In Aguirre Herzog and his cinematographer Thomas Mauch make us especially aware of how the trappings of civilization that the Spaniards bring with them--the sedan chairs, the armor, the brocades, the sexual and social customs--become encumbrances in a primitive natural world that seems literally to seethe around them. (The telephoto shot of the churning river is the emblem of the expedition's, of man's, fate.) Even a horse becomes a liability if it can't cope with the terrain--a horse on a raft can be a frighteningly destabilizing element. In Heart of Glass (1976), a medieval village disintegrates when the craftsman who alone knows the secret of making the town's distinctive ruby-colored glass dies; in Fitzcarraldo (1982) an Irishman drags a 300-ton ship over a mountain as part of a scheme to build an opera house in the South American jungle. Again and again, Herzog dramatizes the vulnerability of human culture in the face of nature. This tension, this challenge, inherent in human existence, is more memorable in Herzog's movies than the skepticism about Germany's feudal past in Heart of Glass or the implied critique of European colonial and mercantile adventurism in Aguirre and Fitzcarraldo. Treadwell's situation generates more pathos, however, because he's not trying to sustain culture against inevitable decay. On the contrary, he thinks he's trying to escape civilization and imagines he's more in tune with the natural world than a human probably can be.
Like Heart of Glass, however, the situation in Grizzly Man brings out the philosophy major in Herzog and he lays it on thick. Heart of Glass is a fiction film and Herzog puts his musings into the characters' mouths; the ratio of musing to action is so great the movie becomes encephalitic. It's a depressive, disarticulated movie; sitting through it was indistinguishable from having a migraine, the only relief provided by derision and fast-forwarding. In Grizzly Man Herzog goes overboard in commenting on Treadwell's attitude toward the natural world, but it goes down better because some commentary seems called for.
Of course, much of Herzog's commentary is in its own way poetry of the second order. Treadwell thinks he has a mutually protective understanding with the bears; Herzog thinks Treadwell is blind to the "fact" that the entire universe is defined by chaos and murder. But "murder," implying malice and premeditation, and a consciousness that you're doing something your fellow creatures consider unjustifiable, is as much a human projection as anything Treadwell says. Male bears fighting for dominance aren't trying to "murder" each other. (And you can't say that Herzog is misspeaking a foreign language because his English is superb, and in any case the German word "der Mord" is a close cognate and carries the same connotations.) Some clichés are sunny while others are occulted but both may obscure their subject.
Article comments
1 - Purple Tigress
March of the Penguins as we know it here is not how it was originally made. I understand the French version of the narration had a greater tendency to anthropormorphize the actions of the penguins. The French version is what was seen at Sundance.
Whether or not this is the feeling of the cinematographers is not evident. Perhaps they only wished to make this available to a wider audience. Perhaps this was a decision of the producer. So while the original narration may have bolstered your argument, interviews about the narration (both in English and French) would have further solidified your reasoning.
Also, you should note that while Timothy Treadwell claimed to spend 13 years alone, he was not always alone. There were girlfriends besides Jewel and Amie. That was part of his myth making and Herzog also alludes to this. There are also blogs that testify to tourists who were able to meet and talk with Treadwell while he was in the bush.
One point the documentary doesn't make clear is that they cannot prove that Treadwell was attacked and eaten by the same bear or even eaten by just one bear.
2 - Alan Dale
Thanks for the comment. You're right that I have ascribed the flaws of the American version of March of the Penguins to the moviemaking "team," in which I include the director, screenwriters, and producers. I didn't have the information to ascribe it more particularly. It is also the case that the French version appears to have been worse. IMDB.com lists, for instance, French voice actors for the mother, father, and child penguins.
As for Grizzly Man, Herzog points out when Treadwell's girlfriend is holding the camera. He notes two instances of it. I assume that when he went through the footage he would have noticed the same telltale signs from earlier summers. Maybe not, though. I don't think it makes that much difference, however, if Treadwell was monologuing to someone behind the camera. The content of what he said is the same, even if the situation is somewhat different. Also, as I recall they found human remains and clothing inside the bear they killed. Yes, it can't be proven that that is the bear Treadwell had photographed, but I believe their theory about the bear being older and desperately hungry holds good as a general matter and seems likely. It may be wrong, but again it doesn't change that much. Treadwell was not "studying" the bears in any meaningful scientific way and plainly, judging from the results, was not an expert at reading bear behavior.
3 - ss
Alan:
Thanks for a great review.
'My Best Fiend', 'Aguirre: The Wrath of God', and 'Grizzly Man'
These are the only Herzog titles I've seen so far. I'm going to have to check out 'Fitzcarraldo'.
What's great about these movies, despite the plodding stories, is Herzog's valiant attempt to avoid simple themes in describing irreducibly complex situations.
His attraction to people who do simplify the world down into familiar, palatable terms, and his fascination with the ability these weavers of archetypal fairytales have to get other people to follow them, to their own mutual destruction, his ability to admit this fascination while not romanticizing these characters, makes for something unique.
You're right, he falls into the same trap himself with the nihilism, but perhaps this nihilism is what keeps him from romanticizing his charasmatic, destructive dreamers.
Without it, he might have shot 'Natural Born Killers' instead of 'Grizzly Man'.
4 - Alan Dale
Thanks for the comment. You got Herzog right--he strictly avoids the gratifying simplifications we're used to at the movies. His avoidance has its own pitfalls--cheerless rather than cheery simplifications--but even that is so rare in the movies that it can be bracing even when it's not exactly profound. It can also be lethal (Heart of Glass) but generally it's pretty stimluating. If you have a certain temperament, anyway. I've been watching one Herzog movie after another at home and my boyfriend thinks I've gone off my rocker, except to the extent he thinks I may have found the cure for insomnia.
I'm also glad you pointed out the way that certain of Herzog's mad characters get other people to follow them--the phenomenon that haunted mid-20th century Germany.
5 - ss
Not to mention the turn of the 21st century Muslim world, as well as early 21st century America.
Strange how a 'philosphical' film maker got to the heart of that one so much more cleanly than the 'political' film makers with their conspiracy theories and simple reductions of phantasmagoric situations.
6 - Alan Dale
Interesting. Yes, the direct route doesn't necessarily lead to the most satisfying results when it comes to political movies, as I think The Constant Gardener and Lord of War show.
7 - ss
I liked both those movies, but I walked away a little disappointed in in each case.
Feines death seemed to indulge the messianic urge a bit to much in CG,
and the first hour of LoW, the 'Blow' of gun running part, could have been better.
8 - Alan Dale
Stay tuned--I'm working on a review of Constant Gardener and maybe of Lord of War though I found the latter outright dull. I used to find Nicolas Cage outrageously amusing. What happened?