The messages and advice that Brooke Gladstone was uttering during her talk were very insightful. As I was listening to her, I was applying some of her messages to documentary work. At one point, Brooke mentioned that the human individuality is a fragile thing. Since, the human individuality is fragile, then it is the documentarians’ responsibility to ensure that they don’t destroy or tarnish people’s individuality. Understanding and keeping to the forefront of out minds about the fragility of the human individuality, we can take great care of those who chose to participate in our documentaries. Last week, KJ said that if we, documentarians, are to gain the trust of our subjects that we have to move the camera around and get close our subjects so that they know that we’re present with them. We do have to get close, not just with the camera, but also with our own individuality as well. To add to KJ emphasizing the importance of seeing and understanding others, Brooke discussed the importance of having empathy. She stated, “Eye contact creates empathy.” Not only are we to do justice to those we capture, but we must also empathize with them. If we are to ensure that we pay respect to the human individuality, we have an (deep) understanding about our subjects. By understanding them, we’ll be able to connect with them. Documentarians must make the attempt to “see” their subjects beyond the camera lens. They have to see beyond the surface of the people they film and get acclimated with their distinct individuality.

I admired Brooke Gladstone for beginning her talk by discussing the recent tragedy of the Las Vegas shooting. Part of the reason I admired it so much was because after a full day of classes, none of my professors mentioned it which bothered me. It made sense for her to talk about it since she has dedicated her life and career to the media. She added a comical twist to the subject when she discussed people taking to twitter and posting photos of missing family members. It was funny because it turned out they were posting pictures of random people such as, and this is one of the examples she used, a famous porn star. After a serious day, she made everyone chuckle that night. She then proceeded to talk about our generation and the generation that is involved in technology as generations that are buried in distraction. She backed up her point by providing evidence of a group of college students being put in a room with an electric shock button. Some were so bored that they pressed the button and received a shock. She went on explaining that it isn’t our fault and that we are just wired that way. Gladstone then challenged the crowd to do one simple thing that would benefit us, whether that would be deleting an app for a week that you used frequently and takes up time in your day or while your commuting (walking to class/ driving somewhere) try not to go on your phone. These examples contributed to her point about how we build boredom and I felt like that connected well with her point about distraction. A few other points I loved during her talk were, one her use of Brave New World and comparing it with the technology takeover. I thought that was a brilliant contrast, and if anyone has read the book you will agree that it is freaky, but somewhat applicable to our rising technological culture. She mentioned the thesis of her book, The Influencing Machine which is “the problem with the media is the problem with us” and it contributes to the idea that we make up the media and it is what we want to see because we create it. Last, and this was my favorite point, she made the claim that the culture we are living in now, and most of the generations that are consumed by technology, contain a lack of empathy. She said something about how if we just looked more people in the eye it would make a big difference and I think that point meant most to me is because I agree with her.

Although this documentary is less than 10 minutes, each minute is incredibly powerful. I like how Johnson took something ordinary and turned it into something extraordinary.

The cinematic choice to keep the blimp in the frame at almost all times is incredibly powerful and symbolic in this documentary. It symbolizes that the US is “always watching” the people of Kabul. It also symbolizes that Kirsten Johnson is always watching the blimp. I think its funny that Johnson was told not to film the blimp, but did so anyways because if the blimp could impose on the people of Kabul, Johnson could impose on the blimp.

The blimp is clearly visible yet its capacities are hidden. It has been there since 2009, but its capabilities are classified. It seems worth pointing out that there is a device that was put somewhere to watch people in their everyday lives, yet they do not even know its intentions. This raises yet another ethical dilemma in filmmaking, which is that between the subject and filmmaker. Though a surveillance blimp is much different from an actual cameraperson like Kirsten Johnson, there are similar ethical dilemmas involved.

There is a similar blimp in Maryland to detect long range missile attacks. When she shows the blimp in Maryland, she shoots scenes with an American flag and red, white, and blue streamers with the blimp in the frame to emphasize the disconnect between America representing freedom and America as controlling in terms of surveillance.

