Flick of the Day: The Imposter

It is rare for a film to truly surprise you. Very often you know at least a brief outline of the plot and who is in it and you may even have read a few reviews.  This has its advantages of course, one obvious one being you get to choose the films you want to see. However it does mean that film will rarely shock you or challenge what you thought the film was going to be about. I had the pleasure this evening of seeing the latest film from British documentary film-maker Bart Layton without any prior knowledge of the subject matter and it made for an excellent viewing experience.

In 1994 in San Antonio, Texas,  13 year old Nicholas Barclay telephoned home from a basketball court a few miles from his house. His older brother Jason answered and Nicholas asked for a ride home. Their mother who worked nights was asleep in the next room. Jason didn't like to wake her so he told Nicholas to walk.  Nicholas was never seen again and no trace of him was ever found despite an exhaustive search. He remained on the missing persons list as the years went by. Three years later the Spanish police picked up a young boy who was monosyllabic and cowering in the doorway of a telephone kiosk. After a lengthy interview, the boy revealed that he was an American who had been abducted three years previously. He claims to be Nicholas Barclay. Despite the improbable nature of such an eventuality, Nicholas sister Carey travels to Spain and confirms the boy's identity and he is quickly reunited with his family. Of course we the audience know that this is not Nicholas, this is the work of serial French impostor Frederic Bourdin. It soon becomes apparent to all that whoever this man is, it isn't the long lost Nicholas, including the FBI special agent charged with interviewing him. There are so many inconsistencies in his tale and basic flaws like a difference in eye colour, that it is obvious. However, this is when the tale shifts on you and this is why it is great film making. The family refuse to provide DNA samples to prove the fraud and keep the impostor as their son. It is almost as if they have a reason for wanting to believe the lie, as if perhaps there is more to Nicholas disappearance then it first appears.

Perhaps the strongest element of Bart Layton's extraordinary film is the decision to lay out the tale from the outset and allow the audience to make their own mind up about what happened. It creates tension in a story that is tension filled already giving the film the kind of dramatic conclusion normally scene in Hollywood thrillers.  We are also left with the feeling that neither side is telling the absolute truth but that Frederic Bourdin is an inveterate liar with a deep undiagnosed psychological problem. He is a chameleon who never really reveals his true self on screen. 

The truth becomes something which you never have a grasp on, a tricky path for a documentary to follow. It is at times deeply sad, at times quite unintentionally humorous such is the bizarre nature of some of the characters who populate this story, but it is always compelling. I normally avoid any documentary where actors are used to dramatize events that were never captured on film but the clever mixture of this method with interview footage with all of the main parties give the film a dramatic weight.

 An extraordinary story and a very good film, I saw The Impostor as it was screening as the opening film of the IFI's Stranger Than Fiction documentary film festival. If you do have the opportunity to see it, I strongly urge you to take it.

Flick of The Day: Catfish

The perils of the Internet age are not something that has been really examined in any detail by the Hollywood mainstream. Indeed technology in general has been poorly treated, with David Fincher's The Social Network being the only mainstream release to look at social networking, and even then it was more the form of a hagiography then anything else. Today's flick of the day, Catfish, would seem to be quite a welcome change. A documentary that examines the perils of an online relationship.

Catfish

Nev Schulman is a New York based photographer, specialising in dance portraits, who lives with his brother Ariel and Henry Joost, both film-makers. One day out of the blue, Nev receives a paiting of one of his photographs from an 8 year old girl in rural Michigan, Abby Pierce, a child prodigy. They become Facebook friends, broadening into a family network that includes Abby's Mother, Angela, her attractive 19 year old sister Megan and her father Vince. Nev becomes enchanted by Megan, a talented songwriter and dancer and he begins a long distance relationship via Facebook and telephone, the tools of the modern day romantic. His brother Ariel and Henry decide to document the relationship and this forms the basis of the the film. As the relationship develops, they discuss meeting in person and Megan sends him copies of her songs to listen to. However Nev discovers that these songs are taken from someone else's work on YouTube. Hurt and worried she has lied about other things, he wants to call it off. However Ariel and Henry convince him to continue. They decide to travel to Michigan to confront Megan and the family and get to the bottom of the mystery with a shocking though not unexpected conclusion.

Catfish is an engrossing film if nothing else. It has the kind of fiendishly addictive storyline that drives so many great documentary films. You really feel like you can't take your eyes off it. There have been allegations, naturally that the film is not true to life. You can draw your own conclusions but personally I would be of the opinion that the events are portrayed as they occurred, though perhaps not filmed at the moment they occurred. Also, it would be fair to say that the film-makers are somewhat disingenuous in their actions. I think any logical thinking person would have guessed what was at the end of the tunnel early on, and that they choose to keep themselves out of the loop as long as possible to make the film more entertaining and it is difficult to argue that it makes for compelling viewing.

