Living the American Dream

People act differently when there is a camera filming them, they just do. It is unavoidable that Nanette Burstein's documentary, American Teen, is no an entirely accurate recreation of reality. People can get used to being in front a video camera however. They may never truly act themselves, but they do get used to being in front of the camera.

Nanette Burstein maintains that she filmed over a 1,000 hours of footage over the year she spent at Warsaw Community High School. It is reasonable to believe that during that time the students got so used to being filmed that they did not alter their actions to too great of an extent as a result. Another reason to believe that the documentary is a good representation of reality is that the students chose to be in it. Allow me to clarify. The type of individual who willingly signs up to be in a documentary that will follow them around for a year, is also the type of individual who is far more willing to share intimate information than your average joe.

What I'm getting at is that I consider the actions that occurred on film believable. I concede that it is a very real possibility that Burstein has glossed over and manipulated a fair number of aspects. Especially Megan vandalizing the house by writing "fag" on it. But I still believe it to be very possible for that to be what happened.

I wouldn't have done the documentary the same as Burstein though. She made the documentary far too formulaic. It is hard to fully describe, but I suppose the best way of putting it is that it felt as though she had decided what would happen during the course of the documentary before she filmed the documentary. Not that she neccessarily staged individual scenes, but rather she had a pretty firm idea in mind of the general narrative.

One thing that I liked was her subject matter. Not many content creators chose topics so every day to focus on, and I appreciated the change. All in all, an enjoyable documentary that quite frankly shouldn't be taken too seriously. Watch it for fun, rather than an indepth insight into American youth.

Not 100% Real

To be frank, I don't think American Teen is entirely real. While some footage from the movie (for example, the scene where the girl cries and insist not going to the school while her father drives her) and epilogues do seem to be real, some other scenes are way too private.
For instance, the scene where the guy is comforting the girl who just broke up with her boyfriend. Even if those teenages got used to the camera, I don't feel like they can totally ignore the camera man. Especially in this comforting scene. I can't iamgine myself comforting a girl in front of the guy who I barely know holding a camera in the corner of my bedroom. Or even if I knew the person--let's say one of my parents was filming me comforting a girl--it would still be quite awkward. I feel like those teenagers in American Teen are too willing to share there private moment.
I also found one contradiction in this documentary. Towards the end of the film, there was a scene where teenagers hanging out inside the car. There were two cameras--one at the passenger seat and another at back seats. So when the footage from the backseat camera is shown, I should see another camera man sitting on the passenger seat; however, I didn't see any camera man. Instead, I saw another teen sitting.
Although I believe this documentary isn't completely real, I want to object to one of the critiques. I don't think use of animation makes any documentary unreal. In this documentary, the animation was used to portray what teenagers were imagining in their mind (for example, where that awkward boy fights to get a girl). These animations make easier for audience to understand what teens are talking about and make this documentary more enjoyable.

Robert Post 3 - American Teen

I think the biggest reason that American Teen didn’t seem realistic was because of how ridiculous the whole portrayal of high school seemed. I fully believed the film was written to mimic a similar high school hierarchy present in movies like Mean Girls. Maybe B-CC is an abnormal high school or maybe times have changed since 2008, when the movie was filmed. Either way, the film didn’t seem realistic or relatable to high school in Bethesda.

Maybe high school is just like that in other parts of the country. I definitely think that the production value of the film played a part in making the film feel less relatable. The animatics helped to visualize the emotions of the characters but at the same time, the cleanness of everything didn’t seem like it really getting into a high school student’s perspective. I don’t believe the film was too mainstream. The characters on display weren’t exactly predictable cookie cutter stereotypes and they were a good choice for the director to follow.

Regardless, I think Burnstein accurately captured a high school in one part of America, but certainly not something relatable to a wider range of teens. If I were directing a project like this, I think that a good change to make would be to follow a variety of students from different high schools around the country, and try to link those in some interesting way.

