Incident au Loch Ness

My wife watched this for 45 min before asking me if this was a fake documentary as I did not let on when I put it on for us.

I really enjoyed this movie.Herzog is both a huge ham and absolutely sincere at the same time, what a joy to listen to him talk.Penn as the "producer" is great as he trys to improve the movie with a bit of sex and silly props,he manages slim quite nicely and it is obvious he enjoyed playing the roll.

This show is basically a movie within a movie, a Documentary about Herzogs making his latest documentary on the Loc Ness monster(and the fact that it is a myth). It is cleverly done and even manages to make one jump a couple of times.

Tongue in cheek and gently amusing, certainly worth watching.

Who knew that Werner Herzog – the director of "Aguirre: the Wrath of God", "Fitzcarraldo", and other weighty dramas -- could do comedy? Herzog proves it here in Zak Penn's terrific send-up of "the making of the movie" documentary.

"Incident at Loch" purports to document a film Herzog sets out to make in Scotland about the Loch Ness monster. Overseeing the production is Penn, a successful screenwriter. Along for the ride are a famous cinematographer, an Academy award winning sound man, a Playboy model, and a radio controlled six-foot "Nessie."

Penn puts it all together in a clever, inventive way. The result is one of the most original – and funniest – movies of the year.

Like a big budget Blair Witch Project this is a clever and amusing con job that shows the manipulative power of the documentary but as the film becomes more and more preposterous and the con becomes more obvious the joke goes a bit flat.

Lately the documentary genre has been messed with royally with blending opinion and personal agenda with fact mainly for entertainment value ala Michael Moore and Morgan Spurlock's Super Size Me, but this one side steps in yet another direction and seems to me to be satirizing the whole mocumentary process which would make it a joke within a joke and a true original. It's not entirely clear if this is the intent of the film, which only adds to the enigma. I like to think it is.

It is refreshing to see a legend like Herzog willing to poke fun at his own obsessive reputation and it's his charismatic presence that carries the film.

I don't know when the mocumentary first showed up in film but one of the first I recall that's well worth checking out if you like this sort of thing is Woody Allen's great from 1983: Zelig.

The film was shot in a mockumentary style. The plot tells about the events that took place at Loch Ness during the filming of a documentary about Werner Herzog. The first half of the plot is devoted to the preparations for filming. Backstage work is shown. But it's pretty interesting to watch. Very quickly you forget that you are watching a movie. Everything was filmed and edited in such a way that it feels like a real documentary. Plus the great and natural acting of the actors playing themselves. The ending sags a little when events develop too quickly. But overall, the movie is worth watching.

This has many things I seek: A faux documentary after the manner of "Lost Silver." Werner Herzog, who is sort of a touchstone for those interested in merged stylization and the documentary-like magic of discovered behavior.

It is a film about a film about a film about a film. It is an examination of truth and fiction merged. Sounds perfect, right?

Some elements are deft. Herzog really is great. I already saw him in a similar real-fiction role in a Harmony Korrine project (similar in spirit to this one). So he really wasn't a surprise. But one gets the impression that he really can live in merged real and fictional worlds. I suppose all great artists can do that.

But the whole thing falls flat, largely I think because the writer went the whole distance with himself. He is the writer/director and he plays that as well. But he doesn't have the oscillating realities that Herzog projects and that is required here. Let's call it the Woody Allen effect: a great idea that the writer had that the same person ruins in the form of an actor.

I have maintained for long that actors cannot understand movies. The interests of filmmakers and actors conflict. But it is also true that asking a filmmaker like Penn to be an actor is just as hard. And just as disappointing.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.