"In the Realms of the Unreal" documentary about Henry Darger

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

You might know who Henry Darger is, but I didn't until this film came to the theater I work at. He was one of those weird recloose types who lived all alone his whole life and upon him being admitted to the hospital pretty much on his deathbead in 1972-73, his neighbors went into his apartment and found thousands upon thousands of paintings and drawings he did, along with a 15,000 page epic story called "In the Realms of the Unreal." Jessica Yu made a doc about him in 2004 titled after his epic.

His paintings are so delicate, beautiful.. that type of strange beauty I only experience on rare occassions that leaves me feeling completely humbled. My only complaints about the film are sometimes Yu edited too quickly between pieces.. some of them are so detailed you could look at them for hours and many of them were only shown for about a second or two... and I would have rather them concentrated more on the actual epic he wrote than his life story because that got a bit redundant.. ok we get it.. he was really weird and lonely. But it's still worth watching more than once for the images and what narration they did do of his epic.. they even animated many of the images, still keeping true to his artwork. Very fascinating film. Go see it soon.. it got released recently, but it isn't getting much publicity, so it may only be around for a short while.

― tzatziki n pita (steph jam), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 08:28 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah darger rules

― j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 08:30 (twenty-one years ago)

Seriously, they could've summed up his life in a title card. Should've been 99% animation.

― mayahee, mayahoo, mayaha, mayahaha (deangulberry), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 08:32 (twenty-one years ago)

Does anyone in Chicago want to see this with me tomorrow or Thurs. night?

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 08:33 (twenty-one years ago)

I think Darger would of got a kick out of Dakota Fanning doing the narration (girl is foine)

― Perce Webloow, Wednesday, 26 January 2005 09:19 (twenty-one years ago)

i bet fanning has a hot ass. them 10 year olds, man. tight!

and dakota is my dead dog's name. :[

― tzatziki n pita (steph jam), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 09:55 (twenty-one years ago)

This doc annoyed the piss out of me.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 10:59 (twenty-one years ago)

some of them are so detailed you could look at them for hours and many of them were only shown for about a second or two

I think the art is best experienced in person, not via a documentary anyway.

they even animated many of the images

It's hard for me to imagine this coming off well.

― o. nate (onate), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 15:52 (twenty-one years ago)

So, presumably, this is where the band "Harvey Danger" got their name?

― mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 15:55 (twenty-one years ago)

OMG I never realized that.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 15:58 (twenty-one years ago)

But actually no!

HARVEY DANGER - Taken from graffiti on the newsroom wall of the University of Washington Daily.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 15:59 (twenty-one years ago)

but close, though. yeah?

― mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 16:01 (twenty-one years ago)

the film was okay, was nice enough to meet the people in his apartment.

the computer animation bringing the drawings to life, with sound effects... uhm well okay, it's a film, what else are you gonna do. felt silly though.

― (Jon L), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 20:15 (twenty-one years ago)

I thought this thread title read 'documentary about Harvey Danger'

― Juan, the Magic Don (jingleberries), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 22:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Did you read the rest of the thread?

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 26 January 2005 22:31 (twenty-one years ago)

six months pass...

It airs on (some? most?) PBS stations tonight. I was intrigued and made queasy.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 2 August 2005 18:32 (twenty years ago)

Many people I've talked to think of him as a paedophile, but, um, apart from little girls having penises in much of his work, I really can't find anything even vaguely sexual in any of his stuff. Unless you consider tediously detailed wargames sexual.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 2 August 2005 18:47 (twenty years ago)

Or, you know, chokings. Or dragons.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 2 August 2005 18:48 (twenty years ago)

someone (can't remember who) made the very plausible suggestion that he drew little girls with penises because he didn't know what a naked girl would look like.

(which would put the lie to the pedo myth, anyway)

hopefully this is doc is on PBS--i'd like to see it...

― Matt B. (Matt B.), Tuesday, 2 August 2005 19:02 (twenty years ago)

The knee-jerk pedo thing is a bit silly. I saw no evidence that he was particularly sexually inclined towards anyone or anything, nor that his obsession towards childhood had very much in the way of sexual overtones.

Dakota Fanning's narration was really annoying.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 2 August 2005 19:09 (twenty years ago)

fuck my cable went out again.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 2 August 2005 23:13 (twenty years ago)

I ended up disliking it, couldn't even finish watching. Felt like they were doing a number on him. The interviews with neighbors were interesting, and they did a fairly good job of telling his story. But it's demeaning to animate his work; it is very odd and childish and certainly mad and beautiful stuff, and the doc didn't do it justice, didn't let you see it for very long except in motion. And choosing Dakota to narrate was obvious and predictable—and dumb. But I guess if you weren't aware of him before...

― donald, Wednesday, 3 August 2005 00:37 (twenty years ago)

I found it tedious as well. I wanted to know more about In the Realms of the Unreal, but the docu got bogged down in too much minutiae of HD's actual life which while idiosyncratic offered me little of interest. Also, I would have liked to have heard of the reception of him in mainstream literary and artistic circles.

― Leeeeeeee (Leee), Wednesday, 3 August 2005 06:23 (twenty years ago)

the disturbing edges are sanded down when you add the music & cute animation. it may be a fuzzy NPR-friendly version, but it does mean that Darger's not fringe anymore, he's mainstream... my mom asked me if I'd seen this film the other day, and I was able to tell her that I thought she'd find it interesting. Which is crazy, because 10 years ago I never really would have seen myself saying 'yeah mom you should check out Henry Darger'

― milton parker (Jon L), Wednesday, 3 August 2005 06:57 (twenty years ago)

i thought it was interesting having seen very little of darger's work; the narration got a little tedious and also slightly confusing at times because it was difficult to tell what the sources were. I actually would have liked to have heard more about his personal life but I gether there isn't much more to tell. if anything it makes me want to see more of the work, too bad the apparent best printing of this stuff is out of print and the only copies of it I can find are selling for $900 on amazon.

