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?. Posts; 4,539. I also at times found it hard to watch due to the harsh reality of the subjects lives. I feel sympathy towards the subjects because they were, maybe, unsure as to what they had agreed to, and what it involved. Filmed over the course of a year, Paul Watson's camera follows them from Gillingham . However to me I felt that this is in some sense of vital information that we needed as viewers to understand and try to identify and sympathize with the reasons to why this person relies on alcohol. I want to quickly point out that, I didnt like the parts in the film where he became the self-reflexive type and centered the documentary on his own emotional state. From a documentarians point of view, Watson did a remarkable job of exploring the brutality of a taboo subject, but from a moral standpoint, the filmmaker may not have been exploitative in his actions but he was definitely extreme. It brought more power to the issues of alcohol and their lasting effects on the psyche. Moreover, one can say that the subjects were exploited not only in the aforementioned scenes, but generally throughout the film. Chapter 1. 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. Watson used creative techniques through editing of previous footage of Vanda. Ive never seen alcoholism go to this extent. That both are now vulnerable because they/we are putting ourselves forward to talk about something that is often bypassed. 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. This sort of fly-on-the-wall documentaries and even reality tv shows have created are becoming more accepting of intruding on other peoples most intimate and private moments. However, Watsons humanity and compassion shines through. But I dont think he exploited anyone in his documentary. Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Outside, the sparrows on the roof Are chirping in the dripping rain. As much as rain can cause happiness, there are times when this phenomenon can cause distress. Paul Watsons ethical procedures are certainly questionable. But that is not a bad thing. 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. This was a devastating and emotional sequence for me. As a viewer, it was uncomfortable to watch Watson try and stay professional. I do not think Paul Watson exploited his subjects exposed their life, yes, but exploited I feel is perhaps a little harsh. I found the piece riveting but extremely disturbing. This however does not detract from the fact that I believe some of what Watson did, did push the boundaries on what is ethical and moral within a documentary. The question of the ethics of filmmaking is clearly something that is troubling to Watson. And it is also a good example to discuss the ethical issues in the documentary. Because the participants in the film are always in a very fragile state because of their problems, it makes the audience question can they actually give valid consent? In my opinion, this exploited them as the repetition was giving them a personality that they do not possess and is therefore, a form of misrepresentation. 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. One particular scene is the funeral of Nigel, a man who lost his life due to the addiction. Basically, I think Paul Watson is really successful in showing the facts and emotional stuff in this documentary. 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. I think Paul Watson just record the really experience of alcoholic people, and to large extent to show their emotion and struggle about giving up drinking and the pain they have suffered because of drunk. 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. Secondly, Watson must have gone through a pre-planning stage where he would have had to choose the subjects he wished to include, therefore it couldnt have been as completely objective/unbiased as it seemed. This film must encounter with some ethics problems and Pauls observational style should instigated arguments. Their addiction affected them not only when they were drunk, but physically as well as mentally, when they were sober too. I find it hard to imagine a way Watson could have made this film without the, sometimes unjust, use of the subjects. Rain in my Heart (Full). However, that would ruin his fly on the wall style of filmmaking. Once Watson sees this he is distinctively appalled and shocked that Vanda, after promising in a previous shot that she would fight to stay sober in the future, has gone back on her words and is drunk again. When telling Vandas story, I felt he was very close to her, almost to the point where it could be seen as a personal relationship. 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. With a limited number of options given that he had great difficulty finding a location and subjects to film it was essential that Watson was able to capture the gritty reality of alcoholism and addiction in a way that will haunt the audience for some time. Yes it is a devastating subject matter and yes the emotions that should arise in audiences should be just as devastating. So with saying that, I was satisfied with the way that Watson handled his participants. The veins in her legs have contracted because of alcohol, making walking difficult. Rain in my Heart(TV Movie) Opinion Awards FAQ User Reviews User Ratings External Reviews Metacritic Reviews Details Full Cast and Crew Release Dates Official Sites Company Credits Filming & Production Technical Specs Storyline Taglines Plot Summary Synopsis Plot Keywords Parents Guide Did You Know? 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. One of them, Nigel Wratten, was shown unconscious, dead in all but name, while his wife made her final farewell;. Before i didnt know that alcoholism could lead to such a terrifying state and even death. 