I saw this documentary on some "best of 2018" lists and for the life of me I can't figure out why. Is the central story somewhat interesting? Sure. I think there is a great irony in the statement that the director/star made towards the end of the doc. She acknowledged that she was awful in Shirkers the movie as she was also the worst thing about Shirkers the documentary. It's almost as if the 18 year old version of herself wrote the over-dramatic dialog that is prevalent towards the end of the film.

- In the scene driving around New Orleans it felt like it was happening real-time. Why was any of it necessary?
- Towards the end her friend Jasmine essentially tells her to move on and stop taking this all so seriously (seemingly because everyone else had moved on). This is exactly how I felt - was this really a story that needed to be told?
- I get wanting it back but it isn't like she was chasing a copy of The Godfather. It was a film made by 18 year olds that looked like a film made by 18 year olds.
- The grand conclusion about the antagonist was waaaaay too dramatic. He very much seemed like a person that received way too much satisfaction in partially completely projects (which is probably why he held on to the stuff his whole life). I don't think he was necessarily preying on younger people - it was probably just easier to do so.

follow me at https://IHateBadMovies.com or facebook IHateBadMovies

Shirkers is an amazing documentary about being able to realize some version of a dream after it has been completely shattered. Anyone who has ever contemplated making a film or even got so far as making one has experienced what Sandi Tam did in some way. This is her way of reflecting on the past and moving on. Great stuff!