The film F for Fake isn’t just a typical film but rather it is a documentary film. I wouldn’t say that I particularly enjoyed watching it but I can’t deny that it was interesting. F for Fake explored the art forgers or “fakers” in the art world which is something that is not typically shown in cinema because the topic may be seen as controversial. I liked how the film gave a look into the stories of Elmyr de Hory and Clifford Irving, two of the most infamous fakers during their time.
The film highlights the art of trickery and deception. In fact, the first scene showed how Welles tricked not only the little boy in the train station but also the audience. Personally, I was waiting for Welles to reveal the secret behind his magic trick however he mentions that the key does not symbolize anything. Welles then sets the tone of the film by saying that it is “a film about trickery, fraud, and lies.” I enjoyed the first part of the film more than the second half since it had more substance and it was actually based on real time events. I enjoyed how the stories of Elmyr and Clifford were told — through interviews which are more personal. I felt that it was the best way to know them rather than by means of a regular film which can give more room for biases. The stories of all the characters — Clifford Irving, Oja Kodar, Elmyr de Hory, Howard Hughes, and Orson Welles himself were somewhat fascinating. Their stories intersect and are all connected to each other to make up this complex cinematic piece on the nature of art, the links between illusion, life, forgery and artifice.
The power of editing is evident in the film as it made it seem as if Clifford Irving and Elymr were conversing to each other and this helped make the documentary film more real. It showed impressive technical cutting, swiping, panning, scanning and freeze-framing which is actually what the director, Orson Welles purposely tried to do so as to explore a new directorial style. I think the editing of the film was what drew me into the film the most, more than the actual content itself. The frequent cuts in the film as well as the other techniques helped in engaging the audience since it would be hard to draw out all the details and references with how jarring the film is. It is easy to get caught up in the film but it is also pretty easy to get lost. I however, watched the whole film through — quite confused but intrigued at the same time. I felt that the scene where Oja Kodar was being ogled by all those men in the street was too long and frankly unnecessary to the whole story of the film. It was also weird for me to grasp the concept of Picasso’s supposed infatuation with Oja which resulted to a the lengthy affair between both of them. Towards the end, it all made sense when Welles said that he had been lying for the last 17 minutes of the film. It showed how not everything being shown or portrayed to us is the truth and that so-called “experts” are not exactly as perfect as we may think.