Ultimately though the directors seem to have missed the point of the story. They seem focused on showing how shocking they believe the ending is and miss the fact that it is a sad story more then anything else and never investigates why people choose to misrepresent themselves on the internet if there is no monetary gain.  This wider context would have been useful and again I come back to my earlier point about how they allowed themselves to be taken in for the purposes of the film. I firmly believe this and it becomes obvious at the end, who is exploiting who here? The big city hip artistes or the small town loners?

That said, the film is definitely worth seeing if only for the many questions it raises, surely the sign of a worthy documentary. While not as good as the promo below makes out, it is still intriguing.

Flick of The Day: George Harrison Living in the Material World

The Beatles are one of the cultural touchstones of the 20th Century and their story has been told many times across numerous formats. It is refreshing then for director Martin Scorsese to look at this in a different light by examining the life and times of perhaps the most interesting member of the group, George Harrison in his new documentary Living in the Material World, which is today's flick of the day.

Living in the Material World

Music, and particularly that which he enjoyed in the 60's and 70's has long been an important part of the work of Martin Scorsese. There is an obvious love there for his favourite artists which comes through in his use of music. This passion is put to good use in this enjoyable and in depth look at George Harrison's life. It opens with his youth in Liverpool, a warm and loving family upon which he built his life. Moving on to his life with the Beatles, we see in depth how it shaped him as a man. Each of The Beatles look impossibly young at the beginning and haggard by the end, perhaps a metaphor for their time together. It becomes apparent that it was but a small part of Harrison's life. For his part, he set out to live his life in a spiritual manner and his life after The Beatles was at the heart of this. Scorsese is at pains to emphasise this aspect of his life and it shines through as the strongest aspect of the film. 

If Harrison had a credo, it was to live life to the fullest and just the once. He would probably have no time at all for people sitting around dissecting his every decision. However, this is the level of depth the documentary goes into without really giving us great insight. There is a wealth of footage, and any fan will find much to enjoy as each major event is well documented and ultimately what you are left with is a portrait of a man who lived life to the full, made the best of his gifts and was rich in friends. The number of people who speak of their love for George is an incredible cross section of talented individuals. From Eric Clapton to The Pythons to Jackie Stewart, he seemed to attract people from all walks of life.

All in all, this is a worthy look at an interesting man and if the picture has a flaw, it is that despite all of the footage and the interviews and an obvious attempt to examine his spirituality, you aren't left with a complete portrait. Yet it comes in at over 3 hours and 20 minutes running time, leaving you with a feeling that focusing on less in more detail might have created a fuller portrait of the man. That said, there is much here to enjoy and Scorsese seems to really care about Harrison, rarely is their a negative word about the man. We never really examine his heavy drug use post The Beatles and rarely are events stitched together with the kind of cogency required of great documentaries. However, it is fascinating all the same and well worth a look.

Flick of The Day: Some Kind of Monster

Music documentaries can be a bland affair. So many of the recent offerings feel more like extended promotions for the artist involved with very few getting to the heart of the creative process or of the artists career. This is largely due to the fact that modern artists are smart enough or indeed their management are smart enough to ensure that they are not see in their true guise,  no matter how childishly egotistic it may be. Gone are the days of watching Mick Jagger standing very still as the violence erupts around him at Altamount in the Maysles brothers Gimme Shelter or the gradual unravelling of Bob Dylan: Folk Hero in D.A Pennebaker's Don't Look Back. It is a delight then to announce that American metal band Metallica are just about gormless enough to allow the camera's access to their inner workings during a particularly difficult period. For comedy value alone, today's flick of the day is Some Kind of Monster.

Some Kind of Monster

In 2001, American rock band Metallica who have sold 90 million records in their 30 year career found themselves at a crossroads. Their long time bass player had quit the group just as they were to start recording their first new album in 3 years and the camera crew follow them for the next two years as they struggle to get along with each other and record an album. Their management bring in therapist to help them deal with each other at a cost of $40,000 a month, with ridiculous consequences. The lead singer, James Hetfield checks himself into a rehab clinic and his bandmates do not see him for the best part of a year. The drummer, Lars Ulrich leads an ill judged campaign against internet file sharing. All the while they bicker like children and reveal themselves to be extremely self centred and controlling. Oh, yes and eventually they record a so-so album sans guitar solos and recruit a new bass player. 

The most compelling aspect of the film is how unintentionally revealing the band are of themselves. Ulrich comes across as deeply self absorbed and somebody who enjoys the wealth his music gives him as much as anything else despite his attempts to position himself otherwise. There is one scene in particular where he plays the new album for his father who rubbishes it and their relationship is particularly revealing. He struggles to get along with his lead singer at one point launching into a rant about how controlling he is before getting nose to nose and screaming "Fuck!". Hetfield is sombre throughout yet deeply controlling. Upon his return from rehab, the group switch to a noon to 4pm work schedule to allow him time with his children however Hetfield decrees that nobody else may review his vocal recordings after he leaves. All the while, the guitarist, Kirk Hammett remains quiet and only once does he burst forth to complain that the other two do not listen to him.

