To tell the truth, I watched this film because the teacher of the documentary class assigned the homework. When I watched it, I was in pain, listening to the two old women chattering in front of the camera, the pace was slow, there was almost no plot, and I couldn’t watch it a few times. But, after watching it on Wednesday, the film stuck in my head, making me want to think about it, both in its documentary form and in its story.
The lingering but messy state caused by this film, I say that I rarely experience it, it can be described as poisonous. After a little discussion in class, and the Chinese and English materials I looked up on the Internet, combined with the narrative of the documentary itself, the story is probably like this. The documentary is about the later life of Jacqueline Kennedy's (President Kennedy's wife) aunt and her cousin. This aunt came from a good background, and her father was a lawyer and was relatively wealthy. She is beautiful and loves to sing, and is fascinated by it, seeing herself as an artist. Later, she married a young lawyer, lived a prosperous life, and had three children, but she was addicted to piano and singing all day long, and she was not willing to participate in various social parties where nobles gathered at that time. His husband separated from her and finally divorced . His father was very opposed to her being a drama singer and the places she went in and out. When her youngest son was getting married, she was not only half an hour late, but also appeared dressed as a drama singer, which made his father furious and cut off allowance for her. Without the subsidy from her husband's father, her life became difficult, but she did not take it seriously. She lived for a while with an accompanist she met later (she raised him?), who later left her too. She was too old to move and called her daughter back to take care of her. Her daughter was 35 at the time. After the model period and the hipster period. Still unmarried at the time. In this way, the two lived in an old villa for 25 years without leaving home. They don't clean on purpose because they want an "artistic" way of life. The house is full of rubbish and no one is fixing it. It's tattered, but they don't care. Although the daughter complained about her old mother's restraint, she respected her mother very much, believed that her mother was indeed an artist, and appreciated her beautiful singing voice. And for herself as an artist, she loves to read and write poems, love to dance, and thinks she is very attractive. Through the camera, you can sometimes see her love and seduction to the director. My mother sometimes wears no clothes and puts on a small blanket. My daughter is bald, but she appears in front of the camera like a model every day, showing her long legs.
Why the narrative is so messy, because this documentary is so messy, there is no plot, only the details of life. The director and camera brothers are said to have spent months filming them for the documentary.
Why is such a documentary so interesting?
1 This documentary does not answer many questions, some of the questions that ordinary films need to answer: why is the mother so short of money, and the other two sons are not bad for starting a family and starting a business, why are there no support? Why doesn't the daughter get married, she was once a celebrity and a rich man wants to marry her (it is said that she was once the lover of a married man)? Why don't they leave the house? Why do my parents want to divorce (the reason I mentioned in the previous paragraph is that I checked the data later)? But the documentary doesn't answer a single question. It's all records of daily life. The mother and daughter say whatever they want, and there is hardly any dialogue with a strong purpose such as "why did you divorce", "are you satisfied with your life now" and so on. The audience can only get a glimpse of the trivial ramblings of the two women chattering about their cats and so on. If you are curious about these reasons, you need to find the information yourself. There is no answer in the film, only the status, only the result.
2 The level of involvement of the filmmakers in this documentary is high. Unlike traditional observational documentaries, where the camera tries to pretend it is just an eye, in this film, the camera admits to being an integral part. "Have you started filming?" "Mom, I'm going to show them the photos" "There's a camera here, pay attention." In this case, it's all restored in front of the audience. When the mother said: "xx (director's name), please sing to me". The director really sang with his voice, and although he had no face, his voice was involved in the film. My daughter even rambles directly to the director many times, "I practiced dancing for a few hours yesterday, do you want me to dance for you?" "Wear your shirt as a skirt, and put on bottoming shorts, this is the I invented it, isn't it great?" The audience actually hides behind the camera and watches the interaction between the protagonist and the director. This real interaction also seems to effectively restore the characters.
3 The topic of this documentary is really interesting. How could two women who used to be incredibly beautiful, with good backgrounds and prominent relatives become such a disgusting appearance? Some even doubt whether the daughter's mental state is healthy. They experienced World War I and World War II, they experienced wealth and poverty, why do they insist so much on the pursuit of "art"? The contrast between old photos and real life is amazing and has a lot to tell. It's even so dramatic that it's hard to believe it's a real event. The director of the documentary played down the dramatic part, and used trivial daily life to explain the current situation of the two. But the story is really good. No wonder it was remade into a drama (movie) in 2009. I even thought it could be remade into a TV series. As available material, make a note here.
View more about Grey Gardens reviews
