MovieChat Forums > Anytown, USA (2005) Discussion > My prob with docs like this **SPOILERS**

My prob with docs like this SPOILERS

posted 15 years ago by schwatime
2 replies | jump to latest

It's the manipulation of the audience by the way the stories are told. Basically this was a blowout election. The characters were quite interesting, but still: blowout election, and it's hard to believe that the filmmakers didn't know that was going to be the outcome when it was being filmed. Yet there was a clear attempt to make you think that it was going to be close--or that Dave might even win. And Dave's tumor coming back, while admittedly given a few seconds of attention well into the film, was pretty much ignored. You see much footage of energetic Dave, yet no mention of the elephant in the room: the probability that, even if he were to get elected, he wouldn't be able to do much mayoring.

I have nothing against people taking real footage and editing it to tell any story that can be coaxed from the footage. I really don't. I love those trailers like Brokeback [insert movie title here] that you see on Youtube, for example. (True, they start with fiction footage rather than nonfiction, but the fun is in the misdirection.) But when I'm trying to decide whether to watch a documentary that does that, I'd sure like some advance warning about it--a rating system or something. I'm sure that--if there are enough people on this board for this to get a response--someone's going to say that *all* documentaries do that to some extent. Perhaps, but I'm talking about degree here.

Side comment: I feel just awful about Dave. I know he was doomed in any case, but it's such a shame he couldn't have won.

[–] howcanyoubesure 14 years ago

Gotta trust people's capacity to be at least as critical as you.

I also think everyone else is an idiot, but until they show up and do something too stupid I ignore them.

[–] tyboulder 7 years ago

*spoilers below*

I share your opinion regarding a truthful telling of a story in documentary film. There are docs that manipulate both the story, and also the retelling of it, which definitely crosses the line you mention.

The documentary Dear Zachary has received a lot of attention in large part due to the way it was told. They follow the same template that Dateline uses, turning a genuinely tragic story into horrific, suspenseful thriller. To me that feels like betraying the truth, if just in spirit.

With is film, from the beginning it felt like a tongue-in-cheek political satire. It followed a real story and the characters were solid, but the ending seemed to be more a part of the plot structure than a significant theme or climax. It was the process that felt like the real focus, so the little bit of uncertainty at the end (knowing afterward that Dave didn't really have a chance) didn't feel like a betrayal of the film's core message. It certainly did have a sad epilogue, though. I fully agree with you on that.

It's amazing that a movie with the video production quality of a 1980's VHS dub can still hold people's attention. It's more evidence that a great story can ultimately triumph over everything.