Comments, relating to the topic, are welcome, add a great deal to a blog, but must be in English, with no profanity, hate-filled insults, or links (unless pre-approved).




Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Catfish, a documentary

When I ordered 'Catfish' from Netflix, I thought it'd be interesting because it's about the internet and how easily relationships and identities can be faked. I knew a lot of such stories from years of being in chat rooms.

Spoiler
will follow after the Netflix blurb; so if you expect to order it, don't read more here but please come back after you have seen it as I'd like to hear your take. It is not everyone's cup of tea though; so I won't say I recommend it even as I will say I, Farm Boss too, enjoyed it a lot, more than especially he expected.
Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman document the strange series of events that unfolds when a gifted 8-year old painter named Abby contacts Nev, a 24-year-old photographer (and Schulman's brother), through Facebook. After Abby sends Nev a remarkable painting based on one of his photos, Nev begins corresponding with her family -- including her seductive 19-year-old sister. Realizing that something's not quite right, Nev sets out to uncover the truth.
As the film, to begin mostly interviews on a webcam, unfolded, I thought I won't write about it here because it's simply too sad, too upsetting as a story, but then it went beyond that to a human connection with need, with the desire to be appreciated, and how our yearning for that can lead us to both create and believe things that aren't what they seem. It can lead to creating a reality that doesn't exist and with the internet, it is possible to bring someone else along for the ride.

First of all the gist of the story is as the blurb explains. It's hard to say for sure but it looks like the beginning idea of the filmmakers, Henry and Ariel, probably was to show relationships online and how it was impacting the life of Ariel's brother, Nev. Some think the whole thing was created to make this story exciting but it didn't seem that way. If it was a fraud, then Nev was a better actor that it appeared.

In the beginning there is a painting sent to Nev by a child protege. He's very impressed with the art and begins to chat with the girl, Abby, at Facebook. Abby's mother, Angela soon is chatting with him. Abby shows him a painting she did of her mother. Then he was introduced to Abby's older sister, Megan, someone younger than Nev but not too much younger. Megan is living a life the opposite of Nev's where she is buying a horse farm and fully involved with family, friends, art, and nature where Nev's is the bustle of the big city and the push to become a successful photographer.

The words flew between the two young people. Soon the feelings grew. Nev, all on Facebook, meets more and more of Megan's friends. These people post things on their walls that Nev could then read. A possible love but definitely lust begins to grow between the two as Megan is beautiful and innocently very seductive.

If the original goal was to show how love can grow online, something Nev wasn't thrilled to have recorded but was going along with, it soon developed a change of direction as there came suspicions that Megan, possibly Angela and maybe even Abby were lying about their accomplishments and what they were doing.

At this point, I could so relate to this story as I have heard of this and seen it several times online. People create stories, use photos that are old or not even of themselves, and they pull in another who falls in love with a person who doesn't really exist. In those cases usually the person did exist except they don't look like what they are suggesting and saying. They aren't doing the exciting things they are describing. They are using those things as bait.

In this story as the three young men grow to understand the characters on Facebook have been embroidering their lives, they decide the only way to find out what is real is to go to where the family lives. They must follow through for real.

Here is where I thought I will never write about this. It's too harsh and cruel on both sides. I had read about this documentary in the fall when it was at Sundance. I knew what would happen. I figured I would watch it all but no way I'd write about what Nev found when he got to Megan's supposed home base.

First the three young men checked out the address of a supposed building that Abby was remodeling from an old building with the money she was making off her paintings. Fraud. Next they checked out the supposed horse farm and found it deserted, postcards from Nev in an unused mailbox.

The next morning, set up with a wire and being filmed, Nev headed for the home that the family was supposed to live in. He didn't know what to expect other than exposing a lot of lies.

What he found was Angela, a 40-year old woman, who had created all of the characters. Yes, she had a daughter named Abby but Abby didn't paint. She had a daughter named Megan but she didn't look like the pictures and didn't live with her mother, hadn't for a long time. Angela was overweight, and probably could have, at one time or in her imagination, looked like the supposed painting of herself that she had given Nev.

Here is where the story could have turned cruel and instead evolved into a sort of sad beauty. Angela had painted a world she wished existed. She was married to a man who seemed very nice (looked nothing like the image she had posted) but was a little slow developmentally. He looked about 10 years older than Angela. There was no answer given as to how these people survived but guessing the next thing they discovered explains that. Angela was caring for her husband's two sons who were so severely developmentally challenged that they could not possibly function in the outside world. She did all of this with love and gentleness.

