
It’s a rare and precious thing when a documentary changes some small part of the world for the better. And such rarity tells us a great deal about how heavily are the odds usually stacked against documentary – not just as a campaigning tool for change but as a purveyor of disruptive and inconvenient stories.
Take 2013 documentary Blackfish, for example. This feature-length film about a trainer’s death caused by a captive killer whale at SeaWorld in Orlando, Florida, placed the plight of captive orcas in the spotlight. It was the lightning rod for an animal rights campaign that could suddenly call upon celebrities such as Matt Damon, Harry Styles and Willie Nelson to condemn what animal welfare pressure group PETA has called a “tawdry circus”.
The public’s appetite for seeing captive orcas does appear to be waning. Since the documentary’s release, SeaWorld visitor numbers, share price and profits have fallen and the park recently announced that it will end killer whale shows at its San Diego venue.
Revealing the new strategy, SeaWorld’s chief executive Joel Manby said: “We are listening to our guests, evolving as a company, we are always changing. In 2017 we will launch an all new orca experience focused on natural environment [of whales]."
Blackfish was controversial from the moment it debuted at the 2013 Sundance Film Festival. Quickly picked up for theatrical distribution in the US, the documentary attracted overwhelmingly positive reviews. Its story of dual tragedy – human and captive whale – was elegantly structured and told without recourse to sensationalism.
It’s remarkable that a documentary should have made an impact as great as this. All the more so when you consider that the film was made with the slimmest of production budgets: $76,000. While it bears the imprimatur of CNN – the news organisation (along with Magnolia Pictures) picked up the film for distribution after its Sundance screening – CNN did not pay for it to be made.
In particular, it’s notable how common the tactic of labelling documentary as “propaganda” is an accusation that trumps all else because it preemptively renders corrupt the motives of the filmmakers. There are other recalcitrant gatekeepers and influencers too, including, I’m sorry to say, academics who study and write about documentary: academic writing in this area rarely ventures into comment or analysis on this kind of thing, particularly in modern-day, big-business counterattacks.
For all the claims that films such as Blackfish are evidence that we are in a “golden age” of documentary, they are fragile things indeed, easily blown into obscurity or silenced by the sheer weight of corporate power. Gabriela Cowperthwaite may have attracted many who otherwise might not have thought much about the rights of killer whales. Documentary needs advocates to stand up for what, as Blackfish has shown, can be a powerful form of journalism capable of bringing about change.
By David Hickman, Senior Lecturer in Film & Television Production, University of York
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.