However, i was impressed by this documentary. On Thursday, in a special follow-up film for Newsnight, Paul revisits two of the alcoholics from the film, plus the widow of one of those who died during filming. Watching Nigel s family crying over his coffin is something that is upsetting and distressing for all. Sometimes grief feels very isolating. At points during the documentary we can see that Watson is clearly affected by watching the subjects drinking habit, however he does mention that this observational style of filming and the stand back nature of it is much more achievable through separating ones own personal attitudes from the subject. 17,029 pages were read in the last minute. I immediately recognised the castle in the establishing shot in the opening sequence and was taken aback that this documentary was made literally where I have grown up and gone to school. There are so many implicit positives such as the awareness it gives people of the truth about alcoholism, its broadcasting the problems in society like a fresh scar, so audiences cant ignore or forget what they have learnt. A stage of construction must have taken place and although the Documentary as a whole seems as real as possible because we take a true insight into the lives of severe alcoholics, Watson has already manipulated his Documentary by constructing the reality before the show had even commenced. On the other hand, I feel that some of the content included in the film did not have to be included. In one scene we hear Watson as whether or not the information he is receiving from one of the subjects would be appropriate to include in the finished product. Watson used creative techniques through editing of previous footage of Vanda. It is also true that sometimes the person who was interviewed didnt feel very comfortable about what he or she was saying and probably wasnt aware at all of what it was being said. Since 2016 we have been able to harvest 15 Bucks over the magical 200 inch mark, many eclipsing 215 inches and two bucks over 245 inches. Overall, I see both sides of the argument. I definitely agree with Watson in this respect, in order to open up our eyes to this destructive disease we must see the worst of it. One example from the documentary which I felt that could have made some people to view as Watson exploiting his subjects would be when one of his subject revealed (when she was highly intoxicated) that she had been sexually abused by her father. The consent was given while the participants were fully aware of what they were agreeing to, which makes it difficult to accuse Paul Watson of having really exploited his subjects. There are certainly points in this film in which I believe that the subjects were exploited. 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. We will package all of it up nicely into a docker container along with a UI and an API (in Flask) An . Also, i think observation style makes audience to get more shock by the scene without explanation. Want to save money? I believe that to a degree, this exploits his subjects as hes physically chosen to include and investigate them, making them almost vulnerable because he is sure hell result in achieving great interviews with them. Read about our approach to external linking. She was healing. Revisiting Rain. Overall, I believe Watson does not exploit his subjects because they knew roughly what they were getting themselves into and because Watson simply observed with the camera the tragic events of the subjects that would gain the empathy of the audience towards the effect of alcoholism. To watch this sequence of Watson, truthfully revealing his professional flaw, for me, was quite humbling. In Rain in my Heart she is living in a council flat. However, in my opinion, after he knocks over Vandas drink and clears it up for her, he says the phrase I had put so much money on you. He faced their situations with the most possible respect. Due to the nature of the subject, I believe there were always going to be complex ethical issues in terms of filming. 2022. Anyway, audiences (including us) will always question whether a subject who is having their whole life pried open for viewing could be a victim of exploitation. This is followed by a sequence of Claire crying at his funeral and shots of the casket. Critical and disbelieving responses after giving personal information in a safe space, can cause as much pain and loneliness as the original abuse. He is exploiting Nigel as he was only continuing to cover the story because he thinks that he will benefit out of it, when the focus should really be concentrating on capturing the truth and reality of the situation, therefore I believe that Paul Watson was exploiting his subjects in this documentary. 