Just saw this - one BIG issue

[deleted]

That was basically my reaction to the film as well, OP.

I understand the other comments on this post that there were disagreements and discrepancies in memory among the family members, but it struck me that the film was a bit "oversold" as an examination of memory, and how different things can be remembered different ways.

Then again, this isn't Rashoman. I don't think that was the intention. But I'm not quite sure what the intention was.

I just saw the film for the first time, and these were my thoughts as well. Everyone had his or her own perspective, but the story was pretty much the same.

Listen to the river sing sweet songs
to rock my soul

there are numerous examples where one person says something, then there is a cut, then someone says something completely contradictory.

and the numerous contradictions when people try to describe her mother's emotional state. one person says x, another person says the opposite.

not to mention the biggest contradiction that every one of her 'close friends' got the father wrong.

if nothing else, this thread basically proves Polley is 100% correct. People watch the same thing happening but come up with different interpretations. In our case, as message board posters, we watched this film, and but dozens of us claim there are no contradictions presented, when I clearly saw several of them.

I don't agree that "no one disagrees about anything". I noticed several times when she presented conflicting versions of a story. This happened a bunch of times, but the one I can remember right now was whether her mom was an open book or someone who tended to put on a false front and keep lots of secrets.

--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250

I think a big point people are missing is what Michael said in his interview: Sarah editing the material and then putting it together will change the content completely (you see, that's something she intenionally left in). You have like 6 hours of material (with that one person) and then you cut it up and take the 5 minutes you like. I never felt like the film ever was supposed to be objective, it's Sarah's point of view. Who directed those staged scenes? It was Sarah. Who made the interviews? Who edited the whole movie? This is her mother's story told by Sarah's point of view. So what really happened is still unclear. Imagine what that film made by Harry would have looked like? He even feared that he'd be portrayed as that typical affair that destroyed the family. So if the differences are just minute, maybe that's because Sarah wanted them to be that way. To me, it still gets the point across, maybe even better.

I thought the one big difference was that Michael thinks she didn't stay in Montreal with Harry because she and Michael fell in love again and Harry thinks she didn't stay in Montreal because she was too afraid to lose her kids again.

"Rashomon" this is not. It seems everyone is telling the same story here.

I think the biggest issue is the lack of the mother's perspective, which of course is impossible. As such, this felt very disrespectful to me. Sarah says the fact of her parentage do not matter in the relationship with the man who raised her, as does the man himself, yet somehow this is worthy of a full-length documentary? The re-creating footage using actors, plus the scenes of Sarah asking interviewees to repeat their dialogue for dramatic effect, added to the disingenuous feel. Above all, I didn't find it particularly interesting.

I think this is a marginally well-made film undone a bit by its inflated sense of self-importance. 6/10 stars from me.