Angela's life had few options for escape except one-- to paint and to create an imaginary world for Nev after she likely fell in love with him. Nev was who he had been presenting; so this sad love was not about to ever have a reality. The film makers photographed her again and again as they interviewed her and finally got the story from her.

Instead of revealing ugliness, it revealed sadness. She was a gentle and sweet person who had created an elaborate web of lies. That is a bad thing. If she had been a different person, the story would have had have had no value. It is a story of deception, need, love, and a desire for something that isn't in one's own life and the search for that is finally revealed to have been on both sides of the experience.

I will be writing more about what it made me think about with the next blog as there is too much for one blog. It went way beyond the events to something more about human needs.

8 comments:

Paul said...

It sounds worth a look Rain...:-)

la peregrina said...

I have this on my Netflix list and it should be the next DVD I receive. I'll come back after I've seen it and read your review. We can compare notes.

joared said...

I recall seeing this story, or something identical on TV in recent years -- may have been on PBS.

Despite what emotional needs are present for an individual, I have a problem with deception in any medium whether Internet or otherwise. Each of us unintentionally deceives enough without even trying when we present ourselves to others.

Isn't it a bit egocentric, to put it mildly, to pursue self-gratification without considering the pain that might be inflicted on others? Worse yet, to know, but not care.

That's the same reason I have a problem with certain books written a few years ago deliberately blurring the lines between truth and fiction.

The Internet may create a false sense of intimacy for the new user and/or one emotionally vulnerable. There is a distancing factor and erroneous belief of privacy created for even those who intellectually know better but may mistakenly disregard their better judgement.

The user has only written words from another -- no voice quality, no non-verbal signals, no actual physical interactions from which to derive clues about the correspondent's demeanor. Trust is paramount and a person's risk tolerance is pertinent.

That said, I've been mostly pleased with those with whom I've met and interacted on the Internet, though I've only talked on the phone with one such person and met another in person one time.

Rain Trueax said...

She at least had more reason than most for deception. I have run into the weirdest kinds of deceptions online and don't think I'd ever trust someone who had lied to me about the basics of who they were.

Chat rooms used to be the worst, I think. There was one guy who told everyone he was a hunchback and when he'd go out people would be cruel to him. I felt sorry for him. He got romantically involved with one of the women. When she met him, no hunchback. It was all a game. A person feels very used after hearing someone tell them lengthy stories about their disability and then find out it was a lie. He was only one of many. Why people lie is beyond me to understand as if they do get to wanting to meet someone, they are out of luck when it happens. And sometimes the lies are as huge as Angela's.

The internet brings out the worst in people in a lot of ways because it's easy to do it and it's anonymous. I have been called more names online and read more really nasty ugly things than ever in my life. The people who said those things wouldn't likely say them to a neighbor.

It's great we can meet each other and form friendships with people miles and miles away but it has many risks attached. Loaning money is one of the least of them. Falling in love one of the worst.

Given that, I have physically met quite a few online friends since I began chatting over 15 years ago. Everyone of them have been exactly as they had portrayed themselves to be. So while there are frauds, there are also many more who are just wanting to talk to people at a distance and about subjects they may not be free to do nearer to home.

la peregrina said...

Well, Rain, I finally got to watch Catfish. During the opening credits I thought in ten years this film will be so dated, so, in a way, I had already disengaged from the movie before it even started.

I don't know if all of the scenes in the film are real or not but I did wonder why no one in New York thought to Google information about the little girl's work.

Both the photography, Nev, and the artist, Angela, lie. Angela lies about who she is so she can sell her art and Nev lies about his reason for going to Michigan so he can finish his film.

I could forgive Nev this deception if I had not Goggled the movie after seeing it and found this:

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video/exclusive-real-megan-catfish-11838023

Nev brought the women whose photo's Angela used to create Megan to New York by telling her they were making a movie about photography.

They actually brought her there so they could film her reactions to finding out that Angela had used photos of both her and her sister on Megan's fake Facebook page. Another lie.

The fact that Angela created a lie on Facebook doesn't bother me that much since people have used communication technology to lie to one another for over a century. The internet just makes it easier for the person doing the lying to make the lie more elaborate.

At one point in the movie Angela makes a comment about how beautiful Nev's smile is and that's when I understood why this movie was leaving me cold.

Nev, smiles when he is lying and he smiles when he is trying to hide his pain. Angela also smiles when she is trying to hide her pain and she smiles after she is found out.