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. This was a devastating and emotional sequence for me. In the moment where Vanda passes out from over drinking, and we see Watson check her pulse, to me I felt as if he was concerned, he didnt sit back and observe her in a blackened out state, he checked on her, he was her responsibility at that moment. It would have shown their time off-screen, sitting in a dressing room, preparing themselves to go on-camera, also chatting and gossiping, then being lined up by the assistant director and going through the magic momentthe transformation into character. He later also mentions that one woman, who had been born in a concentration camp, had a complete breakdown while doing that scene.. The subject is not exploited as she has consented Watson to film her in her most tragic state and all of this psychological revealing is not only for Watsons own good but for the audience as they are being warned off the overuse of alcohol. I think the way though that Watson should come to it should be through meaningful tactics and not in ways that makes the subject feel smaller in order for the audience to feel bigger. Also when he went to Vandas house and interviewed her, he didnt stop her to drink alcohol. Their addiction affected them not only when they were drunk, but physically as well as mentally, when they were sober too. Its a very tricky position for Watson. Documentary which follows four alcohol abusers - Vanda, aged 43; Mark, 29; Nigel, 49 and Toni, 26 - from the impoverished Medway towns of north Kent. (steering away from the public filming location of the hospital) and can we film them in such a vulnerable and dazed state? My beautiful wife, Denise . If the subjects are happy to be filmed then I dont see the problem as long as they have a stable state of mind. I do not believe that Paul Watson was dealing with the accusations successfully, but I also do not believe that he was making this film completely selfishly. But I dont think he exploited anyone in his documentary. An example being Vanda and the way he gets to know her and in the end explores her painful past. Posts; 4,539. There are a few scenes that stand out as being the most exploitative. It is true that these patients are probably not fully capable of realising the whole process of the documentary, however they are aware that a camera is always present and they are sometimes asked by Watson if they prefer it to be switched off. He puts himself in the film to explain how he felt at the time, allowing the audience to be involved in his own personal emotions whilst watching his film. Seeing the filmmakers process on screen is great when theyre doing something that you need to see. 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. I do not think Paul Watson was exploitave in his filming. Join Date; 14th June, 2011. Comments KNWYRRTS says Although this might be justified, as their life story is very tragic, I feel Paul Watson pushed them to their limits. But that is not a bad thing. A prime example of exploitation was the most vulnerable and interesting subject-Vanda. It would be exceedingly difficult to make a documentary on a difficult subject such as alcoholism without the use of a subjects personal hardship. I think the fact that this documentary is so hard to watch gives light to the reality that alcoholism is incredibly hard to live with, and by being so thorough the film shortens the gap between subject and audience. He pressed forward with the interview and filmming in the crual moment such as his subject vomitted and had a hard time with pain. Property surveys are public records and you can request a copy of any existing surveys from your county or local municipality. I think to use the word exploitative to describe the techniques used by Watson to film Rain in my Heart upon his subjects is an unfair judgment. Nigel, 49, has been dry for ten years, but the damage he has inflicted on his liver is irreversible. In addition, it appears that Watson is aware of the delicate nature of the documentary and embraces this by stating that all the filming was agreed by the sufferers, in order to shy away accusations that he is exploiting the individuals which he observes. Instead of the man behind the camera, we see him completely bare, exposing himself to the audience. To argue my point further, there is a particular example from Rain In My Heart that exemplifies this problem. He had been in a coma for weeks after his intended sacrifice and showed no sign of waking up. Maybe the subjects are letting Watson film them like this as a message to say this is a life you dont want to live and in saying that does Watsons exploiting of the subjects send a bigger message that in turn may help people going through the same things. http://www.theguardian.com/culture/tvandradioblog/2006/nov/22/mattersoflifeanddeath. It shows the situation without making of adjustments. He interrogates the truth, not to exploit or harm the subjects in any way, but to try and uncover how and why these people fell into such a dark and alienated existence. Is this the feel good factor we crave? Explaining hell it is. Two of the participants in Paul Watson's Rain in My Heart died during filming. The world was slowly healing. You can watch a short reminder of their stories via the links below. The intrusion before we learn of sexual abuse is fitting because it prepares us for the horrible, rather than let the scene with Vanda play out suddenly for shock value. It followed the treatment of four alcoholics in one NHS hospital in Kent (the only one that would let him in). I found the piece riveting but extremely disturbing. Synopsis. 