The Imposter (2012) - Looking into the Lens
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 кві 2014
- A brief analysis of Bart Layton's The Imposter (2012). WARNING: SPOILS EVERY GODDAMN THING.
For educational purposes only. English & Portuguese subtitles by Akemi Mitsueda.
You can donate to support the channel at
Patreon: / everyframeapainting
And follow me here:
Twitter: / tonyszhou
Facebook: / everyframeapainting
Music:
DJ Shadow - What Does Your Soul Look Like, Pt. 2
Philip Glass - 100,000 People
Anne Nikitin - Spain
DJ Shadow - Why Hip Hop Sucks in '96
Help us caption & translate this video!
amara.org/v/GJaE/
At 0:16, I stopped the video, watched the movie and got back. High five!
Same here. :)
me too!
Yup. Me too. Thank you Tony!
IMightBeJesus69Thanks for the spoiler advice, Tony. The first 16 seconds made me so curious that i just had to watch the movie. Your videos are great!
IMightBeJesus69 Paused it at 27 seconds...to reluctantly watch the film before this video... I have things to do...smh
I love the use of Ferris Bueller on the word "sociopaths..."
+Samuel Wallace God knows how many kids these days get that shot.
i also caught that quite funny
How is Ferris and sociopath? Is he not the intended protagonist of the film.
@@Avo7977 he uses others to his own end
Avozij Ik that’s the joke
You missed something. The sister looks into the camera lens after he hypothesizes that the family did it. You have it at 3:45, obviously inferring that she is now the villain
Patrick Favo Damn.
Patrick Favo Nice Catch!
+Patrick Favo mic drop
OHHH that's probably why she wanted him to pass all the customs to get into America
+Patrick Favo And in the next clip Frederick is looking away from the camera
I'll admit it, I totally fell for it too. As soon as he says "They killed him" I was in awe. Just "oh shit oh shit no way" and it wasn't until much later that I was able to put it into perspective. That one uncle or brother was still a bit suspicious though...
I fell for it hook, line, and sinker. What a fucking adventure that was. He IS the real life Decoy Octopus.
+sdgundum990 yay for the reference :D
+sdgundum990 Ah, but Decoy Octopus had no ears and even shaved some of his cheek bones down to better imposter his targets.
The docfilm shows that Bourdin was caught by the PI _because_ of his ears. Didn't matter because he has a wife and four children now.
Just suck the fun out of it why don't you :P
sdgundum990 Sucking is life. Sucking is love.
Content or otherwise...this was one of the best documentaries I've ever seen. Very rarely do documentaries actual represent the human drama going on so well, and boy did this one do it. And, not gonna lie, what Barton did was fucking effective. Because I did sympathize with Frederic A LOT during this movie. And I realized as we neared the end, it became his story, his struggle. And the form mirrored this.
Of course, by the ACTUAL end, you realize you've been roped into his lies too. Even still, the final act of this thing is an emotional rollercoaster and I personally left with a pit in my stomach. Fantastic film.
I seriously just waited two weeks to watch this video because I trusted you that I needed to see this movie. Boy am I glad I went into it blind.
Sus
Paused the video after the spoiler warning and then saw the film. Just returning now after seing the movie....All i got to say is HOLY shit! I`ve never felt so dirty, manipulated, stupid, used before! I left this movie feeling down, and dirty...i really thought the Barkleys killed the kid! I was so sure, i was going to tell my friends about the awesome plot twist about how this crazy family killed their own son, but god damn if the movie didn`t take a 180! The imposter is seriously one fucked up manipulator, and the movie did an amazing job portraying that!
But so is the director. Brilliantly, though.
If you tell spoilers to your friends, you're a shitty friend
Thingsandstuff wasn`t hoing to tell them what the spiler was...i`m not that evil! I HATE it when assholes spoil things for me, be it games or movies, doesn`t matter!
Sbrff not that manipulated. the only reason the family took him was to hide their secret, and ironically that is how the murder was revealed. the murder was much worse that the identity theft which only happened because the family thought it would shelter them but it exposed them.
