Documentary Films and Programs

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares25 Views

    In ‘Swan Song,’ a Ballet Company Faces Racism and Sexism

    by

    The film follows a National Ballet of Canada production of “Swan Lake” as dancers and others deal with long-simmering issues of racism and sexism.Ballet makes a great documentary subject, with its rarefied, glamorous world that’s hidden from most viewers. What you see on the stage is just a tiny bit of the whole story. All that beauty and grace is the product of something so arduous that some fiction filmmakers have depicted it as physical and psychological torture (think of “Suspiria” or “Black Swan” or “The Red Shoes”). Even when it’s not that extreme, every ballet is the product of extraordinary commitment and work, and that means there are all kinds of stories to tell.Those tales provide excellent fodder for nonfiction filmmakers; any ballet documentary is equally about the dance and the dancers. “Swan Song” (in theaters or on Apple TV+ and directed by Chelsea McMullan) takes that to heart. It’s a film with a lot on its mind, one in which you can sense the filmmakers discovering the story as they go along.“Swan Song” centers on the National Ballet of Canada’s new production of “Swan Lake,” which was mounted in 2022. “Swan Lake,” set to a Tchaikovsky score, is one of the most widely performed ballets in the world, and also one of the most challenging for the central ballerina, who traditionally takes on two roles: the gentle Odette and the seductive Odile.During her career as an internationally renowned dancer, Karen Kain performed the role many times. After retirement, she joined the senior management of the National Ballet, becoming its artistic director in 2005. When “Swan Song” begins, she is preparing to stage and direct a new production of “Swan Lake” with the company. The work is slated to premiere in 2020, coinciding with Kain’s retirement. It’s her gift to the company and a cap to a 50-year career in ballet.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 138 Shares22 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Cirque du Soleil: Without a Net’ Review: How the Magic Happens

      by

      This documentary chronicles the reboot and reopening in Las Vegas of the acrobatic show “O,” which shutdown during the pandemic.Conventional wisdom once held, snootily, that circus folk were quirky, superstitious, given to idiosyncratic behavior. Whether that was ever really true or not, the members of the rather unconventional Cirque du Soleil, as portrayed in the new documentary “Cirque du Soleil: Without a Net,” happen to be rather remarkably levelheaded.In scenes of conception, rehearsal and more, nobody raises a voice, storms off, indulges in Machiavellian scheming or displays anything vaguely resembling diva or divo behavior. One acrobat expresses a hope to bring a new trick to a revived show. When she can’t make it work, she reverts to her rehearsed routine and resolves to come up with something some other time. No drama.The movie is not boring or dry, though, as “Without a Net,” directed by Dawn Porter, chronicles a critical period in the organization’s history: the remounting of a show after the pandemic shutdowns. (It had dozens of shows playing around the world before the pandemic. The virus shut them down within 48 hours in March 2020, and 95 percent of the company’s staff was laid off.) Over a year later, the company began remounting “O,” its popular Las Vegas show. The title is a pun: This spectacle features acrobats performing without a net above an ingeniously engineered pool of water — as in “eau,” the French word for water.Porter’s inquisitive camera gives the viewer enticing detail on how everything comes together — for instance, unbeknown to the audience, the pool is constantly monitored by rescue divers in scuba gear who also serve as prop people — while holding in suitable awe the actual magic all this work eventually yields.Cirque du Soleil: Without a NetRated PG-13 for some strong language. Running time: 1 hour 35 minutes. Watch on Amazon Prime Video. More

