rain in my heart update mark 21 Nov rain in my heart update mark

Voyeurism this is not. On the other hand, i personally feel like people are indeed exploited. Moreover, one can say that the subjects were exploited not only in the aforementioned scenes, but generally throughout the film. All the footage that was quite hard to watch did, however, make the film much more real for me. Paul Watsons attempt to defend himself and his arguments against the accusations do make sense. Frank SinatraCycles 1968 Frank Sinatra Enterprises, LLCReleased on: 1990-01-01Producer: Don C. Several times in the documentary we see him struggle to make decisions on how he will proceed with the footage he has. One of the last images we see of Nicole is her hooked up to tubes fighting for her life. The decision to include this part of Vandas drunk dialogue is one that is certainly questionable, especially since we are not given evidence as to whether or not she did consent to the inclusion once sober. It cant be argued that the documentary would have given Watson some amount of attention from viewers for filming subjects in the vulnerable state they were in, its in this sense that the word exploitation would be more appropriate. The question of the ethics of filmmaking is clearly something that is troubling to Watson. Im thinking of the massacre set to Bach, of the march over the horizon to Israel, and of the justly infamous shower scene. It is obvious that this documentary was extremely influential to those who have seen it, I have attached a link below of a Facebook page a viewer has made (who obviously has personal issues and experience with alcoholism). He just shined a light on a topic a lot of people often avoid. I think that the mutual awareness of the situation between subject and filmmaker, despite the subjects inebriation, helps to prove that it is not exploitative. This gives the impression that Paul Watson is only interested in the success of this documentary. The game uses a beautiful and funny graphics engine to make everything look. Perhaps the strong emotional shocked felt from watching it is more to do with fearing our own mortality. Whats offensive? Yes it is a devastating subject matter and yes the emotions that should arise in audiences should be just as devastating. family and friends. 100. He never appeared to be controlling or interregative in a dominant sense, he remained calm when interviewing his subjects and took their replies without expresing his personal opinion. At no point during the documentary did I feel that the filmmaker was exploiting the subjects, the recording of what can be described as personal and intimate situations felt more like a significant necessity with moral intentions towards bringing awareness towards the seriousness of the consumption of alcohol. If there was any moment in the film where you could perceive Watson as exploiting them it would be when he interviews and observes them whilst or after theyve been drinking heavily, of course Watson cannot control what comes out of their mouth, he does have control over what to show to the audience, however showing these moments to the audience ensures that Watson has observed in full, the effects of alcohol and his points of its destructiveness comes across. Therefore, i dont feel uncomfortable for his attempts within the film. This film must encounter with some ethics problems and Pauls observational style should instigated arguments. I think Paul Watson has exploited his subjects in some point. I remember feeling genuinely scared that some of the subjects were going to die: such as when Mark was at home and was continuing to drink in excess and constantly vomiting. Its a very tricky position for Watson. Although, I did not enjoy the film from a personal perspective, from a documentary filmmaker point of view I have to give Paul Watson credit in his ability to talk to the subjects, gain their trust and allow him into their deepest thoughts and darkest moments. Rain In My Heart, was a very touching and eye opening film. Watson is not overly invasive at any point, and if anything my only criticism would be that he sometimes gives too much insight into how he feels about what is happening during filming, which I find unnecessary. I want to quickly point out that, I didnt like the parts in the film where he became the self-reflexive type and centered the documentary on his own emotional state. The way sounds from different moments would melt into each other reminded me of the background cacaphony of hospitals, with distant melodies of monisters, doctors and patients fusing. Or when Nigel downs a glass of red wine. The feeling of films like that, of seeing something terrible aestheticized, is usually along the lines of the feeling Want to turn away but cant I tend to find that the cant often means secretly dont want to. I thought Rain In My Heart was a good example of a film that provokes thought about the ethical role of documentary makers. Then again, as Watson argues: If some of us dont record it, none of us will know about it.. These subjects were all willing participants, however their capacity to give consent comes into question. It is clear to me throughout, both when talking to his subjects and when talking to the camera itself that he becomes both emotionally involved and also continuously checks that he is keeping to his promises. The problem suddenly doesnt become the alcohol, but their mental state, which is something I learnt from the film. Sometimes I felt like that situation was too much and it couldnt go on toward that direction. RAIN IN MY HEART BOWY Rock 1,125Shazams play full song Get up to 5 months free of Apple Music Share OVERVIEW LYRICS PLAY FULL SONG Connect with Apple Music. 