1. 3MW Analysis
Karl Pilkington – 3 Minute Wonder- Holidays
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjjWJYn2qxQ)
The 3MW by Karl Pilkington isahybridformatdocumentary.The twoformats that the documentary
use are Expository/Interactive. Throughout the 3MW Karl is talking about his various holiday
experiences and his thoughts on the places. For example, throughout the 3MW he talks about a
week long coach trip in Lanzarote where he went and saw inactive volcanoes which talks about in
the 3MW bysaying“Spenta weekoncoaches,goingaroundlookingatlike different volcanoes. And
none of them are active, so basically spent time lookin’ in big holes.” In this 3MW he’s basically
filmeditanddone everythinghimselfandhe’stalkingaboutthe topicthe whole time whilstsittingin
a tent by the coast. It comes across as a spontaneous idea/project that he’s thought of where he’s
justdecidedtofilmitunscriptedandunplannedtosee where it goes. Furthermore, throughout the
3MW he has short snippets of people doing various things such as walking along a sea wall or
walkingtheirdogacrossthe beach.What I like aboutthisclipisthat he just talks about it he doesn’t
have solidevidence of justificationforwhathe’ssayingotherthanwhathe has experienced himself
and even then his thoughts about what he’s saying is very denoted in a way. He talks about things
for whattheyare and notwhat people wanttosee them as. He talks about the moon in this way by
saying…”at the end of the day there’snothingthere isthere.ImeanNeil Armstrong that spaceman,
he’sbeenain’the?Buthe hasn’t beenback.So…Can’t’ve beenthatgood. At the end of the day it’s,
it’s just one big rock.” What I don’t like about the clip is the use of the various snippets of people
doing everyday things by the coast. There’s no need for them in my opinion, whilst he may have
filmedthemhimself (withcamerashake) theydon’t relate tohistopicof speechinany obvious way.
The primarycamera shot usedisa close up from a low angle which gives the impression that’s he’s
got the camera leaning against something as he’s clearly not got the necessary equipment for a
professionally made documentary.
2. 3 Minute Wonder: Carl Andre – 144 Magnesium Square
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bN9hF26j1q8)
Thisclipis an Interactive documentarywhere the interviewers input/participation has clearly been
editedouttoonlyinclude the interviewees. The 3MW opens with these stone tiles being arranged
out in a hardware store (Close-Up). The 3MW then just follows people’s thoughts, opinions and
viewsastheytalkabout the piece of ‘Art’ to a microphone. The clips show loads of different views
thoughtetc.Which showsdiversityinthe freedomof speechtoan extentwhilstinthe secondhalf of
the clipan almostargumenteruptsbuthas beenobviouslycutinplaces to remove the interviewers
questions and responses to answers. The majority of the shots of the people talking about their
thoughtsabout the piece of art work are close-ups from their right side. Whilst the majority of the
scenesof people discussing/debatingaboutthispiece of workactuallybeingapiece of art are close-
ups however when it’s about 2 people talking to each other the shot type is a two-shot/medium
shot. The views/thoughtsfromthe people varyextensively. One person came up to the mic quickly
to speak and said “I like it and I love Carl Andre’s work in general but, having it in here is stressing
me out completely” whilst a different person says “You know people have been saying it doesn’t
meananythingtome,or or itdoesmeansomethingtome but,I’m not sure that somethingitmeans
isart.” Bothof these thoughtsshowsthe individualitybetweenthe differentpeoplein the hardware
store and from where we see them speaking. Various comments from the people come across in
different ways and some of the thoughts come across as arrogant and almost offensive to some of
the people who have completely opposite thoughts whilst some other comments come across as
beingveryopenandacceptingof everyone’sdifferentthoughts. Howeverthisisin my opinion are is
not fact that some of the views are arrogant whilst others are open.
3. 3 Minute Wonder: Marcel Duchamp – Fountain
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIApXD-TdDs)
The cliphere opensthe same as the last one withthe piece of art workbeingmounted and installed
ina publicplace inthiscase a publictoilet.Thenthe peoplewalkingup to the piece of art work with
a few of the people also appearing in the previous clip. In particular one person who I find comes
across quite arrogant and stubborn in both this clip and the previous one about a piece of Carl
Andre’swork.Thisclip follows the same format as the previous one with a few slight changes. The
mostobviousone beingthatthe people givingtheirthoughtsare notspeakingto a microphone (the
microphone is present but not for the viewers not to speak directly into) as well as the shot type
being a medium shot type that is overlooking the piece of art work which is a urinal that has been
signedbythe artistby whatlookslike paintfroma paintbrush.Unlike the previouspiece of art work
this one has been placed in a case to protect it from damage whereas the other the piece by Carl
Andre wasarrangedfor people towalkoverwhichiswhatovertime gave it a different looking tiles.
One of the thoughtsgivenbya viewerisquite denoting in a way as he speaks about the purpose of
the documentary indirectly. The quote is “…and I just sorta find the concept of us all standing in a
toilet, erm looking at a toilet that is not a toilet a bit more interesting than the actual object itself,
you know?” This causes some of the other viewers of the piece of art to give various expressions
from agreement to complete an utter anger based on their own opinions.
