The relationship between the filmmaker and the filmmaker’s subject is probably the most important relationship in documentary filmmaking. American Promise has many instances were this relationship might come into question. For instance, when Idris and Seun were young the filmmakers were most likely their parents, but as they aged, their parents probably hired someone else outside of the family to document their lives. One question that is raised from this is: Would the two boys be inclined to act differently around their parents filming them as opposed to a stranger? And would the parent’s filmmaking portray their children in a different manner than the hired individual?
The ending of American Promise at first made me chuckle when the two boys stated how thirteen years of the camera being in their faces had its pros and cons, but on second thought made me question the entire movie that I just watched documenting their lives. To me, the last few quotes directed towards the viewer roughly translated to “How did you like our acting?” and left me feeling uneasy about the previous ninety minutes of movie I just watched. I, the viewer, will never be able to tell if the movie was one elaborate fabrication of the lives of two boys, or if it was a true depiction of actual events.
American Promise is about two African American boys, Idris and his friend Seun, who attended Dalton; a prestigious preparatory school in New York City, New York. Idris’ parents are the filmmakers, who turn the cameras on their son and his friend at the age of five. They continue filming for the next thirteen years of the two young men’s lives. The boys’ paths split when they reach the eighth grade. Idris continues his experience at Dalton into high school. While Seun continues his high school career in the public school system. With the filmmakers being the subject’s parents, it makes us question the relationship between the filmmaker and the subject. I thought the filmmakers did a great job capturing the differences African American students face in a predominately white private school. But, Wanda Bershen’s article questions the ethics of the relationship between the filmmaker and the subject. Her article states that it is important for the filmmaker to respect their subject and portray their subject properly. In American Promise the filmmakers are the subjects’ parents, giving them legal rights to video their child’s life. I believe the filmmakers of American Promise used the same method as Wiseman in Titicut Follies. Manipulating the legal system to work in their favor to receive video rights of their subjects. The children are too young to sign their consent for the film, and being the legal guardians of the subjects gives them the right to sign over their consent for them. I thought the filmmakers of American Promise portrayed their subjects well, but the way they received consent from their subjects made me question the relationship between them and their subject.
Whereas Titicut Follies was a documentary done in a fly-on-the-wall style, you’d almost have to call American Promise fly-in-your-soup. The parents are simultaneously subjects and filmmakers. The kid’s lives, and thus the central narrative, is directly influenced by the process of making the film itself. It’s not only a film about the inherent social inequality of our country’s institutions, American Promise is about what it’s like growing up with a camera trained on your every move.
There are certain elements to the story we don’t see in the film that I think are important to consider. Joe Brewster, the father, wasn’t just any Stanford and Harvard educated psychiatrist with a video camera. In 1995 he wrote and directed his first feature length film which debuted at Sundance. He later began work with his wife on American Promise, and during the period of time the film spans they released multiple other films, including a documentary about their son’s basketball team. Filmmaking and being filmed is certainly intertwined with the life of Idris.
There are a few ethical dilemmas raised by this. Primarily, the kids are essentially forced to star in a documentary without being old enough to give consent (not unlike the Titicut dilemma) and the process of constantly being in a documentary could cause developmental issues and add to the already massive pressure they face. Idris and Seun seem pretty well adjusted at the film’s end, but there’s still the issue of consent. With any ethical dilemma in film, I think there are two questions to ask. First, is the film worth making? Second, is there a better, more ethical way to make it? Most would agree American Promise is a film with an important message, and it would lose a lot of it’s power if it didn’t start with the kids at 5. I’d say the social benefit makes this film worthwhile.
American Promise is about a two young African American boys Idris and his friend Seun, who attended Dalton which is a very prestigious school in New York City. In all the films we watched, we’ve discussed ethical issues in them. In American Promise, the ethical issue that is questioned in the documentary is the relationship between the filmmaker and the subjects. Since the parents were the filmmakers, this questioned is definitely one to ask. Personally, for me, I feel the parents did a great job. The boys were 5 when this all started, and we literally saw them grow up. Since the parents were the filmmakers, I feel that helped Idris and Seun feel more comfortable, and made them more real. To be honest, I would continue to forget that the parents were the filmmakers throughout the film.
