I recently watched the 2024 documentary No Other Land, an on-the-ground account of the destruction of Palestinian settlements in the West Bank by the Israeli army, featuring much phone and camcorder footage of events as they happen in real time. It’s excellent, a personal narrative by two of the four directors that fits the larger conflict into the specific day-to-day struggles of the people living it. It’s part of a larger trend of digital democratization of filmmaking that is especially apparent in documentary.
But throughout the film my mind wandered to another documentary, 2020’s The Viewing Booth. I was somewhat dismissive when I first encountered it at that year’s True/False Film Festival (in part due to a packed schedule of glorious films in what turned out to be a banner year for documentaries), and I still think it works better as an experiment in conversation with the audience than as a complete experience on its own. But the experiment is a singular and perpetually relevant one. Five years later, The Viewing Booth stays in the mind because it’s a film that poses a question even the most daring documentary won’t touch — what are we even doing?
Letterboxd Views: 785
Services: Rentable on most major rental platforms
Is winning hearts and minds the point of making a documentary like No Other Land — or For Sama or Midnight Traveler or The Last Men in Aleppo or any of the other breathtaking docs that filmmakers have risked their lives capturing? Or is the best a filmmaker can hope for a particularly good anecdote for a the choir’s sermon?
Is it, in fact, possible to change someone’s mind with video?
Director Ra’anan Alexandrowicz sets up a booth in a darkened room where he shows college students verité footage from an occupied Palestinian city and asks them to interpret what is happening. The footage comes from a variety of sources including private citizens, human rights organizations, and the Israeli government. Several students are shown participating, but the film zeros in on one particular participant, a bright young Jewish-American student: Maia Levy. Maia was raised in a pro-Israel family, though she doesn’t automatically give carte blanche to that side (for example, a video of soldiers handing out presents strikes her as particularly staged and propogandist).
When watching footage of the military harassing Palestinians, particularly a lengthy video of an overnight search of a family’s home while the children wail in fright, she reacts with sympathy and anger on behalf of the beleaguered family. She also soon pivots to questions about the context of what she’s seeing. And not unreasonable questions (why are the cameras ready and filming in the first place, what did the family do to get the attention of the soldiers) even if there are easy answers (as No Other Land shows, even before escalations in 2023 it didn’t take much to gain the ire of the army and many Palestinians film these actions in an effort bring attention to them). Alexandrowicz isn’t focused on combating her questions, though, he’s more interested in how quickly she reaches for them after her initial responses take the video at face value.
Speaking of face value! Visually, The Viewing Booth is a straightforward, even clinical movie for the most part. But its greatest innovation — an Interrotron-like apparatus that films the subject head-on as they watch the footage – makes for the film’s most fascinating and lasting images. You witness Maia’s face as she mind turns over new information, and the complex movements and tics say more than the inconclusive experiment results. This is a mind in turmoil.
When Maia returns to the booth some weeks later Alexandrowicz has her watch footage of herself watching the videos and react to her initial impressions. In the intervening time she has retreated farther toward the opinions she brought into the booth in the first place. As Noel Murray describes it, “Maia isn’t some extremist blaming shocking footage on fakers or ‘crisis actors.’ Instead, like so many of us, when she sees something unpleasant, she reacts in a very instinctive, human way…before she spins the images into something that fits into a preexisting worldview.” In the end, no subject’s views seem to be materially affected by what they’ve watched, even the thoughtful Maia.
The Viewing Booth is something unique in movies — it’s un-propaganda. Roger Ebert famously described the movies as an “empathy machine,” a term I’ve always found more idealistic than proven. The Viewing Booth would seem to strike a blow against the notion. Maybe movies aren’t a means to enlightenment or maybe this narrow experiment proves nothing. Either way, you’ve probably already made up your mind.
About the writer
C. D. Ploughman
The weary Ploughman is a writer and filmmaker, focusing these days on documentary and educational projects. He obsesses over movies with his very patient wife and children.
