Where do I begin with this film?

F for Fake truely confused but intrigued me throughout its entire duration. To define this film as non-fiction (for the first hour at least) is non-debatable, yet to try and define exactly HOW it displays itself as non-fictional is difficult. The film uses interviews with the true people who they discuss, hence, becoming like a documentary. Yet, it also incorporates the director as a significant part of the film. His narration dictates the direction of where the film proceeds to go. It continues to go from non-fiction to fiction through these techniques.

The film’s main purpose and contention was to uncover “fakes”; specifically con artists who create counterfeit paintings in order to grow personal gain. While the film goes on to speak about not just Elmyr de Hory but other subjects such as Clifford Irving and Oja Kodar, every new story is always linked back to Elmyr and his deception.

In terms of other film techniques, I was surprised by the choppiness in the editing, especially at the beginning of the movie. The fast cuts, the quick zooms and almost random stills or pauses of the shot were unique aspects which I believe were used to add to the authenticity the film wished to create.

I, however, don’t quite understand the portrayal of Oja and why it was so dramatic at times. I can see why the film chose to strongly sexualise her as she was their only female subject and they needed to show how men perceived women back in the 70’s and link that to their fictional story of Picasso. Yet it almost become uncomfortable to watch her be displayed in such a distasteful manner. The montage of men looking at her lasted for way too long, however, maybe this was the intention? Maybe Orson Welles, one of the directors, felt that it had to be uncomfortable in order to showcase how Oja herself may be feeling. Yet, I find myself believing this may not be the case as this movie was created in the 70’s, not in our recent decade.