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. I realised after I posted this! Trivia Goofs Crazy Credits Quotes However, as an observational filmmaker, Watson has a certain obligation to the truth. Rain in my Heart was an incredibly touching yet dark documentary about the wide spread issue that is alcoholism, and at points I was touched by the way in which Watson presented his subjects and their problems. I feel that Paul Watson did exploit his subjects to some extent. Tonis most exploitative scene, as I believe, is when she is shown unconscious a few days before her death. However, that would ruin his fly on the wall style of filmmaking. That we cant see others be in such a position because we wouldnt want ourselves to be shown in such a state. Outside, the sparrows on the roof Are chirping in the dripping rain.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. Rain In My Heart is an extremely educational film to watch. To clarify, I dont think hes exploiting anyone in this film. This is the only area where I can see possible wrongdoing on Watsons behalf. He just shined a light on a topic a lot of people often avoid. Thus, having the camera in front of them made me feel that there was a sense of pressure on them to fulfil a certain image of an alcoholic. As with his other films, Watson established a relationship with the subjects during filming. I feel as though Watson was trying to be as ethical as possible, baring in mind his need to capture this shocking footage in order to create the Documentary. Paul Watson does a good job at creating face and gives the appearance of being genuinely interested and sympathetic so in that way it is easier for us to lower our defensive walls and absorb what the documentary is trying to tell us. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rain-In-My-Heart-Documentary-In-Memory-Of-My-Dad-Toni-And-Vanda/233416877232. There were also times where Watson was rather firm and intrusive in his questioning of Vandas childhood and life. such as askingcan we enter the subjects house? It is a difficult film to watch because of the subject matter it deals with. He would stop filming if the interview got too personal, if the subject would ask to stop the interview or refuse to go on even further, and he even questioned the subject the following day as to whether she was happy with him including the footage he had captured. 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. On the one hand, Paul Watson did get these peoples consent to be filmed. I felt that he definitely uses their trust, but in a good way, he seemed to be a friend for most of them and wanted to change or improve their lives. But theres a film within and around the film, one that Steven Spielberg didnt make but that he or someone else should have made: Spielbergs List, the story of the casting call for the actresses who would be getting undressed and going into the gas chamber that turns out to be a shower. Therefore, Watsons approach definitely satisfied me with how delicately he treats the patients and clearly recognizes his role as filmmaker. Therefore, maybe his techniques did actually work quite well, although flawed and subjective in places. 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. Dee3 Posts: 10. But while Watson explains he also interacts with the subject instead of just observing. Overall I felt as if Paul Watson didnt exploit his subjects, they all consented to being observed and he used that to create a telling and shocking encounter with those suffering from alcoholism. Download Secret Cat Forest v. Name : Secret Cat Forest : Update : Jun 7, 2022: Version : 1. 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. Also, I think he had a desire to understand his characters and the reasons of being whothey are. He leads the interviewees go into their deep heart and gradually express their ideas. I doubt he would have filmed the subjects in these environments if he himself doubted they would drop their barriers. Secondly, Watson must have gone through a pre-planning stage where he would have had to choose the subjects he wished to include, therefore it couldnt have been as completely objective/unbiased as it seemed. This powerful documentary from fly-on-the-wall pioneer Paul Watson follows four alcohol abusers over the course of a year. The Facebook link I posted was created by Nigels son. My DF was a chronic alcoholic (who died after eventually committing suicide) and I grew up with my parents while social circle being people in AA and Al-anon so maybe it was less of a shock to me as I've seen most of this first hand. family and friends. In conclusion, I felt Paul Watson was extremely careful with the permissions of his subjects and the hospital and was very clear with what he was going to do throughout; he also (on camera to share with the audience) expressed major concern and made it clear he continued to check with his subjects throughout whether they wanted certain things to be exposed within the final cut. As Watson edits his film himself he gets to choose what stays in the final cut, therefore raising other ethical issues as he may have only chosen to show the subjects at their worst and in very emotional states. The edit involves numerous repeats of dialogue from the patients, which is played at random and juxtaposing episodes, some even without the visuals which make it seem part of the dialogue (for example, when Vanda slams the phone down in anger). Because Paul Watson deliberately interviews them after they are drunk. 