Real Documentary Analysis: Gun Show: Rethinking Weapons in the Name of Art

 

    The documentary Gun Show, the story follows an artist named David Hess and his special exhibition. Hess created an assortment of fake guns from everyday items in order to execute a social experiment. The experiment calls for him to display the guns in front of onlookers, the goal is to open up a conversation about guns and their effect on America.  

    

    Something that is really interesting about the documentary is that Hess never admits his stance to the general public or the people he meets when showcasing his work. He listens and serves and never says too much to see where the conversation will lead.  The director uses camera shots, sound, mise-en-scene, and editing skills to convey meaning and tell a story.

Camera 

    Noticeably throughout the documentary, the camera shots are not excessive they are fundamental and straightforward. The shots include an establishing shot, close-up, tracking, over-the-shoulder, two shot, and a medium shot. The shots are very consistent throughout.

    An establishing shot can be seen every time Hess goes to a new location. In the first few minutes, the shot is at Hess's house, where he makes the guns. The next shot that follows is a close-up and is seen when he is building the gun and laying them out. I think this showcases meaning because the guns are the statement. They are the reason behind the experiment and the social discourse amongst random strangers.

     Another camera shot being used is over the shoulder and two shots. These shots are done only when a conversation is taking place. An example of this is when a woman spoke to the man about her beliefs about guns the camera focused on her and made it known that she was speaking to Hess. The final shot is a medium shot and is shown whenever the guns are showcased.

One particular thing about the camera that stood out to me is that it was handheld. Throughout the documentary, the camera makes shaking movements and isn't linear. It makes me wonder why the director choose to do this and is it earlier to transport or a stylistic choice?

Sound

    The aspect of sound is very general majority of it is background noise. At the beginning of the documentary the first thing that was heard were birds chirping, that was followed but distant conversations, and city life. There were also little clinks and noises made when Hess pulled out a gun or when he placed them down.

    The music in the background often added a somber feel to the documentary. There was a woman who talked about how guns were violent and seen as objects of mass destruction. When she mentioned that sad music played and all other sounds faded away into a voice-over dictated by Hess. 

    The voice-over played a large role in amplifying the film and Hess's perspective. Through his dialogue with the onlookers and organizations, he talked about how he felt in those moments and how his work had impacted the people. Included this in the documentary showcases reach and builds a connection to the audience.

Mise-En-Scene

    In terms of mise-en-scene I didn't really notice much or to be more specific I'm not sure if what I noticed would fall underneath mise-en-scene. Analyzing a documentary is very different from analyzing a film or a show when things are noticeable. There really isn't anything that the director or set designer added everything felt normal like they belonged on the scene.

    There were a lot of changes in setting though the film took place in Hess's workshop, college campus, gun show, streets of new york, and Washington D.C. Everything and the people out in each shot were not hand-picked but seemed random and based on simple conversations. The environment was simple it is a reflection of everyday life and highlights the impact Hess has made on the general public. 

Editing

    The editing of the documentary is minimal. There were only cuts and smooth transitions. The timing of the cuts was not rushed or blatant but everything followed together. The edits were also done between different shots. One thing that I noticed is that the cuts happened in order to highlight the atmosphere and show the people and their reactions.

Audience/Purpose

    After watching and analyzing the documentary I don't think there is one specific intended audience I think it is just for the general public. The documentary never picks a side on the issue but rather highlights people's ideas and beliefs while expanding with Hess's perspective. The documentary is created to inform the people about the different sides of the debate.

    I say this because the interviews are with different people with opposing ideas but somehow they are able to have a civil conversation and find a middle ground. Hess also shows the audience how the atmosphere and how different the conversation is depending on where you are. He also highlights the effect that guns have had on people both good and bad, which makes the documentary more informative.