Similar to the significance of the pre-text and
classification of genre that we saw in Cat's Cradle and The
Things They Carried, the term "documentary" is equally as
weighted in regards to Grizzly Man. A documentary, as we
discussed in class, is completely "true" and based on
"facts." This particular definition from thefreedictionary.com I found
very interesting, "Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or
inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film."However, one could argue
that though director Werner Herzog did not "insert fictional matter,"
there is clear editorializing in the way that the main character Timothy
is portrayed. There is clear purpose in the order of the clips, Herzog's
commentary through out, and general construction of Timmy in the eyes
of the viewer.
Furthermore, in Herzog's NPR interview he kept talking about his "vision" for the film. I found it interesting that Herzog emphasized his "vision" because one would think that documentaries should be created without much vision from the director in order to maintain the integrity of the plain facts and truth that one is trying to portray. To be fair, this is seemingly impossible because directors have a lot of power over our perception when it comes to editing and choices about the film, but it does make me more skeptical about what I am thinking and believing. Furthermore, I found it strange that Herzog had never met Timmy before and only had seem film and heard the tapes. It seems hard to fully understand and portray a man that you have never met and this ads to my skepticism over aspects of the film. It is clear that this class is making me more cynical :) but more so I think I am more of a conscious and active reader/watcher.
**sorry i dont know why this is white and i cant fix it
The fact that this is a "documentary" is already manipulative because it makes us think that we will be given blatant facts with no alterations. This is clearly not the case because no matter who directs the film, it will lose some of its integrity. I think your point that Herzog never met Tim brings in the question about authority. The way Herzog talks about Tim and portrays him throughout makes it seem like they were good friends or at least acquaintances. How and why did Herzog get the "OK" to spearhead this project? Does someone who never knew the star of the documentary have enough credibility to fully expose his life to the public?
ReplyDeleteWe know that during his various expeditions Tim took over 100 hours of film. Much of this film was probably of the bears, foxes, landscape, and other scenery, but a decent amount was also probably monologues and self imposed interviews. Herzog most definitely spent hours on end picking through Tim's tapes, contemplating which clips were the funniest, most inspiring, raunchy, and interesting to add to the actual documentary. The Tim we see in "Grizzly Man" is a crazy Tim, but it is only a very small portion of the real Timothy Treadwell.