Cheekily edited, brilliantly structured,
manipulative in the best sense of the word, Bart Layton’s The Imposter is a true crime documentary that unearths a high
profile, already well-examined case of identity theft and somehow manages to
render it only more mysterious, more generative of questions. And its questions
are haunting, burgeoning in your mind as you go over the facts—or lack thereof.
A boy disappears, leaving a black hole in a family; someone comes along to fill
that hole, and that someone, against all common sense, is embraced by the
family. Some kind of exchange appears to have taken place. A tacit agreement
perhaps. It only falls apart when the outside world forces the issue, and then
the tacit agreement becomes a crime, a violation, an outrage. At least, that’s
one reading of the events chronicled in The
Imposter. One of many.
The
film’s antihero—or, if you’d prefer, its villain that we’re led to identify
with—is serial impostor Frédéric Bourdin. Layton has told his story so that
it’s Bourdin we trust, because Bourdin’s been caught, over and over, and speaks
openly about his various deceptions. He’s got nothing to lose. While the film’s
ostensible victims, excessively naïve, in some cases zombified, seem anything
but credible. The bizarre, sensational story, if you missed it during its 15
minutes back in the late 1990s, goes like this: 12-year-old Texan Nicholas
Barclay goes missing in 1994. Three years and four months later someone is
found in a phone booth in Spain, is taken into custody, and some time later this
someone claims to be Barlcay. Carey Gibson, Barclay’s older sister, flies to
Spain and, as promptly as legalities allow, takes Barclay home and reintegrates
him into her extended family and community. But this Barclay, who was blonde,
blue-eyed, born and raised American and only 16 years old, was, we now know,
23, Franco-Algerian, of dark features and hair, and could barely speak English,
and when he did speak had a heavy accent. What is going on here? After watching
The Imposter I kept thinking about
the moment when Gibson and Bourdin first meet. Bourdin claims that Gibson
showed him family photos, told him who everyone was, essentially began
crash-coaching him in becoming her little brother. Did she have something to
hide? Did she just need to have her brother back so desperately that she would
willingly accept a substitute?
Bourdin:
“I wanted to be someone else. Someone who was acceptable.”
Barclay’s
mother: “My goal in life was not to think.”
Crafting a deft
braid of reenactments and interviews that owe something to the films of Errol
Morris—another filmmaker obsessed with uncertainty—Layton’s narrative builds
slowly toward its larger ambiguities. The last act, which introduces us to a
wily detective named Charlie Parker, who proves Bourdin’s ruse by way of
studying his ears, is as engrossing anything you’ll see on a screen this year,
featuring developments that, if you’re not familiar with them, I won’t spoil.
Of course the film will leave you wanting more, much more. I keep thinking how
much this story deserves a great writer to give us an exhaustive investigative,
book-length essay, something as much about psychology, about need and grief,
about secret violence and secret contracts, as it is about crimes and disguises
and con artists. But The Imposter works
beautifully as a lyrical, very cinematic introduction to this deeply strange
story.
1 comment:
Sound great. I'd like to enjoy this documentary film. It may be the story of missing persons.. right? Greg at missingpersonsinaustralia.com.au
Post a Comment