"Kenny". Funny :)

i saw the documentary in question, and while i'd agree that his form of amnesia sounds particularly strange, the circumstances around his filming the whole thing are not...in the beginning of the film, he explains that they are filming everything (they even play the phone call when he's telling the sister and dad about his visit, where he asks them to film it) as a way of trying to help him to remember his life before the amnesia (btw, he was NOT a photographer before the amnesia...he was a business guy before, and became a photographer afterwards)
it is a far fetched situation, but if it weren't, would we be watching a documentary about it?

the personality change that is described by his friends seems pretty severe to be done just for the film, but it could be a particularly well-made fiction...i just can't believe that the entire cast was "in on it" since the performances (particularly the sister and best friend) are SO realistic...if they are actors, they should definitely be getting a lot more work!!

i may be gullible, but i bought the whole thing...believing that there is a guy out there who is dealing with getting on with his new life without going back to fill in the blanks of the past

btw, the distributor is IFC...i'm thinking that your saying that they "could care less about whether its all lies" is sorely misguided. i understand that you won't want to rewatch it, but i really think you should so you can see some of the things you obviously missed

Isn't there something inherently deceptive about documentaries in general though? I mean, all documentaries involve somebody deciding where to put the camera and how to frame shots. Those decisions impose a point of view. Unless the camera is hidden, behavior is going to be influenced by the presence of a camera and crew so what the camera captures is rarely pure, untampered reality. Later in the editing room, decisions are made as to how footage will be assembled so it tells a story.

Some documentarians may struggle to be as objective and truthful as possible while others, like Michael Moore, operate more like essayists -- they have no qualms about making a documentary designed to convey a personal thesis.

Years ago, mocumentaries like "This is Spinal Tap" were easier to spot as such. But not by everyone. Some people *didn't* get that the movie was fictional parody because they lacked the cultural references. (Well, if you watch enough VH1 Behind the Music episodes, the line between parody and reality gets real blurry but that show didn't exist when Tap first hit theaters.) Would Spinal Tap have been as much fun if it began with a disclaimer? Was it irresponsible of Rob Reiner to not blatantly identify his movie as a work of fiction? Should Orson Welles have interrupted his infamous "War of the Worlds" radio broadcast with regularly announced disclaimers to avoid confusing the gullible and stupid?

"Mail Order Wife" from 2005 (www.imdb.com/title/tt0377088/), never flags itself as a work of fiction, but not long into it, I figured that it was. It was just too funny. Trying to determine whether or not it was a work of fiction was part of the fun of watching it.

Anyway, we're living in an age where video equipment and editing programs are more accessible and inexpensive than ever before. So anybody, with any agenda, can shoot and cut a "documentary" and expose it to an audience through venues like YouTube and others, without feeling any kind of accountability or responsibility. Aspiring filmmakers can create fictional pieces that have the look and feel of a documentary because it's a cost-effective way to showcase their work. Should they be obligated to attach a disclaimer?

All these factors make it more important than ever to watch all media with a critical eye.

One of my favorites is Forgotten Silver...it's a film-history mockumentary that takes itself seriously and never really winks at the audience (i know many people who thought it was all true), but it's easy to see the references to real history if you know enough about the history of film.

mockumentaries or fake documentaries are not lying and deception...they are works of creative fiction...

if you want to criticize people who spread lies and deception in a forum that is supposed to relay only facts, you might want to direct your anger at the news...documentaries have no such responsibility (unless it is instilled by the filmmakers themselves).