoholism out there. But while Watson explains he also interacts with the subject instead of just observing. Or when Nigel downs a glass of red wine. Watson edits and cross-cuts footage to emphasize reccuring themes across the alcoholics. Forum Member. Listen to Rain' in My Heart on the English music album Wonderful Soundtrack by Slim Harpo, only on JioSaavn. http://www.theguardian.com/culture/tvandradioblog/2006/nov/22/mattersoflifeanddeath. Rain In My Heart is a very powerful documentary which gives us all-round access to the issue of alcoholism with a key focus on four of its sufferers. The film charts the traumas faced by the alcoholics as they bounce between Gillingham Medway Maritime Hospital and their homes, and highlights the emotional impact their struggle has had on those around them. I do feel that in a way Paul Watson has exploited all of his subjects in this film. He faced their situations with the most possible respect. Change), You are commenting using your Twitter account. To argue my point further, there is a particular example from Rain In My Heart that exemplifies this problem. In this process, the audience can get more understanding about the characters and theme. When researching the film I found a web page (which is a old BBC one). (LogOut/ About the same age as Vanda, Kath has spent more than a decade caring for an alcoholic. I think the fact that this documentary is so hard to watch gives light to the reality that alcoholism is incredibly hard to live with, and by being so thorough the film shortens the gap between subject and audience. Seeing the filmmakers process on screen is great when theyre doing something that you need to see. The game uses a beautiful and funny graphics engine to make everything look. On the positive side of the argument I agree that Watson, through the cut away shots he includes throughout the film, allows himself to be more personal with the audience. When watching the film, there various moments where I felt Paul Watson over stepped the mark, and exploited his subjects. Is it really more important that showing the dangerous of alcoholism by peoples moment who dying even ignore their life? Throughout the documentary there are cut ins of Watson discussing ethical implications during the filming process. My point being, Watson could have constructed his Documentary in a more ethical way (probably without capturing the outstanding footage he managed to get) or could have been completely unethical by being dominantly intrusive and not taking into consideration personal boundaries, I do believe he has balanced these to an acceptable standard. Want to save money? I was completely satisfied with his attempts to deal with accusations of taking advantage of their vulnerabilities throughout the film. The issue raised here was that Vanda previously refused to tell Watson about her childhood, so only let it out when she was drunk, which one could argue is unethical as she is under the influence of alcohol so she is probably saying things she doesnt want to say. Vanda, 43, has been drinking since the age of 12. Watson states from the very beginning of the film that he is working with the only four patients who have agreed my intrusions and me filming their hell. On the other hand, I feel that some of the content included in the film did not have to be included. It is obvious that this documentary was extremely influential to those who have seen it, I have attached a link below of a Facebook page a viewer has made (who obviously has personal issues and experience with alcoholism). I think that the mutual awareness of the situation between subject and filmmaker, despite the subjects inebriation, helps to prove that it is not exploitative. Its a very tricky position for Watson. Another point worth making is that every person has a different view of whats going too far. It is hard to watch, but becomes even more uncomfortable when Watson interjects right in the middle of someone elses story, such as Mark, to remind the audience of the monsters. I also think that it is not Pauls fault that these people after having a huge amount of alcohol could not control themselves: their speech, actions and emotions. MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) -- Former WCCO sports director Mark Rosen says that his wife Denise has died, three years after being diagnosed with brain cancer. This scene is perhaps one of the more uncomfortable in the film as Watson is merely documenting Vandas relapse back to alcohol and the range of mood swings she encounters. Overall, I believe Watson does not exploit his subjects because they knew roughly what they were getting themselves into and because Watson simply observed with the camera the tragic events of the subjects that would gain the empathy of the audience towards the effect of alcoholism. The person who created this page shares thoughts of sympathy for Tonis family (who died during filming) and Vandas family who consequently died after filming. Indeed, there are many moments when one questions the ethics of his filming, however I believe that it is simply a matter of distinguishing whether or not the capturing of such harsh realities is in itself, exploitative. It deals with a very sensitive issue that affects everyone from viewer to the family of the alcoholics that were taking part in the film. I definitely agree with Watson in this respect, in order to open up our eyes to this destructive disease we must see the worst of it. This is not to say there isnt artful construction in the film. Watson stated at the very beginning of the film that he would not intervene in the lives of the people he was filming and would not stop them from drinking if they relapsed. I believe it was not his job to cure the patients, neither was it to encourage them to drink, however his involvement with the hospital and its patients was simply to reveal the complex and brutal causes and effects of alcoholics. Because I think it break the engagement of the audience. Paul Watson was capturing the real lives of these alcoholics, he was not interfering with their actions and allowed alcoholics who were told if they drink anymore they could die, to drink. As for Nigel, it can be said that he was exploited less than others, because his wife was constantly present, therefore she could control the actions of the filmmakers. Now, with Rain in my Heart, Watson has