Some people judge the parents rationale for doing this documentary, but I personally don’t think it is wrong. The boys’ testimony has helped shape the way for future African Americans to enter in Dalton, and it has opened the eyes to people like me, that never knew much about Dalton, or the fact that this is a problem in prep schools. This story needed to be told, and these 2 families decided to be the ones who told the story. All in all, I really enjoyed the film, and I think that the ethical code of filmmakers and subjects were ethical. The parents did a great job.
American promise is a documentary shot by the parents of the documentary subjects, African-American boys Idris and Seun. The film follows the two children as they attend one of the most prestigious academic centers, Dalton in New York City, all the way through their senior year of high school. This, of course, raised several ethical questions in class. First, would having cameras on these children cause them any adverse psychological effects? They seemed well adjusted at the end of the film, but surely having the public know about intimate moments of their lives could be psychologically damaging to some. However, the parents consented for their children, so surely they would be mindful of these things, especially considering that one of the parents was a psychologist.
More importantly, it brings up a question for discussion on the ethics of documentary filmmaking. Is it okay to provide consent for a child too young to consent for themselves if your subject is that important to shed light on? I think, if the necessary precautions are taken, yes. One of the things that upset me the most in American Promise was the additional tension that the camera put on these children in dramatic moments. It seemed to beckon for a bigger reaction than was necessary for the children, and momentarily threw me out of my immersion into this story. More importantly, if there was a clip that was important to the story, but displayed bad parenting on the part of the parents, I believe that these parents would've included it, due to the fact that they add some more sentimental, candid moments with the kids. Someone said that it felt like watching home movies, and I agree, because of these candid moments. It developed a sense of trust between me and the filmmaker, which I think was vital for me to pay attention to their story.
When watching American Promise, the ethical issue that was raised is the relationship between the filmmaker and the people being filmed. The parents initiated the filmaking so this raises questions like "Would they act the same way towards their children if they weren't on camera?" or "Did they plan ahead of time how they were going to act in certain situations throughout the children's time at Dalton?". In my opinion, this was a fantastic film and I think it was a great thing these parents did, not only for their children, but for society to see how racist our community can be.
Some people might think that it was wrong to film their children's life like this since they are not necessarily able to give their own consent. Although, I would not of enjoyed my mother filming me for 15 years, but I think these boys didn't might it and it didn't cause any emotional harm or irepairable damage. I think that the parents filming their children at such a young age made them comfortable around the camera and that there was little to no acting on their part. Overall this was a great film because it opened up the viewer's eyes to prep school at Dalton and paved the way so that more African American children won't be afraid to go to a school where most of the children are all white.
The relationship between filmaker and subject is a very crucial one. It has a very big impact on the total outcome of the film. Documentarians are placed with the responsibility of depicting the narrative of their subject while keeping a level of respect and privacy. They also want to make a compelling film for the audience. The issue within American Promise is that the directors are the parents of the subjects. There is rarely such a close relationship between filmaker and subject. This can create tension, but also a sense of realness that cannot be created elsewhere. Though is the realness worth the potential problems? I think in this case, the overall message that Ameican Promise gives is what is most important.
With the kids being filmed so long, I'm sure they trusted their parents from the jump. Throughout the 13 years of filming, I'm sure there are scenes that the family chose to cut out. From the persepctive of parental filmakers, I'm sure they knew what scenes would be too far or too sensitive. Maybe as they got older they started to lose enthusiasm about being filmed, but I think the Idris and Seun realized the purpose of their story. The issues featured in American Promise are way bigger than them. The film represents America and race relations within this "post-racial" society. The truths featured in the film need to be exposed.
This week we watched a film in class called "American Promise" a documentary about two young African American children, Idris and Suen, attending one of the most prestigious private schools in the country, Dalton at the age of 5 all the way to age 18. The filmmakers in this documentary are Idris's parents and they give us an insight into both of the children's lives while attending Dalton. Throughout the film we see the many struggles and accomplishments both children face outside the school and in the school such as grades, social life, death in the family and illnesses in the family. In the film, the boys are separated when Suen leaves Dalton after 8th grade and attends a public high school, while Idris stays at Dalton for high school. As we discussed in class, ethical questions are were brought up related to the film.