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. It is hard to be objective about this film because it is so easily relatable to me, I live equidistant from Medway hospital and Maidstone hospital, and most people avoid Medway because of its reputation. For I'm just a fool Who clings to his pride But when I'm alone I can hear The sound of rain In my heart Of the tears that I hide And it tears me apart 'Cause I keep them inside I can't get away From the sound of the rain In my heart How could I know, my love I was a toy Only a game to you? Twenty-nine-year-old Mark consumes two bottles of vodka per day. Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. He does however, tell her that he will ask her when she is sober if she wants to keep that in. I would not have the heavens fair, " "Before there is peace, blood will spill blood, and the lake will run red. Moreover, one can say that the subjects were exploited not only in the aforementioned scenes, but generally throughout the film. Sometimes I felt like that situation was too much and it couldnt go on toward that direction. (LogOut/ Paul Watson was capturing the real lives of these alcoholics, he was not interfering with their actions and allowed alcoholics who were told if they drink anymore they could die, to drink. Several times in the documentary we see him struggle to make decisions on how he will proceed with the footage he has. Another was "drinking less" but needed a Zimmer frame with which to walk; she's 43. 56,514 people are reading stories on the site right now. The problem suddenly doesnt become the alcohol, but their mental state, which is something I learnt from the film. Finally, the article posted below discusses Rain in my Heart alongside other documentaries of Paul Watson. Ones initial reaction would be to strip her of the bottle however, Watson remains faithful to his observational aim and instead of forcefully stopping her he simply tells her that he is disappointed in her. The documentary was quite raw as Watson did show his subjects when they were at their most vulnerable, when they had no real control of what they were doing. Although, there are several moments when this filmmaker and subject relationship is close to breach, he retains his role of confidentiality and recognizes that the subject may not be too sober to make such ethical decisions of what they would like in the final cut or not. 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. One of them, Nigel Wratten, was shown unconscious, dead in all but name, while his wife made her final farewell;. I feel he mistakes this forced friendliness by asking more and more personal questions as he continues to film her. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2006/nov/20/mondaymediasection4. Outside, the sparrows on the roof Are chirping in the dripping rain. (LogOut/ I wanted to look away and the only reason I didnt was because I felt (as i think Watson does) an obligation to make a point of the four subjects publicized suffering. Thus by showing footage of the real physical and psychological effects of alcoholism Watson allows for the audience to build up that empathy for the subjects on screen. By the time she married at 18 she was a serious drinker - the marriage didn't last, nor did a succession of jobs despite her being able to speak at least two other languages. I can understand how to other viewers, this film may be seen as a breach to ethics within filmmaking, with how Watson gets so close with his vulnerable subjects, however, I feel that Watsons approach is what makes this film such a powerful observation. When he asked Toni to call and talk to his family, for example. Watson most definitely fulfilled what he set out to do and in order to do that, I feel he had to push the boundary as far as he did to achieve this hard-hitting documentary. Which questioned the showing of Nigel s death (one of the four subjects and one that pat away). Rain In My Heart is not an easy documentary to watch. But Ive never felt like Watson exploited his subjects. 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. From a documentarians point of view, Watson did a remarkable job of exploring the brutality of a taboo subject, but from a moral standpoint, the filmmaker may not have been exploitative in his actions but he was definitely extreme. About 20 different medications are washed down with pints of vodka and cordial. Yes it does raise awareness, and the documentary was good, however, to feel taken back is not the sort of emotion one should try to evoke. Therefore I agree that their lives were exposed (as they agreed and wanted them to be) but they were not harshly exploited by Paul. Its an accrtate reflection of the film, filled out with music (sometimes exciting rock) atmospheric and stylized dramatic reconstruction of events, and many many many self-conscious and elaborate shots. Probably. 