Week 4 Screening 1

The Queen Of Versaille. (2012) Dir Lauren Greenfield.

In the first shot of this documentary film the couple are shown surrounded by lighting and camera equipment, this reflexive shot informs the viewer that it is a documentary you are about to watch and the presence of a camera is to play a pivotal role in the footage that follows. The opening montage with its accompanying light music sets the story as a fairytale, in a clever way this idyllic opening montage conveys to the viewer a narrative that is in contrast to the reality. The placement of the footage that follows seems to be sequenced to convey the opposite; the reality of their existence (crying children and a chaotic family life). There is much reflexive content within the film, activity that reveals the medium (of film) and comments that reflect the influence of its presence. The reflexive elements of the film are evident in things such leaving in shots that are badly focused, lines of dialogue that are directed at the director; “tell me when your ready” or “When you first started filming this we were on top of the world...”. These elements serve as a reminder that the world of the film is being framed by these  uncovered devices, and this serves to convince of the films fidelity.

It is a character driven film in that the characters themselves inform the viewer, they are the main voice of the documentary. From the perspective of narrative they are united in their portraits at the beginning of the film but gradually when the pressures begin to grow they become contrary and uncooperative. Much of the communication is left to go uncontested, as a result they expose their own constricted perspective of events. This allowing the subjects to narrate their own story could go either way in a documentary as the subject seems to view the medium as their own mouthpiece. There is a recognizable element of playing for the cameras, the behaviour is pretty transparent and there is no intentional indication of what these characters are like without the presence of a camera, they are always aware of the camera. That this savy is transparent is one of the reasons why the documentary works as an expose of sorts. The director could very easily have been manipulated but the scenes and shots she decided to leave in the film are evidence of her individual perspective; the characters are overtly trying to lay down the narrative but the ethics of their occupation and their opulent lifestyle is removed from reality and the edited film reveals this.

For example the purchase of a seemingly innocent bicycle is commented on by use of montage; the shot following the purchase of the bicycle shows a garage full of bicycles and is complete with a voiceover which conveys how tight things have become. By not overtly commenting but by showing through documented example the point is made more effectively.

Keeping up appearances is the reccuring activity of the documentary, both for the cameras and for other people but the husband is too stressed to attempt to maintain the facade and the only beacon of honesty comes from his pessimistic monotones. The documentary, which started off being about “the queen of versaille” and the family unit of the (couples name here) changes tack halfway through and becomes about the troubles that the family business are facing. Either this change of focus was following the story or it is evident of the director needing to come away with something to show for her efforts. The end of the documentary strives for a resolution to the circumstance but seems to have been called time on by the subjects of the documentary.

When does the content of a documentary end? Unlike a fiction film the reality of the film does not end with the films credits, because the characters are somewhat true to life the story continues and can be continued every time a piece of media on the story is digested. As it stands the couple have tried to sue the documentary makers for false portrayal as their circumstances have changed since the film was shot. This documentary film is framed as the fall of one of Americas wealthiest families, I say framed because it is not the whole story, the story continues after the cameras stop rolling. A documentary is in effect an extended snapshot of the world, the story contained in this film is illustrative of this. In fact if the story were investigated to date it would not have the same narrative arc that the film contains.