Ironically I found this to be a very disingenuous and mean-spirited film from the start.
Initially the film makers make the case for an adult man striking up an innocent online mutual appreciation with an 8 year old girl who also appears to be a talented painter. Very early on we are given several scenes where the main participant and his friends are filming their surprise at clues that all is not as it appears with the little girls story. But their body language and giggly, childish demeanour suggest to me that they have already done much of the "investigating" that would later come to pass in the narrative. Their big joyous grins and covering of stifled titters at the situation suggests a prior set-up of these early moments on film. This isn't a problem had they then continued their google detective work and simply exposed their stalker-slash-victim as just another online Baron Munchausen. But we are later treated to a cringe-worthy 'look through your fingers if you dare' scene where the central participant reads private texts between himself and the beautiful older sister of the girl whom he has struck up a sexting relationship with online. By now we know, that they know the whole thing is a fake, so why we are given this scene where he lays shirtless in bed reading aloud and mocking masturbatory texts between himself and the target, knowing all the long this online profile is a lie? It is very unsettling. Who is fooling who here? When they meet the target, we are given enough evidence to deduce that it is in fact not the youngest daughter who is the painter in the family, that would be the plain, unglamorous mother who is not a slim, ethereal beauty as imagined in her portrait. The older daughter and love interest is of course nowhere to be seen and can't be reached by telephone. We deduce she is entirely a romantic fantasy persona of the woman's creation.
Her deception is of course deplorable, but the film crew go on to perpetuate this online fantasy as much as she has, and furthermore have hunted her down, attempting to confront her but afraid of the consequences. After several polite but awkward meetings, it isn't until an hour in to the film that we see any hint of humility from the film makers, where the truth about the her online fantasy life finally comes out in the "open", well - filmed from afar without her knowledge. Later she is interviewed on camera and pretty much bares her soul to these virtual strangers in a tearful full confessional. Yes, she was a foolish woman, but this took guts and at no point did she ever seem antagonistic or volatile after her lies had been exposed. Let me be very clear - The woman was a fraud. She seems to be leading a very hard life looking after a young daughter and two severely disabled step-sons. Finding a creative outlet in painting to relieve her daily grind, and taking an online flirtation WAY too far appears to be her biggest 'crime.' I feel like they catfished this woman as much as she catfished them. I sympathise with her as a struggling mother and carer of disabled relatives, and not with the three smug, smirking New York art student types who in the end exploited her as much as she initially fooled them. They knowingly perpetuated this fake relationship as much as she did. And early on in the film they make it pretty clear what is going on when they discover the songs the daughter character had passed off as her own work are simply ripped from youtube by other artists - they could have ended it there, but they were clearly too invested in making a global mockery of this unfortunate and foolish woman, when the sensible thing would've been to just gently cut communications with her online, or at least curtail them to simple passing pleasantries. Instead they continued a pseudo-romance and sexting relationship with her, all the time filming a condescending one-sided interaction just to for their own amusement and a juicier documentary.
I felt a strength of character from her that I never picked up from the chattering, giggling immature film makers. To open up about her silly lies so candidly on camera is a very brave and honourable thing to do. Ironically, I never felt like we got to know the film makers as truthfully as we did her. Although the film makers put themselves in this unusual situation and took it way further than most would, they always had the security blanket of the camera, they were never laid bare like their subject was. I applaud her for allowing them to make this documentary.
What I take away from this movie is that today, many people are out for themselves and whether you're posing as a pretty young singer/artist online or exploiting strangers for your student film career - you had better be on guard and be out for yourself because someone out there is looking to f*ck you over unless you do it to them first. Neither party gets my full sympathy, but if anything I side with the woman as the more innocent party since she was clearly already a very damaged person with immense responsibilities and chronic low self-esteem. A trio of young, single privileged Millenials in New York who perpetuated and inflamed this woman's fantasy deserve nothing from this, but I hope they at least learnt from the experience and put their talents to better use in the future.
