Release Date: 2003
Distribution Company: Magnolia Pictures
Director: Andrew Jarecki
Run time: 107 minutes
Seen on: Netflix DVD
Website: http://www.capturingthefriedmans.com/
Tone: Contains graphic descriptions of child abuse and language
I decided to watch this film for two reasons. First, it is number 20 on "50 Documentaries to See Before you Die." Second, I plan to see 16 Acres at the Maryland Film Festival next week. Richard Hankin is the director of that film, and he was the co-producer and editor for this film. I hope by seeing other works by the directors, it will give me a better sense of the documentaries.
"Capturing the Friedmans" uses interviews and home footage to tell the story of Albert and Jesse Friedman, father and son, residents of Great Neck, NY in the 1980s who were both charged and plead guilty to child molestation. The father, Albert, plead guilty first, in hopes of sparing his 19 year old son.
The interviews are of judges, lawyers, prosecutors, police detectives, students, parents, and immediate family members. The film is remarkable for telling the story both from within and from without the convicted's family. All those interviewed seem reliable, however, their reliable stories contradict one another. The film also contains home videos from the Friedman family, which shows both a loving relationship between brothers and a conflicting parental relationship.
The film is graphic, containing descriptions of abuse, strong language, and fighting. It is a powerful film, which causes one to consider several opposing views.
The film may be best described by Washington Post columnist Desson Howe, writing, "It's testament to Jarecki's superbly wrought film that everyone seems to be, simultaneously, morally suspect and strikingly innocent as they relate their stories and assertions...This is a film about the quagmire of mystery in every human soul."
This documenary poses the question: "What do we lose when we lose the night?"
Director Ian Cheney compares the skies visible around the world. He was raised in Maine, with amazing skies visible due to the lack of ambient light or light pollution. After moving to New York City, he noted far fewer stars in the night sky. The massive lights NYC is known to prevent one from seeing most stars. He then wondered what the effects were of losing the connection to the night sky.
The film casts a broad net of what the night sky means for personal ego, health, endangered species, and mankind as a whole. The film is broken into six parts, with each section posing questions to the next. Because I watched the shorter PBS version, the film touches on each subject just enough to tantalize you and want you to learn more.
I. The City Bright
II. Islands of Dark
III. Nature and the Night
IV. Night Shifts
V. Why We Light
VI. Astrophilia
Neil deGrasse Tyson, the Bronx-born astrophysicist, ends the documentary: “When you look at the night sky, you realize how small we are within the cosmos. It’s kind of a resetting of your ego. To deny yourself of that state of mind, either willingly or unwittingly, is to not live to the full extent of what it is to be human.”
Distribution Company: IFC Films, The Weinstein Company
Director: Patrick Creadon
Run time: 94 minutes
Seen on: IFC Channel 164, previously shown on PBS' Independent Lens, Available on Netflix DVD
Recommended: Yes, interesting use of graphics kept me engaged. I doubted it at first, but stick with it, and trust me on this.
Rotten Tomato Rating: 95%
Website: http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/wordplay/
I have had "Wordplay" on my DVR since February. I put off watching it, because honestly, how interesting can a documentary about crossword puzzles actually be? I was wrong. I was drawn into the documentary during the title sequence after hearing Cake's "Shadow Stabbing." The design of the documentary is very appealing. It had excellent graphics and used overlays to show the clues as the answers filled in on a page. This technique drew me into the documentary and allowed me to solve the puzzle along with the contestants. I credit this interesting use of graphics that kept my attention throughout the film.
The first half of the doc introduces us to the big names in the crossword puzzle world: the editor, the creator, and the enthusiasts. This doc features Will Shortz, Editor of the New York Times Crossword Puzzle. He was so interested in puzzles that he created his own major at Indiana University, enigmatology. He was willing to be poor in order to do puzzles. Shortz reads some amusing hate mail in the doc, revealing the interest and passion of those who regularly do the NYT Crossword. Shortz also founded the American Crossword Puzzle Tournament in 2008. We are also introduced to puzzle creator Merl Reagle and former Public Editor of the NYT Daniel Okrent.
