Capturing the Friedmans

I watch this film a couple weeks ago in a class on Film and Society that I'm taking at one of the local universities. In the class we usually watch a film and then discuss it, both from the point of view of how the film reflects society or a part of it; and how the film was made. If we consider it was accurate, how the light, shoots, interviews, etc. were used; and overall if we liked or not.

The first film that we watched was "Capturing the Friedmans", and I got mixed feelings about it.

This documentary has a lot of topics, several characters and many stories in the 90 minutes or so that it lasts. We couldn't really agree in one single topic for the film, but many stories overlapping each other with different characters each, that at the end leaves you with many questions and different feelings about the whole thing.

The background of the film is a case in 1987 of a retired professor, Arnold Friedman, that was accused of pedophilia. The police tracked down with the help of postal workers, some magazines containing child pornography to his house. The case grew in attention as the media got involved and the charges against Mr. Friedman also escalated to child molestation and even Mr. Friedmans younger son, Jesse, got accused of being part of it. Making a long story short, Mr. Friedman pleads guilty and is sentence to 30 years in jail; and Jesse, who was nineteen years old at the time, also pleads guilty and was sentence to thirteen years behind bars.

Up to here, believe me, I haven't ruin the movie for you. Because it is so much more than just a trial and the evidence that each side presented and the lawyers, jury and judge. I would say that less than 5% of the film actually takes place in a court room. Even more so, the movie is not about who's guilty of what.

The fascinating thing about this documentary is that the Friedman family (Dad, Mom and three sons) taped everything on camera. When I say everything is not just the birthday and new year celebrations, like any other family; they taped themselves talking about the charges, discussing what happened and what they should do; arguing if Mr. Friedman should plead guilty or not, fighting and questioning their support for each other while the shit was hitting the fan, taking sides and accusing each other of whatever, and most of all: having fun in front of the camera as their whole world was collapsing around them.

I don't want to give you much of the film, but some topics that show up throughout the film include the American legal system; the role of the media in criminal cases; the sense of community, of belonging to a community; and of course the family as an institution from where everything emanates.

On the side of the legal system, the documentary shows how the policy investigators did such a poor job. From the very beginning, they started making assumptions and taking decisions based on circumstantial evidence. One thing that I've seen, is that once some sexual conduct is involved in a case, it just escalates to magnify the most terrible conditions of human beings; making assumptions where each one is more outrageous than the other. The police spoke of mass rapes in the basement of the house, and sexual games that included at least ten children at a time where there was no hard evidence to support it. Not a single drop of blood or semen on the floor, just the interviews of some of the kids, taken by the police in ways that some times seems like if they were pushing them to say what the police wanted to say.

Then is the role of the media in the case. Cameras where all over the family and the alleged victims even before all the facts, interviews and evidence was recollected. Some people saw the news of Mr. Friedman being accused and days later the police knocks on the door to ask for a declaration of their children. Once a person is accused in front of the cameras, the odds that the perception of that person being innocent falls like a brick on a sunny day; specially if the charges are related to sexual misconduct, pedophilia and child pornography.

All this together was putted on the shoulders of the children that were suposelly abused by Mr. Friedman and his son Jesse. Once word start to spread, and after some of the interrogations by the police with some positive responses on such allegations, other families came together to support and at the same time to pressure their children to say that it really happen, even though they where even confused when asked if Mr. Friedman "had touched them".

And of course the most important part of the film is all the discussions that take place inside the family, right in front of the cameras. And even though this is the most important part of the movie, I really don't want to ruin the documentary to anyone. Those tapes take you inside a regular American family and how you can find power struggles, comedy, drama, tragic comedy, and how people tend to see each other and prefer one over other inside the family. Only when a family is putted under such stress, is that all this topics coming afloat and the discussions are very interesting. Questions of loyalty, support and love show up that really makes you turn around and look at your parents, wife and children and wonder if you really get to know someone during your life time.

I would say that at the end, I was expecting to see if Mr. Friedman was guilty or not; but the truth is that the film is not about that. It's not about being guilty of one or all the charges, it is true that he had some pretty bad porn in the basement, but from there to systematically abuse children, that's quite a leap. Not ot mention the defense lawyer that acts more like Dracula, sucking blood where he sees fits better for him.

Have you met the Friedmans? I say you should. They might be living down the street from where you live; or perhaps they live under your very own roof.