    • 113 Shares28 Views

      in Movies

      Sympathy for the Diva: Why We Love ‘Difficult’ Stars

      by

      A new Faye Dunaway documentary wants to turn us from gossips into cheerleaders.Before Faye Dunaway makes her big entrance, you hear her snap from off camera: “We need to shoot. I’m here now. Come on!” When we meet her inside her apartment, she’s using a piece of paper to fan herself with a petulance that’s reminiscent of Queen Charlotte from “Bridgerton.” This is the feisty opening to the HBO documentary “Faye,” and it doesn’t do much to dispel decades of rumors painting Dunaway as a temperamental diva. Difficult, erratic, vain, narcissistic: These descriptors have etched themselves into the reputations of many famous women, and they have also been countered in all sorts of media. Much like Barbra Streisand’s memoir, “My Name Is Barbra,” or the 2018 Grace Jones documentary, “Bloodlight and Bami,” one clear purpose of “Faye” is rebuttal: to let Dunaway reconstruct the narrative.Like many in my generation, I first saw Dunaway in “Mommie Dearest,” the 1981 film — either a disaster or a masterpiece, depending on whom you ask and their tolerance for camp — in which she played another supposed she-devil: Joan Crawford, whom the movie depicts as an abusive mother and a fame-hungry prima donna. Unlike Roger Ebert, who called it “one of the most depressing films in a long time,” I was transfixed by “Mommie Dearest.” I couldn’t get enough of Dunaway’s shellacked eyebrows, the murderous rose-garden scene, the “no more wire hangers” theatrics. There’s an entire age cohort whose sense of Dunaway is all scrambled up in this role. Instead of meeting her via classics like “Bonnie and Clyde,” “Chinatown” and “Network,” we met her as Crawford, berating everyone in her path. As Dunaway says in a 1984 interview clip shown in the new documentary, “There’s an inevitable tendency of people who both work in the industry and the audience to associate, to think you’re like the parts you play.”If you’re not up on the reputation that Dunaway now has to dispute, a quick scroll through Reddit threads about her should get you up to speed. There are first-person accounts, too, many of which appear in HBO’s documentary. In one clip, Johnny Carson asks Bette Davis — rumored to be a bit of a harpy herself — to name the most difficult person she ever worked with; Davis, looking prim in a white bucket hat, shoots back, “One million dollars, Faye Dunaway,” to great laughter. In a clip that’s not shown in the documentary, Brenda Vaccaro, who worked alongside Dunaway in the 1984 movie “Supergirl,” says that Dunaway “would terrify people” — though she also calls her a “brilliant actress” and adds that “you can see the struggle.”“Faye” uses a mix of straight-to-camera interviews, family photos, archival footage and plenty of film clips to humanize little Dorothy Faye, a girl from Bascom, Fla., who quickly achieved Hollywood-icon status. It also dwells on that “struggle” part and enlists talking heads to spring to Dunaway’s defense. We learn about her alcohol dependency and her late-in-life diagnosis of bipolar disorder, both of which Dunaway finally sought treatment for after years of unexplained mood swings, depression and erratic behavior. Sharon Stone, Dunaway’s chum and mentee, talks about the intense pressure on actresses to be thin and says that Dunaway has only ever been kind and generous to her. She becomes fiercely protective when the subject of “Mommie Dearest” comes up: “Everybody wants to make fun of her for ‘Mommie Dearest,’ but you tell me how you play that part,” she says. “The joke is on the director, the joke is not on the artist.”At each stage, we the audience have our own parts to play: fans, bullies, executioners, cheerleaders, allies.Mickey Rourke — whose own reputation isn’t exactly untarnished — starred in “Barfly” with Dunaway. He was, he says, “in awe of her and kind of a little intimidated.” He attempts to soften Dunaway’s image, but that task becomes complicated when people like Howard Koch come along to share their experiences. Koch was first assistant director on the set of “Chinatown.” In his first phone call to Dunaway, he says, she guessed that he was a Sagittarius, then informed him that this astrological offense meant they would never get along. He then dishes about Dunaway’s demanding that Blistex be applied to her lips before every take. Jack Nicholson, we learn, had a loving nickname for her on the set: “Dread.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares42 Views

