A privileged white dude complains about how he feels disconnected from his family, so he spends a year harassing an octopus.
It literally tries to run away and he stalks it, it's creepy.
I thought he was suffering from burnout. Regardless, it's possible to be rich and sad at the same time. You don't have to have empathy for the guy if you don't want to, but if we're turning suffering into a competition, there will always be someone with bigger problems than you.
> It literally tries to run away and he stalks it, it's creepy.
Scientists observe animals that try to run away all the time. And it did approach him on multiple occasions as well.
I found it to be a fascinating case study in the life of an octopus in it's natural environment. These long form animal documentaries are a lot more interesting to me than "Earth" or the like where it's a rapid fire, quick form snapshot into multiple animal species.
Is our curiosity about the world not one of the fundamental features of humanity?
The fact that a man is able to rediscover his fervor for life in something as lowly as an octopus seems to me to be nothing short of beautiful.
The film is antithetical to our fractured modern society of ease, reason, disregard for our lowlier neighbors on this planet, and mindless consumption.
Its frustrating to me that its expectedly relegated to the doc category while a vapid, shallow commentary on modern life such as Nomadland is nominated for best picture.
shrug other people who dive in that bay would stalk it, catch it, kill it and later that day; cook and serve it with some nice white wine to their family. Is that less creepy?
As I recall, not even a single line in one of the talking-head section even as simple as "I've been incredibly lucky to be at a place in my life where I have the resources to make this film." I found this lack to be particularly off-putting when the general message (of this otherwise good documentary) is more-or-less "You can strengthen your soul by connecting with nature".
What's the goal of this though?
Any popular documentary is the result of privilege somewhere along the line.
Either it's self-funded by a privileged person, or it raised money from privileged people. Either way, all the content you're able to view on TV, streaming or in the movies is because someone along the line had the privilege to make the film, promote it and distribute it. And those privileged people are likely the ones benefiting the most from it.
So is the goal to just acknowledge when the protagonist has privilege or should everyone involved in the film do it?
"I was unhappy in my life so I spent time personally connecting with and understanding nature and now I feel more fulfilled and whole as a person" is likely to cause viewers who think "Yikes, I sure wish I could afford to drop everything go swimming every day" to respond with resentment. A small acknowledgement of this disconnect can be enough to bring those viewers back in to engage with the core message.
The "goal" is to craft a more resonant/engaging story. I think you need to assess why you have assumed I have some sort of agenda or why this should apply in the exact same way to all media.
Or maybe instead of "Luckily, I had time and savings to figure things out." something just slightly more verbose like "I have been extremely fortunate in my life to have the time and savings to figure things out"
Really? I doubt given the choice that many people would choose to dedicate a year to daily cold water swimming and filmmaking.
And we have no idea about the financial arrangements. Maybe he pitched the idea and got an advance. And we don’t know if he was consulting on the side.
Resentment probably says more about the viewer than the filmmaker. At that point you might just as well resent capitalism.
> The "goal" is to craft a more resonant/engaging story
The privilege exists wether it’s acknowledged or not. I don’t need all my characters to be fully self-aware or without flaws to find them engaging. But we know very little of his life story. All we see is a small glimpse into the fact that he’s burnt out.
> I think you need to assess why you have assumed I have some sort of agenda
I didn’t assume you had an agenda. Why did you assume that? I meant “what’s the goal” as in “what’s the point”, like “why is that important to you”.
Yes. I do not doubt given the choice that many people would choose to dedicate a year to daily cold water swimming and filmmaking.
> And we have no idea about the financial arrangements.
Maybe it could be anything. But the story as presented in the movie is: a burnt-out white guy (who lives in an ocean-view villa in South Africa) spends every day filming an octopus.
> I don’t need all my characters to be fully self-aware or without flaws to find them engaging.
I'm not talking about all characters and I don't understand why you are.
> I didn’t assume you had an agenda. Why did you assume that?
Because I made what I thought was a relatively small and reasonable observation. Your response (instead of engaging with that point perhaps by arguing that My Octopus Teacher is improved by the fact that the main character seems like an out of touch "What's a banana cost? Ten dollars?" rich guy) was to bring in wild hyperbole about applying this specific observation to every one in every thing couched in the extremely broad statement "Any popular documentary is the result of privilege somewhere along the line."
> I meant “what’s the goal” as in “what’s the point”
To craft a more resonant/engaging story
> “why is that important to you”
Because I like engaging stories that feel fully thought out.
No way. Most people don't like swimming, the ocean, free diving or being cold. The subset that likes all 4 and has enough dedication to do it every day for an entire year regardless rain, wind or injury and has a passion for filmmaking is very, very small. That's why this documentary is so impressive and why the footage is so rare. Because very few people who are rich enough to work on a film project for a year would ever spend their time in this way.
> a burnt-out white guy (who lives in an ocean-view villa in South Africa) spends every day filming an octopus
I don't understand why his identity is as important as the content he created. The story to me is: "cold water free diver develops a passion for open ocean swimming and bonds with an octopus while capturing rare, intimate footage of the creature's life, death and everything in between".
> Because I made what I thought was a relatively small and reasonable observation.
It's not a small or reasonable observation to me. I've never seen another documentary about a rich, white male where they need to state their privilege. So that's why I was wondering if it's something particular to this individual or more like you want anyone with privilege in any documentary to acknowledge it, otherwise you'll feel resentment towards them.
> Your response (instead of engaging with that point perhaps by arguing that My Octopus Teacher is improved by the fact that the main character seems like an out of touch "What's a banana cost? Ten dollars?" rich guy) was to bring in wild hyperbole about applying this specific observation to every one in every thing couched in the extremely broad statement "Any popular documentary is the result of privilege somewhere along the line."
Because I have no idea where you would draw the line. Is it only self-made documentaries where people have to acknowledge their privilege? The problem is way deeper than that. People with privilege decide what content options you're able to watch and which projects get funded and who makes them which is a way bigger issue than some random guy you'll never meet acknowledging his privilege or not while making an introspective nature film. If you find yourself resenting this guy, it must be rough resenting at least someone in nearly every documentary on Netflix. Almost all of them have a rich, white male at some point and I've never seen 1 acknowledge their privilege on film. And there's no mention of how he got the beach house or his family history. You're just filling in the blanks that this guy doesn't know the price of bananas when you know little to nothing about him except for that he has a nice house. There are tons of nice beach houses in CA that are super remote, precisely because people build them by hand and the roads / utilities are poor so no one wants to live there. We have no idea how much his house is worth or how desirable that location is.
> To craft a more resonant/engaging story > Because I like engaging stories that feel fully thought out.
The format of a documentary is designed to be a window into someone's reality. A good documentary shouldn't be trying to craft a message or to make someone more likable. This just happens to be a documentary about a white, rich, male, but that's incidental to the focus of the film which is why it wasn't necessary to address it. The guy had a ton of brilliantly shot underwater footage. I really don't see the point in resenting him for that.
In case you care to know:
https://www.property24.com/for-sale/simons-town/western-cape...
https://www.greeff.co.za/results/residential/for-sale/simons...
People always tend to acknowledge their privilege or advantages. Here in the US we even have a national holiday for just that [0].
Don't try to twist this into some culture war bullshit.
However.
Saying that Thanksgiving "acknowledges your privileges" is possibly the strangest and most disconnected thing I've ever heard an American say. And that's a pretty high bar.
This was filmed near Simon's Town, near Cape Town (1)
One can feel blessed living in that part of the world near beach and mountains. There are also still some appalling 3rd world tin-shack slums in Cape Town. It's a part of the world where the privilege is very easy to see, if you care to see it.