Assignment 3: Critical Analysis of "Catfish"

Assignment: Film Review with some critical analysis/opinion.  Avoid summarizing the film (we've all seen it) but don't overlook introducing it.  Within your essay, you should make your case for whom you sympathize more strongly with:  Nev or Angela, or both or no one.  I want your opinion on the film.

Things you should do: Watch the film again (especially if you slept - I copied down the names of students who did sleep), and read up on it.

Your goal: Express an opinion that's interesting and dynamic. You can branch off and isolate any issue that the film brings up. Film-making integrity, online behavior, social privacy, identity theft, reality TV etc. etc. etc. There's no shortage. No need to write too formally. Have fun.

Length: 500-700 words.

Due: Before the final exam.  The sooner the better - strike when the coal is hot and your opinion warm.

FORMAT: Use MLA format in terms of Double Spacing, Font Size and Font type, and Student Info.  Don't know what MLA format is?  Here you are:

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/01/

"They used to tank cod from Alaska all the way to China. 

They'd keep them in vats in the ship. 

By the time the codfish reached China, the flesh was mush and tasteless. 

So this guy came up with the idea that if you put these cods in these big vats, 

put some catfish in with them

  that the catfish will keep the cod agile.

And there are those people who are catfish in life. 

And they keep you on your toes. 

They keep you guessing, 

they keep you thinking, 

they keep you fresh. 

And I thank god for the catfish 

because we would be droll, 

boring 

and dull 

if we didn't have somebody nipping at our fin."

- Vince Pierce

Poetry?  Perhaps.  Scripted?  Maybe. And that's why I like this "documentary," and selected it as fodder for your next assignment. It's a rare documentary that easily generates discussion, and it is well suited to the process of digging and then writing.   We don't have to like "Catfish" to have an opinion about it, and there are clear issues we can deduce.  Is it fake or is it real?  The question is apparently pressing enough for someone to start a blog - www.iscatfishfake.com. And what's interesting about this film is how we, as viewers, can easily follow the lives of those involved after watching.  A visit to Angela's personal blog says a lot about who she is, and why she did what she did.

My opinion? I've now watched this film more than a few times, and on every occasion I've noticed something new that causes me to doubt the legitimacy of it.  However far that goes is up for debate, but I think the filmmakers have performed some clever "sleight of hand" to magically manufacture what they claim as "100% true."  Ironically, Angela might be the most "real" thing in this story.  She was genuinely awkward, genuinely taken by surprise, and genuinely infatuated with Nev.  But how real was Nev?  Does this trailer do justice to the actual film, or simply mislead audiences to assume it would be some new genre we might call "cyber horror" or a reality thriller?  Already, we can see this film walks an uneven path, and has some goals in mind from the onset.

Nev, along with his brother Ariel and friend Henry, are three filmmakers.  Filmmakers make films - and this is something we have to keep in mind.  In Catfish, we meet Nev as a good looking, charismatic guy in his early 20's, who has an interest in the arts.  He lives in downtown New York, meets dancers on a regular basis, and probably has no problem attracting women in the real world.  So why on line?

Supposedly, he falls in love with "Meg" through Facebook, and communicates with her by phone and internet for 8 months.  She's only 19, lives in a small town which might as well be on the other side of the country, and there really isn't much that SHOULD make this romance work.  So my question -  why pursue it?  In my opinion, the answer is simple - to make a film, be invited to Cannes film festival, and rake in thousands of dollars.  And all those things occurred (at least for the filmmakers).

If not entirely fake (with Angela participating), I think the film was "reverse engineered" - rationalized and/or staged to fit the criteria of a great story.  It seems like a journey of illumination, when in fact it was always a hunt.  A hunt to exploit an obvious imposter who really just wanted to make her life more interesting.  

Some red flags that I don't think the filmmakers can explain: web-cameras have been standard features on computers for more than a decade.  Wouldn't it be natural for this couple to use one?  Or at least a personal video from a camera?  Furthermore, Angela doesn't strike me as that effective a writer.  All her Facebook entities were too good to be true, and they all signed off from their messages similarly.  They all sounded the same.  Elaborate and creative - yes; but a genius liar?  Not at all.  I simply don't buy that Nev had no idea.  I think he and his brother and Henry knew very well they were dealing with an imposter, and they invited her to expand her story until it became worthy of an ambush.  It was never really a film to be made about Abby, and the "moment of realization" we see happen in Vail, Colorado (probably "Crossing the Threshold" in the Hero's Journey), was completely performed (as were most scenes featuring Nev).