STOP TALKING ABOUT AMOGUS
I literally stopped this video to watch the movie then watched this and felt EXACTLY what you said. I love your work man seriously keep it up!
Same thing for me. Nice doc discovery, and analysis. Great job.
when the imposter is sus 😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂🤣🤣
He looks in and sees a bean getting thrown out of a spaceship with text saying he was not the impostor
This is the kind of UA-cam channel I want to support, I already watched this film even though I only discovered your channel yesterday. The longer, praising comments and the insanely high like to dislike ratio prove that you are doing a fantastic job and that lots of people like what you are doing. I hope to see more of your very informative and entertaining videos, keep it up!
JERMA
I...
I gotta say it.
I-I’m sorry, everyone
WHEN THE IMPOSTER IS SUS! 😳👀
Did what you said. stopped the video and then watched the movie. Just like you said, I got tricked. A couple of minutes before he even says it, I started thinking it myself "wait.. they probably killed him themselves" and then he just confirmed my 'theory' and I just felt a bit smart for figuring it out.. But.. well.. brilliant movie. Very interesting movie. Thanks for the tip.
+DeJayHank it's not proven that they killed him, which makes it even more unsettling...
+DeJayHank I think the point was that he was so good at lying that he can make you believe that they killed the kid. Since it isn't proven that the kid is dead, noone can know for sure/prove that the family did kill him. So the lying guy could be tricking all of us just like he tricked this family. Great film!
+DeJayHank Old comment to respond to but yeah. One of the FIRST things he says is that he didn't tell the cops he was sexually abused. He only confirmed what they were already thinking.
and that's why he's such a good liar. he tells the story in a way that you come to a conclusion and then he confirms it. making us feel like we were smart for figuring it out when in reality we are stupid for believing it.
Exactly. What did it for me was the way he introduced the druggie brother. It seeped into my mind right then.
Thanks for using a good mic right off the bat, appreciate it.
Everytime I watch a video of yours I feel compelled to reiterate: Your channel is AWESOME! Keep up the great work, man!
Hey, I'm absolutely loving your stuff. I watched your bayhem and just got hooked. I'm surprised there aren't more people watching you because you do a great job breaking down these filming techniques, and even though I'm not a film student I thoroughly enjoy watching them. A request though, could you release some of your own recommendation of movies? cause i'd believe you would have a great taste! I haven't heard of Imposter before and cause of you urging us in the video i actually went and watched it before. I've got to say, I definitely loved it, on my way to watch mother now so I can watch your analysis on that!
I hope you continue to make more of these, and for my sake, make them as rapidly as possible. Ive been a movie fan -like most people- all my life, but your unique and engaging videos have really made me a much more astute fan. Its taught me a lot of things, and even if its a subject i wouldn't normally follow, your videos engage my brain and keep me interested. One of the few channels i will watch regardless of what is being discussed.
You do a great job. Keep it up.
Shortly after discovering the channel I finished watching every single video exept of this one. Today i finally saw this brilliant movie, came straight back here and finished what I started a long time ago. Thanks for the awesome movie suggestion ;)
Please, keep on doing what you're doing. This channel is a great inspiration for everyone, especially those interested in the aesthetic side of film making.
Thank you so much!
There's a brilliant moment in the film when the mother says "My main motto in life was not to think", and Layton uses just for that moment the same shallow focus close up he uses for the imposter himself. Great movie.
Glad I stumbled upon this channel. Really great content. I too actually stopped the video to watch the film and came back to the video. Super polarizing film and also one of the most cinematically gorgeous documentaries I've ever seen.
Thanks for recommending this film, and thanks for the incredible youtube channel. I look forward to all your future work!!!
From Caracas, Venezuela here. Loved this video, great directorial choices. Great analysis from all your videos to. Keep them coming. All the best.
among
I've always been a huge fan of The Imposter and I've never known anyone to have seen it so it's really awesome to have found a youtube video analyzing such a fantastic film! Good job!
