The subject of this documentary is a good one: In Britain in 1977, a Mormon missionary name of Kirk Anderson accused Joyce McKinney, a model and former Miss Wyoming World, of abducting and raping him. Both were Americans. Why were two Americans in Britain? According to McKinney, they were engaged to marry in the States when suddenly Anderson disappeared. McKinney hired a private detective who discovered Anderson, a Mormon, had been sent on missionary work in the UK. McKinney flew to the UK to find him. They did meet each other again and engaged in a sexual encounter, which they both agree on. However, the nature of that encounter is disputed by both sides. McKinney claims it was consensual while Anderson holds it was kidnapping and rape. Not a bad subject.
Unfortunately, in Morris' hands, the documentary doesn't work as well as it should. Morris doesn't like to use narrators for his documentaries, which is effective for certain subjects, like "The Unknown Known" in which Donald Rumsfeld is essentially his own narrator, while for other subjects, it's inadequate. Unfortunately, the lack of a narrator is rather ineffectual in "Tabloid" as I found much of the material confusing. This is not an easy case to understand if you've never heard of it, as I had not until I saw the documentary.
When the case entered into the public consciousness, it became a media frenzy. It had everything the tabloids live to publish: celebrity, sex, bondage, and religion. In terms of the documentary, there were moments when I wanted to know more about the bare facts, not just some of the interviewees trying desperately to decide what they thought about it. Sometimes the interviews offer the facts but in long-winded and/or convoluted verbiage making it difficult to glean what was understood about the case. At one point in the story, McKinney was being exploited in the tabloids in fetish-like garb with a male as her slave. I couldn't understand if her "slave" was Anderson or someone else. And when was she released from prison? I read online she jumped bail in the UK, but I wasn't sure the ordering of events.
This was disappointing as I wanted to understand better this case. For those documentaries where "let the interviewees tell the story" sans narrator, the film risks being enigmatic and confusing. I still believe the most effective documentaries are those which juxtapose narration and interview in which we get the best of both worlds. This was clearly a case when a narrator would have been very helpful. But I'm sure Morris will always stick to the way he does things.
Unfortunately, in Morris' hands, the documentary doesn't work as well as it should. Morris doesn't like to use narrators for his documentaries, which is effective for certain subjects, like "The Unknown Known" in which Donald Rumsfeld is essentially his own narrator, while for other subjects, it's inadequate. Unfortunately, the lack of a narrator is rather ineffectual in "Tabloid" as I found much of the material confusing. This is not an easy case to understand if you've never heard of it, as I had not until I saw the documentary.
When the case entered into the public consciousness, it became a media frenzy. It had everything the tabloids live to publish: celebrity, sex, bondage, and religion. In terms of the documentary, there were moments when I wanted to know more about the bare facts, not just some of the interviewees trying desperately to decide what they thought about it. Sometimes the interviews offer the facts but in long-winded and/or convoluted verbiage making it difficult to glean what was understood about the case. At one point in the story, McKinney was being exploited in the tabloids in fetish-like garb with a male as her slave. I couldn't understand if her "slave" was Anderson or someone else. And when was she released from prison? I read online she jumped bail in the UK, but I wasn't sure the ordering of events.
This was disappointing as I wanted to understand better this case. For those documentaries where "let the interviewees tell the story" sans narrator, the film risks being enigmatic and confusing. I still believe the most effective documentaries are those which juxtapose narration and interview in which we get the best of both worlds. This was clearly a case when a narrator would have been very helpful. But I'm sure Morris will always stick to the way he does things.