Point and Shoot

"Point and shoot" can describe what you do with a camera in order to capture life. "Point and shoot" can also describe what you do with a weapon in order to take a life. These two concepts collide in filmmaker Marshall Curry's latest documentary, which just happens to be entitled "Point and Shoot".

Curry's film consists mostly of footage shot by its subject, one Matt Van Dyke. Mr. Van Dyke is an excellent representative of the current generation and its incessant need to digitally record each and everything about their lives and then foist it upon the public to provide validation for their existence. Van Dyke, a sheltered (some would say spoiled) individual with mental health issues (he admits to Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, but this film leaves you with the feeling there may be a whole lot more at play) decides that he wants to undertake a "crash course in manhood" through North Africa via a motorcycle and, of course, a video camera or two.

What might have been a semi-interesting documentary about world travel and the search for meaning in life soon takes a dark turn as Van Dyke ends up fighting on the side of the rebels during the Libyan revolution. Admittedly, there is value in the footage Van Dyke provides that gives us a rare look at a revolution from the inside, but the price we have to pay for that glimpse is more footage of Van Dyke posing and preening for the camera. This culminates in a stomach-churning scene where Van Dyke is pressed to kill a Libyan soldier, which at first he seems reluctant to do, but ultimately accepts – only after making sure his camera is recording it.

To have a film produced based on footage you shot of yourself must be a narcissist's wet dream. Van Dyke probably sees the release of this film as validation for all the choices he made and affirmation of his "manhood". At first glance, Curry seems to have provided this validation. Look deeper and you'll see a trenchant commentary on the voyeuristic nature of society today and how the meaning of "manhood" has changed from personal growth that is reached through a series of challenges and encounters to the filming and public exhibition of said transformation for all to see.

Matt Van Dyke's camera was clearly pointed at himself. Marshall Curry figuratively takes Van Dyke's camera and turns it back on us. As much as we don't like what we see in Van Dyke, when we think about what we watch today, be it "entertainment" or otherwise, should we feel any better about ourselves?

"Point and Shoot" is as frustrating and infuriating a film as I've seen in a long time.

"Point and Shoot" (2014 release; 83 min.) is a documentary about Matthew Vandyke, a 20-something guy who, having lived a sheltered life (only child of a well to do family), decides to do something about it and goes on a 3 year bike journey across much of Southern Europe and Northern Africa. Along the way he meets and befriends a guy from Libya, and the two develop a strong bond. At the end of 2010, Matt returns home to Baltimore, much to the relief of his girlfriend Lauren, who cannot believe how much Matt has matured (for the better). Then, just 2 months later, the Arab Spring explodes, including in Libya. Matt decides that he cannot stand idle so he returns to Libya to take up the fight alongside his friends against Omar Gaddafi. To tell you more would spoil your viewing experience, you'll just have to see how it all plays out.

Couple of comments: first, this is a very heavy Matt Vandyke-centric documentary. As we get to know him, including video clips from his youth, you can't help but wonder how in the world this guy gets along into his mid-20s without doing anything for himself. But at least he seems to realize that himself as well, reason that he decides to take a "crash course in manhood" (fueled by watching lots of TV and playing lots of video games). The first 30 min. of the documentary focuses mostly on that and the subsequent 3 year/35,000 mi. motorcycle journey (at no point is the question raised how he pays for all this). The remainder of the documentary focuses on his stint in Libya alongside the rebels, and makes for much more interesting viewing. If nothing else, it is fascinating to see archive footage of what Libya was like in those days, and the images are far more nuances that whatever footage we saw from US TV news. Second, as conflicted as I am about Vandyke, who seems mostly interested in himself, you can't help but at the same time also give him kudos for doing what he did, going to a war zone to fight alongside his Libyan friends against a brutal dictator. Beware, there are a number of very brutal scenes that may shock some viewers. Finally, there is a nice instrumental score by James Boxter, and for whatever reason the National also decided to contribute several tracks (including Mistaken for Strangers, and Hard to Find).

"Point and Shoot" opened without any pre-release buzz or advertising on a single screen for all of Greater Cincinnati this weekend. I figured this will not be playing log, so I went to see it right away, and at the early evening screening where I saw this at, I got a private screening (as in: I was literally the only person in the theater). This isn't the greatest of documentaries, but I'd still suggest you check it out, be it in the theater or eventually on DVD/Blu-day, and draw your own conclusion about "Point and Shoot".

What could have been a gripping documentary on the Libyan uprising and overthrow of Gadaffi turns out to be a distinctly uninteresting effort thanks to the focus on the character of Matthew Vandyke, a man who decides to discover himself by driving a motorbike through the Middle East. Vandyke turns out to be a narcissistic nobody who fancies himself as some kind of 'white saviour' figure, leaving the viewer with a bad taste in the mouth throughout.

The only genuinely interesting part of the production is the footage shot from the rebel lines in Libya; the rest is exposition and character-building, but you just don't care about the guy. There are lots of long-winded interviews with both Vandyke himself and his girlfriend in the kitchen and they don't add anything to the experience. Instead they detract from it, making this dull in the extreme except when it focuses on the good stuff. It made me long for a Ross Kemp documentary, where the presenter knows well enough to take a back seat to the real story.

This film could have easily been a docu-comedy if edited differently. But instead we are expected to take a delusional Matthew Vandyke seriously as he hits the road to battle his mild OCD, fight alongside rebel forces, get captured and imprisoned, and create a fictionalzed character for himself along the way. At first it was easy and entertaining to laugh at the observations and realizations that spew from Vandyke's mouth. But as the documentary is edited in such a way to reinforce Vandyke's idea of himself and his "adventure", I found myself becoming annoyed in the character occupying my TV who I'm suppose to be taking seriously. I think it's also worth mentioning Matthew's inflated idea self of importance, and misguided adventure would be funny if not for what he's continued to do since, and especially do to the success of Point and Shoot. The character that Vandyke created in Point he has bizarrely continued to personify long after the film ends. And again this two would also be funny except he's used his notoriety to meddle even more extensively in various other middle eastern affairs. It's unfortunate that Point and Shoot somehow has earned Vandyke credibility and a platform.

We are in a self-absorbed world. Thanks to the internet, we have Facebook, Twitter and many other sources where anyone can voice their opinion and talk about themselves...incessantly. And, we have cellphones with cameras...so people can endlessly text about themselves and send pictures of themselves. Whether any of this is worthwhile or interesting...who cares, as we are now the generation of ME! In light of this, a film like "Point and Shoot" isn't at all surprising because of its inherent narcissism...whether or not there really is anything to tell.

The film consists of a bazillion bits of video footage made by an obsessive-compulsive guy, Matthew Van Dyke. He films EVERYTHING during his travels--close ups of dirty toilets, himself falling off his motorcycle (probably because he was filming himself), boo boos he gets along the way as well as...well, just about everything. Most of it is very dull and extremely narcissistic. It's only when Matthew happens to fall in the middle of the Libyan revolution does it get less tedious. But even then, instead of being a HUGE story about the Arab Spring, too often it's really just about him. The reviewer Leofwine_draca felt that during much of the film, the focus was on the wrong things...and I clearly agree with them.

For me, I'd much rather see a documentary just about the Arab Spring--such as the great Oscar-nominated films "Karama Has No Walls" or "The Square"--not a film that mostly seems like an annoying vanity project. Lots of folks died for freedom and focusing on them and their cause should be THE focus of any documentary on these uprisings.