Where has this channel been all my life ??!?! LOVE THIS CHANNEL AAAAAH!!!!!!!
If you like this channel, you may wish to check out the following as well : )
- Rocketjump Film School
- Channel Criswell
The former offers some excellent look into how filmmakers approach cinematography, while the latter does excellent video essays on themes, symbols, and narrative analysis of movies. I hope you'll find these channels to be useful.
What a film! Never heard of it before now. Also great analysis of it too. Keep it up because not only are you explaining just how wonderful and well thought out certain films can be but your making me discover whole new films while you do it! So thanks
Such a brilliant documentary and I'm glad to see somebody else sees the genius in the way it was shot and edited. Absolute brilliance.
I finally watched this Doc cause it was the only Tony Zhou, EFAP I hadn't seen. Amazing. I have never watched a Doc and been so blown away! And I have edited documentaries for about six or seven years of my 15 year career as an editor. Your work Tony, is fantastic!
Okay, so what is fascinating to you about it? Can you give an example to a layman like me? I'm really curious. I just couldn't care less about his story, or about whether or not he was telling the truth... it's just unknowable, anyways.
I started this video, then listened to you and stopped, then watched the movie. I fell for it, just like you said. Amazing commentary.
I honestly didn't think this was a documentary. I took your word for it and went to Netflix and looked it up without viewing the genre and I thought "they really nailed the documentary feel of this"
Looking back I don't know how I didn't catch on sooner
Amogus
Man i gotta say i love your Videos they are THE best. I just cant express on how many levels you impressed me with each and everyone of your videos there is so much work in them and it is just done so well. What i think makes it so likeable is that, as i see it, you enjoyed doing those Videos as much as i enjoy watching them. I learn something why i enjoy watching movies. Sometimes i wish there was more but i hope you are proud of what you did here
sus
Movie worked brilliantly for me, glad you went through it, missed nearly all the editing on my first watch
Shadow is my favorite producer and dj. Adds a nice touch. Good stuff
I really appreciate the humor of your videos.
When you said im going to spoil everything i knew i had to watch this. Its was amazing thank you, iv watched it twice since, its a new documentary once you have seen it once you have a totally different perspective.
keep on doing these videos. They are great!
This documentary was good mate, loved it!
I had forgotten that I had seen The Imposter so I'm glad I pressed forth here. Great analysis!
This is an incredible channel
It just works, so damn well
When he said he would spoil everything I was like it's fine whatever but... something told me no no listen to him and watch the movie. I'm glad I listened to Tony and my gut instinct telling me to listen to him.
Going into this movie, i didn't know it was i documentary, i just thought it was a movie playing with documentarian effects to convince you it was a real story, so confusing
Glad I took your advice on this. Definitely the right to do a twist!
stopped the video, watched the movie, watched the video.
Film was pretty good, but your analysis made me tink about the whole story from a completly different perspective (thanks for that). So i definitively fell for it.
Awesome doc. Excellent analysis.
You're videos are fantastic. Please do more
Bro I just watched this movie without any context because you said so at the start.
I fell for it
It's interesting - I just watched a film called Under the Skin, and one of the things that made that film so creepy was how nobody ever looked into the lens. Even when they were facing the camera, they were always looking just-off to the side. It made the experience feel like we were trapped in the film. Scary shit. :D
Eli Johnson Just the score of that movie had me shitting myself
***** I don't know if you already know about the soundtrack but here it is in full
vimeo.com/97853822
Jerome khan
umm, no thank you
i want to sleep tonight hahaha
***** Oh god i thought you meant "shitting yourself" in a good way hahaha
5 years later, I finally get to watch this!
wow! Only youtuber who convinced me to actually pause the video and go watch something ( a documentary no less)....... When is your newest video coming out by the way?
he uploads every 2 months or so... which means that another video is likely in the works and on the way some time soon ; )
+Doodledibob Mb that's great
boogy indeed. Glad I was able to answer your question. : )
@@doodledibob lol
Dude your videos making my day! i love making film and you just do perfect analyzes that makes me think of so mouch more! I love your videos man! keep them coming and ill promise you that you will start to make a lot of money and get many view! You just got a new subscriber mate!