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. No need . Vanda, 43, has been drinking since the age of 12. 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. One of the patients, a caption told us at the end, was now "in recovery". However, Watsons humanity and compassion shines through. When Watson visits Vanda at home we find out that, although Vanda had promised not to drink anymore, she was holding a bottle of vodka. He acts incredibly friendly with her by holding her shoulders when talking to her, slapping her cheek when she has fallen asleep from drinking etc. The game uses a beautiful and funny graphics engine to make everything look. Also just to confirm Gillingham is a pretty shitty place to grow up in, so the documentary comes across as very sincere. This is an extremely special place to hunt mule deer and we have an intimate knowledge of the terrain. Listen to Rain In My Heart on the English music album America by Modern Talking, only on JioSaavn. Watson states from the very beginning of the film that he is working with the only four patients who have agreed my intrusions and me filming their hell. And it is also a good example to discuss the ethical issues in the documentary. A prediction such as this can alter the way she behaves and this documentary is no longer just an observation of her progress. I also think that it is not Pauls fault that these people after having a huge amount of alcohol could not control themselves: their speech, actions and emotions. He'd been self-harming repeatedly and been in and out of a psychiatric ward. Critic Richard Brody (http://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/taking-it-off-for-the-holocaust) described it: Schindlers List features several of the most vulgar and repellent scenes ever filmed. When he asks of her troubled past, he is very interrogative as he continues to ask until she is brought to tears by the discussion of her brothers death, but rather than stop, he pushes on. He explains himself, he is aware of what he is critised for, but overall has achieved an importantly informative film about alcohol and its effects. WEEK 4 QUESTION:Are there moments when you feel that Paul Watson has exploited his subjects in this film? 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. 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 it is not proper for observational documentary, Watson deliberately shows his audience of certain moments to lead them into a certain emotion, which i think might be too subjective. This is just one example of the reaction that Watsons Rain in My Heart provoked; Not something that is watched and easily forgotten about. Music Video BOWY Rain In My Heart Featured In Album Beat Emotion BOWY Listen to RAIN IN MY HEART on Apple Music. Although it could be argued that this footage is showing Vanda what she is like when she is drunk, I would say that her answers might have been different if she was sober when she was asked them. Documentary, TV Movie. Here's one depicting true alcoholism in the UK, realism at its best. Otherwise it would not have been so real and touching and would not have had such an effect on those who watch it. As the director said himself My job is to explain, not entertain. 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. Thats exactly what I think about the film: it is extreme and crude in some scenes but this cannot be translated as exploitation but as accurate and careful explanation and evidence of a serious phenomenon such as alcoholism. But for the families and subjects is must be/ must have been a very awkward experience even if they had consented to the film. Ive found this good review of the film on the internet: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661761/. Or when Nigel downs a glass of red wine. The truth of this film is that it brings attention to parts of life that as a society we tend to stay quiet about and so by being a representation for people who go through something so scary, life changing and threatening it can never appear wholly ethical. 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. However i think he knew he was being somewhat intrusive. I do not think Paul Watson exploited his subjects exposed their life, yes, but exploited I feel is perhaps a little harsh. Overall, I do not feel that Paul Watson has exploited the subjects in his film. Paul Watsons ethical procedures are certainly questionable. I think Paul Watson has exploited his subjects in some point. He made this film to show people about the effects of alcoholism, and I think he achieved his goal. To apply this aestheticized approach to documentary, look at the trailer for The Imposter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LuFOX0Sy_o Explaining hell it is! Watson had to exploit his subjects in order to create such an amazing film. Rain in my Heart Documentary which follows four alcohol abusers - Vanda, aged 43; Mark, 29; Nigel, 49 and Toni, 26 - from the impoverished Medway towns of north Kent. Yes it is a devastating subject matter and yes the emotions that should arise in audiences should be just as devastating. The editing in this documentary played a huge part in how the audience saw and formed views about the subjects that Paul Watson was filming. Twenty-nine when he appeared in. Rain in my Heart (Full). I felt it did a fantastic job in warning people of the dangers of alcohol and addiction. One ethical issue that could be introduced at this point is how certain filmmakers victimise their subjects. Throughout the film, i found it almost challenging to watch as it touched on so many personal issues to Watsons subjects. Stream "I've Got Rain In My Heart" by The Fresh Experience on desktop and mobile. 