Harlan County U.S.A.
Discuss how filmmaker Barbara Kopple cinematically represents the miners, the coal executives, and the union leaders. Be sure to use specific cinematic elements in your discussion. What are your impressions of the film as a whole?
Kopple depicts the miners as human. Documentaries often portray the subject in an educational manner, causing a divide between subject and audience; however Kopple allows the miners to characterize themselves with very little manipulation with the frame. The shots appear natural and the audience is able to bond with the miner (and family) rather than with the character the miner represents. Kopple refrains from interviewing the miners, instead allowing them to tell their story as they would a friend. The framing of the miners within the frame also portrays them in a natural setting, in their homes or during protests which highlights the humanity of their struggle as opposed to the [plan] of the director. While watching the audience hardly sees the effect of Kopples presence on the portrayal of the protests and the events in them (minus the possible shooting that may have occurred had cameras not been present). In Harlan County USA, Kopple takes a back seat to the subjects and acts as a messenger/reporter than as a director. With regards to the coal executives and the union leaders, Kopple portrays them through meetings and press conferences as opposed to the personal conversation the miners have with the audience. This choice (and possible necessity) portrays the executives and leaders as distant, creating an us vs them mentality with the audience. After being exposed to the miners in such a personal way, seeing the executives in suits speaking not to the audience but to the press, prevents an empathetic connection between audience and subject. As a whole, I enjoyed the film and especially appreciated the score because most of the music used came directly from the miners. Once again Kopple relies greatly on the miners to make the documentary as opposed to using secondary sources. She allows the miner to keep their humanity and not just fade into the screen; the audience is forced to view them as humans first and subjects second.
ReplyDeleteKopple develops a biased position as the film progresses and it becomes evident through the differences in how she portrays the miners, the president of the United Mine Workers of America, and the coal executives. Bias isn’t necessarily a bad thing, Kopple is clearly a workers’ rights activist and she wants to reflect that point of view onto the audience based on what she includes in this film. Kopple portrays the miners in a way that shows all their stress, anger, and mourning. At some points, she stands back and simply films what’s going on, and sometimes she involves herself and interviews them. When she is just filming the meetings or what happens during the picketing, the audience can almost experience what being in that situation is like, and getting an emotional response makes for a very effective documentary. Kopple doesn’t narrate the film, and lets the situations depicted—such as the houses in very poor condition, the mother crying at her son’s funeral, or people lying in hospital beds—speak for the miners and their struggle. She includes interviews with the miners to give them a voice that they aren’t getting in the constant contract negotiations going on in the film.
ReplyDeleteKopple’s depiction of the miners is contrasted with how she depicts Arnold Miller, the president of UMWA. After Miller is talking about a no-strike clause, there’s a shot of a miner expressing his disagreement. The miner is very close to the camera, while Miller is far in the background, making him look small. The next shot shows the miner actually confronting Miller. This adds to Kopple’s consistent prioritization of the miners’ opinions, as she chooses to film the miners in a negotiation situation where the union president should be the center of attention. Again, she is giving a voice to the miners where it is not being recognized by those higher in power. There’s a specific editing choice made that emphasizes the differences between the coal executives and the miners. After an interview with the formally-dressed Norman Yarborough who works for the Eastover Mining Company, it cuts right to the horrible conditions the miners are living in, and there’s even a child playing with garbage. Ultimately, Kopple contrasts the miners with the coal executives and union president, communicating how she sides with the miners and also in order to get an emotional response from the audience as they sympathize with the miners.
The style of cinéma vérité is said to be an objective or "real" presentation of information. Harlan County USA, however, seems to have a bias in its presentation as it favors the miners over the higher ups. One way in which this film favors the miners is through the timing that the information is presented, which can be attributed to the editing. This is shown from the start, because it opens on the miners doing work. The choice to open the film this way is a conscious decision on the part of the editor. The audience meets the miners first so they sympathize with them. There are people of all ages singing and talking about their experiences. However, about ten minutes into the film, the audience sees the “other side” as it cuts to an interview with Carl Horn. He tells his side of the story and paints the miners in a bad light, but since the film has already established sympathy with the miners, his words fall flat. So, while the filming may seem unbiased as there are interviews with both sides, there is an inherent bias through the editing. Another way in which the film seems to favor the miners is through the cinematography. With the coal executives and union leaders, they are filmed and interviewed in their offices or when they are giving speeches. There is a physical distance kept between them and the camera, probably out of respect for their position as well as security concerns. The miners, however, are filmed up close and personal. There are many closer shots and a lot more spontaneous camera movement, giving a more intimate and lifelike feel to those segments of the film. The cinematography helps audiences sympathize with the miners.