One would be the relationship between the filmmakers and the subjects. Some might think that because the filmmakers were one of the subjects parents, that the children might of "acted" or were told to say certain things or even react a certain way to make the film better for the viewers. After watching the film, I would have to disagree with that because I did not see any effort to act a different way when the cameras were on them. I saw 100% honesty and realness throughout the whole movie. Although, at the end of the movie during the credits, Idris says in a scene that was not put in the movie, "This is not ordinary life, this is not an everyday thing" That left people a bit uneasy because it could be interrupted into so many things. I however believe he was just stating that the struggles he is having as being an African American child in a mostly all white private school is not something that all children deal with. He's in a unique spot in his life and not a lot of people can relate to that. Same with Suen, who half way though his childhood went from a top private school to now a public high school. There are some things in life that not everyone can relate to and those would be some of those things.
This was an amazing film to watch as a viewer. I might not be the first person to sign up for a film that documents you for 13 years of your life growing up but this film was one of a kind and had a story that needed to be told. The story being how 2 African American children face what its like being in not only a private school but a mostly white school, and how it can open the eyes of other African American parents about bringing their children into private school life.
American Promise is a documentary about two young African Americans who are making their way up through the private school system. It is filmed over a 13-year period and is filmed by the parents and on occasion a film crew. This film shows personal conversations, milestones, and tragedies that the boys had to go through. So the question is whether it is okay for a parent of film crew to get this personal with the film, and if they were ever acting at any point? These questions that are brought up have led the film to be criticized and downgraded.
I personally believe the entire documentary was true. For one it is a documentary and I believe that with every personal moment, they were all real moments. It would be hard for someone to act for thirteen years or even fake an emotion when something serious had happened. I also believe that because they were being filmed this long, the camera just became another part of their life; almost like another face or person. Although we will never truly know, I feel confident that what we watched was real. Overall I think American Promise was a great documentary. To be able to follow two young boys throughout their lives and get to see them grow up is truly rare and interesting.
The relationship between the filmmaker and the subject is a very delicate one that may have many more boundaries than many know. American Promise was a documentary made by parents who made the decision to follow their son and his friend through their schooling experiences for thirteen years. The boys, Idris and Seun, are both African American and living in New York City where they both began their education at the prestigious Dalton School. The main focus of the documentary seems to be the struggles of African American kids going through a predominately white school atmosphere, but it also showcases the regular stresses of young children and teens who are living with helicopter parents and extreme pressures to succeed. With Idris' parents being the filmmakers of the documentary, there is and interesting perspective taken in American Promise. It raises many questions right off the bat - "With shooting your own children how does it affect them later?" "Will the filmmakers act differently as parents when they are on-camera?" "How will the children act when they are on-camera if it's mom and dad shooting?" Parents being the filmmaker shooting their kids as the subject was definitely an interesting approach to take. This raises a question in itself - was it right for these parents to give the consent of their children when the boys were only at the tender age of five, when they more than likely had no idea what they were signing up for? In one sense it seems wrong, but at the same time the boys are interviewed in the end and claim that even though having a camera follow them around for thirteen years "sucked," they were used to it being there and didn't think much of it.
With the kids being filmed so much and becoming used to cameras being around, it is hard to think that even once they got older that they were acting. Eventually it became clear that throughout the documentary the parents had other people filming as well, most likely so that they would be seen in their normal setting as parents dealing with the pressures of sending their children to a competitive private school of majority white students. I think the parents did a fairly good job at keeping the documentary as unbiased as they could, especially considering they were parenting while trying to film. There were several times throughout the film that were brought up in discussion at the end of class that some people thought several individuals may have been acting, but I think it is unlikely. For a thirteen year project, the end product was as well-made and unbiased as anyone could make it in their position. My biggest concern though is the ethical thought of the children being signed up for something while being so young. More than likely the boys had no idea what they were getting themselves into, and they really didnt have a choice anyway since neither of them were old enough to sign anything without parental consent. As far as children or, in the case of Tillie Cut Follies, mentally ill people, I don't know that someone else taking the liberty to sign a subject up for something they are unaware of is necessarily the right thing to do.
