Has anyone seen this movie? Wow. I rented it the other night and it kept me up until 3 in the morning and I can't even explain why. I didn't know much about this movie except that it was about a man who lived among grizzly bears in Alaska and who was eventually killed by a bear. From this, I assumed that Timothy Treadwell, the title character, was a scientist of some sort--a biologist or an ecologist. I didn't know that he was a novice, a lost boy, a manic Mr. Rogers with a bandana instead of a sweater and a neighborhood full of grizzlies. When I first started watching the movie, I thought I couldn't finish it because Treadwell was so saccharine, so absurd.
But I got caught up in the narrative, the strangeness of it all. I started rewatching it the next day, but I didn't think I could handle it all again. I think what kept me up was thinking about how confused we are about the natural world. Here's a man who feels so out of place in the world of people that he decides to retreat to the wild. But he doesn't fully understand what that wild, animal world is all about. He talked often about how the bears could maim and kill, but he didn't really seem to believe it. Or he seemed to believe that it wouldn't happen to him, that he was somehow different, that he was somehow a bear. One of the men who helped with the recovery effort for Treadwell's body said that Treadwell seemed to think that the bears were just people in bear's clothing. That seemed an accurate assessment. I understand his need to retreat into wild nature because we have removed ourselves inappropriately far from those wild places and creatures and I think in doing so, we lose something of ourselves. But in the removal, I think it's easy to forget that wild nature is, well, wild and grizzly bears aren't fuzzy friends that we can call Mr. Chocolate.
Sunday, February 05, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Some friends told us about this film, which sounds great and spooky. I heard there is footage of the guy petting a bear, or trying to pet a bear? I think it's indicative of our desensitization about wilderness.
When we were in Teton NP with Ross (he was about 18 months)we saw a bear and turned the other way. We told everyone who passed us, but they just smiled and kept going. Even an older woman with two yippy dogs. They looked like appetizers to me.
I think people think of wilderness as the subject of photography. They forget that animals are "real."
I really hate how we anthropomorphize animals. I gave "March of the Penguins" a miss for this very reason (although I heard it was spectacular). Animals are cute..that is, until they maul your ass!
I meant to comment on this. I didn't like the guy that much for the reasons that E states but the movie is compellingly made. See "The White Diamond" also by Herzog. It is a similar tale of a somewhat wacky guy out exploring nature, but the guy he is profiling isn't so out there.
Anyway great and disturbing movie. Herzog is the master at the uncomfortable edit.
I woke up thinking of a scene this morning; it is one of the last shots in the guy's camera--his fiance is ducking out of the way of a bear. Herzog narrates that as he watched the footage he could not see what the guy saw, but only a cold calculating animal with (I think he said this) "dead eyes."
This movie totally disturbed me, esp the contrast between the manic Mr. Rogers, as you name him, and the powerful beasts/harsh landscapes. I could barely watch when skippy would go into that high-pitched kid's voice: "Mr. wolf is grumpy today...don't be made at me...I love you, I love you so very much."
I'd forgotten the "Mr. Chocolate" line--what ravign lunatic. My soft spot for Tim hardens with time.
Post a Comment