integrityandvalues Please read the first user's review, "Strains credibility." My first question started with this: How is it that Bruce knows about police...why not at least explain his process of understanding that the police would be the most likely place to seek help? In addition to "Strains credibility's" observant review I would like to add that Rupert Murray interviews a philosopher in order to address some of the deeper questions about person-hood, but never is the issue of the development of a person's morality addressed--not to mention Bruce's. Yet Bruce himself says that he feels an obligation "morally" to visit and reacquaint himself with his "lads" back in England. Where did this sense of moral character come from? ...if Bruce has suffered such a memory loss that he cannot recall anything from the people who raised him to any of the defining moments of his life? Also what of that morality when he finds himself in one of the most divided cities of haves and have-nots in the western hemisphere? Would Bruce not take any notice of, even for a moment identify with homelessness as he was wandering the streets aimlessly trying to find himself and a home? Would he not eventually contrast the homelessness that he witnessed (with his new acutely aware sensibility) to his princely lifestyle? I suppose in today's morally bankrupt existence Murray figured no one would notice such an oversight; or rather it did not occur to Murray himself to ponder the issue of where morality comes from to begin with--not to mention Bruce's heightened sense of it.Way, way, way too many holes in this oversimplified, flagrantly over-romanticized attempt at a documentary.By the end of the film I felt that my sense of compassion (and Bruce's condition if it were real) were Murray's vehicles of exploitation in order to show off some his "cool scavenged footage" and editing skills which were completely irrelevant to the film. Murray insults the viewer's intelligence as a completely privileged subjective prankster who goes unquestioned by the subjects in the film.

David Poole Assuming the whole thing wasn't a hoax, imaging the luck of being a budding film maker and having your friend suffer from one of the rarest and most bizarre medical conditions, which not only appeals to the public but which is perfect film material. I think Rupert Murray blew his chance, though. All the artistic camera angles and moods he tried to portray were totally unnecessary. Like a good chef knows not to embellish on quality ingredients, so a good film-maker knows not to embellish on a story that can't fail to be interesting. This film managed to achieve uninterestingness, though. For the first half, I could forgive the attempts to capture the mood of somebody coming to terms with retrograde amnesia, with the jaunty camera angles and ambient music, after all it's his first film, and he can be allowed a little pretentious leeway. However, as the film progressed and all we've learnt is what a wonderful life he had (and will have anew) and are subjected to close ups of his beautiful ex-girlfriends smiling and laughing seductively for the camera and close-ups of Douglas smiling gormlessly as he takes in things for the 'first' time, it starts to grate. Ultimately there was incredibly little of substance in a documentary that could have been twice as long and had 10 times the substance throughout. The fact that he comes from such a privileged background and is not short of money, love and support, shouldn't have detracted from how interesting his condition was; but it did, as the film-maker seemed more interested in celebrating the former and much less in investigating the latter. There seemed to be a suspicious and alarming acceptance of his condition from his family and friends. They seemed more interested in looking demure or cool for the camera than asking questions, that most viewers were probably screaming at the television, such as 'Have you checked your bank withdrawals from the few weeks leading up to the amnesia?'I think Rupert Murray was trying to make two films here and ended up effectively making none. Either make a film about your friend's memory loss, or make a film about beautiful people, with lots of close ups, longeurs and artistry, but don't make them both together.

Nooz Gardner What a compelling story, I could not imagine in my life that ever happening, but hey Doug is proof that it can. To wake up and be totally unable to know anything about yourself would be so weird. I know that sometimes when I am driving, for one second I seem to forget which side of the road I am meant to be on, so the longevity of Dougs dilemma (if it be that) would be way profound. He seems to have taken it in his stride, maybe we didn't get to see the "down" side very much, I would have liked to have seem some more emotion on his behalf. I wish him and Narelle all the best for his NEW life, just a real spinney movie, Rupert did an outstanding doco on his mate. Fantastic. I loved it..

kasserine According to the narrator of UNKNOWN WHITE MALE, Englishman Douglas Bruce mysteriously lost his memory one chilly autumn day and found himself walking around Coney Island in New York City in shorts and sandals. The film begins there with a brief recap of the events of his time in Coney Island and a psychiatric ward. In addition to interviews with doctors, Bruce's friends, girlfriends and family members, the viewer also sees footage Bruce shot himself in the days following his break from memory. So we see him rediscover such things as his apartment, different foods, and even a reunion with his father and two sisters, as well as various friends.This should be enlightening, exciting, fascinating or at the very least mildly interesting. But, very quickly after the first ten minutes or so of UNKNOWN WHITE MALE, it all becomes very uninteresting. This is a film about a 30-year-old man who has lost all of his memory. How possibly could this film not be engaging? Leave that to the particular talents of the director, or lack thereof, since director Rupert Murray manages to make the subject matter a fairly tedious exercise.As any dime store dramatist knows, conflict is what makes a story interesting. However, incredulously, there seems to be very little in a documentary film about a man who's lost his memory.There is no desperation to the situation. And as a work of non-fiction, this is, again, puzzling. Bruce has no financial worries, and has plenty of support at home. An ex-girlfriend flies from Poland to help him and Bruce is even "adopted" by another ex-girlfriends mother. What the film focuses on is his self-absorbed muddle through one encounter after another. There are only so many scenes of Bruce asking, in a child-like way, "what is this new food" when he samples chocolate again for the first time amongst other experiences. The most dramatic moment is Bruce meeting his father and sisters for the first time and learning that his mother has passed away some time before.His father and sisters seemed genuine enough and the moment felt sincere in its awkwardness, but, ultimately, I couldn't take much meaning away from it. The same held true when Bruce learns his mother was dead. As a dramatic moment it rang false. It just seems odd to be upset about a person he doesn't know. Seems more played for dramatic effect then anything else and that effect wasn't there.Because of this lack of drama, the occasional epiphanies about what is life and how our memories fit into the scheme of things, UNKNOWN WHITE MALE comes across as rather labored. There is only so much of Bruce's puppy dog eyes and meanderings a person can take.There is some controversy surrounding the film regarding whether or not Douglas Bruce is faking his memory loss and thus making the entire film a sham. I honestly couldn't care less and I think that is the main problem with UNKNOWN WHITE MALE I just don't care. For the record, however, I doubt that Mr. Bruce lost his memory. In addition to his history of self-indulgent adventures with his friends, he simply acts too much like someone who's lost their memory. And really, that's just it. It's as if he's giving a performance rather then merely being.In the end it doesn't really matter, since there is little to take from UNKNOWN WHITE MALE other then it's pretense and the mild interest of whether or not Bruce is faking it. I would have to go with what the French woman sitting next to me said during the film. "Zis Feelm et is so borhwring. Zis manh is ahnoying" Yes, unknown French female, he and et is.