The relationship between the filmmaker and the filmmaker’s subject is probably the most important relationship in documentary filmmaking. American Promise has many instances were this relationship might come into question. For instance, when Idris and Seun were young the filmmakers were most likely their parents, but as they aged, their parents probably hired someone else outside of the family to document their lives. One question that is raised from this is: Would the two boys be inclined to act differently around their parents filming them as opposed to a stranger? And would the parent’s filmmaking portray their children in a different manner than the hired individual?
ReplyDeleteThe ending of American Promise at first made me chuckle when the two boys stated how thirteen years of the camera being in their faces had its pros and cons, but on second thought made me question the entire movie that I just watched documenting their lives. To me, the last few quotes directed towards the viewer roughly translated to “How did you like our acting?” and left me feeling uneasy about the previous ninety minutes of movie I just watched. I, the viewer, will never be able to tell if the movie was one elaborate fabrication of the lives of two boys, or if it was a true depiction of actual events.
American Promise is about two African American boys, Idris and his friend Seun, who attended Dalton; a prestigious preparatory school in New York City, New York. Idris’ parents are the filmmakers, who turn the cameras on their son and his friend at the age of five. They continue filming for the next thirteen years of the two young men’s lives. The boys’ paths split when they reach the eighth grade. Idris continues his experience at Dalton into high school. While Seun continues his high school career in the public school system. With the filmmakers being the subject’s parents, it makes us question the relationship between the filmmaker and the subject.
ReplyDeleteI thought the filmmakers did a great job capturing the differences African American students face in a predominately white private school. But, Wanda Bershen’s article questions the ethics of the relationship between the filmmaker and the subject. Her article states that it is important for the filmmaker to respect their subject and portray their subject properly. In American Promise the filmmakers are the subjects’ parents, giving them legal rights to video their child’s life. I believe the filmmakers of American Promise used the same method as Wiseman in Titicut Follies. Manipulating the legal system to work in their favor to receive video rights of their subjects. The children are too young to sign their consent for the film, and being the legal guardians of the subjects gives them the right to sign over their consent for them. I thought the filmmakers of American Promise portrayed their subjects well, but the way they received consent from their subjects made me question the relationship between them and their subject.
Whereas Titicut Follies was a documentary done in a fly-on-the-wall style, you’d almost have to call American Promise fly-in-your-soup. The parents are simultaneously subjects and filmmakers. The kid’s lives, and thus the central narrative, is directly influenced by the process of making the film itself. It’s not only a film about the inherent social inequality of our country’s institutions, American Promise is about what it’s like growing up with a camera trained on your every move.
ReplyDeleteThere are certain elements to the story we don’t see in the film that I think are important to consider. Joe Brewster, the father, wasn’t just any Stanford and Harvard educated psychiatrist with a video camera. In 1995 he wrote and directed his first feature length film which debuted at Sundance. He later began work with his wife on American Promise, and during the period of time the film spans they released multiple other films, including a documentary about their son’s basketball team. Filmmaking and being filmed is certainly intertwined with the life of Idris.
There are a few ethical dilemmas raised by this. Primarily, the kids are essentially forced to star in a documentary without being old enough to give consent (not unlike the Titicut dilemma) and the process of constantly being in a documentary could cause developmental issues and add to the already massive pressure they face. Idris and Seun seem pretty well adjusted at the film’s end, but there’s still the issue of consent. With any ethical dilemma in film, I think there are two questions to ask. First, is the film worth making? Second, is there a better, more ethical way to make it? Most would agree American Promise is a film with an important message, and it would lose a lot of it’s power if it didn’t start with the kids at 5. I’d say the social benefit makes this film worthwhile.
American Promise is about a two young African American boys Idris and his friend Seun, who attended Dalton which is a very prestigious school in New York City. In all the films we watched, we’ve discussed ethical issues in them. In American Promise, the ethical issue that is questioned in the documentary is the relationship between the filmmaker and the subjects. Since the parents were the filmmakers, this questioned is definitely one to ask. Personally, for me, I feel the parents did a great job. The boys were 5 when this all started, and we literally saw them grow up. Since the parents were the filmmakers, I feel that helped Idris and Seun feel more comfortable, and made them more real. To be honest, I would continue to forget that the parents were the filmmakers throughout the film.