Not a mockumentary whaaaaaaaaat

First off, I definitely agree that the American Teen's narrative structure in a documentary definitely throws off putting, which is part of the reason for it's criticism.  I think it was American Teen's goal to make a documentary with a narrative based structure on a (or at least the director's idea of a) stereotypical American high school.  That said, I think this film achieved its goal.  They found a high school in the midwest and zeroed in on students who fit the stereotypes and/or and stereotypical problems, and then used those students to drive the story.  While that high school happened to (not surprisingly) be an almost all white high school in a conservative area.  Even though it would have been nice to be a little bit more representative of different types of people, I think that the director did an excellent job in finding and picking a school that fit those stereotypes.  The fact that when we first started watching the film many people (myself included) originally thought it was actually a mockumentary and my not wanting to believe (read freaking out) that these were real people (partially) shows this.

Now having said that, I think that more specifically it was the director's goal for American Teen to show how the stereotypes and issues that we often come to associate with high school really do exist and aren't as exaggerated as many people to assume them to be.  In this case, while certainly headed in the right direction, I think the film's apparent lack of authenticity really hurt it on the way to achieving this goal.  Part of the reason I thought it was a mockumentary at first was because of how well the characters (see I can't stop thinking about them as characters rather than subjects) fit the stereotypes.  The other reason however, was that the film indeed did seem much too polished.  While the idea that teenagers can't be extremely intimate on camera is bullshit, even if the director actually was in all the right places at the right times, she should have made it feel less structured like they really just happened to be there to retain the feel of authenticity that is necessary to a documentary.  While it is totally okay to influence what you are filming in a documentary a little bit as long as that is to portray a more accurate representation of your subject (I will give American Teen the benefit of the doubt on this), it certainly could have done a better job on making it feel like they were only capturing events and nothing more in order to maintain it's documentary feel. Many scenes' authenticity is certainly questionable (reaction shots, phone calls, etc.)

I would have left out the animated sequences, but that is more a personal choice.

oh no i'm going to have to talk about glee.

Sure, American Teen could have incorporated more than just middle-class, white, heterosexual, teenagers. Though as we've seen from Glee, which includes many a gays and many a wheelchairs, you get a unique kind of trainwreck.  Now, I watched Glee.  I am both proud and ashamed to say that.  One of the strongest and weakest parts of that show was incorporating every single issue of the present day.   They delved into Kurt, a flamboyant gay stereotype, when the LGBTQ rights movement started picking up speed.  They've dealt with questioning of sexuality, homelessness, teen drinking, lesbians, sex, the college process, transgender students, eating disorders, and even had time to have a school shooting episode in the last season.  The strengths of Glee come from very distinct characters that ultimately break out of your first perception of them in the first episode, and this is a show that has been on for 5 seasons.  On the other hand, American Teen lacks complexities outside the archetype.  But, Glee's pitfall is that the continuity and the overall structure of the show degrades as it tries to take these Big Issues in each episode and you're left playing an internal battle trying to decide which issue is best to care about.  Glee does the opposite of American Teen, where it oversimplifies everything, and instead over complicates things by takes a thousand Big Pictures and trying to fit it all into one while still finding songs to sing.

With documentaries, I don't really find anything wrong with glossy.  I think with a film like American Teen that is set in the midwest, we as B-CC students suddenly become hyper aware of the normal American high school conventions and idealism that we don't necessarily have.  I think that made it a little harder to accept much of the film as truth and more like how the students reacted to how they were baited by the filmmakers.  I honestly don't think Megan would have vandalized that other student's house if she wasn't thoroughly provoked.  The glossiness of it just comes along with that provocation and trying to depict high school seniors, which is hard because we're so boring most of the time.  Imagine trying to dramatize us sitting at home watching 8 hours of Netflix on a snow day.  It doesn't make for great cinema.

A flaw in American Teen is the way they forced the 5 main characters into emulating each character in the Breakfast Club, which in itself is an institution.  The subjects seemed like they were too forced into being the jock or the weirdo or the rebel and couldn't be anything more than that.  We know that there are football players who also take theatre classes.  We know the yearbook and Tattler staffers are involved in other sports or clubs.  We know that there are students that are much more than what meets the eye, and that's where it feels fake to us, because the characters/subjects are widdled down and reduced to just one singular trait.