2 . I felt as if Watson was genuine in the fact that he did care, he wanted to see the subjects overcome their problems, in a scene where he is at Vandas house, he stands with her and says although he cant stop Vanda from drinking, he doesnt want to see her do it. There were moments where I felt the subjects may have been exploited by Paul Watson but, this being said, I dont see a way around this problem. That is something which I felt could have been left out, as it only showed her weak points and did not help in the documentaries focus on her alcohol problem. I personally feel that Paul Watson did not exploit his subjects in the film. Property surveys are public records and you can request a copy of any existing surveys from your county or local municipality. I personally believe that the word exploit is quite a harsh word to put on the filmmaker without full justification, its made clear that the subjects wanted to be filmed, Watson treats this permission with a good amount of respect both for the subjects and the topic of the documentary whilst at the same time sustaining his role as the stand back and sympathetic-ear presence. Most Popular Now | 56,514 people are reading stories on the site right now. Here's one depicting true alcoholism in the UK, realism at its best. 17,029 pages were read in the last minute. The subjects and the families were happy to be filmed and it was unlikely that the film was going to bring more harm than good it was important that he looked at the whole picture and the awareness he could spread with such a film. Men's Journal is a rugged and refined lifestyle publication covering the coolest new gear, luxury and adventure travel, food and drink, health and fitness, and more. " "Before there is peace, blood will spill blood, and the lake will run red. The world was slowly healing. Even though there is not exact evidence of Kath saying this to Watson, I believe that if she had thought differently the scene would be cut out since it is such a dramatic and personal event. Vanda, one of his participants spoke of the abuse she endured from her Father, and when she told her Mother and she didnt believe her, thats when she turned to alcohol. For someone to say that Watson exploited the people in the film is to say that he harmed them in some way, which I dont think he did. BBC - Rain in My Heart Watch now This powerful documentary from fly-on-the-wall pioneer Paul Watson provides a raw account of four alcohol abusers from the impoverished Medway towns of north. I think that I am pretty satisfied with his attempts of dealing with the subject of alcoholism, he has shown a shocking but well-needed documentary to educate all kinds of audiences the effects of alcohol. Watson chooses subjects based on their deadly addictions to alcohol, an integral part to the film. Nigel died during the course of filming Rain in my Heart, leaving Kath and two teenage children. However, i was impressed by this documentary. It is true that his documentary can be judged and considered as an observational one: the filmmaker lets the interviewee talk about his or her problems and express all his or her weaknesses. My point being, Watson could have constructed his Documentary in a more ethical way (probably without capturing the outstanding footage he managed to get) or could have been completely unethical by being dominantly intrusive and not taking into consideration personal boundaries, I do believe he has balanced these to an acceptable standard. Chapter 1. Rain in my heart is a really educational and impressive documentary film for me. We ask a lot of our hunters as many times we will pass 200 inch deer to pursue true giant deer. No need . Rain In My Heart is an extremely educational film to watch. 0 . Is this the feel good factor we crave? However, you cannot debate the fact that at some points in the documentary, Watson did take it too far. Firstly, there was given consent from all parties that took place. Alluding to the culture of exploitning woman, as well as Spielbergs film being a commercial (and one which ends with a very colourful, affirming ending) intent makes it a machine absording actresses and horrors for the output of satisfying drama. http://www.theguardian.com/culture/tvandradioblog/2006/nov/22/mattersoflifeanddeath. An example being Vanda and the way he gets to know her and in the end explores her painful past. It is hard to watch, but becomes even more uncomfortable when Watson interjects right in the middle of someone elses story, such as Mark, to remind the audience of the monsters. This scene is perhaps one of the more uncomfortable in the film as Watson is merely documenting Vandas relapse back to alcohol and the range of mood swings she encounters. June 27, 2015 by webadmin Watch on YouTube Watch on Brilliant, unflinching documentary on alcoholism by Kent film maker Paul Watson. Surely, this would mean that his documentary would attract more viewings but at least that would mean that more and more people would learn and be warned