Customer Reviews

Unknown White Male: A True Story

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

The cover-art, blurbs and reviews would make many people think this was a thriller. It is nothing of the sort. It is instead a very fine documentary about a person suffering from Psychogenic Amnesia (Dissociative Amnesia). It is an intriguing medical mystery and a take-off point for discussions on memory, identity and self. Doug Bruce awakes to find himself on the New York subway, not knowing what he is doing, where he is, or more importantly, who he is. He has absolutely no recall of anything up to that point. Bruce appears as a handsome, well-dressed, clean-cut man, who speaks with an English accent. He has no visible injuries and does not appear intoxicated or irrational. He goes to the police. They take him to the hospital, where blood-tests, toxicology-screens, CT and MRI scans reveal no organic reason for his memory loss. They place him in the psychiatric ward pending evaluation. A telephone number in his pocket enables them to contact someone who knows him and allows him to slowly piece together his life.

I find this fascinating from a purely clinical standpoint. Although amnesia is very common, Psychogenic Amnesia is not and Generalised Amnesia is very rare. This is where someone claims he cannot remember any past events in his life while the doctor is not able to pinpoint anything physically wrong with him. In Bruce's case he claims to be unable to recall anything in his life up to that point in the subway. He is however able to form new memories. His memory impairment although extensive, is also selective. Episodic memory (memory of past events) is entirely lost. However, some components of semantic memory (general knowledge) and procedural memory (skills) are still present. He knows general things like how to take public transport, how to go to the police if he needs help, how to sign his name (unfortunately an illegible scrawl), all parts of semantic and procedural memory. However, other components of semantic memory are apparently lost - when brought home to England, he doesn't know what is Buckingham Palace, the Changing of the Guards or Downing Street, things which he would be expected to know in his context. We also find out in the Extras that Bruce has not recovered any of his memories more than 2 years after the event. Usually in Psychogenic Amnesia one would expect some degree of recovery. Why did he lose his memory in the first place? Because of stress? Burnout? Some undisclosed psychological trauma? His sister alludes to the death of his mother but we are not told if this is the possible triggering factor. What treatment was he offered? Psychotherapy, hypnosis, medication? Did he refuse treatment by any chance, seeing how uninterested he was in finding more about himself? In the end, we are not given the answers. Of course, as in all psychogenic illnesses, one must always remain wary of the possibility of malingering or fraud which is mentioned in the film and discussed further in the Extras.

Apart from the medical aspect of the case, I liked the subsequent discussion on memory, the meaning of identity and the concept of self. What is a person, bereft of his memories, cut from all links to his past? Does it make him a different person? When he meets his old friends, he doesn't see any special reason why they should be friends. They are friends simply because of their shared history. Similarly his family members are strangers to him. What I particularly wanted to hear was a fuller assessment of his personality changes if any. His father says that he has become "more serious". His younger sister says that he is more openly emotional. But these could just be reactions to his situation and not actual changes in personality. Would someone's personality change if all his memories, all his life experiences were erased? Like some other viewers here, I wished the producers had explored this area more deeply. Still, this is a fascinating documentary which will intrigue most viewers whether you view it from a clinical, psychological, social or philosophical viewpoint.

The documentary is presented in its original aspect ratio of 1.78:1 (enhanced for widescreen TV). Picture quality is excellent with crisp images, rich vibrant colours and good black levels. Audio quality (DD 5.1) is very good for a documentary, with clear speech and good music reproduction. No subtitles are provided. The two longest Extras are the "Making of" and "Extended Interviews with Experts" featurettes at 10-minutes each. The rest all clock in at around 5-minutes apiece. Although I liked the "Extended Interviews," I found the rest of the Extras not particularly illuminating. The "Original Sand Dune sequence" was well done and worth watching. It's basically a beach scene with voiceovers of Bruce's friends and family talking about him and about memory in general. All in all, this is a fascinating documentary well worth watching.

This fellow lost his mind and it really makes you think. He asks professionals of the brain what it is that makes you be you. Is it the sum of your experiences, of which he recalls nothing; or is it your feelings and thought processes, which in his case seem largely untouched? The new Doug is actually more appealing than the original version. Why is that?
If you just like action adventure, forget it. If you want to see a good film at home with your girlfriend (or boyfriend) and then have some really interesting discussions wih your friends, don't miss this opportunity; a steal at the price. Buy it, share it, and discuss it.

One day 3 years ago, Doug Bruce finds himself (whoever "himself" is at this point in the story) at the end of a subway ride to Coney Island without any memory of who he is, where he lives and how or when he got on the subway. A friend of Doug's talked to him the night before at 8pm and reports that Doug said he was staying in that night. But something happened to Doug between 8 pm and the end of that fateful subway ride the next day.
In Doug's backpack there is a book about translating Spanish and between the pages of this book a phone number of someone named Eva. And so begins Doug Bruce's journey to reclaim his life.
Doctors diagnose Doug as having retrograde amnesia. In other words, he could describe an ocean for you but could not describe how it feels to swim in one.
The most touching scenes in the film are those dealing with Doug's family: can you imagine how it feels to look into your son's/brother's/nephew's eyes and realize that he doesn't recognize you? Has no idea who you are? Can't remember the Love that exists between the two of you? In fact, Doug has no idea what love is.
"Unknown White Male" is fascinating, intelligent but ultimately sad. It disturbs. It forces us to think about things we'd rather not and as such "Unknown White Male" extends way, way beyond our comfort zone: something that very few movies have the wherewithal to attempt much less accomplish.