Initially the film makers make the case for an adult man striking up an innocent online mutual appreciation with an 8 year old girl who also appears to be a talented painter. Very early on we are given several scenes where the main participant and his friends are filming their surprise at clues that all is not as it appears with the little girls story. But their body language and giggly, childish demeanour suggest to me that they have already done much of the "investigating" that would later come to pass in the narrative. Their big joyous grins and covering of stifled titters at the situation suggests a prior set-up of these early moments on film. This isn't a problem had they then continued their google detective work and simply exposed their stalker-slash-victim as just another online Baron Munchausen. But we are later treated to a cringe-worthy 'look through your fingers if you dare' scene where the central participant reads private texts between himself and the beautiful older sister of the girl whom he has struck up a sexting relationship with online. By now we know, that they know the whole thing is a fake, so why we are given this scene where he lays shirtless in bed reading aloud and mocking masturbatory texts between himself and the target, knowing all the long this online profile is a lie? It is very unsettling. Who is fooling who here? When they meet the target, we are given enough evidence to deduce that it is in fact not the youngest daughter who is the painter in the family, that would be the plain, unglamorous mother who is not a slim, ethereal beauty as imagined in her portrait. The older daughter and love interest is of course nowhere to be seen and can't be reached by telephone. We deduce she is entirely a romantic fantasy persona of the woman's creation.
Her deception is of course deplorable, but the film crew go on to perpetuate this online fantasy as much as she has, and furthermore have hunted her down, attempting to confront her but afraid of the consequences. After several polite but awkward meetings, it isn't until an hour in to the film that we see any hint of humility from the film makers, where the truth about the her online fantasy life finally comes out in the "open", well - filmed from afar without her knowledge. Later she is interviewed on camera and pretty much bares her soul to these virtual strangers in a tearful full confessional. Yes, she was a foolish woman, but this took guts and at no point did she ever seem antagonistic or volatile after her lies had been exposed. Let me be very clear - The woman was a fraud. She seems to be leading a very hard life looking after a young daughter and two severely disabled step-sons. Finding a creative outlet in painting to relieve her daily grind, and taking an online flirtation WAY too far appears to be her biggest 'crime.' I feel like they catfished this woman as much as she catfished them. I sympathise with her as a struggling mother and carer of disabled relatives, and not with the three smug, smirking New York art student types who in the end exploited her as much as she initially fooled them. They knowingly perpetuated this fake relationship as much as she did. And early on in the film they make it pretty clear what is going on when they discover the songs the daughter character had passed off as her own work are simply ripped from youtube by other artists - they could have ended it there, but they were clearly too invested in making a global mockery of this unfortunate and foolish woman, when the sensible thing would've been to just gently cut communications with her online, or at least curtail them to simple passing pleasantries. Instead they continued a pseudo-romance and sexting relationship with her, all the time filming a condescending one-sided interaction just to for their own amusement and a juicier documentary.
I felt a strength of character from her that I never picked up from the chattering, giggling immature film makers. To open up about her silly lies so candidly on camera is a very brave and honourable thing to do. Ironically, I never felt like we got to know the film makers as truthfully as we did her. Although the film makers put themselves in this unusual situation and took it way further than most would, they always had the security blanket of the camera, they were never laid bare like their subject was. I applaud her for allowing them to make this documentary.
What I take away from this movie is that today, many people are out for themselves and whether you're posing as a pretty young singer/artist online or exploiting strangers for your student film career - you had better be on guard and be out for yourself because someone out there is looking to f*ck you over unless you do it to them first. Neither party gets my full sympathy, but if anything I side with the woman as the more innocent party since she was clearly already a very damaged person with immense responsibilities and chronic low self-esteem. A trio of young, single privileged Millenials in New York who perpetuated and inflamed this woman's fantasy deserve nothing from this, but I hope they at least learnt from the experience and put their talents to better use in the future.