This aside, the band often come across as completely ridiculous. Some scenes would be fit for This Is Spinal Tap. There is one scene in which they decide that nobody is allowed  to comment on what anybody else is working on and their round table lyrics writing sessions would leave you with the impression that the creative process is not what it once was, with some laughably bad writing. My personal favourite is the scene where they are required to record a promo for a national radio competition by their management which they feel is beneath them, asking would Bono and The Edge do it before proceeding to take the piss out of it.

                                            [Metallica is asked to record a radio promo] 

                          Lars Ulrich: Hey it's Lars from Metallica. I'm about to stick 50 grand up your ass... 

                                            James Hetfield: ...One dollar at a time.

If the band do not cover themselves in glory then their therapist, Phil makes himself look very foolish indeed. Sporting a bizarre choice in knitwear, he spouts inane babble and seems determined to keep them in therapy despite their requests to cease. Whether they actually learn anything about themselves is a moot point.

All in all, a compelling way to spend a couple of spare hours, whether you are a fan of Metallica and their music or not. It is great psychological drama and would be compelling if they were learning impaired garbage collectors rather then wealthy musicians. 

Flick of The Day: Senna

The documentary film has long been a difficult cinemagoer. A trip to the cinema is by definition a wish to be entertained not lectured. However in recent years, thanks to a gaggle of truly superb documentaries such as American: The Bill Hicks Story, Touching the Void and Anvil, a documentary is now a seriously entertaining and compelling proposition. Today's flick of the day is a recent arrival in cinemas that delivers on all counts, Senna.

senna (2 Dvd) Italian Import

Told by the man himself in his own words, Senna is the life story of Ayrton Senna, the Brazilian Formula 1 racing driver who came from Brazil and conquered the world of Motorsport, winning 3 world titles before his life was tragically cut short in a crash at the San Marino Grand Prix in 1994. The film begins as Senna moves to Europe for the first time in 1978 as Go-Kart champion in search of a bigger stage. Before long he is in the highest form of the sport, Formula 1, joining the struggling Toleman team in 1984. It quickly becomes apparent that Ayrton is a special talent, in an early race at Monaco he guides his car to second place in the rain and is hot on the heels of the leader and soon to be nemesis Alain Prost when the race is stopped at Prost's behest because of the rain. 

The relationship between the two is central to the film. Initially grudgingly respectful, this rapidly spirals into enmity when the two becomes team mates for Mclaren in 1988. At 1989 Japanese Grand Prix, Prost drives Senna off the circuit knowing it will guarantee him a World title before Senna returns the favour at the same Grand Prix in 1990. Their duelling and bitter rivalry drives the film forward but in truth Prost is not the villain of the piece. This falls to Jean-Marie Balestre, the man in charge of Formula 1 and who at various points seems to favour his countryman Prost much to the irritation of Senna. The level of political chicanery and outright corruption is shocking at times. 

However most shocking of course is the danger that was involved in the sport at this time. With cars going faster and faster on circuits not built for it and safety regulations that are laughably lax, tragedy was inevitable. The film builds to its climax in this vain with the San Marino Grand Prix in May 1994. A cursed weekend, it began with a horrid crash for driver Rubens Barrichello from which he emerges unscathed, before Austrian driver Roland Ratzenberger is killed on Saturday. We see Ayrton's reaction to all of this, obviously unsettled he decides to race on Sunday wearing an Austrian flag under his suit in honour of Ratzenberger. As Senna entered the high-speed Tamburello corner on lap 6, the car left the track at high speed, hitting the concrete retaining wall. He was just 34 when he died.

The true strength of the movie is the wealth of footage they make use of, enabling Senna to tell his own story. Almost everything seems to have been documented from drivers briefings prior to races to behind the scenes discussions and shocking footage of the aftermath of crashes. The accident suffered by driver Martin Donnelly is particularly difficult to watch. Not only is everything documented, the various camera men took great care to shoot with an eye for cinematography and it gives even the smallest of a scenes a cinematic feeling. Ultimately, this is not the story of why Senna was a great racing driver but why he was a great man, it is a film that is watchable even by somebody with no interest in the sport.

It is a profoundly moving story all the same. Having battled against the blatant cheating of his main rival and the inane bureaucracy of his sport, to be cut down in his prime by a car that was fatally flawed is a bad end. By the time this occurs, you feel you have the measure of the man and how he lived his life. Director Asif Kapadia has created a compelling and ultimately tragic documentary. You really must see it.