Dougherty Arts Center
Disagrees With Valentino Review
RECEIVED Mon., May 4, 2009
Dear Editor,
I am a documentary filmmaker with an Master of Fine Arts in communications/media and several award-winning PBS broadcasts. I would like to respond to Marjorie Baumgarten’s review of Valentino: The Last Emperor [Film, April 24]. She laments that the film “exudes a sense of not having captured everything there is to see.” I agree. The documentary succeeds in this regard. A film that purports to be “the complete story” risks creating a disappointed, jaded audience and also forfeits its greatest hold on the viewer: what’s not revealed directly but rather is implied, suggested, or simply unknown. One of this film’s strengths is that it did not capture everything there is to see. How could it? Why would it?
Ms. Baumgarten concludes, “Ultimately, the film feels as glitzy and superficial as the fashion industry itself.” In one screening, I was overwhelmed by the multidimensional story of a dedicated, visionary man in his 70s, a complex and changing megaindustry, an extraordinary but dying craft, a loyal partnership of 50 years, and a work-driven lifestyle within an elite world. Glitz, superficiality, money, and celebrity are the wallpaper, not the story. In the end, we all see what we see.
I, for one, saw more than glitz and superficiality. My interest in the subject matter, for the record, was as an outsider looking in. I don’t work in the auto industry nor in a coal mine nor in haute couture. I do enjoy opportunities to be taken into these worlds and to see what they are about – to better understand their issues, to meet their people, to confront my biases, to be surprised, amused, entertained, fascinated, and educated. I see what I see, including, sometimes, what I do and don’t want to see, and am all the better for it.
I am a documentary filmmaker with an Master of Fine Arts in communications/media and several award-winning PBS broadcasts. I would like to respond to Marjorie Baumgarten’s review of Valentino: The Last Emperor [Film, April 24]. She laments that the film “exudes a sense of not having captured everything there is to see.” I agree. The documentary succeeds in this regard. A film that purports to be “the complete story” risks creating a disappointed, jaded audience and also forfeits its greatest hold on the viewer: what’s not revealed directly but rather is implied, suggested, or simply unknown. One of this film’s strengths is that it did not capture everything there is to see. How could it? Why would it?
Ms. Baumgarten concludes, “Ultimately, the film feels as glitzy and superficial as the fashion industry itself.” In one screening, I was overwhelmed by the multidimensional story of a dedicated, visionary man in his 70s, a complex and changing megaindustry, an extraordinary but dying craft, a loyal partnership of 50 years, and a work-driven lifestyle within an elite world. Glitz, superficiality, money, and celebrity are the wallpaper, not the story. In the end, we all see what we see.
I, for one, saw more than glitz and superficiality. My interest in the subject matter, for the record, was as an outsider looking in. I don’t work in the auto industry nor in a coal mine nor in haute couture. I do enjoy opportunities to be taken into these worlds and to see what they are about – to better understand their issues, to meet their people, to confront my biases, to be surprised, amused, entertained, fascinated, and educated. I see what I see, including, sometimes, what I do and don’t want to see, and am all the better for it.
Ellen Harris
