Skip to main content

Guest Review: George On The Imposter

James A. George, Eyewear's film critic, weights in on The Imposter

The Imposter is a new documentary from Bart Layton about a young boy found in a phone box in Europe. Soon after, he is returned to his grieving family in Texas that lost him three years prior. A miracle, or too good to be true? The less known about this documentary the better, that is all you should know.

Even writing the words documentary to describe this film is a weird sensation. At points it is easy to forget you are watching a documentary at all, not only due to the shocking jolts and turns in the story that seem so unlikely you could be mistaken for thinking you were watching a hastily scribbled action movie. But due also to the creative cinematography. Far from recreating scenes the strange history in a crimewatch style, the scenes are dramatised with actors and shot to show the multiple point of views of the events as they unfold; be it the police, the family or the imposter.  Bart Layton and his action-movie editor toy with the idea of subjectivity through shifts in point of view visually and narratively. Many documentaries are simply voice over with archive footage and result in an ultimately informative yet not particularly filmic and rather lecturing, whereas the methods described before result in gripping cinema entertainment as well as a revelatory factual documentary.

The themes of manipulation, belief, truths and trust are not only embedded in the story and plot. Layton’s almost absent authorisation of the film, yet expert storytelling, manipulates the viewer and makes them question everyone presented to them as well as the viewers own thoughts. Information is trickled out craftily and different interviews juxtapose one another’s stories. By the time local Texan private detective gets involved, the whole thing becomes so wild, unpredictable and deceptive that it is as darkly funny as it is enjoyable.

In the tiny cinema I saw this in there was a mixture of dropped jaws, withheld sniggering and outright shrieking with words like “liar” or “nutcase” lingering around. It is without doubt one of the best films of the year and deserves all the worldwide praise it has been getting. While this review may seem rather vague (which it is vital to the true enjoyment of this film) I cannot make clear enough how fascinating, fulfilling and shocking this documentary is. See it in the cinema if you can, the visual construction definitely warrants it, as do the voices of others in the cinema. You may think you know what is coming, but you certainly do not.
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog


According to the latest CBS, ABC, etc, polls, Clinton is still likely to beat Trump - by percentile odds of 66% to 33% and change. But the current popular vote is much closer, probably tied with the error of margin, around 44% each. Trump has to win more key battleground states to win, and may not - but he is ahead in Florida...

We will all know, in a week, whether we live in a world gone madder, or just relatively mad.

While it seems likely calmer heads will prevail, the recent Brexit win shows that polls can mislead, especially when one of the options is considered a bit embarrassing, rude or even racist - and Trump qualifies for these, at least.

If 42-45% of Americans admit they would vote for Trump, what does that say about the ones not so vocal? For surely, they must be there, as well. Some of the undecided will slide, and more likely they will slide to the wilder and more exciting fringe candidate. As may the libertarians.

Eyewear predicts that Trump will just about manage to win th…


Like a crazed killer clown, whether we are thrilled, horrified, shocked, or angered (or all of these) by Donald Trump, we cannot claim to be rid of him just yet. He bestrides the world stage like a silverback gorilla (according to one British thug), or a bad analogy, but he is there, a figure, no longer of fun, but grave concern.

There has long been a history of misogynistic behaviour in American gangster culture - one thinks of the grapefruit in the face in The Public Enemy, or Sinatra throwing a woman out of his hotel room and later commenting he didn't realise there was a pool below to break her fall, or the polluted womb in Pacino'sScarface... and of course, some gangsta rap is also sexist.  American culture has a difficult way with handling the combined aspects of male power, and male privilege, that, especially in heteronormative capitalist enclaves, where money/pussy both become grabbable, reified objects and objectives (The Wolf of Wall Street for instance), an ugly fus…


The Oscars - Academy Awards officially - were once huge cultural events - in 1975, Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr, Shirley MacLaineandBob Hope co-hosted, for example - and Best Picture noms included The Conversation and Chinatown. Godfather Part 2 won. Last two years, movies titled Birdman and Spotlight won, and the hosts and those films are retrospectively minor, trifling. This year, some important, resonant films are up for consideration - including Hidden Figures and Moonlight, two favourites of this blog. Viola Davis and Denzel Washington will hopefully win for their sterling performances in Fences. However, La La Land - the most superficial and empty Best Picture contender since Gigi in 1959 (which beat Vertigo) - could smite all comers, and render this year's awards historically trivial, even idiotic.

The Oscars often opt for safe, optimistic films, or safe, pessimistic films, that are usually about white men (less often, white women) finding their path to doing the right thin…