Nanook and Kunuk

Any form of art portrays reality. Some in ways more figurative than others, but all with the goal of trying to show a particular viewpoint of the world. Two very different approaches were taken by Nanook of the North and Kunuk Uncovered.

Nanook of the North tried to portray reality as close to as it really was, or at least claimed to. It did this by filming shots in a way that made the audience aware of the filmmakers. Characters would address the camera with their body language and actions. Title cards would describe the process of the filmmaking. This lent to the idea that the filmmakers were being as honest as they possibly could and that the audience should accept what they see as how the subjects of the film actually are.

Kunuk Uncovered speaks on reality in a very different way. As a mocumentary it is inherently fictional and the audience comes into the film understanding this. Despite the inherent documentary style of the film, the audience understands that what is happening on screen isn't actually true. Despite this, the film is commenting on how we as an audience will automatically accept that what is happening on screen is reality when in fact it is not. Most audience members do not consider that a shot in a documentary might have been staged, even when it is something that must have been, like looking up at Kunuk through the ice fishing hole.

Kunuk Uncovered also discusses exaggerated events occurring on set that are quite dissonant with the film being made. Things like a food table and Kunuk's inability to hunt. The exaggerated nature of these events are what make a mocumentary so good at taking this approach to discussing the unclear nature of truth in documentary filmmaking.