Did I enjoy American Teen?  Yes.  Do I think they got American teens right?  No.

America's Average White Teens

Personally, I think the main issue with American Teen was the way the students were depicted to us. We all thought it was a mockumentary because the things each individual said sounded not only scripted, but it sounded like adults wrote lines for today's teens. Part of me hopes that the reason we all thought it was fake was because we're not used to seeing people's lives in that way. We notice our classmates may have issues like the students from American Teen, but we don't see it in such a detailed manner. Assuming the crew spent nearly every waking moment with these kids, they had such a large amount of footage they could have done anything. Out of hours of footage, they chose 95 minutes. Maybe they recreated certain interactions to make them more cinematic, or they had the students act out things that weren't filmed. 

I think there was one black kid in the whole film, and that's as far as this film's representation went. Aside from the race issues, the students themselves were mostly incredibly average. The person who had the most severe issues was Hannah. Megan's problems were not being sure if her top choice could accept her (which is something a lot of kids go through, so who cares about her), and experiencing the consequences of spray painting slurs on someone's house. Honestly, she was incredibly uninteresting and an overall terrible person. I don't remember Mitch at all. Colin was a little more interesting, but still painfully average. If the director's goal was to take the most average kids in some small town and glorify their boring lives, she succeeded. However, if the film had more students like Hannah who went through a severe issue that most kids don't experience or hear about, it would have been better. I really liked that about the film. They were able to show people what happens to some people. That some people go through very serious emotional problems, but we don't get to see how that person lives with it every day. The point is, aside from Hannah, all the storylines were bland. We all know what those kids went through because every kid goes through it. There are so many things happening to high schoolers, and we focused on the white girl who cares about prom more than she cares about other human beings, the jock who has to do something amazing for the team to win, some random kid who can't get a girlfriend, and I still don't remember who Mitch was.

teen dream

This film was severely suffering from a lack of diversity and a lack of originality. None of the students seemed to have unique stories, and when their lives were presented in such a tired narrative format, it just got...boring. The animated sequences were bizarre and pulled the viewers out of the storyline. Her choice of filming "a nerd, a jock, a rebel, and a queen bee" was, in my opinion, a mistake. These overused archetypes are not going to surprise anyone. If Burnstein wanted to do a documentary about high schoolers that nobody had seen before, she should have told stories that have not truly been told in an unbiased, uncut form before. It would be far more interesting to see the parallels between the high school experience for, say, a black inner-city jock, a bisexual Asian rebel on the west coast, a nerdy white girl in Illinois, and a Latina mean girl than it was to watch four white kids in the same town all prove that we all have a lot in common. Also, the documentary seemed too polished--the capturing of two sides of phone calls with supporting characters threw me out of the story and made me wonder how they had managed to have a camera crew at some random kid's house at the exact moment he was calling.

One criticism I actually didn't agree with was the concern that teens would never be so intimate on camera. People like to open up about their lives, and in this digital age, they aren't very camera-shy. The most intimate moments of the film happen months into filming, so the teens would've been used to being followed around. That said, the filmmakers clearly set up some things--it seemed very unnatural to me that the explanation of the queen bee's sister's death would come out on camera in the way that it did. It seemed set up to give us a reason to pity her after we'd seen her being rude and rather one-dimensional in every other situation. And the whole scene with her friend and the boyfriend was difficult to follow and also seemed fake.

My biggest problem with the film was Hannah's hats. Why did she keep wearing hats???

American Teen: Real or nah?

After watching American Teen and reading director Nanette Burnstein's comments on the film, it becomes clear that her ultimate goal was to tell a story. Now, while I believe American Teen succeeds in this regard, there is a broad gap between what the film wants to be and what it turns out to be - and this is where its criticisms stem from.