While the first half of the documentary focuses on the creation of crossword puzzles, the second half focuses on the 2005 American Crossword Puzzle Tournament. We were introduced to five major competitors in the first half of the documentary and now have a more personal connection to these contestants. The contestants include:
#333 Al Sanders from Fort Collins, CO
#321 Ellen Ripstein from New York, NY
#90 Jon Delfin from New York, NY
#162 Tyler Hinman from New York, NY
#292 Trip Payne from Fort Lauderdale, FL
Because we had been introduced to these contestants in the first half, we are now rooting for them to succeed in the competition. There are numerous rounds in the competition. You are competing against yourself as much as you are against the person next to you. Your score is based on your time and your errors. So the first one done may have the highest score. The competition is based on seconds and accuracy. You struggle with the contestants and groan when you know they have made an error. Again, the graphics help you to work along with them and keep a running score of who is in first. By the time you are in the final round with the final three, you are right there with them. I won't ruin the ending for you, but I was yelling at the film by the ending. I recommend this documentary. I doubted it at first, but stick with it, and trust me on this.
Interspersed into the doc are interviews with fans of the NYT Crossword including: Jon Stewart, Ken Burns, Indigo Girls, Mike Mussina (New York Yankees Pitcher), Bob Dole, and Former President Bill Clinton. The documentary filmmaker Ken Burns describes his interest in crossword puzzles: "Cities are where we leave the imprint of human interaction. What the city offers, particularly this city, especially this city, is a sense of grids. You know, it's all about boxes. You live in a box, and you ride in a box to go to work in a box. And we have the wonderful newspaper that boxy-shaped that has in it this page which is my favorite page in the whole newspaper and there are a set of boxes in which you kind of practice the wordplay of this particularly exquisite language."
Release Date: 2008
Studio: Wall to Wall
Director: James Marsh
Run time: 90 minutes
Seen on: Netflix DVD and Watch Instantly
Recommended: Yes, it has the pacing of a good heist film. Won the Academy Award for Best Documentary in 2008, recommended on CurrentTV's "50 Documentaries to See Before You Die."
Rotten Tomato Rating: 100%
Website: http://www.manonwire.com/ Showing on TV: Sundance Channel, Wednesday, February 1, 7:25 AM, 12:00PM, 4:40 PM
"Man on Wire" documents the obsession of French high-wire artist Philippe Petit. His obsession was the yet unfinished World Trade Center Towers in New York City.
The doc is crafted like a heist movie, combining re-enactments, interviews, photographs, and vintage films. From the beginning, they discuss how they needed to sneak into both towers in order to string the wire and ultimately walk the line. The "heist" comparison lends a sense of drama and immediacy to an event over 20 years in the past. Since the doc combines modern interviews, you know that Petit survived his ordeal. But one wonders how and why he attempted this feat.
Petit began his interest with WTC after seeing a plan of the towers in a magazine. He was taken with the visual and wanted to bridge the span. Petit had already spanned the towers to Notre Dame in Paris, France and Sydney Harbour Bridge in Sydney, Australia. However, these had much less difficulties than the World Trade Center. The WTC had the difficulty of being two separate structures, designed to withstand high winds. The structures moved with the wind and their roofs were susceptible to high winds.
The doc moves you towards the inevitable point of his walk, but it does not rush you there. It takes a leisurely stroll, stopping to talk to people on the way, watching Petit train, and re-imagining the hiding and risk they took. Overall, it was an effective documentary despite the fact that there is no film footage of his walk from the rooftops. The footage from the ground is combined with still shots to place you on the rooftop watching him.
Fun fact: Ten years ago, I learned that the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City had a high-wire artist as an artist-in-residence. Petit is that artist.
Release Date: 2003