ReplyDeleteOverall I really enjoyed this film. I think it is the first time I have watched a cinéma vérité film, or any documentary for that matter, from the 20th century (sorry, but I’m definitely going to watch more now). I liked how the camera and the filmmakers were acknowledged by the people being filmed, because to me it just makes sense. In other documentaries it seems strange and fake to ignore them. I also liked the lack of outright involvement from the filmmakers. Barbara Kopple doesn’t show up on screen, do a voiceover narration, or anything like that. Of course, like I said before, the crew’s opinion is shown through the conscious choices made during editing, but I like how for the most part it just shows what’s happening without interfering too much.
In her documentary “Harlan County USA”, filmmaker Barbara Kopple cinematically represents all of the subjects, including the miners, the coal executives and the union leaders in a manner far different from most films. Many films are shot to resemble stylized versions of reality, with cinematic techniques such as lighting, costume design and special effects. In this film, the effect is as if Kopple simply left her camera running to capture the raw, uninterrupted lives of these people. Many shots are blurry, dark and shaky, starkly contrasting the standards of most films. When I first viewed the film, I must admit that I did not care for it. This had everything to do with its like of stylization, which can be found in nearly every film. The documentary more so resembles everyday life than a regular film. However, once I accepted this I began to enjoy the film, and its message really resonated with me. The film is an uncut window into the lives of people who struggle every day, and the film displays these struggles in ways that are true and genuine.
ReplyDeleteDocumentaries are often used to expose a idea or viewpoint that usually is not thought about. The majority of the time, documentaries are used to convince people to either support a cause, or to remove support of a certain cause/ person. As this is usually the case with documentaries, their creators cinematically create bias in hopes of convincing their audience. The creator of “Harlan County, USA” (1976), Barbara Kopple, is no exception to this trend of biased documentary filmmaking. “Harlan County, USA” (abbreviated as HCUSA), is a wonderfully done film that, unlike other documentaries, is very covert in its way of implementing bias. Before going into the cinematic specifics of bias, I want to first discuss how effective this film was. I see documentary filmmaking as, in its purest form, a way to document a subject. However, as previously stated, there are ways to shoot and edit together footage of subject to get a certain message across. HCUSA did an amazing job at showing the strength, passion, and caring nature of the citizens of HC, while exposing the cold and materialistic ways of the coal executives.
ReplyDeleteHighlighting these aspects of the two separate parties is done mainly by the use of editing. Editing is not only putting together shots in a coherent manner, but also choosing which shots to put where. In this film, Kopple pieces together the footage she has to create the biggest impressions she can. For instance, Kopple couples the natives of HC singing with them telling of their hardships, just to have the very detached and distant shots of the coal executives. That is also something I found very interesting- although it makes practical sense that Kopple was able to interview the locals and not the executives it also adds the characterization of these groups, as it inadvertently humanizes the locals while dehumanizing the executives. Taking this even further, the only shots Kopple does actually use of the executives is from news footage from a press conference or something of that sort. This kind of shot detaches the viewer from empathizing with the executives as it creates more of a boundary between audience and subject. To go back to the element of music- I believe that the usage of the locals music and little tunes is integral to the characterization of the locals of HC. Music, as described by the AIM (American Instrument Museum), is the “Language of the soul.” Music can be used to heal and is generally liked as an art form. With this being said, having the locals singing their local tunes and songs helps us relate to them more as people, while helping them communicate their emotions more freely. When thinking of this next to the stale, cold nature of the coal executives on the news footage, the separation between the two becomes even more prominent.
Harlan County USA is a documentary by Barbara Kopple, that focuses on the miners union versus coal barons. She wants us to get very personal with the miners so that we can feel the emotions and family ties. But with the barons she wants to alienate them so we feel they are inhumane. The thing with the union leads is that the two seperate union leads we see are meant to be shown in different lights. She tends to keep the union leads far from the camera and we see them talk, usually at a long to medium long shot. The is in stark contrast to the miners and their families as we tend to see them up close which is used to feel closer and more personal with them.
ReplyDeleteThe film as a whole was a very effective documentary as it let us understand the blight of the mining community, and their mistreatment by the coal barons. Personally, I did not very much enjoy the film, but i was able to see the purpose and intent behind it, so I liked it in that regard. I respect the film but did not enjoy it.