MovieChat Forums > The Laramie Project (2002) Discussion > A genuine attempt smothered with Hollywo...

A genuine attempt smothered with Hollywood cheese


I really hate this movie with its American Beauty-style soundtrack with all of its big Hollywood names with their stereotypical Hollywood-style acting and quirky editing. It's like watching Six Feet Under under the pretense of a documentary - it stinks.

They could have shown the original interviews instead with the real people of Laramie and they would have ended up with something significantly more genuine and dramatic than they ever could have achieved with this flashy HBO-saturated crap.

reply

Agreed.

reply

[deleted]

I still found it pretty powerful. Perhaps would have worked better with real people, but then would they have been the same if filmed?

If it had been fiction I would have agreed with you, but the fact that it was real made it powerful, and I don't think the soundtrack or the acting detracted from it too much. Although ironically, it was the actors that I didn't recognise that I thought did better than the "names".

reply

I agree too. It really is a terrible and genuinely emotional story, but the way this was done just came across as sickly and manipulative to me. Americans can't seem to do serious documentaries or movie docs without going over board. Everything is so over dramatic - subtletly is far more effective in my opinion. For all the star cast, the acting was so over the top that it was cringe worthy. The format ddn't work for me either. Either do a straight documentary, or a dramatisation based on the known facts. To have actors come in to act out a documentary....just didn't do it for me. Knowing the faces made it less believable and sincere to me.

reply

they didn't film the interviews with the real people they just audio recorded them. I should know. I was there. I thought it was wonderfully acted and maybe exagerated at some points but sometimes you have to exagerate to get the point across. I do have to agree with you on one point however. The more " names" you put in movies like this the more cheesey and insincere it turns out.

reply

You guys do know this was a play first, right? That Moises Kaufman intended it to be a theatrical event, while also illuminating the terrible true story? It wasn't meant to be a documentary, but documentary theatre, which is different. This is simply a film version of a play, not a documentary. Hence the theatricality.

reply

I think that the format is really interesting....someone on another thread said that movies that are 'documentaries' are usually comedies (mockumentaries) but this one wasn't.

Also...whereas as it WOULD be interesting to see the real people, let's face it - if this were a straight-up documentary, it likely would not have had as large an audience. Sure, things like March of the Penguins and Fahrenheit 911 were big successes, not just for being documentaries but for any movie, really - however these are exceptions, not the rule.

And, as others have pointed out, the interviews were audio recordings which formed the basis of Moises Kaufman's play....of which this is film version. It would not have been possible to make this movie the way you want. Isn't it better for the story to be told at all, even if it might not be told in the "most effective" way?

reply

It's not just the fact that it was fake that bothered me. I'm complaining specifically with respect to the execution. Every famous face in this movie referred back to their typical movie personas, executing their typical Hollywood body language. It's like each one was shooting for an Oscar, only they didn't realize how much of a Hollywood jackass it made them look when trying to portray a real, genuine event.

reply

The scene with the "angels" is cringe worthy.

reply

Agreed. Unknown actors would have worked much better.

reply