The aftertaste is as important as the taste itself. I was intrigued by the outrageous concept behind the documentary
Man on Wire, the story of the covert wire walking act between the Twin Towers by
Philippe Petit. The story and footage of the feat itself were mesmerizing, but its final denouement left me with a shake of the head. I speak of the trivial reenactment of Petit's sexual encounter with a random fan after his famous walk. Given that the story incorporates his relationship with his then girlfriend, who was incredibly supportive and there to help and document much of his experiences, this appears as jarringly out-of-place. It's said and demonstrated the Petit is unconventional and given to very liberal tendencies. And he's French, of course, who would ridicule traditional sexual roles. I don't have any issue with Petit or the way he lives his life.
My issue is with the documentarian Marsh, who somehow thought this was necessary to the story, or that it would be good for a laugh. Instead, it comes off as a final unnecessary and out-of-chord note to an otherwise excellent film. When Rotten Tomatoes give a film an across-the-board 100% rating, I guess I expect something near-perfect. To get a positive approval, all you need is a positive recommendation, not an acknowledgment of superiority. In short, I believe this to be a universally liked, not loved, film.
The aftertaste is as important as the taste itself. I was intrigued by the outrageous concept behind the documentary Man on Wire, the story of the covert wire walking act between the Twin Towers by Philippe Petit. The story and footage of the feat itself were mesmerizing, but its final denouement left me with a shake of the head. I speak of the trivial reenactment of Petit's sexual encounter with a random fan after his famous walk. Given that the story incorporates his relationship with his then girlfriend, who was incredibly supportive and there to help and document much of his experiences, this appears as jarringly out-of-place. It's said and demonstrated the Petit is unconventional and given to very liberal tendencies. And he's French, of course, who would ridicule traditional sexual roles. I don't have any issue with Petit or the way he lives his life.
My issue is with the documentarian Marsh, who somehow thought this was necessary to the story, or that it would be good for a laugh. Instead, it comes off as a final unnecessary and out-of-chord note to an otherwise excellent film. When Rotten Tomatoes give a film an across-the-board 100% rating, I guess I expect something near-perfect. To get a positive approval, all you need is a positive recommendation, not an acknowledgment of superiority. In short, I believe this to be a universally liked, not loved, film.
No comments:
Post a Comment