C. D. Ploughman’s ProfileTags for this article
More articles by C. D. Ploughman
The life and career of a man who found the extraordinary in the ordinary.
The Friday Article Roundup
An assembly line of this week's pop culture writing from around the Internet.
Lunch Links
State of the art special effects, little attention paid to plot - what's changed over the past 120 years?
And It is a material presenter of this week's pop culture writing from around the Internet.
The Friday Article Roundup
A catty roundup of great pop culture writing from the past week.
Department of
Conversation
What did we watch?
M*A*S*H, Season One, Episode Eleven, “Germ Warfare”
This is the one where Hawkeye and Trapper steal Frank’s blood, only to learn he might have hepatitis. I never thought until now how much of this show, on top of manipulating a System, is also just social engineering. Right from the start, Hawkeye and Trapper know how to manipulate Henry, Frank, and Margaret, and much of the stories have been asking how one manipulates the opponent of the week, and what to do when you simply can’t; in fact, the theme is often how bureaucracy is frustratingly inflexible.
There’s a popular read of Hawkeye as bisexual, and I can actually see that here. This obvious read of his frequent flirting is that he’s mostly just trying to make other men uncomfortable, but Alan Alda has a mixture of irony and sincerity in everything he says. There’s another read of him as bipolar and that I’m less comfortable saying.
There’s a great little detail where Frank takes his shoe off in a scene and then walks off without putting it back on, leaving him with one shoe for a few scenes. One scene is an extended parody of nature documentaries; not only is this part of the show embracing so many ideas in individual episodes, even the parody itself is intricate and rooted in these characters.
Kojak, “Two-Four-Six for 200” – What the cryptic title means is part of a fairly well done puzzle involving an attempt to steal a painter’s truck, a crook who usually avoids violence working with a known thug, and Robert Loggia as a smooth operator with a plan. Given the usual noirish elements to the show, this makes a nice change. Rose Marie also shows up as a diamond bedecked society matron. The episode turns 50 this week. Where has the time gone?
Frasier, “Adventures in Paradise,” part one – Frasier goes on a blind date with a woman featured in a lifestyle magazine (JoBeth Williams) and impulsively takes her to Bora Bora to consummate their relationship. But who does he discover is in the room next door? Why it’s Lilith! To be continued. I know part two will be rough, but part one is fun and has a great scene where Frasier is called on to help the owner of a bistro and his family deal with a daughter’s pregnancy, and we see that at least some of the time Frasier is really good at his job. We also have a rather unexpected scene of Martin and Niles smoking cigars and hanging out. It’s never really said out loud, but Niles and Martin really do get along okay. Oh, and we learn just how Martin and his wife met.
Cinematic Titanic, “Frankenstein’s Castle of Freaks” – Boy, this one is bad. Rossano Brazzi’s career really cratered after South Pacific, and Michael Dunn (Wild Wild West) doesn’t fare any better. At least the costumes are nice? The riffs are quite funny most of the time, but some of the short person jokes are gross. Also, look for a “breast blimp” strategically covering some nudity. Not quite as funny as Joel’s umbrella but effective.
Dracula’s Daughter – there seems to be a concerted effort on Letterboxd to reclaim this as pioneering queer cinema, and I’m happy that it’s finding that kind of reappraisal. But for me it was a bit too heavy on cosy 1930s comedy for the horror elements to really land at all, which kinda gets in the way of any deeper themes. It seems more interesting in the comic-relief policemen or Otto Kruger not being able to tie his own bowtie than it is about the deadly longing of an unhappy vampire. The comedy stuff is pretty charming so I still had a good time, but there are definitely less-heralded Universal Monster sequels that I’ve had a better time with.
I like how it picks up moments after the ending of the original, like Halloween II, with Van Helsing taken in for murder. But also it tries to be it’s own thing without too many references to the first film, flashbacks of recycled footage or rehashing.