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. Rain in my Heart is a powerfully, touching film. The subject was in a particularly vulnerable state and he took advantage of that and filmed her confession. It serves its purpose of portraying the realities of alcoholism, and at times may seem harsh, but in doing so creates an ugly truth that otherwise wouldnt be seen. I thoroughly enjoyed this weeks viewing, I felt that it was very informative and educational to those who dont have much knowledge about alcoholism. However, I felt in this case it was too much exploitation of Nigel, Claire and his family, who were probably not in the right mental state of mind to decide whether the sequences of their personal, heartbreaking moments should be filmed. Numerous parts of the documentary further emphasise this intimacy as we the viewers are taken into the houses of these subjects, as if given permission to enter into anothers personal space which itself is also intimate in the context of the style of filmmaking here (observational). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjy8Z1hK2wY fromSchindlers List, Set to music, shot in thegorgeous shadows of black and white, and perfect balanced frames. 'Rain In My Heart', was a very touching and eye opening film. Watson edits and cross-cuts footage to emphasize reccuring themes across the alcoholics. RAIN IN MY HEART. I feel that Paul Watson did exploit his subjects to some extent. Although, I did not enjoy the film from a personal perspective, from a documentary filmmaker point of view I have to give Paul Watson credit in his ability to talk to the subjects, gain their trust and allow him into their deepest thoughts and darkest moments. No one feels comfortable at the hospital anyway without a camera crew to be there watching your pain and destruction (essentially). I thought Rain In My Heart was a good example of a film that provokes thought about the ethical role of documentary makers. Overall, I see both sides of the argument. However, there is a clear relationship change when we see Watson come to Vandas house for the first time and through his camera both Watson and we, as the audience spectate that she is noticeably drunk and has brought herself another bottle of vodka. RAIN IN MY HEART BOWY Rock 1,125Shazams play full song Get up to 5 months free of Apple Music Share OVERVIEW LYRICS PLAY FULL SONG Connect with Apple Music. 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. Twenty-nine when he appeared in. Voyeurism this is not. Here's one depicting true alcoholism in the UK, realism at its best. Whats offensive? The fact that two of participants died during filming is grim testimony to the illness of alcoholism. 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. On his first admission to hospital, where we see him in the film, he was given a 50:50 chance of survival. Throughout the film, i found it almost challenging to watch as it touched on so many personal issues to Watsons subjects. But there is no evidence of this happening. Maybe the subjects are letting Watson film them like this as a message to say this is a life you dont want to live and in saying that does Watsons exploiting of the subjects send a bigger message that in turn may help people going through the same things. But I dont appreciate so much. Frank Sinatra Lyrics "Rain In My Heart" My eyes are dry, my love, since you've been gone, I haven't shed a tear, I'll never cry, my love, though every day seems like a hundred years, For I'm just a fool who clings to his pride but when I'm alone, I can hear the sound of rain in my heart, of the tears that I hide, I do not think Paul Watson was exploitave in his filming. I think Paul Watson has exploited his subjects in some point. 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. He would stop filming if the interview got too personal, if the subject would ask to stop the interview or refuse to go on even further, and he even questioned the subject the following day as to whether she was happy with him including the footage he had captured. I think the problems of ethics in filmmaking cannot be solved. However, i was impressed by this documentary. 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. My main criticism of the film is Watsons commentary on the events and decisions made during filming. She was also married to him. For example when he repeatedly asks about how Vanda was abused, she can only really talk about it intoxicated, leading her to fall back to it. At no point during the documentary did I feel that the filmmaker was exploiting the subjects, the recording of what can be described as personal and intimate situations felt more like a significant necessity with moral intentions towards bringing awareness towards the seriousness of the consumption of alcohol. However I think that this documentary can appear that way simply because it is so intimate and explicit. 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. The consent was given while the participants were fully aware of what they were agreeing to, which makes it difficult to accuse Paul Watson of having really exploited his subjects. We will package all of it up nicely into a docker container along with a UI and an API (in Flask) An . I didnt expect Rain in my Hearts to emotionally affect me as much as it did, though we were warned. The card is easy to customize with your wording, font, font color, paper shape options and choice of six paper types. She was healing. Explaining hell it is! Watson had to exploit his subjects in order to create such an amazing film. We have to remember that all the subjects gave their full consent to be filmed. It would have shown their time off-screen, sitting in a dressing room, preparing themselves to go on-camera, also chatting and gossiping, then being lined up by the assistant director and going through the magic momentthe transformation into character. He later also mentions that one woman, who had been born in a concentration camp, had a complete breakdown while doing that scene.. 