PART 2:

Describe a TV documentary you watched that was particularly interesting.

You should say:

• what the documentary was about
• why you decided to watch it
• what you learnt during the documentary

and explain why the TV documentary was particularly interesting.

Sample Answer

Some say it “the partisan documentary” while the others call it “fair and balanced”. But, I called it very “powerful” when I first watched the documentary “Fahrenheit 9/11”, made by Michael Moore, back in 2010. I decided to watch the documentary simply because, in my opinion, no American documentary film managed to provoke as much political controversy ever before as Fahrenheit 9/11. This is, in fact, one of the best documentaries I have ever watched.

Being filmed during the US presidential campaign of 2004, the documentary probably was aimed, in my opinion, at helping the-then democratic presidential candidate even though many argued at the same time that film-maker was actually trying to turn off swing voters and thus contribute to a Republican victory with his “strident” film-making approach. Having raised some legitimate questions over Bush administration’s motives for war in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the disputes about the Saudi flights from the United States right after the horrific events of 9/11 in 2001, the documentary has also tried to shed some lights on the “dark” sides of American politics and corporate profiteering. I heard about this documentary for the very first time from one of my university professors who highly recommended it to us.

Being a political documentary presented with an interesting “deadpan humour” approach, Fahrenheit 9/11 served a very significant and serious purpose in proving to its audience that any war, considering that it was based on lies, was bound to cause atrocities and loss of innocent lives. Having a very passionate tone in its words and images in order to create a lingering effect in the mind, the film also proved that the then president was no “take-charge” kind of leader during a time of “serious crisis”, leaving the audiences to wonder about how the greats like Eisenhower, Reagan, Truman, Bush senior, Clinton, Nixon or Kennedy would behave in such crisis situation. Besides, the controversial film also tried to reveal a “naked truth” during its 2-hour 3-minute run time about how some people, who are in charge of making the laws of the country, do not care to read and understand the laws. Having fashioned its arguments in favour of revealing an “uncomfortable truth”, the document was surely interesting enough to have won the Palme d’Or at the 2004 Cannes Film Festival.

Phân tích từ vựng

Presidential campaign: chiến dịch tranh cử tổng thống

Democratic presidential candidate: ứng cử viên đảng dân chủ

Legitimate questions: những câu hỏi chính đáng

Profiteering: trục lợi

Cause atrocities and loss of innocent lives: gây ra tội ác và mất mạng người vô tội

Lingering effect in the mind: hiệu ứng kéo dài tâm trí

Serious crisis: khủng hoảng nghiêm trọng

Controversial: có thể gây tranh cãi