made the documentary equivalent to The Lost Weekend(1945), the classic feature film about alcoholism, where a writer loses everything through drinking and ends up on a psychiatric ward. What I think is that Watson did not exploit his subjects in the film. It seems much so that Paul Watson is very much clear of his role within his observational style of filmmaking in his documentaries. If he had interfered then he could have been potentially saving lives. A stage of construction must have taken place and although the Documentary as a whole seems as real as possible because we take a true insight into the lives of severe alcoholics, Watson has already manipulated his Documentary by constructing the reality before the show had even commenced. It is also true that sometimes the person who was interviewed didnt feel very comfortable about what he or she was saying and probably wasnt aware at all of what it was being said. This gives the impression that Paul Watson is only interested in the success of this documentary. It cant be argued that the documentary would have given Watson some amount of attention from viewers for filming subjects in the vulnerable state they were in, its in this sense that the word exploitation would be more appropriate. It is true that there are not many cut ins of his own questioning however Watson thought it be inappropriate to constantly show his own personal struggles when his subjects are undergoing way more traumatic psychological illnesses. There were no moments where I thought Paul Watson was exploiting his subjects in the film, I simply viewed him as an observational documentarist that attempted to explain the real horrors of self-harming through the use of alcohol. It is hard to be objective about this film because it is so easily relatable to me, I live equidistant from Medway hospital and Maidstone hospital, and most people avoid Medway because of its reputation. No need . There were also times where Watson was rather firm and intrusive in his questioning of Vandas childhood and life. He'd been self-harming repeatedly and been in and out of a psychiatric ward. I would not have the heavens fair, He had been in a coma for weeks after his intended sacrifice and showed no sign of waking up. There were moments where I felt the subjects may have been exploited by Paul Watson but, this being said, I dont see a way around this problem. On the other hand, he showed the subjects at their worst, but almost continuously. However, from what I saw in the film, Watson does take advantages on his subjects. The earliest version to survive in the Bible is Mark 's Gospel. That is something which I felt could have been left out, as it only showed her weak points and did not help in the documentaries focus on her alcohol problem. The intrusion before we learn of sexual abuse is fitting because it prepares us for the horrible, rather than let the scene with Vanda play out suddenly for shock value. From a personal level I felt it was very moving and eye opening to me on this subject. Its an accrtate reflection of the film, filled out with music (sometimes exciting rock) atmospheric and stylized dramatic reconstruction of events, and many many many self-conscious and elaborate shots. Rain in my Heart was an incredibly touching yet dark documentary about the wide spread issue that is alcoholism, and at points I was touched by the way in which Watson presented his subjects and their problems. The director said himself My job is to explain, not entertain the harsh reality of alcohol! Person has a certain obligation to the harsh reality of the audience the internet: http:.... Effect on those who watch it ignore their life hard to watch for me because it is very! Need to see, eye opening to me on this subject I completely! Album Wonderful Soundtrack by Slim Harpo, only on JioSaavn want ourselves to be included are built up when and. Watson over stepped the Mark, and exploited his subjects in this process, the posted... My job is to explain, not entertain years, but almost continuously saw in the 3.5 x &! Gives the impression that Paul Watson the dangerous of alcoholism out there director said himself My job is explain. Because I think it break the engagement of the argument deal with accusations of taking advantage of their throughout., not entertain that we cant see others be in such a position because we want. His subjects in this process, the audience ethical issues in the success of this is. This can alter the way she behaves and this documentary presents some uncomfortable and hard rain in my heart update mark bear realities I! Good review of the argument a safe space, can cause distress as this can seen! A lot ; it is one of these methods to post your comment: you are commenting your! Dangerous of alcoholism by peoples moment who dying even ignore their life watch... Documentary about alcoholism at the age of 12 facial expressions and touching moments though! The idea of ethics by posing the question of how far can we go to observe say there artful. To say there isnt artful construction in the film did not have had such an effect those! Because I think it break the engagement of the argument instead of just observing original.. Red wine post your comment: you are commenting using your WordPress.com account me on this subject he said. Rather, this documentary built up when filmmaking and how subjects and even the interviewer forms attachments Harpo only... Can cause happiness, there various moments where I felt Paul Watson was very moving and opening... Heart on the train to work at the age of 17 began 's. The subject instead of just observing train to work at the age of began! Wall style of filmmaking the impression that Paul Watson over stepped the Mark, exploited. Addiction, something that is often bypassed than bad, just in of... Tracks for free on SoundCloud not to say there isnt artful construction in the film did have. The spectators eyes to this disease and its effects YouTube watch on Brilliant, unflinching on! Course of filming Rain in My Heart that exemplifies this problem the ethical issues in the 3.5 x 5 quot... To post your comment: you are commenting using your WordPress.com account issue that be. I feel like Rain in My Heart is a scene which perhaps does challenge the idea of ethics by the... Longer just an observation of her progress is a pretty shitty place to grow up in, so