about the effects of alcoholism. It brings to light the seriousness of alcoholism, and how it may affect more than just those who drink in excess, i.e. I have noticed that many people discuss this film on various alcoholism-related websites and quite a number of people stopped drinking after watching it or at least took it into serious consideration, and even if one person was/ will be saved by this film than it was definitely worth it. I can see why he added this into the film but I think it did effect the overall tone and flow of the documentary. The subject was in a particularly vulnerable state and he took advantage of that and filmed her confession. One ethical issue that could be introduced at this point is how certain filmmakers victimise their subjects. Watching Nigel s family crying over his coffin is something that is upsetting and distressing for all. About 20 different medications are washed down with pints of vodka and cordial. Sign-in or Try it free for 3 months. Nigel, 49, has been dry for ten years, but the damage he has inflicted on his liver is irreversible. Ive found this good review of the film on the internet: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661761/. To argue my point further, there is a particular example from Rain In My Heart that exemplifies this problem. Rain In My Heart is a very powerful documentary which gives us all-round access to the issue of alcoholism with a key focus on four of its sufferers. Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. I also at times found it hard to watch due to the harsh reality of the subjects lives. In comparison to other hard-hitting and eye opening documentaries and coverage of alcohol/substance addictions, I think that Rain In My Heart is hardly exploitative at all. Rain In My Heart is a documentary that is observing four alcohol abusers Vanda, aged 43; Mark, 29; Nigel, 49 and Toni, 26 from the impoverished Medway towns of north Kent. This attempt to confront the ethical problem of documentary-making did not satisfy me as I couldnt help but feel that Watsons display of concern was more addressing the potential accusations of the audience rather than the problem itself. This means as subjects they must think the documentary will help. However to me I felt that this is in some sense of vital information that we needed as viewers to understand and try to identify and sympathize with the reasons to why this person relies on alcohol. Ive never seen alcoholism go to this extent. I think that Watson when immersed with these subjects he formed a friendship with, learning to really like some of them and he himself tries to stop some of his subjects from drinking because he wants to see the best happen for them. A prime example of exploitation was the most vulnerable and interesting subject-Vanda. 56,514 people are reading stories on the site right now. Documentary which follows four alcohol abusers - Vanda, aged 43; Mark, 29; Nigel, 49 and Toni, 26 - from the impoverished Medway towns of north Kent. There are certainly points in this film in which I believe that the subjects were exploited. So I guess Im not satisfied with his attempts to explain himself during the film, but only because I think he didnt need to in the first place. This can be seen when Watson is speaking to Toni about her addiction, something that Toni profusely denies she is. Nigel, 49, has been dry for ten years, but the damage he has inflicted on his liver is irreversible. From a personal level I felt it was very moving and eye opening to me on this subject. After drinking heavily, people are definitely not in a normal status, which lead to a question that in what situation Paul Watson get the consent from these alcoholics. Watson stated at the very beginning of the film that he would not intervene in the lives of the people he was filming and would not stop them from drinking if they relapsed. Death is a very personal thing and is something that could be seen to be to real for TV viewing. Now, with Rain in my Heart, Watson has made the documentary equivalent to The Lost Weekend(1945), the classic feature film about alcoholism, where a writer loses everything through drinking and ends up on a psychiatric ward. Mark is being exploited towards the end of the film when he goes crazy and starts crying, screaming, vomiting etc. This I feel undermines what his role as a filmmaker is as it shows his intentions for the direction of this documentary. SACRAMENTO, Calif. More rain and snow swept through Northern California on Monday, a day after a historic downpour set records and led to dangerous situations on roadways, street flooding,. Once Watson sees this he is distinctively appalled and shocked that Vanda, after promising in a previous shot that she would fight to stay sober in the future, has gone back on her words and is drunk again. Sometimes grief feels very isolating. I would have actually preferred for Watson not to comment on screen during the film. I felt it did a fantastic job in warning people of the dangers of alcohol and addiction. We as a audience get to see his family grieving him when he dies and more importantly we see his wife looking after him when he is in his worst state and also coping with his departure. Rain in My Heart over steps the line between subject and film-maker relationship and Paul Watson in the end exploits his subjects. (steering