Walking Thin Blue Line

Title: Walking The Thin Blue Line

Name:  Heidi Lorenzen

Personal Response to Film:
The film really interested me; I have always been the one to turn the television channel to Forensic Files or any reality detective show.  As I have watched Making a Murderer, I felt that I continued to compare the two films.  Personally, it was not until the second time that I watched The Thin Blue Line that I realized how much the director of the film manipulated film techniques to convince the viewer that Randall Adams was innocent.  Comparatively, when I watched Making a Murderer, I could tell right away that the director had taken a very one-sided approach to his film.  The Thin Blue Line left me asking more questions; I am not sure if I missed some details but I wondered what happened to the vehicle that Randall Adams had been driving, was it left on the side of the road where it ran out of gas or did the two men return the vehicle to the hotel at some point?  It also interested me how some of the testimony that Adams gave changed in the film; his brother was asleep when he came home and watched the Carol Burnett show and then later, he was awake and they watched t.v. together.  After watching, I also looked up what had happened to Randall Adams and found that he had been released eventually.  David Harris also really stuck out to me; what struck me the most was how much law enforcement let him get away with.  I lost count of how many times he was in jail or committed robbery or some other crime.  It amazed me that he had not been put in prison for long term so much earlier.  Another thing that really struck me was that the officers in the film who had known Harris had committed so many crimes basically said that they never gave Harris more than a slap on the wrist because they did not want to ruin a young man's future; even though Harris was doing that on his own.

Summary of Critical Article:
In the article, Errol Morris' Construction of Innocence in "The Thin Blue Line" by Renee Curry depicts how the film's director, Errol Morris combined the rules of documentaries with the characteristics of cinematic motion picture.  Curry describes the film techniques that Morris utilized to manipulate the viewer into changing their mental image of Randall Adams as a cop killer to Randall Adams, a man who was wrongfully convicted.  Curry describes this by saying, "To construct this innocence, Morris relies on ordinary "telling" techniques such as verbal monologues and newspaper graphics. However, he also employs cinematic techniques to construct Adams' innocence" (1995, p. 154)  For example, Curry notes Morris' interesting film technique in which the interviewee seems to be speaking directly to the viewer as if we are the ones conducting the interview.  Another strategy throughout the film that Morris used to convince viewers, according to Curry, was the story-telling of the characters rather than using direct question-and-answer.  Finally, Curry points out that Morris used fantasy elements of film making, such as the police lights spinning and the flying malt.

Response to Critical Article:
Unlike the articles for the other films, this article did not clear anything up for me.  However, this article did break down the film techniques very well for me.  After reading the article, I find that I agree with Curry that Morris did utilize certain film techniques to convey the message that Adams had been wrongfully convicted.  I read the article before the second time that I viewed the film, this made the elements that Curry mentioned pop out to me.  Such has realizing how much more of monologues each character utilizes rather than answering an interviewer's questions.

Consideration of Critic’s Use of Critical frameworks/concepts:
Throughout the article, Curry utilized a Reader-Response framework.  The reader can make up their own mind on whether the story-telling elements of the film are used with the purpose of convincing the viewer to be swayed.

Film Analysis:
I chose this scene because it depicts a lot of the film techniques that the article mentioned and I pointed out above.  This clip is an example of the story-telling that occurred throughout the documentary as well as the interviewee looking right into the camera to appear to be speaking directly to the viewer.  The slow action of the depiction of what had happened when the cop was killed, is an example of the fantasy-like elements that Morris used throughout the film.
Using a voice over, the detective tells the story of how the officer was shot.  The clip starts with a close-up shot of the ground where the officer's shadow is seen approaching the car.  Throughout the clip, Morris keeps the reenactment as least biased as possible by keeping the identity of the shooter anonymous.  This helps to allow the viewer to decide who really shot the officer.  The camera then changes angles to see the ground where the officer's shoes are seen beneath the car as they approach the driver's window.  Then, the camera shows a straight-on shot of the detective who is telling the story.  While he is talking, the detective is looking directly into the camera which gives the viewer a sense that the interviewee is talking to them.  This further accentuates the reader-response framework of the film as Morris allows the viewer to decide to believe that Adams is innocent or not.  Throughout the beginning of the clip, the lighting is very dark, but still allows for the shadow of the officer to be seen.  The viewer understands that the cop has pulled the car over as the red and blue flashing lights are easily seen.  When the detective is shown, the lighting is very bright.  The camera then goes to a close up shot of the driver's side corner of the windshield so that the trunk of the officer and flashlight is seen.  The driver then raises the gun and shoots the officer.  At the end of the clip, the camera zooms into the flashlight as it falls to the ground and shatters.  

The darkness of the clip and the music creates an ominous feeling that is consistent with the murder-mystery aspect of this documentary.  Even the story-telling element may seem as if someone is telling the viewer a scary story, keeping them in suspense and trying to figure out the truth behind the story.

References: 

Curry, R. (1995). Errol Morris' construction of innocence in "the thin blue line". Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature, 49, 153-167.

After providing a careful analysis of the film elements in your tube-chop clip make sure to write a few sentences about the subtextual/allegorical meaning beneath the surface…