I find this the most disturbing, not only do these people lie to each other they lie to themselves about what they have done and how they feel about it. Brrrr.

Rain Trueax said...

thanks for your review, la peregrina. As I said at the start of my thoughts on it, it's not everyone's cup of tea. If a person wants good and bad guys, this film doesn't deliver them. It's a mix of motivations and personalities.

I don't have the sympathy for Megan that this happened. She put out photos of herself nude, which the film didn't show, nor did they show her reaction to what happened, but she did get paid money according to what I had read. I don't think putting out nude photos of yourself online is very smart even if they are tastefully done which these might've been. She was looking for something and hard to say what that was. I don't know. I had also read about her last fall when the film was shown at Sundance. It would be interesting to know if the publicity she got from this film helped her modeling career or not.

At any rate, I agree... the people weren't admirable even if a person finds their motives interesting. As a writer, I find such stories interesting for me to use.. not the direct characterization but the type-- so I am also using someone as really all writers do.

Life for some people is filled with deceptions. I don't envy them that as I have always felt living with truth is simpler.

la peregrina said...

Rain, After thinking about this some more I realized that I am not as upset with Angela's deception as I am with Nev's. Angela did lie in an desperate attempt to have her artistic talent recognized but Nev's lies seem more calculated to me. He says he is upset by Angela's actions but...those smiles...
is he secretly happy because he knows he now has a better movie?

I don't really need good or bad guys in any movie I watch and agree it is interesting to watch motives and personalities develop in any film. I do require a "truthfulness" at the core of the film and from the film makers, though. I don't think we get that with this movie.

In a way, this movie is just like Facebook, all surface and no real depth, which may be the reason why I don't really like it and why, at the same time, it bothers me so much.

Thanks for letting me, as my husband says, "Present the opposing view."

Rain Trueax said...

I always appreciate other viewpoints, particularly with something as complex as this. For one thing it's basically reality tv which is something I don't watch on cable at all. Nobody is totally natural when they know they are being filmed. I think of how I'd be when I have had videos taken. It's impossible to be really natural so I don't take his smiles as indicative of anything except some people use smiles to communicate with the world. I have often said I don't trust someone who smiles all the time and there is a reason for that. It's a cover-up, which given what's going on with a reality type show, is not surprising people would use it. Angela did also.

I don't know Nev's motivations all the way but I think it was a mix. In the beginning it looked like he allowed this to be filmed for his brother's benefit. He didn't appear to like it but he is the younger brother and maybe he thought it would do him good career wise. When he realized he'd been lied to, he seemed angry to me, smile or no smile. At that point he had a mix of motivations from hurt that he'd been fooled to disappointment, to probably getting something out of it and in particular not looking like a fool if the video went public.

I thought about it more from the model's end, whose photos were used, and thought how she wanted publicity or she'd not have used sexually charged photos for strangers to see. Facebook allows you to limit what you put out. She wanted hers seen by strangers. They didn't show suggestive ones in the film which is probably because she didn't give permission. She went to NYC with the idea of profiting off her photos and she did even if she got videotaped finding out something she hadn't known about where they were used. I have no sympathy for her. She should be a lesson to all people who put up photos anywhere that it's a risk. They do end up in Google searches if they aren't set aside. I think like with blogger, it's smart to make sure any photo a person puts out is small enough that they cannot be easily enlarged. But it's no real protection as they can take one face and put it with another body. It's the risk we all face over the Internet usage. I don't lose sleep over it. If they want to use the face of a 67 year old woman over a hot young body, I could care less. It's not me and if someone thought it was, they are the one being duped.

Basically the complexity of this internet world but also human emotions are why I did write about it even though I had been thinking to start with I would not. It's much more fun to write about honorable people and actions but since I'd had a lot of experience with chat rooms when I first got online, I already knew about the deceptions out there long before Facebook came along. Facebook photos at least cannot be used, except maybe by hackers.

Catfish is disturbing and that's why the second part of what I wrote to this was important-- how even what is negative can be utilized. It fit well with the entropy angle.

Whether Nev or Angela or any of them would be better people for this, who knows. Maybe not... and that is a bad lesson in terms of it looking like deception pays. It is also why I never watch these myriad of reality shows out there. But once in awhile I do watch something like this or the Parrots of Telegraph Hill. Every once in awhile one attracts me, like the one about the brothels in India, and I do watch it to sometimes write about it and sometimes not.