This is an interesting and thought-provoking film. The documentary follows the experiences of one man with complete amnesia, telling the story both of his total loss of memory and his work to rebuild his life. Experts gives us an overview of the science behind memory, but the film never gets too bogged down in the science. It really provides a very compassionate look at the question of whether we, as people, are just the sum of our memories. What happens when those memories are lost? How do we go about our daily lives? How do we interact with the family and friends who remember a person who's no longer there? All of these issues come up often watching elderly patients with Alzheimer's or dementia, but this film shows a different story as it happens to a very young man. It draws you in and you become very emotionally attached to Doug, the Unknown White Male.

A man finds himself on a train with no knowledge of who he is, or even how he got on the train. His head hurts, but apparently he is not severely injured. He carries no wallet, so presumably he was mugged, although the movie does not address that. Fortunately for him, he has the phone number of a friend's mother with him, and the mother is compassionate enough to call her daughter and ask her to call him, to see if she knows him. Thus begins a very strange journey, as Doug is told who he is and must piece back together some kind of life.

It's very interesting to wonder who we would be if we had no past. Just plunk us down in the life of a man who was wealthy enough to retire at 30, and let us blossom. Doug returns to his study of photography, and attempts to normalize his life.

There are a lot of things to recommend this movie, although it is not spectacular -- it's a careful documentary made by the man's friend. It's thought-provoking in the extreme -- among those thoughts: what would have happened if he had not been wealthy?

I've read other reviews, and most think it's a hoax. So what? Wouldn't we all like to start over? The fact that he went all over the world to reconnect, with friends and family, makes me wonder that, if he was faking, why would he bother? Certain things were innate in his character, such as speaking English and a love of photography, which were somewhat re-taught to him. If he wasn't such an incredibly handsome man, I wonder if anyone would really care.DVD extras are great, especially his former friends telling what a rake Doug really was before the ordeal. This was a darling at the Sundance film festival, but was never up for any awards that I'm aware of. My biggest problem was that when dialogue wasn't happening, the music got really loud, unnecessarily. The sound recording is lousy, but this indie, small-budget film can be forgiven for this oversight. This film is interesting, and director Rupert Murray has presented a film of interest, substance and a bit of controversy. I'd love to start my life all over, with lots of money. Who wouldn't? But I'd never forget my loving family. Doug had all that. That's why I don't think it's a fake... unless he's a real [...]...

I found it to be an intriguing story.

Imagine that you wake up one day, not only have you lost your memory of your past, but you also need to be introduced to everything again. You have no issues, no problems weighing you down, your personality is totally changed. How would that feel?

Doug Bruce seemed to be a changed man. Before his memory loss, he was a stockbroker turned photographer, but seemed arrogant and spoiled. The arrogance hadn't completely disappeared after the memory loss, especially the way he talked about his "old" friends, but he seemed more at peace.

It was difficult watching his family adapt to the "new" Doug, especially his younger sister and his dad.

I gave it less stars because even though I was glued to the screen later, it took a while to get into it, and it had a slow beginning.

I would be disappointed if it were a fake. If it were, then maybe they should have produced this film as fiction. Plus, you would probably get more of an audience that way. I don't know what someone would be trying to prove by making a documentary as a fake. I'm hoping that it's not though. It was an attention-grabbing subject and I felt empathy for those that were involved.

I have to say that after reading these reviews, people have lots of axes to grind. UNKNOWN WHITE MALE is a fascinating film that poses age-old questions about memory, identity and who we are as human beings. It doesn't provide lots of answers -- and that's good. Who wants to be spoon fed? Ultimately, many of the the negative responses to the film may be because what happened to Doug TOTALLY threatens our worldview, everything we define ourselves by, everything we hold dear. Its as if the universe pulled the rug out from under your consciousness and left you in mid-air.

The film is done with both straight documentary and montage imagery. It does not look like your typical documentary at times, but then this isn't you typical story. And if it doesn't explain exactly what happened, its because the filmmakers are being honest. Neither they nor Doug, nor any of the experts know exactly what happened.

UKNOWN WHITE MALE is a compelling, engaging, and mysterious film. See it and wonder.

Are we still caught up in the faux-profound of this ridiculous charade? A documentary maker that refuses to get his subject to take the REAL test that objectively, once and for all, clears up whether this clearly implausible - yet clever, admittedly - LIE, all because he thinks it would be.... I loved this... "rude"?!?!? I mean, really. And the revealing of later video (not in the actual documentary) where Bruce chokes up over the first time he sees rain, even though he has already told of how it was raining, the night he took himself to the police station??!! Or how about the later revealed coincidence to end all coincidences, where it turns out Doug's friend, only a year before, had a REAL case (of only one week) of amnesia, after a soccer accident?!?!? This guy ended up hob-knobbing with lost celebrities who found something "spiritual" about Doug's story, and his pal had a hit doco. I find the whole thing hysterical, however, and so I do recommend seeing the film - even though it does make me feel... well... kinda sick, to be putting money in their pockets. The irony being that beyond the concept, it's actually a really hollow, mediocre affair. But sometimes the truth is stranger than the fiction. Except for Doug Bruce, I suppose, whose fiction is pretty damned extravagant.

I can't say for sure whether I believe this documentary to be true or not, and frankly I don't care. It is still extremely interesting and it poses some very thought provoking quandaries on existentialism and the psychological and sociological processes that make us who we are. Are we merely the sum of our experiences, or is our definition as a person more complex than that?

Although I'm not sure whether this is a hoax or not, I will say that if it is, it is one of the most intricate and interesting hoaxes ever.