[![Dogma](https://i1.wp.com/farm3.static.flickr.com/2179/2210794638_5a25c4f8d0.jpg?resize=278%2C417)](http://www.flickr.com/photos/ari/2210794638/)Image by [Steve Rhodes](http://www.flickr.com/photos/ari/2210794638/) via Flickr
[Mike Jones Digital basin](http://blogs.digitalmediaonlineinc.com/digitalbasin/) is one of those blogs that I keep an eye on more with my video hat on rather than my journalism fedora. But I in a recent post he picked up on something I wanted to comment on.

In his post The Belgrade Manifesto – Profound or Indulgent? he discusses the recent statement by a group of filmmakers at the Belgrade Festival of Auteur Film last year. It’s aim according to Mike was:

to draw a line in the sand for filmmakers; a line that attempted to declare �No More� to shallow, puerile, pointless cinema and foster a focus on quality engagement with cinema as an artform for the human experience.

Mike cites the Dogma95 ‘vow’ as a clear influence on this effort but, as you could guess from the title of the post, Mike isnt sure about the motivation or value of the statement. Dogma was a “framework and a creative ideology rather than a socio-political one”. But

I find it hard to read the Belgrade Manifesto and Not picture a whole bunch of filmmakers (no-doubt wearing black and sporting designer eye-ware) who cant find the success they believe they deserve, gathered together and looking to find someone to blame for their un-success. Complaining that there�s too much focus on �story�? and we need more focus on �Form�? You�ve got to be kidding me! That�s exactly the problem with the worst of Hollywood � all glitz and no guts; all effects and no engaging narrative.

All of which may sound like a spat in art house cinema of little interest to the ‘real’ world of hard-edged commercial journalism. But keep in mind what Mike is saying about narrative and take a look at the last paragraph of the manifesto:

We are at a crossroads where the new possibilities opened up by digital production and exhibition have real potential for the rejuvenation of cinema. But the danger is they could also work against it by swamping the market with low-quality work. As filmmakers, we have to grasp this opportunity. At last, it is now possible, because of the huge reduction in costs, to bypass existing funding channels and make high quality films WITHOUT PERMISSION. In addition, we need to adapt and develop those models of distribution and exhibition that are already being pioneered and begin to identify new sources of minimal funding. It is time to take responsibility for our own future and establish a committed, interactive community that can share ideas and work together to find viable ways to make and show our films and build audiences that will want to see them.

Now, replace cinema with journalism, filmmakers with journalists and you can see why the whole thing piqued my interest.

Video manifestos

In the move to try and define what newspaper/web video should be about a lot of people are talking about what it shouldn’t be. Not like TV. It needs to be fresh and edgy not like all that hyper-polished network stuff. It starts to sound a lot like that Manifesto railing against the ‘Hollywood’ of those demanding high quality kit (the flashy glitz?)

Without getting entrenched in the quality debate (again). The manifesto got me thinking about how we need to try and avoid the dogma as we develop video. There are many parts of industry that still do a pretty good job of the crowd *who cant find the success they believe they deserve, gathered together and looking to find someone to blame for their un-success. *I would hate to see that turn in to a Belgrade Manifesto.

But, a bit of dogma? Well take a look at the Dogma95 vow.

  1. Shooting must be done on location. Props and sets must not be brought in (if a particular prop is necessary for the story, a location must be chosen where this prop is to be found)
  2. The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa. (Music must not be used unless it occurs where the scene is being shot).
  3. The camera must be hand-held. Any movement or immobility attainable in the hand is permitted. (The film must not take place where the camera is standing; shooting must take place where the film takes place).
  4. The film must be in colour. Special lighting is not acceptable. (If there is too little light for exposure the scene must be cut or a single lamp be attached to the camera).
  5. Optical work and filters are forbidden.
  6. The film must not contain superficial action. (Murders, weapons, etc. must not occur.)
  7. Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden. (That is to say that the film takes place here and now.)
  8. Genre movies are not acceptable.
  9. The film format must be Academy 35 mm.
  10. The director must not be credited.

You could kind of ignore the last 3 but the first 7 look pretty good.

So what do you think? What would you add to a newspaperviDogma08?

[![](https://i1.wp.com/img.zemanta.com/pixie.png?w=525)](http://www.zemanta.com/ "Zemified by Zemanta")