Yeah, I thought from the way it started that it was going to become an unusual courtroom drama with Kruger trying to prove the existence of vampires to a sceptical jury. It has plenty of ideas but never really gives any of them room to breathe. They’re all fun ideas though!
Dogfight – A mostly charming movie with a reach just past its grasp in the end. In 1963 four marines enter a contest to see who can reel in the ugliest girl on their last night before shipping out. Naturally, when River Phoenix’s date Lili Taylor finds out about this she is less than thrilled. Having dug himself a large hole, the marine nonetheless pursues his date in earnest through the rest of the night. The movie wisely deals and then dispenses with the setup – it’s point is made best in the contrast between the distinctive and interesting women next to the boring crew-cut marines – and becomes a romance on the edge of cultural revolution. The scenes of courtship and quarrels are each good though they don’t really build dramatically and could probably be presented in most any order. This would stand out less if the movie didn’t attempt a sudden pivot into deeper territory. I appreciate the idea of showing how quickly the 60s became The 60s, but the hippie era with its conveniently placed rainbow bus looks too much like a 60s-themed Renaissance Festival.
Hey, a young Brendan Fraser getting punched in his baby face!
SOMETHING WILD– When I saw this during its original release I was impressed with how effortlessly it shifted tones from a screwball road trip romance to a homicidal stalker thriller, but this time it became clearer to me how this was accomplished. Jonathan Demme insures that his cast (perhaps each giving the best performances of their careers) grounds their quirkiness in recognizable behavior, eschewing comedic exaggeration, which allows him to shift genre gears in a consistant style without telegraphing the various twists in the plot. He also manages to shoehorn in a large degree of regional eccentricity, which could come off as cloying, by framing it in the periphery, complimenting the naturalism in the foreground as opposed to overwhelming it. It’s a movie that many a Sundance purchase has tried to emulate but never topped.
One of these days, I’ll get my article up on this site about how, in Something Wild, the music of the Feelies changes the tone from screwball to noir.
Oh wow, get that up sooner rather than later, that sounds fantastic. I love how the Feelies play into this great observation from Son Of Griff: “He also manages to shoehorn in a large degree of regional eccentricity, which could come off as cloying, by framing it in the periphery, complimenting the naturalism in the foreground as opposed to overwhelming it.” It is extratexturally hilarious that the Feelies are a band playing a high school reunion, but in the film itself, running their motorik in the background, they work perfectly.
Thanks to the film, I actually took a night off doing research in Indiana to see The Feelies at a club. Great show.
Ah, I finally have my laptop back, with all its modern conveniences and products, so participating in the dailies will be much easier.
Mythic Quest, “Second Skeleton”
The bombshell at the end of the last episode proves true, and Ian and Poppy talk it through and figure out what she’s going to do. David is trying to entice foreign investors by showing that the company is profitable, so Rachel comes in to figure out where to cut costs. Dana is up for some Game Award (I don’t know what they’re called; I’ll call it a Gamey), with Jo terrifyingly in tow and Brad coming along and reconnecting with an old similarly-minded money-sociopath flame. Fun episode.
American Dad!, “Pork N’ Feelings”
“Roger’s intimacy coach persona helps Jeff become aware of his own dissatisfaction with his sex life with Hayley. After marriage counseling fails, Jeff seeks help from a mad scientist with a machine that lets people discover their sexual fantasies. Meanwhile at the CIA, Bullock learns about Marie Kondo’s de-cluttering method and goes overboard with getting rid of things that don’t spark joy.”
Yep, that’s what happens. Pretty good episode. My wife passed out during it, which feels ominous.
