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.
shareanother idiot to the list. you are only here to draw attention to yourself. go jump off a bridge if you want attention.
"You only need matches and balls and I got those"
[deleted]
I agree with you,it felt like I was watching a movie made by a college student in film school.The problem with the whole thing was that it was kind of bias and some stuff could have been cut out along with the rewinds which were kind of annoying.What makes it such a great documentary is the trait that also weakens it as a documentary.The writer/director should have been the one interviewed should have helped with the documentary but he shouldn't have made the documentary.
shareClearly Kurt is an amateur film maker and from what I understand, he never intended to make a movie that would reach a wide audience. The film was supposed to be a visual letter to Zachary using the collection of home movies, collected interviews with friends/family etc, about his father. It was simply supposed to detail his life and paint a portrait of the beautiful person he was, so that Zachary could grow up with knowledge about who his father was and why he was no longer around.
As you saw yourself, what was initially a very sad story turned into an absolutely gut wrenching tale, and I think he probably realized the value the film had for public audiences. Despite the harrowing nature of the tale, the story ends of a very positive note, and does a great job highlighting and shining a light on a lot of the underlying problems with the legal/child protection systems in North America. It also shows how individuals can have a big impact in fighting for change in their communities.
In my honest opinion, his amateur style did not make this movie "hard to watch" at all. In fact I thought the lack of polish and budget gave it a beautiful, authentic touch. I think Kurt really did a great job telling the story, and most importantly, showing viewers what a great guy "Bags" was and what strong, inspiring, and truly beautiful people the Bagby family are as a whole.
well said MisterMovieGuy..
I thought it was excellent.
I couldn't agree with you more. There was so much of it that was right. But this was a story that needed no fancy editing or Python-esque animation to make it powerful. They could have scaled back so much of that. It was still very good, because it is an intense and emotional story, but so many sequences felt...like you said "glib". The one that comes most to mind is the animation of Zachary being hit in the head with the ball to the sound of old school video game sound effects? What?
Any time I see a documentary being made by a "filmmaker" who injects themselves into the story, in what seems like a pretty self-serving way, I have to be a little wary.
Still it was a very engaging film.
yes, you absolutely nailed it. great story but very poorly edited. it came across to gimmicky with jumpy scenes and was unnecessarily dramatic throughout which took away from the story.
shareI fully agree with you. Don't know what people see awesome about this documentary. I started watching with great expectations but end up very disappointed. There are a lot of crazy people in this world , yes we knew that. Needed a documentary to remind us of it? Nope.
There is practially no "acting" at all. Just home movies and story telling badly edited. High school projects make it better. 6/10 at best.
Yeah... the editing is kind of terrible.
The constant repeating of lines, sometimes overwhelming and overuse of sound effects, that Monty Python-esque edit of the mouths of the judge and Shirley...