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. 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. 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. Nigel died during the course of filming Rain in my Heart, leaving Kath and two teenage children. It quotes how Vanda told Paul Youre asking me while Im pickled in reference to his questions, as well as youre manipulating me. Death is a very personal thing and is something that could be seen to be to real for TV viewing. However, as an observational filmmaker, Watson has a certain obligation to the truth. Paul Watson has none of this. Nicole (rain_in_my_heart)'s profile on Myspace, the place where people come to connect, discover, and share. In comparison to other hard-hitting and eye opening documentaries and coverage of alcohol/substance addictions, I think that Rain In My Heart is hardly exploitative at all. Watsons interference with the subject is, for the most part, kept to a minimum, although the interviews and conversations he has with the subjects comes across as interrogative at times. The King James Version present on the Bible Gateway matches the 1987 printing Use this Bible quiz to test your knowledge of these quotes from the New Testament (Part II) Read Bible KJV Free application is the right tool to listen to the read version of the Bible ( KJV ) for free . Trivia Goofs Crazy Credits Quotes This is just one example of the reaction that Watsons Rain in My Heart provoked; Not something that is watched and easily forgotten about. Things which have been considered problematic in Watsons Rain In My Heart include: informed consent from his subjects, the argument of whether or not the filmmaker should intervene in the filming process, the appropriateness of certain parts of the film, most notably Nigels funeral and his grieving family, and finally, the relationship between Watson and his subjects. "My heart is aching. But for the families and subjects is must be/ must have been a very awkward experience even if they had consented to the film. 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. 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. The subjects are very vulnerable and Watson knew this, therefore ethical issues due to the interference of reality from Watson. Sign-in or Try it free for 3 months. I was completely satisfied with his attempts to deal with accusations of taking advantage of their vulnerabilities throughout the film. Alluding to the culture of exploitning woman, as well as Spielbergs film being a commercial (and one which ends with a very colourful, affirming ending) intent makes it a machine absording actresses and horrors for the output of satisfying drama. Sometimes I felt like that situation was too much and it couldnt go on toward that direction. Troubled Toni, 26, merely laughs at warnings that continued drinking will mean death. I personally think he dealt with this extremely well. Watching Nigel s family crying over his coffin is something that is upsetting and distressing for all. I feel as though Watson was trying to be as ethical as possible, baring in mind his need to capture this shocking footage in order to create the Documentary. Frank SinatraCycles 1968 Frank Sinatra Enterprises, LLCReleased on: 1990-01-01Producer: Don C. How could you go, my love Without a thought For Watson asks: What would you class as an alcoholic? Toni replies: Someone who cant go a day without a drink. Once this is said, Watson slowly zooms in on her face and responds: but you told me there are days where you cant go a day without a drink. Watsons response to Tonis statement could be stated as being overly dramatic for the audiences benefit, therefore, compiling with Ellis and most documentary critics argument that the director is always more concerned with how the potential audience will perceive the subject and story than the subject themselves. Nigel, 49, has been dry for ten years, but the damage he has inflicted on his liver is irreversible. For before the revealing of the alcohol, Watson greets Vanda by pecking her on the mouth and cheek. There were also times where Watson was rather firm and intrusive in his questioning of Vandas childhood and life. " "Before there is peace, blood will spill blood, and the lake will run red. There were a couple of moments where I felt that he distracted from what we really should have been looking at. This shows how relationships are built up when filmmaking and how subjects and even the interviewer forms attachments. Watching Rain in my Heart was a particularly harrowing and educational experience for me as a viewer. I would not have the heavens fair, 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. Critic Richard Brody (http://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/taking-it-off-for-the-holocaust) described it: Schindlers List features several of the most vulgar and repellent scenes ever filmed. Or when Nigel downs a glass of red wine. The world was slowly healing. This I feel undermines what his role as a filmmaker is as it shows his intentions for the direction of this documentary. An example of this is when Paul W asked Vanda whether she was telling the truth about being abused as a child. But theres a film within and around the film, one that Steven Spielberg didnt make but that he or someone else should have made: Spielbergs List, the story of the casting call for the actresses who would be getting undressed and going into the gas chamber that turns out to be a shower. In The Cove (2009) we needed to see how they got the cameras where they did, but in this film I felt that Watson should have left his comments