The title and premise of American Teen paint a picture of an unadulterated glimpse into high school life in middle America. Viewers and critics alike probably initially went in with expectations of an episodic, thematic documentary as opposed to one that tells clear-cut narratives. I also think that this is the mood Burnstein wanted to achieve - but it clashes when introduced to the three or four primary students. While this story-driven aspect alone doesn't necessarily lower the quality of the film, it does hurt it in the long run by being much more susceptible to perceived contrivances (stereotypes such as the popular girl, gamer nerd, jock, etc.). In addition, each of these subjects must say or do things that propel their arcs and keep things from getting boring - which creates the other problem of possible premeditated dialogue. 

All this said, I personally think that American Teen achieves truth, at least in part. Granted, much of what is going on in the students' lives is dramatized, whether through additional dialogue, editing, or complex animated sequences - and yet, the students' performances (if they can even be called that) are so natural, so nuanced, and intimate that I can't help but believe that they mean every word they say. At times, I often wondered why the filmmakers even bothered to artificially enhance the events. 

Had I directed a film such as this one, I would have kept my camera focused on a bigger picture than just several people - it is called American Teen, after all. While there's nothing wrong with individual narratives, one of the film's drawbacks is its struggle to draw out certain students' stories for its entire duration. I would have perhaps alternated through many students (which would also invite diversity, something American Teen sorely lacks) who could supply anecdotes, sound bytes, and other such means of thematic support. My film would offer a look at the tiny fish in a big pond rather than big fish in a small one, and I think that this approach invites many more opportunities for unfiltered realism.

American Fake!

I don't believe that this movie was actually a documentary. We spent the entire half of the movie thinking that it was a mockumentary. When we learned that it was a documentary we all could not believe it. Between the flashy animation scenes and the real life scenes that seemed like they were out of a high school romance film. Also they always had access to both sides of a conversation. I knew that they ending would have been happy because something similar would of happened in a high school romance film. I felt like I was watching High School Musical without the musical numbers. Also all the characters were an archtype in a movie. The nerd, the artistic outcast, the popular girl, and the jock. I mean the nerdy character even had like 500 zits. I feel like I was watching a mockumentary or just a regular narrative film. Real life isnt a narrative. Somethings in real life are never solved. My last and final point is how do you get accepted to a California College when you werent even there for half the year. I think it was fake.

Star Watch and Night Wars

Star Wars and Night Watch both balance the idea of good and evil, but they do it quite differently. Also, the concept of a "chosen one" is clearly present in both films (or both series as wholes). As well as the idea that this particular chosen one can completely change how each side is seen and thought of. Night Watch blurs the line between good and evil; both sides have their positive qualities and their negative qualities. In Star Wars, it's clear that the Light Side has to prevent the Dark Side from taking over the galaxy and essentially destroying all that is good (Note: there is an objective good in Star Wars, whereas in Night Watch good is more of a relative term).

Night Watch achieves more of a balance between good and evil.  That being said, there isn't necessarily a clear good and evil. During this truce that both sides are involved in, the Dark Others and the Light Others have an equal amount of power. They stop each other from having too much power and influence over their universe; there isn't a set group that is good and a set group that is bad. 

Both films (series whatever) follow the idea of good and evil and whether or not good and evil are subjective or objective terms and concepts. I liked how Night Watch blurred the line and made both sides have equal power, showing that it isn't always about good or bad, but sometimes about the power each side has. Can good become evil if it's given too much power? Perhaps.

American Teen is a Bad Title

Let me start of by saying, I do not go to high school in the Midwest.  The experience that these kids have is entirely different from the experience I have had in school.  This brings up the first issue I take with the film: the title.  “American Teen” is a horrendous and misleading title for this film.  The title suggests to the viewer that what is being depicted on screen is the process that every teenager in the United States goes through.  This is so far from the truth.  My years in high school have been totally different, and I think I can safely say they are totally different for students in an impoverished neighborhood with a school that has a significant lack of funding.  The experience would also be totally dissimilar for an upper class teenager in Beverly Hills or a kid living in Alaska or even a kid being homeschooled.  All of these experiences together represent a much better cross section of America than the students featured in the film.  They are all white, middle class, and live in the same Illinois town.  It is misinformation for the director to suggest that this film shows what it means to be a teenager in America.  If I were to have directed this film I would have traveled to not only this Illinois town but also to places across America that represent other points on the spectrum.  A more interesting film could’ve come out of comparing and contrasting these places.  The film could’ve provided first hand insight into the severe inequality that exists in our nation rather than its, in my opinion, unperceptive message of “wow look high school is difficult for these white Midwestern teens”. 

