Why , oh Why, Did I Rent This?

I feel like I just got kicked in the gut. No, that would feel better.

I just finished watching Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father, an unbelievably moving documentary/tribute to a young man.

In 2001, Dr. Andrew Bagby was murdered at the age of 28. Soon thereafter, the prime suspect (his ex-girlfriend) moves back to Canada and announces she's pregnant with his child. Childhood friend and filmmaker, Kurt Kuenne, begins compiling video interviews with Bagby's friends, coworkers, family, etc. to collect stories about him to give to his son so he can have an idea what a great guy he was. From the portions of the interviews that make the final film, Bagby seems like a great guy, well-loved by many.

But of course, it's not that simple (or the home movies wouldn't have made their way to any of the film festivals this won awards at). Shirley Turner, the expectant mother, is released on bail during the months and months of delays in her extradition hearings. As soon as that happens, Bagby's parents, David and Kate, move from California to Newfoundland so they can be involved in their grandson's life, and hopefully get some sort of custody. The movie then becomes both a tribute to his father, and the chronicling of his grandparent's efforts to protect the son from his mother.

Turner is incarcerated for a few months, during which the Bagby's move is briefly rewarded until Turner's incarceration is successfully appealed. Months and months of ups and downs go by and the film documents the grandparents attempts to care for and interact with Zachary and the increasingly unstable antics of Turner.

Kuenne doesn't try to be objective, he's clearly pulling for the parents of his friend and sees Turner as the enemy (as he should given the preponderance of the evidence). He makes his case obviously, thoroughly and successfully. No one can watch this film and think of David and Kate as anything but heroes and Turner as anything but vile (at best).

Some say Kuenne manipulates the audience, I don't think so--but he does tug at the emotions--the way a skillful rhetorician would. Towards the end he goes beyond tugging--he bludgeons, but that's not a criticism, he does it well, and it's well-deserved. Throughout the film we see genuine emotion--people loved Bagly, his parents and his son, and they had clearly strong feelings toward Turner as well. As the film ends, the genuine emotions are shown at their rawest--love, anguish, rage, despair. The tears flow freely at this point--from both those on screen and the audience (so I read...and, yeah, experienced). Kuenne's editing--as much as anything else--shows us his raw emotions as well as his interviewees'.

A couple reviewers I read said something important--yeah, it's a documentary; yeah, the events are well reported--but stay away from google, don't read up on it--let Kuenne tell the story. It will affect you in ways you can't see coming.

It should be remembered that this was originally intended as a home movie--not an independent flick that was denied Oscar props, the video quality, the cinematography--everything, is low quality. But this movie tells a story, and provokes a reaction in a way that the slickest productions can't. It's an experience I won't soon forget. I started this post right after I watched it, and I didn't have time to finish until now--8+ hrs later, and I'm still reeling from it.