Not the OP, but I have some of the same concern. No, it's not a "mockumentary"; yes, it's based on true events; but based on some of Herzog's other films and public statements, there are good reasons to doubt that it's a straight factual account of what happened. Herzog has frequently stated that he's not trying to relate straight facts, but is going for a deeper truth.
In pursuit of this, he's frequently bent the facts in his other "documentaries" to achieve the narrative that he's aiming for. I vouched for the parent comment because I think it's a view that should be discussed rather than suppressed. I like his art, but equating a Herzog documentary with factual truth is likely to end badly.
I've only skimmed it (and I don't have time to read it closer today) but this looks to be a decent academic paper that explores some of the problems with Grizzly Man:
Conceiving Grizzly Man through the "Powers of the False"
...
But is Grizzly Man a documentary at all? Is it a "true" or appropriate representation of reality?Grizzly Man engages in "creative falsification" -- a cinematic concept theorized by Gilles Deleuze in which the filmmaker generates optical images which bond to virtual images (or images that evoke a people's general past, fantasies, and dreams) to reveal some representation of "truth"
Fascinating paper. The primary point doesn't seem to be that Hetzog has bent any facts, but willfully presents his subjective interpretation of the world.
It is more akin to the idea that all perception, thought, meaning, and opinions operate in a realm distinct from the material world.
The following sentences after your quote make this clear.
>But is Grizzly Man a documentary at all? Is it a "true" or appropriate representation of
reality? Most scholars presently writing on documentary posit that the duplication of realities
through cinema is always fictional because of its use of rhetorical figures and emblematic
symbolism, regardless of claims of objectivity or historical significance. As a filmmaker, Herzog shares this ideological: all documentary is false even if it conveys the myth of objectivity
> doubt that it's a straight factual account of what happened.
Maybe I'm misremembering but I don't remember this "documentary" having any narrative or facts. It's not trying to teach you anything reality, it just seems to be about 2 people perspectives about living in nature amongst bears. Again, it was a while ago since I watched it so maybe I'm not remembering accurately.
