A mockumentary is great in itself provided that there is a certain level of professionalism associated with the execution. For instance, in its existential breath, both This Is Spinal Tap and The Office are not simply classic examples of a genre; they are classics in their own right, and they work in a rather subtle way that is unique to them. Stories could not be told using a different format as it would be rather redundant and this is how it seeks to do with Fiasco, a French farce about a wannabe filmmaker, but cannot get past first base.
Please bear with me for a moment because Fiasco is not The Office or Spinal Tap interms of how well it has been executed to. But it is quite close, because it appeals to a similar aesthetic, and a rather unique concept which is rarely attempted due to the complexity of issues involved.
The wannabe filmmaker tried to be a filmmaker, directing. That would be Raphael (Pierre Niney), a thirty-something who is completely lost as he tries to turn his script – in which his late heroic grandma plays a leading role – into a box-office money maker. He manages to somehow secure investment and a good name to go along with it, but both are lost within a week of making the very first shot.
Raphael usually messes everything up, however, things got more complicated due to a saboteur’s suggestion. Undoubtedly, leaked speeches made on the Raphaels’ set, stunts going amiss and, everlasting, storms and taming the audience are issues that bring forward the period in Raphael’s life that he constantly wishes to avoid and rather, wishes to see himself to the extent of how much he can really take.
Fiasco is very aptly called this way because it is about the dumbest program one can imagine – which is significantly more stupid than many of this particular oeuvre’s more dour cousins, if we are being honest about it. While we may be able to hear the distant sounds of other mockumentaries or freaks of the backstage who expose some secrets of the film or television industry, Fiasco came out without any one predecessor.
But you will certainly spot some familiar components though. There may be some that bear a certain resemblance to the others, which you have already seen and are likely to be following through these loose lines. It can be seen from its meta-satire on French cinema that Fiasco is decidedly more popular than that since it is more accessible.
More to the point, ridiculing the documentary style as a format rather than the scope of the industry is the kind of bragging that makes sense. Jokes have been made around cinema and its target segments and some of them are downright outrageous, but they are within the larger picture. After all, every single person has seen a documentary, at least once.
The issue is that because of this absence of such industry humor, mocking the novel as ‘a movie about a movie’, makes it come off as a weak satire. In fact, it offers nothing much more than commonplace ideas which patrons of such films and their near mono-tone delivery, concerning heavy handedness when it matters above all else.
But there is a lot to like on this side of the pond, in terms of the energy. The cast is terrific and most of all, they seem to be having a great time, which is quite obvious. There is something charming in that, as well as remarkable. It would appear, Fiasco is designed for the ‘international palate’ and it manages, somehow, to avoid the overreaching smart-arse genre.
Will it be successful? I’m unclear. Nowadays, romancing which will turn out to be successful is extremely difficult but at least Fiasco goes in the correct direction. Speaking of this, I remember the kind of movies that were produced but never quite caught on with the audience and some genres that are truly fun if executed well, for instance, mockumentary has always been a great genre for those who know how to do it. But maybe you see it differently – all the same, don’t be concerned if you thought that Fiasco would be a bit too self-contained to be enjoyable for you. And that is important.
Watch Free Movies on o2tvseries
