JC230

2/10

I always kind of resent the implication that we must give movies like these their due, like they were the only ways a genre or form could happen. The implication that there was just no other way to tell this story, it was just the time. And look if this was a different topic or executed differently I would excuse the methods a lot more as necessary and even fine as the ‘rules’ of documentary hadn’t been established yet. But this is exoticism at its finest. Flaherty’s much exalted adoration and respect of these people by figures like Ebert is just a paternalistic fascination, an awing othering. He forces them into the boxes he can conceive for them and throws out the rest. It perpetuated if not outright created stereotypes about Inuits that persist to this very day. And I’m supposed to excuse it because we think somehow no one else did or could ever get the idea to film ‘life’? No amount of craftmanship or staging can excuse the hollowness at its core. If Flaherty truly cared about these people he would tell their story, not make them out to be simpletons to be laughed at who don’t understand gramophones. How quaint. Or act as if they only know the old ways and not guns, or that Allakariallak died of starvation because it was just so rough out there, instead of tuberculosis like so many around the world. Or you know. Call him Allakariallak. But that wasn’t marketable enough. The half star is for Allakariallak and his people, who shine through in moments and charm despite it all. But the movie as a whole leaves a bad taste in my mouth, as do the efforts to excuse if not valorize its director who has two common law wives portrayed as Allakariallak‘s, that he abandoned. How can we question exploration taking place here? How much were these people compensated? Surely not enough. Nanook is a relic. Still worth examining, but for its failings as much if not more than its craft and influence.

CinemaSerf

0/10

At times I thought this was filmed in the 1960s. It has an astonishing quality to it - the camerawork delivering quite a pristine image of this man and his family as they spend a year eking out a traditional existence. The terrain is inherently hostile. The weather cares little for him, his wife, his young children or his howling pack of dogs as they must constantly hunt for fish and seals to ensure continued survival. Who knew it only takes an hour to build a igloo? Well these architecturally creative structures provide essential shelter, even if the temperature inside must never exceed freezing - as the winds and snows batter down on them relentlessly. This is a documentary and although the family fairly gleefully engage with film-maker Ronbert J. Flaherty at times, we also have to be prepared for some fairly graphic images of how they capture and consume their prey. Virtually nothing is left to waste: the flesh, the skin and the blubber all proving crucial in getting them through these toughest of winters. The photography goes some way to illustrating just how truly subsistence and perilous their lives can be - and yet they still keep pets! Darkness and cold, winds and snow - but when the sun is up, a more beautiful and thriving landscape it's hard to imagine. Fascinating, in the truest sense of the word, and well worth wrapping up in front of the television for.