      in Television

      ‘Two American Families’ Is a Knockout Documentary

      by

      This latest installment in a long-term Frontline series is an intimate look at two American families, who work hard but struggle to make ends meet.The Frontline documentary “Two American Families: 1991-2024,” arriving on Tuesday, follows two Milwaukee families, one Black, one white, over the last 30-odd years. “Families” is intimate and dignified, unwavering but gentle. At a time when so much documentary television feels generic, disposable and even straightforwardly pointless, this is both a master work unto itself and a glaring reminder of what is largely absent in television narrative nonfiction.“Families” is the fifth installment in the tales of the Stanley and Neumann families, a long-term portrait series produced and directed by Tom Casciato and Kathleen Hughes, with interviews and narration by Bill Moyers. The specials began with “Minimum Wages: The New Economy” in 1992, after the breadwinners of each family were laid off from union manufacturing jobs. (This newest entry covers the full timeline and does not require previous familiarity.) Since then, neither family has ever truly recovered, despite ceaseless — ceaseless — hard work, as the parents, and eventually their children, all struggle to find their way into the middle class.Faith is a huge theme here, with each family turning to religious practice as a respite from suffering and as reservoir of hope. In one scene, the white family, the Neumanns, stand on the altar as their priest thanks God for providing the dad with an $8-per-hour nonunion job with no benefits. Even that job doesn’t last. Prayers and preaching weave through the decades, gratitude for the riches ostensibly to come.“Families” intercuts moments of everyday strain with Inaugural Addresses going back to Bill Clinton, in which each president promises jobs, jobs and more jobs, and each declares the American economy to be growing and glorious. And yet. “Despite all the hard work, these two American families had barely survived one of the most prosperous decades in our history,” Moyers narrates. And that’s barely at the halfway point in the story.The latest installment is available Tuesday on the PBS app and website and airs on PBS that night at 10 p.m. (Check local listings.)SIDE QUEST“Two American Families” reminds me a lot of the 1998 series “The Farmer’s Wife,” also a Frontline documentary. That’s available on the PBS Documentaries app, and it’s one of the most memorable and powerful documentaries I’ve ever seen. More

    • 63 Shares78 Views

      in Music

      10 Outstanding Brian Eno Productions

      by

      Inspired by an ever-changing new documentary about the musician and producer, listen to songs he helped construct by David Bowie, Talking Heads, U2 and more.Just four versions of Brian Eno.Kalpesh Lathigra for The New York TimesDear listeners,This week, I saw Gary Hustwit’s lively documentary “Eno,” about the musician, artist and producer Brian Eno. I’d recommend it to you — but it’s highly unlikely that you will see the same version of the film that I did.Formally inspired by Eno’s longtime fascination with generative art, “Eno” is essentially created anew each time it’s screened. A computer program called Brain One (a playful anagram of “Brian Eno”) selects from 30 hours of interviews with Eno that Hustwit conducted and 500 hours of archival footage, fitting it into a structure that lasts about 90 minutes. According to the Brain One programmer Brendan Dawes, 52 quintillion possible versions of the movie exist. I did not even know, before seeing this film, that “52 quintillion” was a real number.Some of my favorite parts of the version of “Eno” that I saw concerned his work as a producer. He’s certainly been a prolific one, working with traditional rock bands (Coldplay, U2), avant-garde composers (Harold Budd) and a whole lot of legends in between (David Bowie, Peter Gabriel, Talking Heads). Eno is neither a classically trained musician nor a conventional technician, and his role in the studio can be hard to define — maddeningly so, to certain record-label executives over the years. Admitted Bowie, in a clip from the film I saw, “I don’t really know what he does.” He meant that as a compliment.The most interesting parts of “Eno,” for me, shed a little more light on that elusive “what.” As a producer, he is equal parts agitator and sage. When he and Bowie were hitting a wall during the making of Bowie’s 1977 landmark “‘Heroes,’” they each pulled cards from Eno’s deck of Oblique Strategies cards, which provide creative jumping-off points; the result was the hypnotic ambient composition “Moss Garden.” When Bono was struggling to complete a soon-to-be classic U2 track, Eno showed patience. When Talking Heads were looking for a new musical direction before making “Remain in Light,” Eno played them one of his all-time favorite musicians, Fela Kuti. The rest — in so many clips of Eno in the studio — is history.Inspired by “Eno,” today’s playlist is a collection of songs produced by the man himself. Eno the Producer is merely one side of this multifaceted artist, but I appreciated that the sense of multiplicity baked into the structure of “Eno” speaks to how difficult it is to define him with a single identity. There are probably nearly 52 quintillion possible Brian Eno playlists I could have made — Jon Pareles made another in 2020, selecting 15 of Eno’s best ambient compositions — but here is the one I chose. It flows well from start to finish, but if you’re feeling inspired by Hustwit’s generative approach, you’re certainly welcome to put it on shuffle.Line my eyes and call me pretty,LindsayWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares92 Views

