By Ed Koch
“Unknown White Male” (+)
I could have gone either way in my rating of this borderline documentary about Doug Bruce.
Bruce, a young man with roots in New York City and London, disappeared several years ago for about 24 hours. He ended up in a Coney Island hospital claiming to be a victim of amnesia. Days later Bruce’s friend, Rupert Murray, the director of this film, asked him if he would be interested in making a documentary about the difficulties of reestablishing relationships with family members and friends. Bruce agreed to do the film, and the camera is present when he talks with his family and new girlfriend, and reestablishes contacts with friends in London.
Manohla Dargis began her New York Times review of this film by writing, “What would it be like if one day you discovered that you didn’t remember anything—not your name, the mother who died, the friends who didn’t, your lover’s caress or the wet kiss of a snowflake on your cheek? Such is the premise of the thought-stirring documentary ‘Unknown White Male,’ which recounts the bizarre saga of an East Village loft dweller, Doug Bruce, who in July 2003 walked into a Coney Island hospital claiming not to know who he was, thereupon becoming either a heart-wrenching casualty of a medical anomaly or the prime suspect in a mystery yet to be solved.”
When I saw the film, Murray took questions from the audience at the end of the performance. He was asked if some people doubted the truth of Doug’s experience. He said yes and asked for a show of hands on that issue. Interestingly, many in the audience indicated that they did not believe he was telling the truth. I believe him, since no reasons were given to convey that he had anything to gain by making it up.
HS, who saw the movie with me, wondered whether the movie was true, a hoax, or something in between. He said he liked it as either a documentary or a mockumentary, but would like to know which one it really is.
The problem with this documentary is that there are very few surprises along the way. The people in the film are nice and appealing but not particularly fascinating. It is more clinical than dramatic and occasionally a little boring.
“Tsotsi” (+)
I asked two exiting viewers what they thought of this film. One replied that it was very good and the other said it was a tearjerker. In my opinion, the first person understated the quality of the movie and the second overstated its impact. This is an excellent film in terms of storyline and acting.
The title of the film means “hoodlum,” and the setting of the movie is South Africa. The rhythm of Johannesburg is depicted early on by showing thousands of commuters departing subway cars for the streets who are being importuned by vendors and beggars. Among the prowlers is a gang of four thugs led by 19-year old Tsotsi (Presley Chweneyagae). The other three members include Boston (Mothusi Magano) who wants to know if his fellow members know the meaning of the word “decency;” Aap (Kenneth Nkosi) who is totally dependent on Tsotsi until he concludes that Tsotsi may one day kill him; and Butcher (Zenzo Ngqobe) who is the most dangerous and ultimately becomes a murderer.
Robbery and killing are part of everyday life in this poor area outside of Johannesburg. The location is never identified, and it is never stated if the period is before or after Nelson Mandela took power in a democratic election.
We witness a robbery on the subway resulting in a gruesome ending, and that incident leads to a car hijacking by Tsotsi. In the back seat of that car is an infant. How he deals with that situation, including having it fed by a lactating woman, Miriam (Terry Pheto), who is the subject of his attention, makes for interesting viewing.
The South African setting, a terrific story, and excellent acting add up to a film well worth seeing, especially since it won an Oscar in the best foreign language film category. (In Tsotsitaal, with English subtitles.)
