Yes, this film certainly brings out the handkerchiefs, but why is everyone so oblivious of how poorly it was made? The editing was really amateurish and hard to watch, and the inserts from the home movies were carelessly edited in and even glib in tone. This film was so maudlin and over-the-top, couldn't the director tone it down a bit? The story was wrenching enough.
shareCould not agree more. It's an amazing, heartwrenching story that did not need such a heavy-handed, overly biased approach. Not to mention the fact that the entire film is cut like it was a trailer. A 95 minute trailer.
shareI must agree with you. I found the story to be surreal, however wish the film's execution definitely took away from the story in my opinion. At moments I felt myself unable to focus and actually grab on to anything the interviewee's were saying, almost as if what they had to say was unimportant, because everyone's words were so overlapped. I felt myself taken out of the film and instead of spending time with family members and friends telling us of their memories of Andrew, I would just wait for the scene to end so I could find out what happened next. I feel that without the claustrophobic editing I would have been more engaged with Andrew's memories and what he meant to everyone around him.
Unlike some other comments, I had no problem with the 'home-video' feel of the movie. That's what the movie was intended to be! The cutting however did not make this a home movie. I wish there was some room to breath between all the information thrown at the viewer.
I think it was supposed to be "amateurish", appearing similar to a "home movie" like the ones they made together as children. The story itself IS over the top, so unbelievable, I don't know that it could actually be toned down. I think the reason it was so wrenching (beyond the obvious) is because this wasn't a "glossy" film, but gritty and accessible and oh so personal. I stopped complaining about my terrible week immediately after seeing this movie. I can't remember a movie making me this sad or angry before. Stranger than fiction, indeed.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I have to agree somewhat with the OP. I didn't mind the fast cuts but the audio overlapping at times made it tricky to hear what was being said and confusing. Quite understandably biased in tone against Canadian Law procedure, this is one documentary that would be impossible to hold a neutral position from the film-maker.
shareI concur. It's an awful harrowing story and hugely shocking but as a film I thought the editing was poor and the tone often wrong.
The director shouldn't be immune to criticism just because of the sensitive subject matter of the film.
http://helloyouitsme.com
Agree with the OP. The story was extremely powerful and all the elements were there: Interviews with friends and family, bringing Andrew back to life through the home movie clips and, of course, the premise that Andrew's best friend makes a movie for his son... But the editing and score, even the narration was completely over-the-top and sensationalist.
Also agree with Devo McDuff: The director shouldn't be immune to criticism just because of the sensitive subject matter of the film.
Funny, my first response to this film was that it was such a well made documentary.
share