Queenmaker: The Making of an It Girl

I saw the trailer on Hulu and thought it would be a fun deep dive into what the trailer & title of the movie called it, 'The making of an IT girl'. I was excited to watch it and revisit that time in the early 2000's when pop culture was OBSESSED with socialites, heiresses, and debutants. The first 1/3 of the movie delivered on that, focusing specifically on Tinsley Mortimer who despite always seeing her name and pictures in magazines & blogs, I was pretty unfamiliar with at that time. It shed some light on how she & other 'It' girls of that era made their mark in society and the media and all that goes on to get into and stay in the spotlight; From going to Diet Doctors in order to fit into designer sample sizes, getting a publicist, interviewing people who wrote about these girls or helped craft their image and brand etc. So far so good, and then the movie took a hard left and went into the life of a then anonymous blogger who wrote about these socialites. I initially thought it was a little side story that would help segue and tie everything together but it really didn't. The rest of the film is about the blogger, literally. There were parts that connected the bloggers world to that of the socialites he wrote about but the majority of it felt irrelevant to the film and unnecessary. Honestly I was very confused about what I watching, I had to double check that it was still the same documentary and that I hadn't accidentally changed it. Towards the end it dips back in to Tinsley very briefly and gives a vague description of her "downfall" which really wasn't a big deal as much as it was a change in the times. I wish the filmmakers would have dug deeper into her life and her fall from grace and how perspectives have shifted from then to now. They didn't, it was very surface level shallow. Again most of the focus being on the blogger from who he was then to today. Overall, the trailer & description was straight up false advertising, it's 2 films and 1 but only one of them is what's being advertised. The documentary was very disappointing and underwhelming, a choppy & confusing mess that had me scratching my head wondering why Tinsley Mortimer even agreed to be in this and asking myself wtf did I just watch?

The onslaught of negative engagement the distribution network is placing on this film is noted, but let's get to the crux of it all... it's magic

There's a story within a story here, one fantabulously more interesting than the necromacy of the early-00s It Girl era that dominates the first half. Not that I'm not here for a Gawker post mortem, but what could be ground for a really in-depth look at a very specific scene which emerged alongside a new form of surveillance and monetisation thereof fades into something else... rather than revel in the weeds we seek to learn and understand its creator, maker, Morgan. This someone else is what you can only see in the title once you read it through the prism of this deeply enriching interior story, of a plucky crestive with a gift for writing, obsessional focus, and fabulist tendencies, who infiltrated an alien world and made its leading swans dance their greatest dance. Kudos to Morgan Rose and to Zackary the director and fellow viewers disjointed by the internet feedback to this rather brilliant character study on a clearly unusual soul and woman.

This is a wonderful documentary that provides a unique and fresh prospective on an industry where we often see the same scandals recycled again and again. Morgan Olivia Rose's story is one of the most compelling I've heard. This documentary does take a look at what goes on in the background to really make an "It Girl" but much more interesting is the life story of Olivia, who's writing is responsible for making several of the known "It Girls" of our time. Her story highlights a range social factors and the toll this industry takes on those both in and out of the spotlight. I would defiantly recommend watching this!

This film doesn't know what it is. Would have loved to have watched a film about NY socialites, etc. But this devolved fast into a story about a former fact checker intern who is now a trans prostitute and has delusions that he was somehow part of that world. Separately - could have been 2 different interesting documentaries but the bridge between the two didn't ever show up.

This film doesn't know what it is. Would have loved to have watched a film about NY socialites, etc. But this devolved fast into a story about a former fact checker intern who is now a trans prostitute and has delusions that he was somehow part of that world. Separately - could have been 2 different interesting documentaries but the bridge between the two didn't ever show up.

As "Queenmaker" (2023 release; 93 min) opens, we get an It Girl 101 mini-history lesson, which inevitably leads up to Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie. Along the way, we learn that publicists have a great deal of power, as well as the inevitable blods that start popping up,,, At this point we are 10 minutes into the documentary.

Couple of comments: first, please do not confuse this with the South Korean TV series of the same name that appeared on Netflix not long ago. Second, this US documentary is directed by multimedia artist Zackary Drucker. Third, and this is the most important comment: this documentary is really two-films-into-one: the first one last a good one-third of the documentary, and gives a straight up overview of the New York It Girl universe and all that it entails; the second one runs the remainder of the film and examines who the creator was behind the influential NY It Girl blog called Park Avenue Peerage. The New York Times then drops the bomb when it identifies the person behind the blog. I won't say another word. Just watch. How these two separate movies are stuck into one is a bit of a headscratcher to be honest. I literally was about to abandon the film altogether as I was not interested in the It Girl scene. Turns out the movie is about some else altogether. Which brings me to my last, but not least, comments: the title of the documentary, as shown in the film's opening credits, is "Queenmaker", nothing more, nothing less. It's not "Queenmaker: The Making of an It Girl", as noted here on IMDb and many other sites. This is really annoying. Like we need to be explained what the movie title REALLY means. We are not dumb. We can figure it out. (This also happened with the recent Michael J Fox documentary, which is titled per the movie's opening and closing credits "STILL", but for whatever reason, the movie is now known everywhere as "Still: A Michael J Fox Movie". Stop it already, and show some respect for the moviemakers decision on the actual movie title.)

"Queenmaker" started airing on Hulu recently. I had read a positive review of it in the New York Times last week, and that was enough for me to want to check it out. If you are in the mood for a documentary that takes an unexpected turn left, and then keeps going even more off road, I'd suggest you check it out and draw your own conclusion.