      in Movies

      The Stomach-Dropping, Heart-Tugging Appeal of Climbing Documentaries

      by

      “Skywalkers” and “Mountain Queen” are strong entries in a genre with great appeal to viewers who themselves might prefer to be sitting.Documentaries in which people climb very tall things have a remarkable track record. “Man on Wire,” James Marsh’s 2008 recounting of Philippe Petit’s high-wire walk between the Twin Towers in 1974, is one of the most acclaimed and successful documentaries of all time. Jimmy Chin and Chai Vasarhelyi have made two celebrated films about the sport, “Meru” in 2015 and “Free Solo” in 2018. Just do a quick search for “climbing documentaries” and you’ll find dozens — it’s clearly a genre people love.That’s undoubtedly due in part to the fact that most of us (myself included) will never, ever attempt to scale a 3,000-foot cliff without ropes. These movies show us what we can’t otherwise see. Plus, in contrast to the manufactured safety of a fiction film, a documentary is heart-pounding. Your head knows they probably will get out alive — but your stomach sure doesn’t.There’s another reason these movies are so popular, though, and it’s more psychological. As a nonclimber with an aversion to physical risk, I find it hard to fathom what drives those who choose, of their own free will, to put themselves into extreme physical situations that could easily kill them. It must mean something more to them than oxygen-deprived thrills — but what? Two gripping documentaries on Netflix this week come at that question from different directions, but offer similar answers.Lucy Walker’s “Mountain Queen: The Summits of Lhakpa Sherpa” is a biographical documentary about Lhakpa Sherpa, a Nepalese mountain climber who holds the women’s world record for the most summits of Mount Everest, 10 in all. (And not many men have summited more.) I expected a portrait of an incredibly strong woman, and that’s an apt description for “Mountain Queen.” But Lhakpa’s story is much more complicated than that. Through interviews and footage shot on Everest, Lhakpa — who lives in Connecticut with her teenage daughters — reveals the many obstacles she’s had to overcome, including patriarchal ideas about climbing in her home culture and an abusive marriage to a fellow climber once she moved to the United States.Most important, she shows what drives someone like her toward this kind of extreme sport, and it mainly boils down to wanting to live a life of significance. But Lhakpa’s aim is less about being famous and more about paving the way to a better future for herself and her children. “I want to be somebody. I want to do something good,” she says. “I want to show my two girls how to be brave.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares91 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Join or Die’ Review: Come Together

      by

      This documentary about the work of Robert Putnam, who wrote “Bowling Together,” argues that Americans can save democracy by becoming joiners.In the wake of the 2016 election, a new type of film briefly emerged: the liberal “how did we get here” documentary. It doled out insights, and visited with “ordinary” folks across the country to take the temperature of the political divide.“Join or Die,” directed by the siblings Rebecca Davis and Pete Davis, recalls those postelection films. Narrated by Pete and essentially framed as a plea to save the United States, it centers on the work of Robert Putnam, an academic who has dedicated his life to arguing that American civic engagement is in decline. Putnam articulated his thesis in “Bowling Alone,” first published as an article, and then in 2000 as a book.Putnam is Pete’s former professor, and the directors dedicate most of their running time to laying out the author’s queries, methods and findings while supporting them visually with montages and engaging collagelike animation. Throughout, the film unabashedly adopts Putnam’s doctrine: Become a joiner or democracy is doomed.Some of the film’s points feel simplistic, and questions linger. (I expect they would be answered by reading “Bowling Alone” rather than watching a movie about it.) The film also breaks up its Putnam biography by spending time with a handful of Americans who benefit from local communities — but these mini-profiles are too brief to resonate. Better to hew close to Putnam, whom the film regards with a deferential but congenial attitude.Join or DieNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 39 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 63 Shares91 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Hollywoodgate’ Review: Inside the Taliban