I noticed that at the beginning the sound of metal against metal was sudden and rough. Besides that, there was only a couple of moments of sound throughout the film. I think the lack of sound makes it more thought-provoking so you can raise questions about the blimp yourself. By showing the blimp next to an old man fixing wires, carrots, church, a sidewalk of houses, children and women shopping it makes the blimp have an active presence. No matter what’s going on the blimp is always present and active in the film. A film like this could’ve easily become boring because it’s about something in the background. It’s not something most filmmakers would make a film about because it could be seen as something trivial and easy to ignore. The shots are unique because the composition and angles are ones you wouldn’t typically see. That’s what makes it interesting. The handheld shots add more emotion and diversity. For example, the shot of the kids on the Ferris wheel was unexpected and at first, I questioned why the shot was there. However, I saw that throughout the commotion the blimp was still hovering over everything that was happening. That’s what added to its active presence. There’s also a shot of a person walking underneath the huge blimp which makes it seem powerful and makes her look powerless. As I mentioned, the composition of each shot is what makes this a great film and it’s something many wouldn’t have been able to pull off.

Surveillance is a such a modern issue. The ethical considerations are, compared to other classic philosophical questions, almost completely new to us. Never before has technology existed to such a degree that the inhabitants of a city feel that everything they do is seen and recorded. Given the topic of this film, I find KJ’s long shots and use of deep focus to be extremely fitting. They suggest the view point of the U.S. government, giving us a perspective into how the intelligence community might see Kabul. In addition, many of her shots are high angles, which achieves the following effects: firstly, it makes her subjects look diminutive. KJ might be commenting on how the US government views the citizens of Kabul. They literally look down on these people from their high altitude blimp. Ignoring basic human rights of privacy and decency in favor of a hard nosed stance on the prevention of global terrorism.

The intent of this blimp is juxtaposed with the everyday sights of Kabul. KJ chooses to include carnival rides and children in her frames; these humanize a foreign land to a western audience, and they also shed light on how ridiculous it is to conduct 24/7 surveillance on an entire city. It is hard not to think about how many useless recordings must exists of children minding their own business, busy playing and enjoying life. KJ includes other juxtapositions as well though, often framing the “eye in the sky” with other common airborne objects. Children play with a kite that flutters around the blimp, which floats many miles away; even birds are framed right next to the blimp, furthering the notion that the blimp is recording everything regardless of its importance to national security.

Later, in the video we see a similar blimp floating in Maryland. KJ’s text reveals that a military spokesperson stated that there are no cameras on board. Yet, an after action report recommends that the blimp be kept up to keep enemies of the state on their toes even if the camera systems are broken. These statements stand in opposition. Are there cameras on board or not? Are Americans being spied on without our consent or knowledge? In the end, KJ doesn’t answer these questions. Yet, the take away point for me is how powerful juxtaposition can be. Her framing of the blimp against so many different environments, objects, and people suggest the different relations that each thing has to the blimp. KJ’s use of a camera to record everything makes me wonder what is worth recording, how should it be recorded, and who gave permission to be recorded. There is a unique statement being made by someone who records and captures images for a living concerning the omniscient recording of humans, a city, and life in general.

Before this course, I didn’t know who KJ. I’m fairly inexperienced in prior documentary knowledge and am now so grateful I took this course. KJ’s enthusiasm and passion were inspiring. I went into camera person, not fully understanding what it was but came out with a new perspective on what documentary making was and the different ways it can be approached.

The way shots were chopped together, cut with black informative slides, seemed so simple but the thought process to combine all those videos in that order, it must have required so much skill and practice. The was KJ placed a video showing how she felt in the moment that occurred directly before by showing us someone else with those emotions she felt was indirect, but the indirectness gave the moment and the cinematic choices power.

I feel as though the message of this film questions the morality of an invasion of privacy by the United States government. Bringing to light a possible mistrust in the true intention of these blimps. Whether it be in Kabul, Afghanistan or Aberdeen, Maryland, the film is designed to make the audience question things further.

I also really enjoy the play on words with the title of this film, the idea of a field of vision. The film is shot in a way that makes us feel as though we are both seeing the blimp from the ground level vision of people, and seeing the world from the eyes of the blimp. Stylistically I think it is clear that this done on purpose with both high angle shots that feel as if we are looking down from and sky, and low angle shots as if we were sitting on the ground with the blimp in the background. There also this constant reinforcement of a single detail, the blimp. Almost every shot incorporated the blimp whether literally we see the blimp in the far background, or symbolically like shot with the colorful balloons. Sound throughout the film is also significant with the constant almost buzzing noise that reminds one of something hoovering above. Nowhere in the film can the audience escape the presence of the blimp. And this seems intentional.

