Point and Shoot (2014)

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Just perfect...

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

The acting in this movie is really good.

We are in a self-absorbed world. Thanks to the internet, we have Facebook, Twitter and many other sources where anyone can voice their opinion and talk about themselves...incessantly. And, we have cellphones with cameras...so people can endlessly text about themselves and send pictures of themselves. Whether any of this is worthwhile or interesting...who cares, as we are now the generation of ME! In light of this, a film like "Point and Shoot" isn't at all surprising because of its inherent narcissism...whether or not there really is anything to tell.The film consists of a bazillion bits of video footage made by an obsessive-compulsive guy, Matthew Van Dyke. He films EVERYTHING during his travels--close ups of dirty toilets, himself falling off his motorcycle (probably because he was filming himself), boo boos he gets along the way as well as...well, just about everything. Most of it is very dull and extremely narcissistic. It's only when Matthew happens to fall in the middle of the Libyan revolution does it get less tedious. But even then, instead of being a HUGE story about the Arab Spring, too often it's really just about him. The reviewer Leofwine_draca felt that during much of the film, the focus was on the wrong things...and I clearly agree with them.For me, I'd much rather see a documentary just about the Arab Spring--such as the great Oscar-nominated films "Karama Has No Walls" or "The Square"--not a film that mostly seems like an annoying vanity project. Lots of folks died for freedom and focusing on them and their cause should be THE focus of any documentary on these uprisings.

What could have been a gripping documentary on the Libyan uprising and overthrow of Gadaffi turns out to be a distinctly uninteresting effort thanks to the focus on the character of Matthew Vandyke, a man who decides to discover himself by driving a motorbike through the Middle East. Vandyke turns out to be a narcissistic nobody who fancies himself as some kind of 'white saviour' figure, leaving the viewer with a bad taste in the mouth throughout.The only genuinely interesting part of the production is the footage shot from the rebel lines in Libya; the rest is exposition and character-building, but you just don't care about the guy. There are lots of long-winded interviews with both Vandyke himself and his girlfriend in the kitchen and they don't add anything to the experience. Instead they detract from it, making this dull in the extreme except when it focuses on the good stuff. It made me long for a Ross Kemp documentary, where the presenter knows well enough to take a back seat to the real story.

"Point and shoot" can describe what you do with a camera in order to capture life. "Point and shoot" can also describe what you do with a weapon in order to take a life. These two concepts collide in filmmaker Marshall Curry's latest documentary, which just happens to be entitled "Point and Shoot".Curry's film consists mostly of footage shot by its subject, one Matt Van Dyke. Mr. Van Dyke is an excellent representative of the current generation and its incessant need to digitally record each and everything about their lives and then foist it upon the public to provide validation for their existence. Van Dyke, a sheltered (some would say spoiled) individual with mental health issues (he admits to Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, but this film leaves you with the feeling there may be a whole lot more at play) decides that he wants to undertake a "crash course in manhood" through North Africa via a motorcycle and, of course, a video camera or two.What might have been a semi-interesting documentary about world travel and the search for meaning in life soon takes a dark turn as Van Dyke ends up fighting on the side of the rebels during the Libyan revolution. Admittedly, there is value in the footage Van Dyke provides that gives us a rare look at a revolution from the inside, but the price we have to pay for that glimpse is more footage of Van Dyke posing and preening for the camera. This culminates in a stomach-churning scene where Van Dyke is pressed to kill a Libyan soldier, which at first he seems reluctant to do, but ultimately accepts – only after making sure his camera is recording it.To have a film produced based on footage you shot of yourself must be a narcissist's wet dream. Van Dyke probably sees the release of this film as validation for all the choices he made and affirmation of his "manhood". At first glance, Curry seems to have provided this validation. Look deeper and you'll see a trenchant commentary on the voyeuristic nature of society today and how the meaning of "manhood" has changed from personal growth that is reached through a series of challenges and encounters to the filming and public exhibition of said transformation for all to see.Matt Van Dyke's camera was clearly pointed at himself. Marshall Curry figuratively takes Van Dyke's camera and turns it back on us. As much as we don't like what we see in Van Dyke, when we think about what we watch today, be it "entertainment" or otherwise, should we feel any better about ourselves?"Point and Shoot" is as frustrating and infuriating a film as I've seen in a long time.

Point and Shoot is remarkable footage of the Arab Spring from an American man who briefly lived it. The trouble is that the man is a textbook unreliable narrator who has an odd, narcissistic streak.Point and Shoot tells the story of Matt VanDyke, a Baltimore man in his late 20s or early 30s who is doted on by his mother and grandmother and lives at home. To prove that he is not a wimp, VanDyke decides he needs an adventure to understand "manhood." He decides to go on a motorcycle ride across the middle east and, through a variety of accidents and decisions over several years, ends up fighting with the Libyan rebels against Gaddafi. VanDyke films many of these encounters and ends up giving them to a full-time director when he returns to the U.S.The footage is very interesting, and the documentary is well-edited. But VanDyke is troubling to watch for most of the film. For example, he asks a friend to film him trying to kill another man, and repeatedly focuses on how his actions in Syria affect his "manhood." VanDyke seems to be overly fascinated with his own image and at the same time unable to understand how poorly his actions will come across on camera. The documentary director does a good job of raising subtle questions about VanDyke's mental state.