It's interesting to note that Herzog said much the same thing about the jungle in Les Blank's documentary Burden of Dreams (1982), which covers the shooting of Fitzcarraldo and its numerous fiascos, involving an uncooperative river and the formidable mountain. We hear in that film that the historical figure Fitzcarraldo carried the ship over the mountain dismantled in 14 or so pieces, and that it was only 30 tons to begin with, and realize that Herzog has courted his disaster in the jungle. He doesn't appear to see it this way, however, and so when his juggernaut of a ship is immovably mired he says directly to Blank's camera, "The trees here are in misery, the birds are in misery. I don't think they sing, they just screech in pain." And then, "Taking a close look at what's around us there is some sort of harmony; it is the harmony of overwhelming and collective murder." I suppose a German can't hear how ineffably "German," i.e., solemnly overwrought, these comments sound. Herzog doesn't even seem to catch the irony that by trying to literally drag the ship over the mountain he has, in effect, become Fitzcarraldo, times ten, a notable monomaniac in his own right.
Herzog also says some things in Burden of Dreams that could have come out of Treadwell's mouth: "If I abandon this project I would be a man without dreams and I don't want to live like that. I live my life or I end my life with this project," and, speaking of his indigenous actors, "I don't want to live in a world where there are no lions anymore, where there are no people like lions, and they are lions." Altogether Herzog does not seem very self-aware. (In Mein liebster Feind (1999), his documentary about Kinski, for instance, Herzog doesn't address what struck me as the central question: since he experienced Kinski's erratic and violent moods in close quarters at age 13, why did he send the script of Aguirre to him and why did he work with him four more times after Kinski's impossible behavior that first time out?) And yet Herzog's distance as a moviemaker from the relaxed middle range of perception and emotion enables him to understand Treadwell both from the inside and the outside. Herzog, a child of the '60s, seems to sympathize with Treadwell in some way, but is, in Ruskin's terms, "the man who perceives rightly in spite of his feelings." His irony keeps him in orbit here, despite whatever pull Treadwell may exert.
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?