      by

      In a frustrating documentary, the journalist Ibrahim Nash’at shows the Taliban after American troops left Afghanistan.There is no question that the director Ibrahim Nash’at faced tremendous danger in shooting “Hollywoodgate,” but the risks required to make this documentary also highlight its limitations.Nash’at, an Egyptian journalist based in Berlin, traveled to Afghanistan in 2021 shortly after American troops had left. He negotiated a tenuous arrangement with Mawlawi Mansour, the new commander of the country’s air force, to film him and a lieutenant named M.J. Mukhtar.In a voice-over at the outset, Nash’at explains the terms. He has been forbidden to film anyone who is not Taliban, he says, and he is under constant surveillance. In return for access, he adds, “I must show the world the image of the Taliban that they want me to see.” But he hopes simply to show what he saw.Nash’at, who handled his own camera and sound, is, to his credit, transparent about some gaps. When going to inspect a group of aircraft, Mansour doesn’t want the filmmaker to show them. (Nash’at nevertheless zooms in toward a few planes across the tarmac.) During a nighttime operation in which Mukhtar apparently hopes to root out people hostile to the Taliban, Nash’at is instructed, “The cameraman stays here.”What remains are Mansour and Mukhtar presenting themselves with varying degrees of self-consciousness (it is amusing when Mansour, after trying out a treadmill at a former American gym, asks that one be sent to his home so he can lose belly fat), and the Taliban’s public pageantry. Nash’at notes at the end that he was kept from filming the daily suffering of regular Afghans. The frustration of “Hollywoodgate” is that it could only ever feel incomplete.HollywoodgateNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 32 minutes. In theaters. More

    • 88 Shares87 Views

      in Television

      Loved ‘Couples Therapy’? Read These 11 Books

      by

      These stories of relationship dramas and evolving partnerships will fill the “Couples Therapy”-sized hole in your life with wisdom, schadenfreude and humor — and sometimes all of the above.It can be hard when shrinks go on summer vacation — especially in a summer when each news cycle seems to bring more upsetting developments to process. And it doesn’t help that the fourth season of the cult favorite Showtime docuseries “Couples Therapy” has just wrapped, so even affordable, vicarious therapy is off the table. Without our weekly fix of Dr. Orna Guralnik’s deep nods and cathartic sympathy crying — and with the good doctor’s own much-anticipated book still months off — what are we to do?The series, which started airing in 2019, did not seem to have the makings of a hit: real couples, sitting on a Brooklyn sofa, telling a therapist their problems. At worst, thought skeptics, it sounded voyeuristic and upsetting; at best, boring and contrived. Long before Annie and Mau were a twinkle in my eye, or I’d wept over Season 2, or I’d had wildly differing feelings about different strangers named Josh, I, too, was one of those people. “Watch it,” said a co-worker. “Nothing you thought will ever be the same.” Forty-five minutes in, I was hooked.There are many reasons “Couples Therapy” has broken through: the happy surprise of seeing our perceptions change, the age-old distraction of other peoples’ problems, the actual applicable advice, Dr. Guralnik’s glossy mane and teeny tiny braids (a major discussion point on message boards).But even if you aren’t a fan of the show, these shoulder-season reads will get you through August with wisdom, schadenfreude, dysfunction, pain and humor — and sometimes all of the above. It’s not a spoiler that most of these couples could use a session or 10.Desperate Characters, by Paula Fox (1970)Otto and Sophie Bentwood are a childless couple in their early 40s living in a rapidly gentrifying Brooklyn (they’re the gentrifiers). Life seems comfortable — until Sophie is bitten by a feral cat and their carefully ordered existence begins to crumble. There’s even a kitchen renovation in this sharply observed, humane classic of New York marriage. (Read about the book’s legacy.)We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More