Reviews: "My Kid Could Paint That;" "For the Bible Tells Me So"

By Susan Gerhard

Rashomon to judgment: Is “My Kid Could Paint That” and the art of nonfiction storytelling.

While critical distance is commonly expected in mainstream journalism, the “conflict of interest” clause is pretty much beside the point in the personally entwining world of documentary. The filmmaker and the filmed share the most intimate of rituals in a collaborative project both hope will bring good fortune. Without some conflict, it seems, there is no interest, which may be why the documentary filmmaker’s Moment of Doubt is becoming a fairly standard plot point. At times one could chart the intensity of an audience’s belief in a filmmaker’s conclusions as directly proportional to how much skepticism the filmmaker develops for his or her subjects in the course of their relationship.

[SF360.org editor’s note: This review appeared originally in indieWIRE during the Sundance Film Festival.

Taking a leaf from “Capturing the Friedmans,” “My Kid Could Paint That” invites its audience into the home of a family to judge whether a 4-year-old artist is a prodigy, or a hoax. Like “Friedmans,” which welded together a family portrait with essayistic takes on ’80s sexual hysteria, “My Kid” marries its portraiture and investigation to an essay on art. Unlike “Friedmans,” the filmmaker will not really bend the stick back toward his subjects, but instead offer audiences an insider’s criticisms of his own project, approach, and conclusions as an act of intellectual generosity.

With key commentary from the best of talking heads – from Elizabeth Cohen, the well spoken local reporter who broke the story, to New York Times art critic Michael Kimmelman, who put the story in perspective – it builds on the question implied by its title. If a “kid” could truly paint a Pollock, in this case a 4-year-old who could be at home on a Gerber label, is a Pollock really worth that much? That question about art, however, leads to another about ethics: If a kid’s Pollock was actually created by an adult, is the adult more fraudulent than the too-easily replicable modern art? And that ethical question – which finally sends the director’s sympathies away from his subjects — leads to yet another about documentary filmmaking itself: Whose story is it, anyway?

Director Amir Bar-Lev does an excellent job developing his characters, timing his revelations, and managing his second-guesses. He understands we have to first love, or at least open up to, this family (who’s described as Gap-ad beautiful by its gallery rep) before we can begin to care about the conflict later. He cleverly peppers the innocent-portraiture section of the film with all the facts he’ll later use to damn the family after “60 Minutes II” raises questions about who, really, is making the art. (The parents, we’ve learned, work opposite shifts – one in a dental office, the other at a Frito-Lay factory – so the articulate, caring mother may not, in fact, realize what her mate’s been up to at the easel.)

Though insightful, one can’t help but wonder how seriously Bar-Lev takes his late-in-the-game self-reflections. The weakness in the story comes from the fact that this art fraud, if that’s what it indeed is, is a somewhat victimless crime. The price? Clueless collectors who drive off in tasteless, gas-guzzling Hummers are minus a little pocket change and a few grand illusions. Cost to a family, who, for the umpteenth time has lost a platform for proving its innocence? Priceless.

“For the Bible Tells Me So” is evenhanded, and even enlightened.

In the U.S. culture wars that are crudely nutshelled as “Red State” versus “Blue State — though needless to say there’s a lot of red, blue, and purple in each — there is a Ground Zero conflict more potent than race, class, faith or economics. It’s this: Christian versus Gay. Of course, plenty of Christians are gay-tolerant. And a lot of gays are Christian.

But no “threat” is more exploitable amongst certain, largely fundamentalist Christians for raising fears (and dollar contributions) than homosexuality. Which is invariably presented as a decadent “choice” (god forbid God would genetically design it!); a “recruiting” when not outright child-abusive menace to youth; bent on destroying heterosexuality via same-sex-couple adoption (recruiting again) and the farce of “gay marriage.” (But ‘scuse me: Isn’t heterosexual divorce the bigger enemy of trad nuclear-familyhood?).

And widespread personal experience combined with serial community political fleshburns has made many gay, lesbian and transgender folk regard Christianity — even religion in general — with great suspicion. To put it politely. Even the still-faithful often find their presence divides, or is expunged outright, from individual congregations or their larger ruling bodies.

It’s a tug of war that only pulls harder in each direction as gays gain more mainstream social acceptance and fundamentalist Christians become an ever-more-powerful American minority. Both sides seem to be obstinately saying: You’re with us, or you’re against us.

Though made by gay filmmaking team (the director is Daniel Karslake), new documentary “For the Bible Tells Me So” is notable for the relative evenhandedness it brings to this heated debate. It refuses to demonize or make fun of disapproving Christians motivated by sincere belief — as opposed to the raving-nutcase hate of Rev. Fred Phelps & his minions — while poignantly addressing the profound that church-driven homophobia wreaks on individuals and society as a whole.

The result is a fairly sweeping overview that deserves to be seen by a wide audience — not just a gay one. The filmmakers pointedly did not launch “Bible” on the gay film festival circuit after its Sundance debut, hoping to raise a more mainstream profile. I worry hetero viewers will demonstrate their usual allergy toward “gay stuff” by actual gay people. Which latter category does not include the rare prestige package (“Philadelphia,” “Boys Don’t Cry”), and Gays R Funny fluff (“The Birdcage,” “Will & Grace,” “I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry,” et al.) easily palatable to nearly all.

The documentary’s canvas ranges from major Biblical scholars (including Archbishop Desmond Tutu) contradicting homophobic interpretations of select passages to Christian families who variably reacted to their children’s coming out (or in at least one case, closeted suicide).

Then there are the ardent protestors who marshal effort against gay-marriage legalization in various states- — any hardly fitting the stereotype hell-and-damnation redneck profile. They’re just defending what they believe to be God’s word.

Given that evangelical rock pitted against the hard place of equal-rights gay citizenship, I wish “For the Bible” dwelled longer on how Biblical passages have been (mis-) interpreted and rewritten over the centuries. Many scholars believe the original (or at least earliest-known) texts didn’t address homosexuality at all. Making those arguments more explicit might do more to sway those opposed to gays because “the Bible told me so” than all the latterday human suffering and conflict on display here.

Nonetheless, this sharply crafted doc is as entertaining as it is enlightening. One particular highlight is even hilarious — a succinct cartoon encapsulation of nature-versus-nurture (or “choice”) arguments that in itself would make a great debate-starter.

Homo project of the month: Drag at least one not-entirely-tolerant straight friend to this movie, or mail several the dvd once it’s out. Their education could be your (non-denominational) salvation.

topics: documentary, reviews

10.09.2007