ReplyDeleteSome people judge the parents rationale for doing this documentary, but I personally don’t think it is wrong. The boys’ testimony has helped shape the way for future African Americans to enter in Dalton, and it has opened the eyes to people like me, that never knew much about Dalton, or the fact that this is a problem in prep schools. This story needed to be told, and these 2 families decided to be the ones who told the story. All in all, I really enjoyed the film, and I think that the ethical code of filmmakers and subjects were ethical. The parents did a great job.
American promise is a documentary shot by the parents of the documentary subjects, African-American boys Idris and Seun. The film follows the two children as they attend one of the most prestigious academic centers, Dalton in New York City, all the way through their senior year of high school. This, of course, raised several ethical questions in class. First, would having cameras on these children cause them any adverse psychological effects? They seemed well adjusted at the end of the film, but surely having the public know about intimate moments of their lives could be psychologically damaging to some. However, the parents consented for their children, so surely they would be mindful of these things, especially considering that one of the parents was a psychologist.
ReplyDeleteMore importantly, it brings up a question for discussion on the ethics of documentary filmmaking. Is it okay to provide consent for a child too young to consent for themselves if your subject is that important to shed light on? I think, if the necessary precautions are taken, yes. One of the things that upset me the most in American Promise was the additional tension that the camera put on these children in dramatic moments. It seemed to beckon for a bigger reaction than was necessary for the children, and momentarily threw me out of my immersion into this story. More importantly, if there was a clip that was important to the story, but displayed bad parenting on the part of the parents, I believe that these parents would've included it, due to the fact that they add some more sentimental, candid moments with the kids. Someone said that it felt like watching home movies, and I agree, because of these candid moments. It developed a sense of trust between me and the filmmaker, which I think was vital for me to pay attention to their story.
When watching American Promise, the ethical issue that was raised is the relationship between the filmmaker and the people being filmed. The parents initiated the filmaking so this raises questions like "Would they act the same way towards their children if they weren't on camera?" or "Did they plan ahead of time how they were going to act in certain situations throughout the children's time at Dalton?". In my opinion, this was a fantastic film and I think it was a great thing these parents did, not only for their children, but for society to see how racist our community can be.
ReplyDeleteSome people might think that it was wrong to film their children's life like this since they are not necessarily able to give their own consent. Although, I would not of enjoyed my mother filming me for 15 years, but I think these boys didn't might it and it didn't cause any emotional harm or irepairable damage. I think that the parents filming their children at such a young age made them comfortable around the camera and that there was little to no acting on their part. Overall this was a great film because it opened up the viewer's eyes to prep school at Dalton and paved the way so that more African American children won't be afraid to go to a school where most of the children are all white.
The relationship between filmaker and subject is a very crucial one. It has a very big impact on the total outcome of the film. Documentarians are placed with the responsibility of depicting the narrative of their subject while keeping a level of respect and privacy. They also want to make a compelling film for the audience. The issue within American Promise is that the directors are the parents of the subjects. There is rarely such a close relationship between filmaker and subject. This can create tension, but also a sense of realness that cannot be created elsewhere. Though is the realness worth the potential problems? I think in this case, the overall message that Ameican Promise gives is what is most important.
ReplyDeleteWith the kids being filmed so long, I'm sure they trusted their parents from the jump. Throughout the 13 years of filming, I'm sure there are scenes that the family chose to cut out. From the persepctive of parental filmakers, I'm sure they knew what scenes would be too far or too sensitive. Maybe as they got older they started to lose enthusiasm about being filmed, but I think the Idris and Seun realized the purpose of their story. The issues featured in American Promise are way bigger than them. The film represents America and race relations within this "post-racial" society. The truths featured in the film need to be exposed.
This week we watched a film in class called "American Promise" a documentary about two young African American children, Idris and Suen, attending one of the most prestigious private schools in the country, Dalton at the age of 5 all the way to age 18. The filmmakers in this documentary are Idris's parents and they give us an insight into both of the children's lives while attending Dalton. Throughout the film we see the many struggles and accomplishments both children face outside the school and in the school such as grades, social life, death in the family and illnesses in the family. In the film, the boys are separated when Suen leaves Dalton after 8th grade and attends a public high school, while Idris stays at Dalton for high school. As we discussed in class, ethical questions are were brought up related to the film.
