When you disagree with such movies it's probably easier not to get sucked in too much into the narrative style, so you can separate manipulation and stated facts easier.
When you disagree with such movies it's probably easier not to get sucked in too much into the narrative style, so you can separate manipulation and stated facts easier.
There is another kind of documentary, e.g. the Ken Burns style, that seems to take no position, similar to a piece of journalism. This is simply a different style of documentary.
You should check out Werner Herzog's "Lo and Behold", which may be at the center point of these two styles. In that film, Herzog is clearly stating a point of view, but the visual structure -- its scenes, setup, cinematography, and structure -- borrows from the journalistic style. If you put these three styles on a spectrum, perhaps then you will find the style itself isn't worth debating, just as George Orwell vs Jorge Luis Borges may have been writers of very different styles, but very (nonetheless) interesting content.
It still had beautiful cinematography, but I just couldn't enjoy the commentary.
To be honest: Yes. I kind of avoid columns for that reason. I get very little out of that kind of stuff. The same goes for those lengthy "long read" opinion pieces that have come into fashion. They're basically just very long columns.
But, I think the term "manipulative" suggests Curtis is somehow being "dishonest" in his filmmaking. I find that instead he's trying to craft an intellectual argument which may lead you to rethink things. In this film, the suggestion is that eroding at the nature of truth can lead to many in society feeling numb to current events, because they cannot trust what is "real" and what is "theater". The result might be fatalism/apathy. This is an interesting thought and, in my view, very relevant to our world.
Each one may be internally consistent, but the ones that overlap (in time or in subject matter) are semi-contradictory.
Still different strokes for different folks and all that.