Overall the story is constructed through sound, changes in perspective, a single narration of a man, and the juxtaposition of the two blimps in Kabul, Afghanistan verses Aberdeen, Maryland. Someone seems to be always watching, leaving the audience wary and some uncomfortable. It seems although the blimps are beyond just unnatural, they feel almost unmoral when juxtaposed next to the cross and against the idea of god expressed by the man’s narration.

I absolutely loved Cameraperson, but I am sure this isn’t surprising for anyone that was there. It felt as though the entire screening room was experiencing the same emotions and interest while watching, and then the feeling were even further confirmed during the QA when everyone gushed over the piece. It was truly incredible.

Once leaving the cinema I couldn’t stop thinking about the film. I drove up the hill with Margie and we discussed things even further. We couldn’t stop talking about empathy.

What do I mean by that? Documentaries have the power to make people feel and see something, someone or an event, in a way so distinct. That is why I love them because they allow an audience to really grasp what is happening, and understand it in a way that is unlike anything else. They are powerful and can leave a lasting impression.

But I guess I never fully appreciated how making a documentary can affect the person making it. And as discussed in the QA and even in film these stories and these experiences become a part of a documentarian’s life too. I never really thought about how that could take such a toll on someone. Traveling the world and exposing the human experience in its purest sense, is an incredible experience no doubt, but is also a difficult one.

`        The essence of Cameraperson, is to make the audience feel what the filmmaker felt. KJ has an extraordinary amount of empathy towards others especially those who she films, and that is what makes her films so incredible and moving. Her empathy and connection is truly translated across the film, and you can see her passion for others when she discussed her filming process. During the QA i was moved when she spoke about wanting to return to places she had been and how difficult it is still for her to watch the film. Her passionan for what she does is moving. I truly admire KJ dedication to her craft and respect for other human beings.

Specifically when looking at the film itself, I really enjoyed KJ decision to insert herself into the shot from the very beginning whether it was pulling the grass out of the shot or sneezing, the audience knew she was there and was going to be with us throughout the movie. The decision to include the footage of her mother and children made the film feel real and genuine. The overall rawness of the film and footage is what made each story and each person so easy to empathize with.

After spending nearly the whole day with Kristen Johnson in my “Women in Film” class, visual learning workshop, and the screening and Q&A of Cameraperson (Johnson, 2015) I was amazed at her work and who she is as a person. She taught me so much about cinema during her short hours in Lafayette. I went back and watched All These Sleepless Nights (Marczak, 2016) and I’m still blown away by every single aspect of it. As a striving filmmaker if I was in her position I would be like,”wow I did that.” I hope one day I can travel the country and make films I’m proud of. The visual learning workshop was incredibly insightful and her attentiveness to her surroundings and things like hand gestures blew everybody away. As she mentioned being able to listen, connect, and talk is one of the best skills you can have as a documentarian. She has mastered that skill and you could clearly see that in her film. During the workshop and Q&A, I liked how she would expand on every answer and she was very blunt as well. She didn’t hide anything and you could see that transparency in her film as well.

When I began watching Cameraperson I had no idea what I was getting myself into and that’s how I usually like seeing films. That’s why I avoid seeing trailers, especially long ones. One of the very first things I noticed was the sound. It was very in your face and added to the different stories she was telling. She also focused on hands a lot and used them to show emotions. For example, the girl in the women’s clinic who was going to abort her second child was telling her narrative with her hands, more than with her words. Through her hands you could tell how scared, insecure and anxious she was. It made me want to hold her fidgeting hands and tell her that everything would be okay. There were moments that made me want to look away because I felt like they were happening right there and then. For example when the child was using the ax or when the nurse was delivering babies and was putting the child upside down. In our culture, those are things that we don’t see every day and I was in shock by seeing some of those things. When the kid was using the ax my heart was racing and I wanted to jump into the screen and stop him. Two other stories that reinforced the idea that as a documentarian you put yourself in very uncomfortable and unexpected situations was when James lost his boxing match, and when the woman was grieving her mother’s suicide.  Like some people mentioned the woman’s unexpected rage left us with our mouth opened. I never thought that she would start acting like that so quickly, but you could feel the rawness in her emotion. It is something she needed to let out. Also, when James lost his match you could feel his rage coming out of the screen and it personally worried me if Kristen Johnson was okay. It seemed like he was ready to punch the camera any moment. Those are the type of situations that as a documentarian you have to be ready for but you can also never be fully ready for them. You have to be good at reading people’s body language and cues. Kristen is truly amazing at doing that and more.