
The film begins with the origins of the viral video. It turns out that the video of Rebney's explosive temper was viral before the internet and youtube made such phenomena common. Instead, the video was copied on people's VCRs and distributed by hand. Remember VCRs? Anyway, the film goes on to show that Rebney has pretty much erased himself from almost all public records. At first we assume that this is because he wants to avoid the unwanted notoriety, but in fact it turns out that's just who he is: a hermit. In fact, he repeats a few times that he couldn't care less about the video. His phone number is unlisted, he uses on P.O. boxes, and lives in a remote cabin in northern California. The only way Steinbauer was able to meet up with Jack was by mailing him a letter, to which Rebney responded saying that he was interested in talking to the filmmaker.
What unfolds after that is semi-remarkable portrait of this crotchety old man who lives in the woods. At first, Rebney acts very calm and relaxed in an attempt to show the world that he is not the angry man from the viral video. But later, after some consideration Jack decides that he wants to be heard, and calls Steinbauer and reveals that his behavior during the first visit was all an act. After that, Jack Rebney is exactly how you expect him to be. He's old, he has a dim view of society and appears to hate everyone except for his close friends and his dog, Buddha. At first, I kind of felt bad for Jack. Here he is minding his own business, living life just the way he wants to, when suddenly some guys with a camera come to his door and start bugging about something he did almost twenty years ago. The film quickly illustrates that Jack has some strong political views and wants to express them to the world via this film. I still felt as though Steinbauer may have been taking advantage of this to get the footage he wanted, but those thoughts were allayed after Jack goes to San Francisco to meet his adoring fans.
Questionable subject material aside, (seriously, you made a film about this guy?) documentaries are peculiar beasts. Some have narrative arcs, others don't. Some have messages, others don't. There is simply less to judge them on than non-documentary films. You can't fault them for poor cinematography or writing, it's just life and you capture what you can. The documentaries that I have preferred are ones that expose something startling, or make some kind of commentary on life, society, the world, etc. This film doesn't really do either of those things. Some questions are certainly raised about internet videos and the fame they bring to their subjects. Are we laughing with them? At them? Or because we are happy it's not us in that situation? How do the people in these videos deal with the attention and the ridicule? But ultimately, the film doesn't really draw any conclusions on any of these questions. After the first act, it almost ignores them entirely. But this film isn't an entire loss. Jack is a truly entertaining person. He has a immense vocabulary that he uses frequently. After losing his vision to glaucoma, he laments that he can no longer ride his unicycle. One of my favorite moments is when he starts taunting a Wal-Mart manager who threatens to call the police on them for filming on Wal-Mart property in a fake German accent, saying that the manager is going to “call the gestapo.” This film also has a heart-warming ending which I found to be somewhat reminiscent of How the Grinch Stole Christmas.
Rating: 5/10 - Ambivalent
No comments:
Post a Comment