True re-enactment

Missiles of October and Watkins' films have a similar link. Both films try and re-create the past through action and dialog. Though Missiles of October is extremely campy, it gives an earnest try at creating the "what could be". Watkins uses re-created action to comment on the past. Missiles of October is almost shot as a play, the settings don't change much, the actors talk to express their thoughts and emotions, and there are no jump shots, as Watkins' interviews. The rhythm that is established in the film keep the audience in rhythm with the story line the unfolding events. The extra dialog in Missiles of October just pull you away from the story and aware of that the writers are trying to be truthful. Watkins uses fictious dialog to articulate the mood of the time instead of trying to be factual. I wonder if in re-creating films of historical events would be better off without words, or, even better, have the action be the expression.