While there is much to appreciate in Roy Germano's essay, I argue that the analytic filmmaking project as currently presented has flaws that need to be addressed before we can proceed with this approach. First, Germano underemphasizes many of the similarities among visual, audio, and textual data collection and analysis while at the same time failing to note important ways in which the two differ. Second, the discussion of documentary filmmaking focuses on a particular style of documentary and neglects to consider documentaries that are similar in their construction to the type of analytic filmmaking he argues for in the article. This emphasis on the differences creates needless and potentially problematic schisms between two groups of empirical researchers who have a great deal in common, in terms of interests and methods. Finally, the theoretical framework and the connection between theory and data need to be presented much more explicitly so that the viewer can follow the argument of the film.