"In 2017 artist Damien Hurst organized a solo exhibition. The title of the exhibition is "Treasures from the Wreck of the Unbelievable", purporting to present ancient treasures from a sunken Greek ship, with findings that range from the Ancient Egyptian-alike items to Disney characters reproductions, incrustated of shells and corals." A paraphrased excerption from the artist's biography on Wikipedia.
The artist (and by extension this documentary) very cleverly and openly plays on the role of belief in providing context and history to the objects of our lives, and in the mythos we imbue into those objects. Moreover, the psuedo-documentary of an imaginary history for a very real documentary of the real artist's very real exhibition reflects a troubling state in modern media--both in film and social media, of the blurring--often deliberate blurring between reality and fiction. This blurring can be constructive, informative (as when re-enactments are used to illustrate events), thought-provoking (as in this case), imaginative, manipulative, or even deliberate propaganda for the support of a particular agenda. This documentary states at the very beginning that it is exploring the role of belief, and that is exactly what it does. There is no hidden agenda here (though it is subversive), though you could miss this message if not paying close enough attention. This is not a movie that is pretending to be based on "real events" just to aid the audience into buying into what is usually some kind of supernatural horror film.
Unlike some claims, the film IS in fact a documentary, though not of the recovery of these artefacts from the bottom of the sea. It in fact TELLS you that what you are seeing isn't fact but they do such a great job at duplicating your typical documentary style, and the objects are so bueatifully done that it is easy to suspend your disbelief (and who really listens to the narrators in these things anyway, right?). There are hints dropped throughout that these objects are not really from their purported date--some of the statues for example could not possibly be from such an early period (statues from well before the end, and not the one that every spoiler likes to crow--or complain about) and anyone who watches shipwreck recoveries, or is familiar with them will easily recognize clues that not is all as it seems.
I understand why some people feel angry at being fooled; it isn't pleasant to realize that you've been "tricked". In fact when I first started watching, I was upset that it was classified as a "documentary" when it clearly was not portraying real events. But when you consider the full context, to say this is not a documentary is quite bluntly wrong.
The artist (and by extension this documentary) very cleverly and openly plays on the role of belief in providing context and history to the objects of our lives, and in the mythos we imbue into those objects. Moreover, the psuedo-documentary of an imaginary history for a very real documentary of the real artist's very real exhibition reflects a troubling state in modern media--both in film and social media, of the blurring--often deliberate blurring between reality and fiction. This blurring can be constructive, informative (as when re-enactments are used to illustrate events), thought-provoking (as in this case), imaginative, manipulative, or even deliberate propaganda for the support of a particular agenda. This documentary states at the very beginning that it is exploring the role of belief, and that is exactly what it does. There is no hidden agenda here (though it is subversive), though you could miss this message if not paying close enough attention. This is not a movie that is pretending to be based on "real events" just to aid the audience into buying into what is usually some kind of supernatural horror film.
Unlike some claims, the film IS in fact a documentary, though not of the recovery of these artefacts from the bottom of the sea. It in fact TELLS you that what you are seeing isn't fact but they do such a great job at duplicating your typical documentary style, and the objects are so bueatifully done that it is easy to suspend your disbelief (and who really listens to the narrators in these things anyway, right?). There are hints dropped throughout that these objects are not really from their purported date--some of the statues for example could not possibly be from such an early period (statues from well before the end, and not the one that every spoiler likes to crow--or complain about) and anyone who watches shipwreck recoveries, or is familiar with them will easily recognize clues that not is all as it seems.
I understand why some people feel angry at being fooled; it isn't pleasant to realize that you've been "tricked". In fact when I first started watching, I was upset that it was classified as a "documentary" when it clearly was not portraying real events. But when you consider the full context, to say this is not a documentary is quite bluntly wrong.