“the camera was a catalyst and the director should embrace rather than try to hide its presence because it gets things out of people that they wouldn’t normally ever say in real life. You get extraordinary versions of people, things they don’t normally present to the world, when you point a camera at them.”
“And Errol Morris talks about the same thing. He has this three-minute rule; he says if you let anyone talk to a camera for three minutes just about themselves, uninterrupted, you will discover that everyone is mad.”
– An interview with Anna Broinowski, director of Forbidden Lie$ (2007), Monique Rooney
I think there is an argument to be made about what Searching for Sugar Man was really about. Is it about Rodriguez? Or the people that he influenced? Was it about the revolution in South Africa, or about the social and political struggles of the Afrikaans in that day? Was it about the apartheid? Was it about the difficult search for Rodriguez? Or about the many holes in the music industry back in the day? Is it about what it’s like to have two different lives or about what music can do for people?
Frankly, I enjoyed the film. I did not know anything about the music, or the countries or the political struggles. Thus I was sucked into the story of the film, being carried along the journey of learning how amazing Rodriguez was and then feeling utterly lost at his death and how the search was at a dead end. And then the elation at realising he was alive all along! How exciting! How magical! And at his concert, I was drawn in with the crowd – they couldn’t believe they were finally finally getting to see the source of their inspiration and courage live! And Rodeiguez finally got to meet the fans he always had but never knew about! I couldn’t believe it was finally happening for them! Wow!
And the critics want to argue that this “wasn’t a real documentary” because the facts weren’t all right, or that it simply didn’t uncover anything because it was so general and broad. To that, I echo Jonathan Hyslop in saying “I do wonder whether any film such as this can really do that job.” What was it’s intended purpose? Perhaps it was to tell us enough about many things to spark our interest in it so we could learn about it ourselves after the film. Perhaps it was to show that there were many many factors involved. Perhaps it was a subtle show of racism in itself by how it failed to show or emphasise those of the minority – even though it was an important part of the whole story. Perhaps it was trying to tell the side of the story that no one knew about – how there were whites that were anti apartheid too? Perhaps it was a film for the family to remember how they found out their dad was actually famous.