So I do personally think that they crossed a blurry line of filmmaker etiquette, and we can see that they, along with Universal Pictures, spent at least a couple of years hashing out the details of the film before it was released - steps that include a long legal process of getting permissions and tracking down the models Angela assembled in her story.  Despite the potential damage this film might have caused the Pierce family, we can assume that all would be forgiven in the name of financial opportunity for everyone involved.

Clearly, Angela's art career has taken off a bit, as we can see from this YouTube video.  It's weird, and I have no idea why these people made it the way they did (because they are weird to?), but Angela actually DOES appear in person near the end.  Why Nev and "Megan" never exchanged this kind of thing is a big question mark for me:

To say the least, there is no shortage of discussion and intrigue for you to touch upon in your written response.  Keep in mind that the film was filmed over 4 years ago, and released two years ago.  Things have changed and there is a constant flow of new "news" on the project, including a potential TV show based on the documentary.  The careers of Nev and Ariel have taken off, and as mentioned they were creators of Paranormal Activity 3.  The producers chose them for the project based on Catfish.  Any similarities? In hindsight it's a bit telling to say the least.

Wikipedia, as always, is a treasure trove of primary sources if you go to the bottom.  IMDB, as well has interesting discussions in the comment section, and even Rotten Tomatoes.   You can even visit Nev at Facebook, and see Angela's art site.  YouTube has tons of follow up, and Angela was even on 20/20.  If you really want to experience online voyeurism, you can even explore Nev's Macbook here.

So, have some fun with this informal writing exercise.  I'd like you to share your personal opinions, and branch off however you see fit in order to enrich the assignment.  I myself am "friends" with Angela on Facebook, and once in a while I see a bit of small town weirdness pop up in my news-feed.  Why not add her yourself?:)  If you need to review the film, I have it on file, or you can easily get it yourself from the pirate bay dot org.

UPDATE:  Even the OST is interesting.  The cover of Good Vibrations we hear was sung my The Langley School Music Project.

 Here's a documentary:

Interestingly, this kind of project still continues today with PS22.  Here's their blog and an Eminem cover:

Total Scores - Final Exam

Below is the final scoring for this class.   Regarding the final exams, I was generally impressed with most of them and it was refreshing to read some heartfelt writing about the upcoming year.  A few of you who don't tend to fair as well in grammar REALLY impressed me with some clean writing.  Whether you realize it or not, KMLA's constant reading and writing has actually had an effect (even if my class was pretty easy this semester).  I think you guys are pretty much ready for the big year ahead.

As for the Final, the higher scoring papers covered the prompt more thoroughly than those that scored lower.  It is good to discuss Rohan's paper and the Dean's action in equal parts with your plans for next semester.  Some of you did some weird stuff like "breaking the fourth wall" and talking about Mr. Garrioch in the essay Mr. Garrioch is reading.  Sometimes it is "cute."  Sometimes it is "cheeky." And no it wasn't that guy you think it is. : )

You were a fun group and I'm sorry I didn't make you work like slaves.   I'm sure you wanted that though, right?  LOL.  Or is it LoL. :)

As for NEIS comments, let me know if you want one.  I have tons of Domestic field freshman to write comments for so I won't write them for you guys unless you request them.

　

		Final Exam	Mid Term	Perf.
		15.0%	10.0%	75.0%
Student ID	TOTAL
Kickback	90.51	91.40	89.60	90.45
Optimus Prime	90.71	92.00	92.00	90.27
Bumblebee	90.88	90.20	90.00	91.13
Ratchet	90.87	91.80	90.20	90.77
Ironhide	88.26	89.60	90.70	87.66
Mudflap	90.04	90.40	89.40	90.05
Jolt	90.83	88.90	89.40	91.40
Inferno	90.79	90.80	89.90	90.91
Sentinal	90.21	89.30	89.00	90.55
Wheeljak	91.89	89.80	89.40	92.64
Megatron	91.52	91.00	90.30	91.78
Demolisher	90.96	90.80	89.60	91.17
Star Scream	91.14	89.50	89.90	91.63
Ravage	87.90	90.00	90.50	87.13
Devastator	90.36	89.10	89.00	90.79
Rampage	91.04	90.60	91.50	91.06
Scrapper	89.81	91.60	89.10	89.55
Laserbeak	91.76	91.20	90.00	92.11
	TOTAL
Average	90.53	90.44	89.97	90.61
Highest	91.89	92.00	89.99	92.64
Lowest	87.90	88.90	89.00	87.13