The version I watched on YouTube had a small prologue in the beginning of the film. This little addition helped add to the films credibility. It provided the viewers a background about what the film is going to be about. This allows us to have a better understanding of the point that the document is trying to get across. By having this prologue, we can also see that the filmmaker knows what he is talking about. The beginning graphic does not necessary add to the films creditability, but it does help add more background knowledge for the audience. The reason why I say it does not add much creditability to the film is because it is not that hard to add a graphic to a documentary. The film seems very real, which is VERY different from most fiction films. The shots are real and do not appear to be touched up or edited to look more aesthetically pleasing. This movie is one of the rare ones that actually look like it was filmed by a camera. I did not care for the style of the music that played over the documentary. Too me, it seemed fake and a little cheesy. I just do not see where it adds to the story. Maybe in a way, and I mean maybe, it makes the story more exciting. It reminded me of what a filmmaker would add in today's age as a joke. I did enjoy the voice over narration at least that seemed to fit the style of the movie. Although I did not like the music, I can see how it would add a more melodramatic feel to the documentary. It had those old school "Mickey Mouse" sounds to it that transforms hard work into a more lively situation. The music was clearly gave the film a more over dramatic element setting to it. Whether this was on purpose or not is unclear to me. It was probably just the style of the time.
Review of The Plow That Broke the Plains
