Par : SPARTACVSDim. 25 Sept. 2016, 20:34
Oui en effet. J'ai aussi lu ce qui est écrit dans wikipedia. C'est ce que je voulais mentionner par les «mise en scène». Je ne peux pas juger. Je n'ai aucune idée comment vivait les esquimaux il y a 100 ans. Je n'ai même pas vu Nanook. Tout ce que je connais vient de Kabloonak que j'ai vu il a des années. Mais, sur wikipedia, on peut également y lire:
Later filmmakers have pointed out that the only cameras available to
Flaherty at the time were both large and immobile, making it impossible
to effectively capture most interior shots or unstructured exterior
scenes without significantly modifying the environment and subject
action.
Reception
As the first nonfiction work of its scale, Nanook of the North
was ground-breaking cinema. It captured many authentic details of a
culture little-known to outsiders, and was filmed in a remote location.
Hailed almost unanimously by critics, the film was a box office success
in the United States and abroad. In the following years, many others
would try to follow in Flaherty's success with "primitive peoples"
films.[17]
Legacy
At the time, few documentaries had been filmed and there was little precedent to guide Flaherty's work.
C'est un peu pour ça que je considère que nos différents points de vue se valent en ce sens qu'il faut en prendre et en laisser.
.
.
.