In this blog post, I’d like to discuss the boundary between movies and documentaries and the trend toward their blurring.

Same Clothes, Different Feel: The Starting Point

Even if it’s the same outfit, it gives a completely different impression depending on who wears it and what accessories are paired with it. The relationship between film and documentary is similar. Even when dealing with the same subject matter, the audience’s perception varies greatly depending on the direction and style of expression.

The Columbine Incident and Two Films

The tragic incident on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School in the United States, where two students opened fire, killing 12 students and one teacher, is a tragic event that has been the focus of both films and documentaries. The motive behind the incident was that the two students called themselves the “Trenchcoat Mafia,” and initial investigations suggested they were influenced by specific music or culture.
Michael Moore’s documentary ‘Bowling for Columbine’ critiques this incident within the historical context of the liberalization of gun ownership in the United States. He argues that American history and social structures gave rise to such tragedies, interpreting the incident as a product of social responsibility.

The Different Techniques of Documentaries and Feature Films

When watching ‘Bowling for Columbine’ and the film ‘Elephant’, anyone can distinguish which is a documentary and which is a feature film. However, the two works also blur the lines by borrowing techniques from one another.
While ‘Bowling for Columbine’ has a strong documentary character due to the director’s direct intervention and interviews, it also clearly features fictional elements such as animated reenactments and intentional staging. Conversely, ‘Elephant’ adopts a documentary feel through long takes, an observer’s perspective, and the capture of characters’ everyday movements.

Changes in Documentary Perception Observed in Class

While taking a recent documentary course, I sensed that my perception of documentaries is shifting. I used to view documentaries as a form of fine art, but now they are expanding commercially, with an increasing number of specialized documentary film festivals and a growing diversity in genres and subject matter.
While some speak of a depletion of subject matter, documentaries actually have an endless supply of material. Even everyday things—such as interviews with people, local events, or table tennis tournaments for the elderly—become interesting subjects. That is why the term “documentary film” no longer feels awkward.

Animated Documentaries: The Case of “Waltz with Bashir”

The Israeli film “Waltz with Bashir” deals with the distortion of memory formed during the Lebanon War and makes active use of animation. By recreating the voices from actual interviews through animation, this film left many viewers confused as to whether it was a documentary or a feature film.
For example, the scene where the narrator, suffering from seasickness on a boat, experiences hallucinations is not merely a flashback but is actually visualized, making it difficult for the audience to determine whether to accept the scene as fact or as imagination. Furthermore, the use of music to establish the rhythm of the scenes creates a more cinematic atmosphere than traditional documentaries.
Nevertheless, the film retains many documentary elements. It centers on the interview format to explore the fragmentation of memory, features real-life figures who inspired the story, and incorporates actual footage of the events. Ultimately, it uses animation to protect identities or explain events that are difficult to reenact.

Documentary or Fiction: The Issue of Boundaries

Some critics argue that ‘Waltz with Bashir’ is a film that pretends to be a documentary. However, the boundary between fiction and nonfiction is inherently unclear.

Novels are often based on real experiences or stories, created through exaggeration and distortion. Similarly, when staging in front of the camera is involved, it is impossible for a documentary to capture only the complete truth.
The very way in which the process of memory distortion and narrative exaggeration is handled can become an important theme of this genre. If so, isn’t it necessary to acknowledge this hybrid form and classify it clearly?

The Proposal for “Docu-Film” (Documentary-Style Film)

I would like to propose a new classification: “docu-film.” This term can be used to describe films that incorporate fiction based on documentary elements to enhance message delivery and audience accessibility. This genre will help filmmakers connect more closely with audiences and convey their messages more clearly.
Pure documentaries may be instructive, but they often have a limited audience and may lack commercial sustainability. Conversely, docu-films reveal a blend of truth and fiction, allowing audiences to comfortably engage with the work while granting directors greater creative freedom. The key is not to hide this nature from the audience.

Common Roots and Conclusion

Early cinema and documentaries share the same origins. The boundaries we draw today are merely distinctions that emerged later within the historical flow. Cinema and documentary have evolved by encompassing one another and influencing each other.
In conclusion, rather than strictly separating documentary and cinema, we need to find common ground and view them from a broader perspective. I hope that documentary will be respected not as a subgenre but as a vital pillar of cinema, and that new classifications like “documentary film” will open up more possibilities for both audiences and creators.