The main criticism against American Teen is that it feels staged.  In fact, when Mr. Boswell first showed us the film many students in our class thought the film was scripted.  I know that psychologically, the students may have started to become used to the presence of the camera, however I imagine that some of the things that the students say or do are fabrications in an attempt to appear more interesting.  Burstein is also, suspiciously, always in the right place at the right time.  She gets reaction shots of students and can hear the other side of phone conversations.  These elements appear to be an example of Burstein fabricating the narrative, not the kids.  However, moments that are raw, initimate, and powerful such as when Hannah refuses to go to school and sits in the car with her father, feel  like they are too personal to be staged. 

I understand what Burstein was going for.  She wanted to create a film where the camera was invisible and the audience gets an untainted, completely realistic view of this group of American teenagers.  However, I feel like she openly defies this intent with the way the film is constructed.  She often manipulates the narrative by withholding information from the audience until it becomes important.  If I were placed in the position of the filmmaker I would have done away with the out of place animated sequences and presented a straightforward documentary that did not manipulate the events to form a coherent narrative arc for each of the characters. 

While the film presents some honest and powerful moments from each of the characters, at many points it feels staged.  The film also does not present a diverse cross section of the American teenage experience and thus has no business calling itself “American Teen”.

Hey I remember Night Watch

As much as I love Star Wars I would say that Night Watch possesses a much more complex and realistic understanding of the relationship between good and evil.  In each film the people who come to possess the special power (whether via the force or being an “Other”) can choose to be on either side.  However, in Star Wars it is made painstakingly obvious that the Jedis and the light side are the good guys so as to give the audience a clear side to root for.  In Night Watch it is more complicated, the light side and dark side to not necessarily represent good and evil because there are clearly good and evil people on both ends.  When Yegor makes his choice at the end of the film it is reminiscent of Anakin Skywalker’s choice to join the dark side in the (horrible) Star Wars prequels.  In Star Wars, Anakin is manipulated by the dark side, desperately trying to prevent a premonition of her death from coming true.  We see the dark side as pure evil who are constantly exploiting Anakin in their quest for power.  In Night Watch, the two sides stay at peace for hundreds of years and the two leaders can have ordinary conversations with each other.

                 A very big distinction between the two films is the truce. While in Star Wars, each side is trying to destroy the other, Night Watch concedes and admits that this fight is futile.  The truce between good and evil in the film is something I haven’t seen much of in any mainstream science fiction or fantasy.  The good side has accepted the fact that they will never truly triumph over evil.  In the Star Wars world there is  always hope for the Jedi to prevail and defeat the Sith but the universe of Night Watch twists this idea and says no its not possible. The goal of both sides in the film is balance. 

                Yegor chooses the dark side at the end of Night Watch because the lines between the two sides are not as clear cut as a film like Star Wars.  Both sides draw power from the same source and understand that they will never truly defeat the other side.  The truce and the ambiguity of good and evil is what makes the struggle in Night Watch unique.  

QUESTION #3: HOW REAL IS REAL?

Nanette Burnstein's 2008 documentary, American Teen, has been criticized on three fronts:
a. it's too glossy (slick production choices like animated sequences)
b. it's too willfully mainstream (no gay couples, no long-term handicapped students, etc.)
c. it's inauthentic (the actors were being dramatic for the camera).

Burnstein's defense is interesting:  "I think it's unusual to have a very narrative documentary, so people aren't used to it.  I think people have a hard time believing teenagers are willing to be that intimate on camera. So sometimes I feel I'm being criticized for what the film's achievements are."

As high school students and filmmakers, you're in a unique position to weigh in on this.  Do you think Burnstein got it right in her film?  What would have done differently?