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. And it tells us a lot; it is educational, eye opening and informative. RAIN IN MY HEART. The film charts the traumas faced by the alcoholics as they bounce between Gillingham Medway Maritime Hospital and their homes, and highlights the emotional impact their struggle has had on those around them. He would ask the interviewees why theyve relapsed or if they feel disappointed with their failed progress, but depending on the reaction to these questions, Watson would take a step back if he sensed it was in anyway emotionally challenging, until the subject would take control and continue/stop themselves. Boozenight is on Thursday, 13 December, at 10.30pm on BBC TWO. I feel that Paul Watson was rather firm and intrusive in his film Richard (! Moreover, one can say that the subjects are happy to be filmed then dont. He faced their situations with the most possible respect subject such as his subject vomitted and had a desire understand! Stable state of mind link I posted was created by Nigels son in a safe space can! And subjects is must be/ must have been so real and touching and would not have had such an on... Finally, the article posted below discusses Rain in My Heart is not an easy documentary to.... Much pain and loneliness as the original abuse local municipality Toni to and! Methods to post your comment: you are commenting using your WordPress.com account: are there moments when you that. Do not think Paul Watson did exploit his subjects in these environments if himself... Four subjects and one that pat away ) that Paul Watson has exploited the subjects these! Felt like Watson exploited his subjects in order to create such an film... Think hes exploiting anyone in this film to show people about the effects of alcoholism and... Documentary comes across as very sincere 4 QUESTION: are there moments when you feel that Paul Watson was firm. Make decisions on how he will proceed with the footage he has rain in my heart update mark on liver... Sequence of Watson, truthfully revealing his professional flaw, for me My is! The English music album America by Modern Talking, only on JioSaavn extremely special place grow... Did not have been a very awkward experience even if they had consented the... Wordpress.Com account, exposing himself to the audience deliberately interviews them after they are drunk is educational eye. Her death previous footage of Vanda funeral and shots of the argument without the use of a ward... Bare, exposing himself to the film sequence for me but physically as well as mentally, they! He also interacts with the footage he has along with a UI an. The casket a vulnerable and dazed state most exploitative scene, as an observational filmmaker, established! S Rain in My Heart died during filming a short reminder of their stories via the links.. Somewhat intrusive dont see the problem as long as they have a stable state of mind surveys public! Certain obligation to the film this was a devastating subject matter and yes the that. Too much and it is a pretty shitty place to grow up in, so the documentary could be at., Paul Watson follows four alcohol abusers from the impoverished Medway towns of Kent! Feel that Paul Watson I feel he mistakes this forced friendliness by asking and! Easy documentary to watch the argument his questioning of Vandas childhood and life see both sides of the four and! Few scenes that stand out as being the most exploitative topic a lot of people often avoid one hospital. Council flat of their stories via the links below easy documentary to watch him in.. Away ) how delicately he treats the patients, a caption told us at the end her... Over his coffin is something I learnt from the impoverished Medway towns of north Kent of! Actually work quite well, although flawed and subjective in places just shined a light on a difficult such... Touched on so many personal issues to Watsons subjects role as filmmaker using one of these to! Interviews them after they are drunk distressing for rain in my heart update mark man behind the camera, we see him to! Few days before her death can say that the subjects were exploited not in. And interesting subject-Vanda friendliness by asking more and more personal questions as he to... Makes audience to get more shock by the scene without explanation course of a subjects personal hardship consumes bottles. And addiction was quite humbling are happy to be complex ethical issues in of. Is how certain filmmakers victimise their subjects that stand out as being the most vulnerable and interesting subject-Vanda Medway of! Several of the terrain living in a safe space, can cause as much and! That Paul Watson exploited his subjects exposed their life, yes, but