Captuing the Friedmans...

[Zens_7s]

Usually, by Oscar time, I have seen most of the nominations for best documentary. This year, due to excessive travel, I only caught Andrew Jarecki's "Capturing the Friedman's" on DVD the other evening. It is also the Grand Jury Prize winner for Sundance in 2003 (which I tend to pay more attention to than the Oscar anyway).

Has anyone else had the chance to see this?

To provide a synopsis, I shall steal from Roger Ebert:
a documentary about a middle-class family in Great Neck, Long Island, that was torn apart on Thanksgiving 1987 when police raided their home and found child pornography belonging to the father. Arnold was a popular high school science teacher who gave computer classes in his basement den, which is where the porn was found--and also where, police alleged, he and his 18-year-old son, Jesse, molested dozens of young boys. Of the porn possession there is no doubt, and in the film Arnold admits to having molested the son of a family friend. But about the multiple molestation charges there is some doubt, and it seems unlikely that Jesse was involved in any crimes.

Many people have the erroneous belief that documentaries are boring classroom films. If that is the belief, then a good place to start would be with this film. The intensity builds throughout the whole piece, with an ending that leaves the viewer with more questions than answers. The remarkable part is how much we are actually allowed to see of this family, and still we are no closer to the right answer. Did he do it? Did Jesse do it?

[Mighty_Wingman]

Documentaries can be very boring depending on their subject matter and how they're shot directed and edited.

This particular one sounds pretty sickening, even if darkly interesting. I guess it's kinda the whole train wreck mentality you wanna look away, but you just can't.

Though it does sound very thought provoking it seems like the kind of thing I'll probably try to avoid. It seems ( and I could be wrong ) like someone making $$$ of someone elses trauma/pain. Even if the victims aren't named , people know who they are. They know who they are.

I was trying to pitch a documentary idea to a friend of mine who works for PBS . Based partly on Jonathan Kellermans book "Savge Spawn" delving into what sorts of psychosis actually create the mental , moral barrier in some childeren that makes it okay to kill. Before Columbine there was Jonesboro Arkansas and that town in Kentucky that escapes my memory at the moment. I think if a serious documentary seeks to find answers rather than just tell the story It can do some real good.

Pa-ching $0.02

[Zens_7s]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
This particular one sounds pretty sickening, even if darkly interesting. I guess it's kinda the whole train wreck mentality you wanna look away, but you just can't.

[/ QUOTE ] Yes, I generally agree with you. However, I might recommend watching it before you decide. The focus is not on the crime details. Instead, the focus is on the family itself, and the how far from normal a "normal American family" may be.

The other major point this film delves into is the power of suggestion that authority figures have over individuals, especially children. With good intentions, great harm can occur to the perceived victims and the accused.

I would view this (using fiction terms) as an intense psychological drama, and not a sensational muck-raking flick about child abuse.
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I think if a serious documentary seeks to find answers rather than just tell the story It can do some real good.


[/ QUOTE ] The answers could prove very unpopular. Parents are intensely defensive of the way they raise their children. The suggestion of parental irresponsibility; for example, "Why did you not know your child had a gun in his room" becomes a defensive reaction point.

The idea would be publicly successful if there could be a scapegoat found that did not relate back to basic irresponsibility on the part of the people that raise these children. Music, drugs, peer group, guns, chemical imbalances, school faculty, etc. It may be true that mental illness can cause singular crimes, but I can't think that holds up well for a group, as in Columbine.

It would be a interesting, and tangled answer!

[MattSinger]

I just rented it over the weekend after a lengthy search for it to rent. I think it's a fantastic movie, I was totally into it. I watched it once, then watched the extras, then watched it again with commentary. I spent a whole night on it until the wee small hours. I say more about my feelings about it, but I wrote a review of it for the column, which will probably appear in the coming weeks.

If you have a chance, I also recommend another of the Best Documentary nominees, My Architect: A Son's Journey. It's about the illegitimate son (from one of two different families Kahn had outside of his legal wife) of one of the most important architect's of the 20th century, Louis I. Kahn, coming to terms with his father by visiting the buildings he created and seeing what they can teach him. It's a small film, but very powerful and the way it makes you interested in architecture is really impressive. My review of it is over on PopThought at http://www.popthought.com/display_column.asp?DAID=174.

The Fog of War was all right, but I actually felt it was the weakest of the three. And we all know how I feel about Spellbound. Documentaries rule.