I wish there were more of these videos! I’ve watched all of them and it makes me so sad. :(
im binge watching every video of Every Frame a Painting and im glad Tony gave that warning in the start because i immediately stop ._.
Really awesome analysis. I noticed some of it but not like this! good work
I fell for it. The whole time I thought the doc was going for a "look what we can convince ourselves of when we really want to believe something" kinda message. Then the turn around on the family had me screaming "IT MAKES SO MUCH SENSE". They (possibly) saw this guy as a get out of jail free card.
I've never seen a plot twist in a documentary. It was so clever.
thats exactly what it was, when the fbi announced they were re-opening the case the uncle of the boy killed himself. Plus its kind of obvious when they accepted him, if you go and look at the actual photos of him and the little boy they look like the polar opposites of each other, theres no fucking way he would have been able to pull it off had the family had something to hide
Such a great film, such a great analysis!
I'm back after watching the film, and it was great, thanks for the recommendation, and the video of course. I loved how ambiguous it was/is, where even though the Imposter is a horrible person, the missing boy was probably killed, perhaps by a member of his family. It's kind of telling that the only one not in the film was the older brother, and he was the only one that acted differently to him, according to his story. At the same time though, it'd be easy to think that the family could have wanted the missing boy to be alive so bad that they would believe this French guy that looked and sounded nothing like their missing loved one. A very interesting documentary.
i watched this last night. so very good
Thank you for this video! This is one of the films I'm doing for my A level film studies exam
You made me watch "The Imposter"...
When I first saw the trailer, I did not want to watch it because it looked very boring... but I really wanted to watch this video of yours, so I decided to give in and watch the movie...
And now I am very glad I did!
Thank you very much for suggesting me to watch it! :)
Imposter is great, and I liked your analysis of it. I'm going to have to revisit this movie.
we miss you Tony. Come Back
Brilliant. Watched the movie just to watch the video and was not disappointed!
So gald to see you used Bronson as reference. Such a magnificent movie.
I need more of this in my life. Quit your job, sell your family, make more EFAP videos. By far the most informative film related videos on the internet.
You should check out Collative Learning. Those videos are also really informative.
Ricoffy Then patreon this guy.
Brilliant as always Tony, thank you so much. I immediately switched off and went to watch the movie after your warning at the start. That warning was so cryptic though that while watching I was not sure whether this was a fictional documentary or not. So much of the interviews seemed staged or 'acted' to me and the story was so fantastical that I thought perhaps it was made up - an interesting point that ties in with your question over how easily persuaded we are maybe! Keep up the great work.
Stranger than fiction
A huge Shadow fan! High five! I like it!
Thanks for the advice (Good Guy Tony), just added the video to "Watch Later". BRB!
WOW! it was awesome! this video too! I recommend you "The Wolfpack", even when it's not very cinematically clever as "The Imposter" it's a great story.
Regards from México.
Going to see this film was the most captivated I've ever felt at the cinema. My brother and I were bored one weekday afternoon and decided to go see something. This was showing, so I googled it and saw a couple of links to 4 or 5 star reviews. I didn't read them, but took them as evidence that it'd probably be worth sitting through. Because I had no idea what it was about before we got to the cinema, it was an incredible experience; horrifying, exciting, intruiging, just utterly spellbinding. Can't recommend this film highly enough. Just try to not read a synopsis before you see it.
i almost watched all of your videos in one day ! You teach me cinema. Thank you so much.
I love Chinatown - could you once do a video to explain me why ?:)
I've been watching your videos ...your analysis always surprises me ..in a good way
love the imposter and kudos for the #edgarwright appreciation
I think for myself and a lot of people were convinced that the family have something to do with this from the point where the information from the detective and FBI agent are revealed since they're the first who raise the suspicion (and have no interest on either side) around the Barclays (sister took him back home despite the medical confirmation, mother behavior and the revelations from the detective). Comments from the the imposter came quite later on and have little to do with the judgment of the viewers.