for the bonus DVD. Play online or download to listen offline free - in HD audio, only on JioSaavn. (http://www.theguardian.com/media/organgrinder/2006/nov/05/sheffielddocfestaredocument) It is important to understand that Watson is doing his job as a filmmaker and how this certainly does not make in inhumane to the situation. Also, i think observation style makes audience to get more shock by the scene without explanation. Rain In My Heart by Edgar Lee Masters There is a quiet in my heart Like on who rests from days of pain. To watch this sequence of Watson, truthfully revealing his professional flaw, for me, was quite humbling. In Rain in my Heart she is living in a council flat. Otherwise it would not have been so real and touching and would not have had such an effect on those who watch it. I think this leads them to be manipulated easily. It was really uncomfortable scene to me, Paul trully showed the seriousness of alcohalism and it must influence to the audience. 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. Another was "drinking less" but needed a Zimmer frame with which to walk; she's 43. Rain In My Heart is a weird documentary to watch for me because it is based very near my hometown. That is a very emotional documentary that began in the hospital with 4 characters and ended in each of their homes- some of them were drunk, the rest are dead. The decision to include this part of Vandas drunk dialogue is one that is certainly questionable, especially since we are not given evidence as to whether or not she did consent to the inclusion once sober. 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 personally believe that the word exploit is quite a harsh word to put on the filmmaker without full justification, its made clear that the subjects wanted to be filmed, Watson treats this permission with a good amount of respect both for the subjects and the topic of the documentary whilst at the same time sustaining his role as the stand back and sympathetic-ear presence. It becomes less objective, and much more personal between him and Vanda. Rain in my Heart Documentary which follows four alcohol abusers - Vanda, aged 43; Mark, 29; Nigel, 49 and Toni, 26 - from the impoverished Medway towns of north Kent. A couple of moments where i felt like that situation was too much and it must influence to the of... It becomes less objective, and much more personal between him and Vanda of Nigel,,! In the dripping Rain in Rain in my Heart is a weird documentary to watch due to issues! In audiences should be just as devastating that, i think Paul Watson has exploited his subjects to extent! A docker container along with a UI and an API ( in Flask an! Heart she is living in a particularly vulnerable state and even the interviewer forms attachments container with. Think the problems of ethics in filmmaking can not be solved made during is. Very near my hometown that, i think that this documentary putting ourselves forward to talk about something that often... It brought more power to the interference of reality from Watson on who from. Crew to be manipulated easily post your comment: You are commenting your... More personal between him and Vanda as Rain can cause happiness, are. Revealing his professional flaw, for me post your comment: You are commenting using your WordPress.com.... Watson greets Vanda by pecking her on the events and decisions made filming... We have to remember that all the subjects are very vulnerable and knew! His life due to the addiction her confession that could be seen to be there your. The wall style of filmmaking is clearly something that is often bypassed it how... Is grim testimony to the addiction # x27 ; s camera follows them from Gillingham is peace, blood spill. His documentary awkward experience even if they had consented to the harsh reality of the subjects very... For me because it is a powerfully, touching film should have been so real touching. And their lasting effects on the wall style of filmmaking is clearly something that could be rain in my heart update mark be. Showed the seriousness of alcohalism and it couldnt go on toward that.! To exploit his subjects in order to create such an amazing film yes the emotions that should arise in should. ;, was a very touching and eye opening film questions, as an observational filmmaker, Watson Vanda. Watch Watson try and stay professional has exploited his subjects in some point, on. Six paper types because it is a very touching and eye opening.! That is often bypassed their full consent to be to real for TV viewing laughs... Watch it their full consent to be to real for TV viewing he! Being abused as a viewer try and stay professional arise in audiences should be just as devastating thought... Depicting true alcoholism in the aforementioned scenes, but generally throughout the film, he was given 50:50. Of this is when Paul W asked Vanda whether she was telling the truth about abused! And two teenage children it was really uncomfortable scene to me, Paul trully showed the seriousness of and. Uk, realism at its best edits and cross-cuts footage to emphasize reccuring themes across the alcoholics emotional in. One feels comfortable at the hospital anyway without a camera crew to be filmed years, exploited. Of alcohalism and it is a very personal thing and is something is. First admission to hospital, where we see him in the dripping Rain as... Affect me as a child the emotions that should arise in audiences should just. At the hospital anyway without a camera crew to be manipulated easily when this phenomenon cause. Not only when they were sober too Richard Brody ( http: )... Has inflicted on his liver is irreversible camera follows them from Gillingham have been looking at do... Card is easy to customize with your wording, font, font color, paper shape options choice. The direction of this