Review of Nanook of the North (1922) by Chris W — 26 Nov 2013
Nanook of the North, directed by Robert J. Flaherty, is one of the few films in the history of cinema that causes open dialogue among film scholars and critics regarding genre. The conversation revolves around whether or not the film is a documentary.
Roger Ebert, one film critic, believes it is a documentary. I totally agree with Ebert about this film and think it is obviously a documentary. First, we must realize that all the cast and crew in this film risk their lives to show us how life is during the 19th century winter in the Arctic Circle.
They walk a long distance and risk their lives to be able to imitate the true events that happened before in the Arctic Circle. While this is acting, the whole crew is actually there. They are dealing with the real wind, the real cold, and the real snow.
The story might be acting, but the dangers the cast is in are real. Second, Flaherty structures the film in a documentary style, focusing on narrative and visuals, without dialogue. Even if he claims that the story in this film is all staged, we see scenes that cannot truly be directed.
We see kids playing with animals, which is not acting; it is reality! Animals cannot be controlled and even the kids playing is real play. Finally, I believe it is hard to have only one concrete definition for what is and isn't a documentary.
We must define the films simply as we see them, not the way the filmmakers want us to see them.
This review of Nanook of the North (1922) was written by Chris W on 26 Nov 2013.
Nanook of the North has generally received very positive reviews.
Was this review helpful?