You don't think for yourself, you like to think that you think for yourself. If you thought for yourself you'd analyse the evidence and see that the families story constantly changes and they constantly act in wildly abnormal ways as told from multiple sources that aren't in contact with eachother. You'd see them revise the story that the FBI tells and not even attempt to revise the story about them tantruming to refuse a DNA test and instead come up with some passive comment to change the subject. The "I believe the family" route is the most sheepish, uncritical, moronic perspective possible to have. You can trust the fbi or not, you can completely discredit the PI, sure, whatever, but if you actually believe that family than you are not a critical thinker and you are in fact very, very gullible.
How is this "falling for it"? "Falling for it" is when you think of something false as true or vice versa. In this movie you think of something that's possible as true. The imposter proposed a possible explanation which was neither proven nor disproven.
In my opinion, because the possible explanation, only in retrospect, makes no sense whatsoever. So, here's the narrative he wants me to accept, as far as I can tell. The real kid is killed, by that one guy and maybe with the assistance of someone else, and the family, or at least the sister, knows about it. Thus, when they hear the kid is alive, the sister knows the claim is false, but she travels out to pick up the imposter, priming him to succeed in the impersonation. This is the crux of the claim, because the known about murder is meant to explain the details she gave him as well as their supposed foolishness in failing to identify this person as fake. If the sister specifically didn't know, then this explanation explains nothing, and is just as possibly true as it was before we knew anything about the story.
So, the critical flaw here is, why did the sister do that? The ostensible reason, the intuitive leap we make, is that she brought him home to prove he wasn't dead, to clear the murderer of suspicion. This was an amazing opportunity, a way to literally get away with murder. But motive is fundamentally illogical. No one suspected anyone of murder in any serious way at that point. The kid's death happened years ago, there wasn't an investigation, and whatever trail existed had gone thoroughly cold. Bringing the imposter in only does what it actually did in real life. It at the very least brings this rando into the fold of their murder pact, and we can reasonably expect some variety of investigative heat to return to the investigation. Arguably, in this scenario, the sister had to check this guy out, just to keep up appearances, but she had a whole flight to work out the fact that saying, "Nope, that's not my brother," was a fully expected reaction.
I mean, Jesus, just look at all the places this could have, and kinda did, go horribly wrong for them. Once she says, "Yep, that's my Brother," anyone subsequent saying, "No, we have conclusive proof that it isn't your Brother," casts her and her family under a ton of suspicion. And that could have happened immediately, because he actually did fail to identify one of those pictures. More suspicious officials or a guy with worse memory and the plan collapses. He was made subject to a polygraph test. Have him always fail it and, again, tons of suspicion. But we don't have to play games with hypotheticals, because he actually was outed, and not, of course, by anyone in the family. And now we're standing around here talking about how this might be a murder family, or at best a family of dupes.
So, while it is indeed theoretically possible that someone in the family killed the kid, and while there might be the occasional thing in the movie might orient you in that direction, a lot of the ideas in the dominant narrative of that murder, the narrative the movie is pushing you towards, are highly illogical ones.
+Edgar Nackenson How can you go on a four-paragraph diatribe analysing Bourdin's claims rather than doing any sort of background digging?
The police aren't pursuing an investigation because the brother's dead and the family un-cooperative. It's a waste of resources. The prevailing theory, nay practically the only theory anyone has bothered to put forth for his death is his brother. You don't think the family would have been more interested in searching for Nicholas had he just disappeared? No care for closure?
@@teebonesteak8015 thanks for having some fucking sense, the response to this fucking movie is embarassing, so many people with no fucking clue how to analyse or actually think about anything who are mesmerized by the concept of being lied to but are too dumb to actually think critically about the unbiased evidence that is there that still makes the family look incredibly guilty.