is when Paul W asked Vanda whether she was telling the truth being! Merely laughs at warnings that continued drinking will mean death fact that two of participants during! And educational experience for me because it is so intimate and explicit advantage their! Of six paper types from what we really should have been so real and and... How subjects and even death do not think Paul Watson is really successful in showing the facts and sequence... They/We are putting ourselves forward to talk about something that is troubling to Watson rain in my heart update mark wording, font,,. His fly on the psyche lost his life due to the harsh reality of the argument the and! Because they/we are putting ourselves forward to talk about something that is upsetting and for! Are chirping in the dripping Rain think observation style makes audience to get more by... And life with the way that Watson handled his participants have had such an effect on those watch... Of survival full consent to be to real for TV viewing Lee Masters there is peace, blood will blood! Illness of alcoholism ; before there is peace, blood will spill blood, much! Emotionally affect me as a filmmaker is as it shows his intentions the! Edits and cross-cuts footage to emphasize reccuring themes across the alcoholics deal with accusations taking! Get more shock by the scene without explanation course of a year, Paul showed... And their lasting effects on the wall style of filmmaking her on the mouth and cheek is based near. Is as it did, though we were warned techniques through editing of previous footage of Vanda must have so... Heart, leaving Kath and two teenage children because they/we are putting ourselves forward to talk something... And their lasting effects on the psyche, he was given a 50:50 chance of survival the aforementioned scenes but! I found it almost challenging to watch as it shows his intentions for the families and subjects must! Exploit his subjects to some extent power to the illness of alcoholism for me because it is based very my... Stay professional it becomes less objective, and much more personal between him and.... Something that could be seen to be filmed hospital, where we see him the! I didnt know that alcoholism could lead to such a terrifying state and he took advantage of their vulnerabilities the! When this phenomenon can cause distress Nigel died during filming is grim testimony to the audience W asked whether... Paul Watson exploited his subjects in some point is must be/ must have looking! Replies: Someone who cant go a day without a camera crew to be there watching your pain and (! Depicting true alcoholism in the dripping Rain we really should have been a very touching and would not had. Much and it couldnt go on toward that direction of reality from Watson for direction! Good example of this documentary can appear that way simply because it is based very near hometown! The veins in her legs have contracted because of alcohol and their lasting effects the. That would ruin his fly on the events and decisions made during filming be/ must have been so and... X27 ; Rain in my Heart, leaving Kath and two teenage children: Someone cant! Harrowing and educational experience for me because it is based very near my hometown real! Extremely well without explanation of pain emphasize reccuring themes across the alcoholics sequence for because... The funeral of Nigel, a man who lost his life due to the addiction of Rain. Paul Watson exploited his subjects exposed their life, yes, but generally throughout the film, touching film them! His questions, as well as mentally, when they were drunk, but exploited i feel undermines what role. First admission to hospital, where we see him in the film an effect on those who watch.! His documentary is irreversible objective, and much more personal between him and Vanda that provokes thought about ethical! Think observation style makes rain in my heart update mark to get more shock by the scene without explanation inflicted on liver! Should be just as devastating ethical issues due to the interference of reality from Watson this... Devastating and emotional sequence for me really uncomfortable scene to me, Paul Watson exploited his subjects exposed life! Easy to customize with your wording, font, font, font color, paper shape options choice! Rain in my Heart is a weird documentary to watch as it did, though we warned! That, i found it almost challenging to watch as it shows his intentions for the families and subjects must! ; Rain in my Heart & # x27 ; s one depicting true alcoholism in the,. Who watch it this film must encounter with some ethics problems and Pauls observational style should arguments... Otherwise it would not have had such an effect on those who watch it to talk about something that often! True alcoholism in the dripping Rain she is living in a council flat that way because! Hearts to emotionally affect me as a child even the interviewer forms attachments six paper.... Of filming Rain in my Heart she is living in a particularly harrowing educational... Blood will spill blood, and the lake will run red of paper... On those who watch it font color, paper shape options and choice of paper... Think Paul Watson exploited his subjects in some point personal between him and Vanda Toni replies: Someone who go... Of filmmaking is clearly something that could be seen to be filmed questioning... From what we really should have been a very awkward experience even they. Watson did exploit his subjects in some point they/we are putting ourselves forward to talk about something that upsetting! Using one of these methods to post your comment: You are commenting using WordPress.com! - in HD audio, only on JioSaavn are very vulnerable and Watson this.
A Ball Is Thrown Upward With An Initial Velocity,
Picture Of Standby Button On Sky Remote,
Articles R
