lyndalu-45740
I was glued to my seat the entire time. Just when you think the story can't get any crazier, it does. The family is very "white trash" which may be part of the reason it didn't get media coverage. I highly recommend this documentary, very engrossing. As I watched, I kept thinking, "I can't believe that really happened".
John Lennon (luis-boaventura22)
To portray historical facts in cinema opens, usually, a delicate tension between the limits of dramatic effect and reliability of past events.Evidently, as the Luis Borges map drew attention, a representation is incapable of disclose the truth nature of a real object. However, a film, per si, do not should be purely objective, but rather pay attention to subjectively dramatic dimension.The issue of balance, therefore, it is stated by the very nature of the movie art. Lapidary carefully the limits of the intelligible and dramatic becomes, therefore, the very craftsmanship of the director. The question becomes more spicy as it brings into play a major limiter of the fictional liberty, that is, the need to narrate the reality without the direct filter of dramaturgy. Within this context, THE IMPOSTER has the exceptional merit of building a charged voltage narrative, which takes a surprisingly suggestive dramatic reversal, concluding with open elements a documentary narrative. More important, everything is just right, without sacrificing the dramatic element. It is to say, extraordinary events combined with a careful and progressive narrative results in a sweeping documentary.As for the actual content of the film, it is, however, the story of a succession of misunderstandings carved by a talented swindler of only 23 years. There is no mention of a great moral or social issue.The incredible story of a master forger do not initiates a deeper debate about immigration policies, or social inequality, the problems of investigative policy of various institutions, etc. It solely – and with indisputable merit – offers a dose of enchantment from incredible and improbable facts, coupled with a dubious criminal investigation.
yousefabdel
(*May contain spoilers*) The Imposter was intriguing and breathtaking as well as one of the best documentaries created in my opinion. It surprised me how well the director Bart Layton was able to keep the viewer gripped to their seat throughout the entire film with such an obvious ending. From the start the viewer was lead on and hinted by the director about how events have unfolded and the truth about Frederic, the con artist who pretends to be a missing boy in America. The director somehow manages to keep the escalating suspense and tension however with what he has to work with. He somehow places you right in the moment of action. He manages to make you feel like you are with Frederic during tense moments in the film, that every decision he makes somehow will affect you and that you will either survive together or go down together. These effects are best achieved through first person views by placing the viewer in Frederic's position. I believe Layton executes this perfectly without having to rely on cliché methods such as first person angles or through dialog. The result is a perfect edge clinging suspense film. One scene which best highlights this is the moment when Frederic receives a photocopy of what the boy he is imposing as looks like. In this scene you share the dread with Frederic as he realizes that he looks nothing like the missing boy yet the American government and the family have already gotten too involved and will soon see that. Bart Layton took a unique story and managed to turn it into something greater. This truly is one of the few documentaries in my experience to be able to suck you deep into the action and leave you stranded there with thousands of questions while trying to find your way back to reality.
LunaticFringe
--is the first that came to mind as I began writing this review, because it is the only word that is required. In fact, the very word "vapid" has more color and interest than this pointless movie. Yes, it's utterly POINTLESS. And that's not even hyperbole!This movie SO monumentally FAILED to live up to what I'd heard/read about it, that I was ANGRY by the time it was *finally* over. I'm a tough critic anyway, I know, but come ON. Some serious back- alley shenanigans involving critics' genitalia/star valves and the hands, mouths, and other assorted orifices of the producers/directors/actors/et al HAD to have occurred for this drivel to be so highly rated.I'd demand my money back, but I didn't pay to see it. Instead, I guess I'll just have to log into IMDb (which is rare) so I can vent my spleen.
AD