It's obviously not true. And he doesn't think so either. He is manipulating you for shits and giggles because that's what he does and what he says he does from the getgo. The literal thesis of the alternate point makes no sense from the getgo, but you're so fixed up in the doubt of how something like this could happen you forget this guy is literally a professional liar.
Thank you so much - awesome analysis. I saw the movie and was left feeling really confused about who to believe. Never caught on that that was the whole point - to feel manipulated like the family was.
I'm studying this in film class and we also analysed this. There's an interview where Layton confirms that he did want to trick the audience the way it was explained in this video. Super cool director
Just like others in the comments here, I paused the video, watched the film, and came back to finish this upload. I'm still getting over the tornado of emotions and deception I just watched unfold before me.
All of these points are almost exactly how House of Cards works
It's an excellent drama/thriller, and therefore manages to strike several of the same tones as Fincher's work, though there are some key differences. Most notably, I would point to the greater prevalence of handheld shots (which as Tony correctly pointed out in his essay on Fincher, the latter employs only rarely) and the key difference in how characters tell the story. In HoC, it's mostly dialogue, with some very clever camera shots and excellent writing, and only the occasional monologue from Spacey. I also cannot recall a single POV shot from House of Cards of the top of my head, though it has been a while since I last saw it.
I love DJ Shadow. And how its in most of these film critiques.
this is one of my favorite movies
Please make as many videos as you can. You can tell you put work into them. Thanks.
No amogus
Good choice of music my friend
You had me watch a whole documentary, that's quite impressive...
My my you do love DJ Shadow.
I was planning on binging you uploads and take notes because it interests me. First time that I actually paused a video that told me to watch something first if I hadn't yet. Glad I did. And holy fuck I didn't even know I was being conned by the villain until I watched your video.
Also, I thought this was a fictional documentary. I'm still confused about a lot of things here.
To this day you can see people who didn't understand the entire point of the documentary and it's so unfortunate. The lowest common denominator are out there defaming this family because there wasn't text at the end saying "See! He could fool you, too!"
Yea it got me big time. i don't regret watching this movie. Thank you for showing it to me :)
AMOGSUS
Just finished watching it. Unfortunately I didn't listen to your warning and I had watched your video before about half a year ago, but didn't get round to watching till now.
And you know what? There where several times when they got me. Even though I knew some of the tricks I still sort fell to Frédéric Bourdin or the Filmmakers sway even if it was just for a couple of seconds.
That said in my head I'm still trying to maintain some distance at the end because I'm still being relayed this story through the this lens.
Man I do hope they the child one day.
I just watched the movie just to then be able to watch this video and it was totally worth it. Both the movie as well as the video are awesome (and I usually don't like those documentary-type movies)!
+MadE I just found out that it's not fiction. Oh my fucking god
+MadE That got me too. I didn't even know the film was a documentary until the last few minutes. I feel like a complete idiot.
+Todd Bollinger But I'm glad I watched the movie before finding out about that, it made the revelation much more effective.
Good video. Very nice analysis, it was good having stuff that I hadn't consciously realized brought to my attention.
I'm curious though, what do you think in regards to the alleged killing?
I judged the sister to be the most sincere. I think she really believed, or allowed herself to believe it was Nicholas. I believed her when she recounted that she couldn't sleep for two days before arranging a flight to Spain on short notice, and the fact that she did this to me suggests she believed her brother had really been found.
The mother I thought knew something. In the stock footage at the airport she looked rather nonplussed and the testimonies she gave in her interview were delivered lacking emotion and she continued looking away as she spoke.
You've altered my perception of film in such fantastic ways.
Thank you for this gold you offer among chunks of coal.
They used this effect in the TV Show Star Trek Deep Space Nine episode called 'In The Pale Moonlight' to focus on the moral ethical crisis the captain was having over war decisions. Great effect when used correctly.
