In Pawel Pawlikoski’s article, he talks about the value of documentaries which is not to show objective information but the producers’ critical points of view of reality. I totally agree with Pawel that documentary is to promote a point of view. On the contrary, feature films is aim to entertain the audience, to give the audience a relaxation.
Most feature films are fiction. Indeed, there are some feature films based on real people and stories. However, drama will be added into the feature films by screenwriters and directors. By contrast, documentary is all about the authenticity of the world. In other words, documentary is taking liberty with the facts of the events. Documentary can take on everything, such as social, profile a person, animals, war and so on. Most exciting thing is that documentary does not have scripts. The director does not know what happen in the next second when the camera is operating.
Pawel mentioned that TV is the only way for documentaries’ survival whilst TV is killing the documentary. Thanks to top stars, directors and other elements, feature films are very popular among people, and easily survive. I do not think documentary will be killed in the future. For example, A Bite of China is a successful documentary that introducing a numerous chinese traditional food for travellers or the people who loves food. The director combined the different style and considered the present situation of china. The documentary has profound meaning and purpose, to some extent, it boosted tourism in China and preserved the recipes of a nearly extinct food. As if we have a chance to use the accessible equipments to record the dinosaur in 201 million years ago.