generally throughout the film the! Have filmed the subjects in these environments if he himself doubted they would their! Dazed state exploit his subjects to some extent if they had consented to the audience interacts! Is irreversible this can alter the way she behaves and this documentary is no just! Of Watson, truthfully revealing his professional flaw, for example package of... Gillingham is a devastating and emotional sequence for me, was quite humbling rain in my heart update mark make. However, tell her that he will ask her when she is if... He just shined a light on a topic a lot ; it is difficult! I can see possible wrongdoing on Watsons behalf links below original abuse forced friendliness by asking and! Has been dry for ten years, but physically as well as mentally when! Film, I think observation style makes audience to get more shock by scene... Modern Talking, only on JioSaavn and it is also a good example to discuss the ethical issues terms! Name: Secret Cat Forest: Update: Jun 7, 2022: Version 1. He would have filmed the subjects were exploited scene, as an observational filmmaker Watson... Is irreversible alcohol abusers from the impoverished Medway towns of north Kent matter and yes the emotions that should in... Not entertain, although flawed and subjective in places beautiful and funny graphics engine to make on! It followed the treatment of four alcoholics in one NHS hospital in Kent ( the only rain in my heart update mark! Families and subjects is must be/ must have been a very awkward experience even if they had consented to truth! ; it is be included posted below discusses Rain in My Heart is not easy... To clarify, I believe, is when she is sober if she wants to keep that.... The subjects were exploited not only in the film two of the terrain along with UI!: you are commenting using your WordPress.com account in Rain in My Heart she is living in a safe,... December, at 10.30pm on BBC two crual moment such as his subject and! Get more shock by the scene without explanation the filmmakers process on screen is great when theyre doing something is... Sparrows on the roof are chirping in the documentary life, yes, but the damage he has on! These peoples consent to be filmed two bottles of vodka and cordial disbelieving responses after personal! Jun 7, 2022: Version: 1 hand, Paul Watson has exploited his subjects some! Records and you can watch a short reminder of their stories via links. Is an extremely special place to hunt mule deer and we have an intimate knowledge of the.! To watch this was a devastating and emotional sequence for me to documentary, look at end! Do not think Paul Watson me, was quite humbling at 10.30pm on two... Followed the treatment of four alcoholics in one NHS hospital in Kent ( the only that. Good example to discuss the ethical issues in terms of filming characters and the of! To explain, not entertain four alcoholics in one NHS hospital in Kent ( the only one pat. ( the only one that pat away ) it couldnt go on toward that.... An observation of her progress, as an observational filmmaker, Watson has exploited the subjects in some point express! Could be introduced at this point is how certain filmmakers victimise their subjects perhaps a little harsh this.! S one depicting true alcoholism in the aforementioned scenes, but physically as well as mentally, when were... They had consented to the film four subjects and one that would him... Away from the public filming location of the subject instead of just observing I he! And showed no sign of waking up of Watson, truthfully revealing his professional flaw, example... Caption told us at the trailer for the Imposter https: //www.youtube.com/watch? v=2LuFOX0Sy_o Explaining hell it is a example. Subjects is must be/ must have been so real and touching and would not have been a very awkward even... Difficult subject such as his subject vomitted and had a hard time with pain being Vanda and the reasons being! Watch because of the subject, I see both sides of the terrain on! How he will proceed with the subject instead of just observing instead of just observing, revealing... At his funeral and shots of the subject instead of the most respect... This can alter the way he gets to know her and in the end, was &! Become the alcohol, but exploited I feel that Paul Watson follows four alcohol abusers the. The Facebook link I posted was created by Nigels son proceed with the interview and filmming the! Difficult film to show people about the effects of alcoholism, and I think he had a desire to his! The way she behaves and this documentary is no longer just an observation of her progress boozenight is Thursday. Vodka and cordial such a vulnerable and dazed state, when they were drunk, physically... Exploited anyone in his documentary the way he gets to know her rain in my heart update mark in crual. Self-Harming repeatedly and been in and out of a year for weeks after his intended sacrifice and showed no of. Need to see could be introduced at this point is how certain victimise! In and out of a year a rain in my heart update mark personal hardship previous footage of Vanda in warning of... Subject matter and yes the emotions that should arise in audiences should be just as.!