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 3 August 2005 14:26 (twenty years ago)

which one's the best printing?

the Bonesteel book reprints a lot of Darger's text, you can find it used for around $30, it's worth it new though

these aren't even the best drawings, and they're going for $60-80,000 per thin slice of meatwrap

― milton parker (Jon L), Wednesday, 3 August 2005 18:22 (twenty years ago)

yeah I couldn't watch the whole thing either. the animation and the ever-present narration really dragged it down. I would've been happy with just slow pans of the artwork and maybe a little light music in the background. Instead it was all this cutesy bullshit.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 3 August 2005 18:33 (twenty years ago)

(tho I did find the stuff about his working methods interesting. as someone who also does pointlessly laborious art by hand, I'm always curious to see what other techniques people use/have used, like w/Darger and his photo enlarger, or stringing pieces of paper together to make tapestries, etc.)

― Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 3 August 2005 18:34 (twenty years ago)

I think with different narration and a stronger reliance on interview footage of those few people who actually sorta "knew" him, this film could've been much greater. I actually did kinda like the animation work, only so much in that it helped to sorta tell the infinitely long story his work was telling.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Wednesday, 3 August 2005 18:38 (twenty years ago)

which one's the best printing?

allegedly, this is, but it's out of print. I remember seeing it around, it's not very old; but it must have had a small print run.

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 3 August 2005 19:16 (twenty years ago)

the other thing about the film, and I know this is hard to do in what is trying to be an objective portrait, is that it kind of avoided mention of just how FUCKED UP ALL THIS SHIT IS. I mean, the cruicified and tortured children....this stuff is seriously twisted. Having the Dakota Fanning narration across the top made it even more surreal I suppose.

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 3 August 2005 19:21 (twenty years ago)

not only did they concentrate on the pretty colors & blendragons (over the nooses & entrails), but -- the accustomed context for animation is 'cartoons', and they scan and pan over the darker images very quickly, the battle sequences are done with quick cuts, sparing you. the twisted content is still there but the film's context really takes the sting off of it.

the actual motionless prints cut far deeper and force you to engage.

but this is clearly what the filmmaker was trying to do -- the more I think about the film the more I can appreciate what it's done, which is to present an extreme character study of an outsider artist and make it comprehensible & sympathetic to people who would otherwise run away screaming

― milton parker (Jon L), Wednesday, 3 August 2005 19:44 (twenty years ago)

Agree re Fanning's narration, mainly re sound quality they were dealing with her mumbly little voice) and mumbly little voice couldn't quite enunciate (narration wasn't written for child?)The backstory (of his childhood ordeal) relevant to (partially) de-mystifying ordeal of Vivian Girls, and the later fustrations (diary of his "tantrums," as he called them, although neighbors/housemates never saw these, they say) relevant: even before the scenes/chapters/battles involving "general Darger," was thinking that "generals" and fighting xtian rebel slave girls were polarizations of his own inner conflicts--but hopefully a DVD (multi-disc!) edition will someday provide more non-distracting views of the art, and of his own texts, esp. Realms.

― don, Wednesday, 3 August 2005 21:48 (twenty years ago)

Did I not warn you people?

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 3 August 2005 22:13 (twenty years ago)

I liked the doc much more when I saw it in a theatre. Watching it again I thought
"this is some glorified grad student thesis film". And they should've gotten Dakota Fanning to narrate after her cold was gone. Still -- I love the shots of his room and books.

― Jay Vee (Manon_70), Thursday, 4 August 2005 06:28 (twenty years ago)

Anybody familiar with the operas and other stuff mentioned at the end,inspired by his work?

― don, Friday, 5 August 2005 04:20 (twenty years ago)

two years pass...

Finally saw this. Film is disappointing, but still illuminating and quite moving.

― Hurting 2, Friday, 14 December 2007 16:09 (eighteen years ago)

I wish all the books about him weren't out of print! The book milton parker mentions by Michael Bonesteel (Henry Darger: Selected Art and Writings as being ~$30 used is like $200. It's fucking incredible. I read it about 4 years ago and I really wish I owned a copy, but I'm requesting it through interlibrary loan so I should be able to at least read it again in a month or two.

― Abbott, Friday, 14 December 2007 20:15 (eighteen years ago)

Weird - I just watched this Wednesday night on Netflix's On Demand thing.

I knew of Darger previously, but only vaguely. I think the only thing I could've told you before seeing this was "Darger was a recluse who drew penises on little girls." I don't think I'd ever heard about the 15000 page novel, or anything about his life - so yeah illuminating indeed.

The 2002 documentary about Ray Johnson, How to Draw a Bunny, is viewable online through Netflix also. I found that really interesting and motivating.

― Kerm, Friday, 14 December 2007 20:30 (eighteen years ago)

Yeah, I liked How to Draw a Bunny.

― Hurting 2, Friday, 14 December 2007 20:32 (eighteen years ago)

The book I just mentioned has significant excerpts from his novel and they're just...whoa. Like wizard of oz written by a simple man writing out detailed Good vs Evil war themes with magic and the innocence of little girls vs the evils of grown ups. It just knocked me out totally.

Poor guy, he really did care about little kids.

― Abbott, Friday, 14 December 2007 20:33 (eighteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.