Production Unit - Influential Doctumentary Directors

There are a few works that i could say i have taken inspiration from, but from the get go i knew that i wanted it to have a cinematic feel, be dark (both in tone and appearance) in places and have a real edgy feel to it, the kind of feeling the audience gets where they are uncomfortable but can't look away.

The Director

Watergate (2018)

Of course it is never a good idea to get political, especially when you are making a documentary, but one man has done exactly that. Charles Ferguson has made many documentaries but two that stand out to me are his 2007 title No End In Sight and his relitively new realse in 2018 so named Watergate. No End In Sight is an inside look at George W. Bush's actions in the White House and the invasion of Iraq. Clearly when setting out to make these documentaries you don't have a goal of making any friends, as is always the case with political or government sensitive subjects. Ferguson's latest documentary is about Prisdent Nixon and the accusations of scandelous misconduct he carried out durimg his presidency. Both these documentaries are in keeping with the "uncovering the truth" style of documentary, one that challenges what the public are lead to belive. I admire this and really want to take this approach when making this documentary, to almost have no fear of what people will think when filming.

No End In Sight (2007)

There may be a reason to how Ferguson can get away with dramatising such serious subjects and coming close to crossing the line between cinematic and sensationalist. Firstly he gains lots of access to archive footage which gives a better impression of truth than a staged reconstruction shot by someone who is only going on information they can gather (secondary source). But archive footage is a primary source because it was filmed at the time and location of the subject, it was there when said subject happened and cannot be changed. So what we have established so far is archive is trusted more than reconstruction when it comes to the sceptics.

Richard Ben-Veniste (2018)

Richard Ben-Veniste (1974)

Another way Ferguson gets away with a documentary airing very close to sensationalist is that he uses contributors that were directly involved in the subjet. They can recall specific memories and are eye witnesses/ have concrete evidence they were there. This decreases the liklihood of things being said that are not true, because if they were there at the time, then there will also be other eye witnesses that can coroberate thier involvement/ recount of the event. Not only will there be other people that you can use to verify your contributors but in certain cases if you have access to enough archive there may even be video evidence of your contributor's involvement in the subject. Moral of the story is try to get contributors that are as close/ involved with the story/ subject as possible.

The Look

Clay Tweel is an inspirational Director in terms of aethitics, the way he structures shots and the visuals he includes in his works are a perfect summery of what i am looking to do for my project.

A website called DeadGoodBooks had an interview with Tweel on December 13th 2018 and asked him the questions shown below, i found reading them really interesting and it gave me an insight into his thought process. Especially when he mentions the inspirations he himself had as that lead me to watch and analyse those as well as the work he has produced.



When did you first come across The Innocent Man?


Ross Dinerstein approached me about adapting the book in 2016. He sent me a copy and I read it in a couple of days. I was blown away at the miscarriage of justice and dark twists and turns that the story contained. Ross and I talked and we felt like the best way to walk an audience through this case was in a longer format, really digging into the details of this stranger than fiction situation.

Can you describe the process involved in adapting the book into a TV series?

The first step was to do research and try and get our hands on whatever archival material existed. Secondly, we connected with as many of the main subjects involved in the story as possible to gauge their interest. I always try and approach any story I’m telling through the lens of the characters that are involved and we had had many great voices to draw from in these cases. From there we were off to Ada and shot over the course of about a year and a half to assemble as much new information and context that we could.




What were the main challenges?


The two biggest challenges we faced were how long ago these crimes took place and how reticent people were to talk. The murders happened in the early 1980s and in that time evidence has gone missing, reports and investigative work have disappeared and people’s memories have faded. Simultaneously, we encountered many people who were still afraid to talk to us because they felt like speaking ill of local authorities could place them in danger.





How did you work with author John Grisham?


John has done a ton of research writing the book a decade ago, so he opened up his resources and files to us when we started. Also, he knows the story so well that at a certain point in the process it was clear that his voice as a speaker in the show would help lend weight and clarity for the audience.




In making the series, were you influenced by any other true crime books or shows?


This is my first foray into True Crime so I was watching and reading many things for reference! In particular, I was drawn to Errol Morris’ book The Wilderness of Error, As well as the film The Imposter and Fincher’s Mindhunter. I loved the thematic underpinnings of Morris book matched with the clinical aesthetics of Fincher.

The show includes blending of new footage with archival footage. What made you want to use both? Was the book a part of that decision?


From the time I read the book, I knew that I wanted to use the archive of confession tapes, modern-day footage of delving into an investigation and stylized re-enactments. In presenting the show as a commentary on individual’s biases and how they can pervert the legal system, I felt that the re-enactments provided a powerful way to illustrate multiple perspectives to the audience. The audience would be watching something they know isn’t real, but believe it’s represented actions to be true. Then their attitudes were shifted as the content of the recreations shifted as well, mirroring the way in which an investigator can curate information and sell their “story” to a jury.