I think I was one of the few people who was already familiar with this unusual case before I saw the movie. I first read about it in the extensive New Yorker article by David Grann called "The Chameleon". It was with that knowledge that I went in to watching this movie, a movie very obviously edited for those who are not already familiar with the story.
I hesitate to even call it a documentary because a documentary is supposed to be a piece of journalism. This movie seemed to be walking a tightrope in terms of the ethical standards typical of good journalism. It was extremely manipulative and after watching it I felt very off-put and kind of mad.
Your analysis of The Imposter has made me appreciate it much more than I did initially. I never doubted that it was a beautifully made movie, but I never picked up on just how exactly I was being manipulated, and that this isn't so much a documentary as it is a movie specifically made to manipulate us. The movie itself is as much a manipulation as anything Frédéric Bourdin did. And knowing that, well, that kinda makes it alright in my book.
Having said that I still have a lot of misgivings about the movie and especially the debate that surrounds it. It is very frustrating to see people talk about the events that happened *only* in the context of this movie. This isn't a piece of fiction, the movie doesn't exist in a bubble, there are other resources out there about this case that can enlighten us about the facts. Some characters in this story, such as FBI Agent Nancy Fisher who is portrayed as kind of dimwitted, whereas in the original New Yorker piece she pretty much understands from the get-go that he is not who he says he is. The most maddening discrepancy is when the movie fails to explain what happened during the lie detector tests Beverly had taken.
I wonder what you might think of Foxcatcher. In some ways it reminded me of this story, if only because it was another true crime tale that I was already familiar with. I'm less certain with that movie who it is supposed to be for. Is it for the person who already knows what is going to happen? Or is for the people in the dark. The movie I think works both ways but it is without a doubt a different viewing experience for the different audiences. I found the movie steeped deep in foreshadowing, every action and word that came out of Du Pont's mouth had that edge of menace. Everything leading up to it's inevitable outcome. My wife, when she watched it with me, had no idea what was going to happen.
Foxcatcher kind of shook us both to the core but for different reasons I think. I think she felt the same way I felt when I first watched Woody Allen's "Match Point", I was totally caught off-guard by what happened in that movie, especially since I've been a life-long Woody Allen fan and was very familiar and *comfortable* with his work. In the end that movie reminded me a lot of Kubrick's Barry Lyndon. Both about sociopath imposters pretending to be someone they are not, much like Foxcatcher, much like The Imposter.
Would love to hear your take on Foxcatcher, I think it was a very daring movie in terms of it's framing and choreography. The movie is very intensely focused on these three characters to the point where things happen off-screen where in most movies they wouldn't. Like the scene where DuPont gives Mark the book and binoculars, the camera stays on the characters as the items are handed off-screen before even being seen, or when DuPont puts the medals up on the shelf, we don't actually see that moment, the camera stays on DuPont while he does it. I think there was a beautiful intensity in the relationship between the two brothers that relied on so much being unsaid. The first wrestling sequence was amazing, it was an entire dialogue without any words being spoken.
Anyway, keep up the good work, I'm enjoying the series very much and I hope to see more of it soon!
I read. Very interesting.
_"I hesitate to even call it a documentary because a documentary is supposed to be a piece of journalism"_
I desagree with that rigth away.
+Sir Mildred Pierce popc52 is correct - it's a common fallacy that documentaries are considered "journalism". Journalism implies a balanced, researched, fact-base, sourced approach to telling a story. Most journalism doesn't hold up to that level of impartiality, let alone documentaries. The greatest lie a documentary film makes, is that it is the "truth". But documentaries rely on exactly the same type of psychological mindset in the viewer as the imposter in the film, Frederic, does with the people he tries to fool, and he uses a very similar method - specifically he allows people to make the assumptions he wants them to and just reinforces it. With docs, so many people believe they're "true" simply because they're documentaries, that assertions made by the filmmakers (along with their agendas or biases, subconscious or not) are just taken at face value.
Push in on most docs, and like sticking a needle in a ballon, they pop -- if you're lucky, something closer to a deeper truth will spill out.