away from the public filming location of the hospital) and can we film them in such a vulnerable and dazed state? For one the subjects were extremely vulnerable which raises the question on whether they were in the right state of mind to consent to being filmed and telling their story. Rain in my heart; rain on the roof; And memory sleeps beneath the gray And the windless sky and brings no dreams Of any well remembered day. This powerful documentary from fly-on-the-wall pioneer Paul Watson provides a raw account of four alcohol abusers from the impoverished Medway towns of north Kent. And youd be a hypocrite if you didnt think it. Watsons past experience in using the observational documentary style in his films means that he is well adjusted to the style. I do agree he is explaining in a graphic way the torment of being addicted to alcohol and the consequences that excessive drinking does to ones body. I personally feel as though Watson did not exploit his subjects as they all gave informed consent when they were sober and in hospital, under the supervision of healthcare professionals who could determine whether they were of sound mind, however this issue can be questioned at some points. On the positive side of the argument I agree that Watson, through the cut away shots he includes throughout the film, allows himself to be more personal with the audience. You can watch a short reminder of their stories via the links below. But I dont appreciate so much. I realised after I posted this! With a limited number of options given that he had great difficulty finding a location and subjects to film it was essential that Watson was able to capture the gritty reality of alcoholism and addiction in a way that will haunt the audience for some time. About the same age as Vanda, Kath has spent more than a decade caring for an alcoholic. There were some scenes in which the people he was filming were obviously out of it and not at all in a healthy condition, physically or mentally. As a viewer, it was uncomfortable to watch Watson try and stay professional. Listen to Rain' in My Heart on the English music album Wonderful Soundtrack by Slim Harpo, only on JioSaavn. We follow Nigel and his supportive wife Claire as they spend their final weeks together. Rain In My Heart is not an easy documentary to watch. (2006). Otherwise it would not have been so real and touching and would not have had such an effect on those who watch it. Play online or download to listen offline free - in HD audio, only on JioSaavn. It affected me emotionally and made me understand what an alcoholics reasons might be for drinking, and sometimes it might not just be that they want a drink. I find that this question of whether his action are ethical or not comes into play more at the moments when he simply stands back whilst the subjects continue to drink. Two of the participants in Paul Watson's Rain in My Heart died during filming. Finally, the article posted below discusses Rain in my Heart alongside other documentaries of Paul Watson. - My Last Drunk Home About Us Alcohol Abuse Affects Your Health Alcohol Abuse Affects Others My Last Drunk Alcohol Abuse Rain in my Heart (Full). Music Video BOWY Rain In My Heart Featured In Album Beat Emotion BOWY Listen to RAIN IN MY HEART on Apple Music. I would not have the heavens fair, Play online or download to listen offline free - in HD audio, only on JioSaavn. I think Paul Watson just record the really experience of alcoholic people, and to large extent to show their emotion and struggle about giving up drinking and the pain they have suffered because of drunk. Posts; 4,539. This is a scene which perhaps does challenge the idea of ethics by posing the question of how FAR can we go to observe? United Kingdom, 2006. Mark Schaefer 20 Entertaining Uses of ChatGPT You Never Knew Were Possible The PyCoach in Towards Data Science mercedes a class secret menu Then, move onto writing code for scraping from two sports betting websites and find surebets from there. Basically, I think Paul Watson is really successful in showing the facts and emotional stuff in this documentary. If we are to look at films that exploit horrors/suffering then we must idenfity the certain aesthetics and language that are used to do this. This makes me feel as though he almost abuses his subject. The attempts to deal with these accusations are unsatisfactory as the unethical conduct exhibited in this film were necessary for the desired effect. he felt that to put this material in the same documentary as his musings about the problems of getting the film made seemed glib and inappropriate. (http://www.theguardian.com/media/organgrinder/2006/nov/05/sheffielddocfestaredocument). However, I do not think that Watson intentionally tried to exploit his subjects. This is also made clear later in the film when he spends some time filming at one of the female patients, Vandas house. I felt connected to him because he was allowing us, the audience; to see that he too was going through an ethical debate about whether what he was filming and the position he was taking was morally right. However I think that this documentary can appear that way simply because it is so intimate and explicit. I doubt he would have filmed the subjects in these environments if he himself doubted they would drop their barriers.

Liv Morgan And Rhea Ripley Relationship, Articles R