Catfish Hunter

Pardon the cliché, which by the way is also a cliché, but Catfish is not your ordinary movie. I mean that in the best way possible, I’ve never seen another film quite like it. The film skillfully blurs the line between reality television and documentary. On one hand, it is an accurate depiction of real events, a trait associated with documentary filmmaking. However, the way the film relies on human emotion and reaction has close ties to the way reality TV is made. The unique nature of the movie makes it impossible to describe with current terms, thus a new one is need: Reality Film.

Because of the uncertain nature of the filming process and the costs associated with filmmaking it is unlikely that this style of film will become widespread. Studios would likely be unwilling to give people money for a project that “might not pan out”. This type of filmmaking is only feasible with a small scale production. Unlike other forms of art which are pioneered by a small group of people and adopted by the recognized channels after proving commercially viable, this style will likely remain in the hands of the smaller crew.

The film is entirely dependent on the ending, without such a dramatic twist it could not be said if the film would have got made. Unlike other films this one was not scripted, the filmmakers had no idea how it would turn out while filming. Some films leave the ending open to several options, but very rarely is a film left as open-ended as Catfish. There was a strong possibility nothing film worthy would come of the processes. Given that fact you have to respect the filmmakers to some degree for taking such a risk in making this movie to begin with.

Catfish is just as much a study of human behavior as it is a revealing look into the newfound freedom Web 2.0 can offer. The film showcased an extreme example of anonymity gone wrong. Under the current requirements to make a Facedbook profile this type of scenario is unavoidable. The only real barrier to similar actions is the massive time and effort requirement needed to create so many unique and intertwined profiles. With these obstacles out of the way the last bulwark of certainty is firsthand knowledge of the person’s existence. With relationships that exclusively exist within the realm of Web 2.0, this last ditch failsafe must be abandoned.

It would be very simple to dismiss the woman in the film as a nut. You wouldn’t be wrong in saying that either in my opinion, such elaborate means to deceive are the workings of a crazy person. Given her circumstances however, can you blame her? Taking care of two severely handicapped kids, artistically stifled, living in Michigan; we’re all lucky she turned to Facebook as an escape instead of more drastic measures. She was looking for an escape from the daily monotony of her life; Facebook provided the easiest avenue to do so. On the internet she was able to become the pretty girl all the guys wanted, the aspiring artist, and the rest of her cast of characters. On the internet she had no obligations to be herself; we all just assume this is the case. Sure she may have been deceiving Nev, leading him in into believing she was a nubile young artsy chick whose one wish was to be alone with him. But Nev allowed himself to be duped. He was eager to jump at the prospect of a pretty woman taking interest in him. Granted, there was no way of knowing she wouldn’t be who she said she was, but there was no way of know she was actually her either.