ReplyDeleteOne would be the relationship between the filmmakers and the subjects. Some might think that because the filmmakers were one of the subjects parents, that the children might of "acted" or were told to say certain things or even react a certain way to make the film better for the viewers. After watching the film, I would have to disagree with that because I did not see any effort to act a different way when the cameras were on them. I saw 100% honesty and realness throughout the whole movie. Although, at the end of the movie during the credits, Idris says in a scene that was not put in the movie, "This is not ordinary life, this is not an everyday thing" That left people a bit uneasy because it could be interrupted into so many things. I however believe he was just stating that the struggles he is having as being an African American child in a mostly all white private school is not something that all children deal with. He's in a unique spot in his life and not a lot of people can relate to that. Same with Suen, who half way though his childhood went from a top private school to now a public high school. There are some things in life that not everyone can relate to and those would be some of those things.
This was an amazing film to watch as a viewer. I might not be the first person to sign up for a film that documents you for 13 years of your life growing up but this film was one of a kind and had a story that needed to be told. The story being how 2 African American children face what its like being in not only a private school but a mostly white school, and how it can open the eyes of other African American parents about bringing their children into private school life.
American Promise is a documentary about two young African Americans who are making their way up through the private school system. It is filmed over a 13-year period and is filmed by the parents and on occasion a film crew. This film shows personal conversations, milestones, and tragedies that the boys had to go through. So the question is whether it is okay for a parent of film crew to get this personal with the film, and if they were ever acting at any point? These questions that are brought up have led the film to be criticized and downgraded.
ReplyDeleteI personally believe the entire documentary was true. For one it is a documentary and I believe that with every personal moment, they were all real moments. It would be hard for someone to act for thirteen years or even fake an emotion when something serious had happened. I also believe that because they were being filmed this long, the camera just became another part of their life; almost like another face or person. Although we will never truly know, I feel confident that what we watched was real. Overall I think American Promise was a great documentary. To be able to follow two young boys throughout their lives and get to see them grow up is truly rare and interesting.
The relationship between the filmmaker and the subject is a very delicate one that may have many more boundaries than many know. American Promise was a documentary made by parents who made the decision to follow their son and his friend through their schooling experiences for thirteen years. The boys, Idris and Seun, are both African American and living in New York City where they both began their education at the prestigious Dalton School. The main focus of the documentary seems to be the struggles of African American kids going through a predominately white school atmosphere, but it also showcases the regular stresses of young children and teens who are living with helicopter parents and extreme pressures to succeed. With Idris' parents being the filmmakers of the documentary, there is and interesting perspective taken in American Promise. It raises many questions right off the bat - "With shooting your own children how does it affect them later?" "Will the filmmakers act differently as parents when they are on-camera?" "How will the children act when they are on-camera if it's mom and dad shooting?" Parents being the filmmaker shooting their kids as the subject was definitely an interesting approach to take. This raises a question in itself - was it right for these parents to give the consent of their children when the boys were only at the tender age of five, when they more than likely had no idea what they were signing up for? In one sense it seems wrong, but at the same time the boys are interviewed in the end and claim that even though having a camera follow them around for thirteen years "sucked," they were used to it being there and didn't think much of it.
ReplyDeleteWith the kids being filmed so much and becoming used to cameras being around, it is hard to think that even once they got older that they were acting. Eventually it became clear that throughout the documentary the parents had other people filming as well, most likely so that they would be seen in their normal setting as parents dealing with the pressures of sending their children to a competitive private school of majority white students. I think the parents did a fairly good job at keeping the documentary as unbiased as they could, especially considering they were parenting while trying to film. There were several times throughout the film that were brought up in discussion at the end of class that some people thought several individuals may have been acting, but I think it is unlikely. For a thirteen year project, the end product was as well-made and unbiased as anyone could make it in their position. My biggest concern though is the ethical thought of the children being signed up for something while being so young. More than likely the boys had no idea what they were getting themselves into, and they really didnt have a choice anyway since neither of them were old enough to sign anything without parental consent. As far as children or, in the case of Tillie Cut Follies, mentally ill people, I don't know that someone else taking the liberty to sign a subject up for something they are unaware of is necessarily the right thing to do.