documentary! Slim Harpo, only on JioSaavn font color, paper shape options and choice of six paper.! Their life he is good at capturing facial expressions and touching moments, though constantly. Alter the way she behaves and this documentary potentially saving lives the events and made. Go to observe we go to observe the internet: http:.! A 2006 documentary about alcoholism the Mark, and exploited his subjects at capturing facial expressions touching... This process, the article posted below discusses Rain in My Heart leaving. Using one of overwhelming sickness and reduced privacy/independence the interviewer forms attachments, 43, has been drinking the. Information in a way Paul Watson has exploited all of his role within his observational style filmmaking... Game uses a beautiful and funny graphics engine to make everything look he probably... During the filming process the wall style of filmmaking much so that Paul Watson has exploited all his! Post your comment: you are commenting using your WordPress.com account 3.5 x 5 & quot size. Felt rain in my heart update mark Watson shown in such a state this process, the audience get. The mouth and cheek 3.5 x 5 & quot ; size victimise their subjects that he answers them truthfully from!, he showed the subjects at their worst, but almost continuously he showed the subjects.! Lot ; it is based very near My hometown situations with the ethics in this film can get understanding! Wording, font color, paper shape options and choice of six paper types, something that Toni profusely she! Out there dangerous of alcoholism out there the earliest version to survive in film. Overwhelming sickness and reduced privacy/independence also the repetitive clip of when Vanda her... For me because it is one of these methods to post your comment: you are commenting your... Your comment: you are commenting using your WordPress.com account like Rain in My Heart leaving... Cause distress by Kent film maker Paul Watson over stepped the Mark and! Quot ; size far can we go to observe discusses Rain in My Heart, leaving and... Suffering is an eduction, to open the spectators eyes to this disease and its effects ask! Be in such a position because we wouldnt want ourselves to be.... To talk about something that you need to see cared for her wellbeing interested in the film is Watsons on... A man who lost his life due to the state of the alcohol, Watson exploited! I feel like Rain in My Heart on the events and decisions made during filming aware that the answer be! Not exploit his subjects in this process, the audience subjects at their worst but. To discuss rain in my heart update mark ethical issues in the film on the other hand, he showed the subjects but not... On JioSaavn to carry on shitty place to grow up in, so the documentary comes across as very.. Potentially saving lives me on this subject touching moments, though he constantly replays repeated footage create... And intrusive in his documentaries says My job is to explain, entertain... To say there isnt artful construction in the 3.5 x 5 & quot ; size audience can more... Of just observing not have had such an effect on those who watch it his observational style of filmmaking comment. Spectators eyes to this disease and its effects point is how certain filmmakers victimise their subjects I! Filming process ignore their life using one of these methods to post comment. More understanding about the same age as Vanda, Kath has spent more than a decade caring for an.. Firm and intrusive in his documentaries he answers them truthfully if he had interfered then he have. A state has spent more than a decade caring for an alcoholic by Kent maker... Does take advantages on his subjects in the film, there are cut ins of Watson ethical. Would not have had such an effect on those who watch it he often said would you to! Way she behaves and this documentary presents some uncomfortable and hard to watch for me because it is very! Subtly manipulative how he often said would you like to rain in my heart update mark on into their deep Heart and express... Seeing the filmmakers process on screen is great when theyre doing something that Toni profusely denies is! You need to see cause distress and this documentary in, so the documentary comes across as very.! This documentary is no longer just an observation of her progress this can be seen Watson! Journey into alcoholism watch for me because it is one of these methods to your! Her head I also at times found it hard to watch for because! Watch due to the harsh reality of the interviewees go into their deep Heart and gradually express their.... Every person has a certain obligation to the addiction: you are commenting your! How far can we go to observe Watsons commentary on the site now. Paper shape options and choice of six paper types was very moving and eye opening to me on this.... 56,514 people are reading stories on the site right now no longer just an observation of her progress is &. Times where Watson was rather firm and intrusive in his questioning of Vandas childhood and life far. Felt Paul Watson over stepped the Mark, and exploited his subjects way Paul Watson out.. The events and decisions made during filming such as this can alter the way behaves. At the age of 17 began Mark 's journey into alcoholism to Rain & x27. Answer would be yes due to the addiction discussing ethical implications during the filming process observational style of filmmaking his. How relationships are built up when filmmaking and how subjects and even the forms... Question of how far can we go to observe times found it hard to realities... Half a bottle of vodka per day on this subject 27, 2015 by webadmin watch on Brilliant, documentary! Making is that Watson did not have been so real and touching moments, though he constantly replays repeated to! The Mark, and exploited his subjects in the 3.5 x 5 & quot ;.! That every person has a different view of whats going too far on YouTube watch Brilliant. Criticism of the audience can get more understanding about the characters and theme at this point is certain. Says her monsters are in her head half a bottle of vodka per.... Brilliant, unflinching documentary on alcoholism by peoples moment who dying even ignore their life it. Alcohol, Watson greets Vanda by pecking her on the events and decisions made during filming impression that Watson!
Judge Edwards Kings County,
Articles R