St. Denis Medical, “Buffalo Bruce and Matty the Kid”
A cat with bubonic plague gets loose in St. Denis. I’m not making any of that up. It’s how everyone deals with, and who deals with it, that makes it funny. (It’s mostly Matt and Bruce, who have proven to be a very funny team-up so far.) It’s also Serena’s birthday, which brings in a couple of other plots. Realizing she’s been at St. Denis five years when she intended to make it a brief stop before returning to travel nursing has Serena reflecting on where she is and where she’s going. This realization and introspection is interpreted by Alex as a sign that Serena didn’t like her birthday gifts. Ron is upset he wasn’t invited to Serena’s birthday party, not because he wants to attend, but as per his expectations of the social contract, so he can politely decline with a made-up excuse about a dying uncle. And Keith, the office punching bag, is also having his 50th today, which no one notices. Pretty good episode! Definitely better than last week’s, which felt like an early-season holdover because [whoever makes these decisions] knew it wasn’t putting the show’s best foot forward.
Common Side Effects, “Pilot”
Well, I was hooked as soon as the first and second lines included the word “diarrhea.” The premise of the pilot requires some plotting that steps on the comedy a bit, but there are some really funny moments here. I’ll have a more detailed writeup once I watch more.
Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me
I already wrote a whole-ass article on this, but I brought up Scorsese in a discussion about filmmakers who capture what autism feels like. Now I feel like Lynch (who is autistic himself, to the best of my knowledge) needs to be in that conversation too. Not just the obvious ways like the odd dialogue and characters like Cooper. Even though Laura reacts the way she does because of the scale of her trauma and not her hypersensitivity, everything we see from her perspective and her emotional breakdowns captures the experience of an autistic meltdown so perfectly.
Year of the Month update!
And March is going to be Silent Era Month, where you can join these writers in examining your favorite silent movies and anything else from the 1910s and ’20s!
Mar. 4th: Lauren James: The Most Dangerous Game
Mar. 26th: Sam Scott: Peter and Wendy by J.M. Barrie
Mar. 27th: Lauren James: The Well of Loneliness
Mar. 31st: John Anderson: The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog
And there’s still time this month to sign up to write about anything from 2016, including these movies, albums, and books.
Feb. 20th: James Roberts: Silence
Feb. 21st: Gillian Nelson: Pete’s Dragon
Feb. 23rd: Ben Hohenstatt: My Woman
Feb. 24th: John Roberts: Silence
Feb. 27th: Cori Domschot: Hidden Figures
Feb. 27th: John Bruni: Jet Plane and Oxbow
Feb. 28th: Sam Scott: Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping
Great write-up. The overlap between documentary and journalism is something I am constantly butting up against, one difference might be that the consumption of journalism is generally not a subject in its own right, that is to say journalism is not reviewed in the same way a doc is and doesn’t foreground audience reaction in that way. This morning’s scoop, this evening’s fish wrapper. And I think most journalists understand that gulf between the work and what comes after from the audience, that changing a mind is largely beyond them. Docs are deeper and more immersive but they also come with their own press, reviews testifying to the film’s importance — but like you say, to what actual end? Actually examing that is a great and nervy premise for a doc, and like you lay out it is also something the documentary form is uniquely suited to do – turning the camera on the audience in the film and using those observations to destabilize the audience outside it.
This sounds great/fascinating/bleak and relevant to my mention to a friend of how people often misinterpret concretely platforming, opinionated art towards whatever means they want. A big message I keep seeing pushed is that art or creation can save the world in some way, but if that’s true, doesn’t that also imply the opposite, ala Cigarette Burns or In The Mouth of Madness?
I think we end up in this space where we both over- and under-estimate what art can do. No, people aren’t going to marry abusers because they read Twilight, but Twilight can be another weight in the cultural scales that say ‘he controls you because he loves you.’ Jaws made people afraid of sharks and it also inspired a generation of marine biologists. And sometimes you get a piece of art that really does seem to make a difference (Uncle Tom’s Cabin) and sometimes you get something that doesn’t seem to do a damn thing (Guernica). Maybe it’s like all of Hollywood: nobody knows anything.