Kumaré

"Kumare" is a documentary starring filmmaker Vikram Gandhi. He sets out into Arizona pretending to be a Guru from India named Kumare. He begins his journey by growing his hair and beard, adopting a fake Indian accent, and going out with this fake persona. Along the way he meets many people that all believe in him and his "powerful ways". He even collects fifteen devoted followers that continue in his teachings even after he has left them. Kumare's main teaching is that followers do not need a Guru, because the truth and whatever else they are searching for comes from within.

At first sight this might sound rather funny. It sounds very similar to "Borat" or "Bruno" or whatever Sasha Baron Cohen alter ego. But it isn't. Not at all. Baron Cohen is mean spirited and goes out to make fun the people he meets. When you see him in interviews he doesn't realize the consequences of his actions. The people that he offended. Vikram as Kumare is the polar opposite. While you're watching you see how connected he is with these people. How he really does believe in what he is teaching. He believes in them and he just wants them to have faith in themselves.

The point of the documentary was to show that anyone can be a Guru (of sorts). When people are lost and confused they seek out understanding and direction. This is why they'll turn to a man, a false prophet, a fabricated Guru. Kumare listened to their problems and assured them that they had all the tools to fix their problems. He told them that they didn't need him. They just needed to seek that light within themselves, get hold of it, and use it.

I'm a firm believer in Christ and still I found Vikram's teachings profound and real. People will believe in anyone who appreciates them. Someone who can listen to their problems and love them the same. It was painful to see these people fall deeper in love with Kumare. Then in the end he has to tell everyone the truth of who he really is...I was just as deep in the lie and thus shared his fear and anxiety. If anything else this shows great storytelling.

The big picture, this is a spectacular documentary. It's evenly paced, shot well, with an intriguing plot. It's not gritty, pretentious, or sardonic. It doesn't pretend to be anything that it is not. (I did not mean for that to be nearly as ironic as it sounded). Some might be offended and hate this film, but to that I'd say they are looking to closely at the small picture and should broaden their horizons to see the real world application. Isn't that what a great documentary does? Puts life in perspective by showing the heart and flaws of humanity. Kumare may not be real, but "Kumare" is a true expose of faith, love, and humanity.

"Kumaré" is a bit like a Hindu version of "Marjoe." And like that movie, we end up wondering if the audience, too, is being taken on a ride. Deceptive charisma can cut both ways. Most documentaries rely on a certain amount of editorial manipulation to create a coherent narrative. Sometimes the business of creating narrative crosses the line between events that happen and events that are constructed. Many instances during the film raised doubts about documentary fidelity:

1. The participants seem unaware of the camera, even when it is right in front of them. Were they coached so successfully that they never glanced at it?

2. How did Gandhi get signed legal release forms from all these people? Were they compensated for their participation?

3. Was ALL the footage real-time recording or were some of the scenes reenacted? Was any of it scripted or rehearsed?

Gandhi probably could have withheld the final reveal from us until the end of the movie. He decides instead to clue us in on the deception from the beginning (and that's where Gandhi's role as a reliable narrator comes into question). Doing so allows the use of circular form -- starting the movie near "the end" and backtracking to the setup and then proceeding forward again until we catch up with the opening scene. The problem with that, however, is that waiting well over an hour to see how an "unveiling" to which we are already privy will play out begins to wear on the viewer's patience. This would have been a stronger film at half its unnecessarily drawn-out length.

The film's strongest aspect is the implied examination of the strife between rational and emotional epistemology. Rationalists want to know whether or not the Emperor is actually wearing new clothes as a point of objective and external reality. Emotionalists want to see beauty in the new clothes that the Emperor may or may not be wearing and are willing to create an internal reality that feeds their expectations. Winnowing out what is real and what is not may not be at the epicenter of belief acquisition for everyone.

In the end, we see that spiritualism is a kind of stone soup. The characterization may be a deception because the stone has no taste, but the soup is still flavorful because of the bits of meat and carrot and potato that the believers bring to the broth. People yearn to be in fellowship with others. Almost any stone that can make that happen is going to attract people. But it shouldn't take 84 minutes to underscore that point.

I just saw this movie, and I encourage you to see it if you're drawn to the subject at all. The premise sounds mean-spirited, and one would expect the movie to be all about poking fun at the gullible followers of the fake guru, but it's not like that. Surprisingly, the director (who plays Kumare) does not come off as a jerk who's looking down on the followers he's managed to rope in. He seems surprised, as the audience is, that it's so easy to be accepted as a fake guru, and there is a lot of humor surrounding that. But I thought the jokes were aimed at Kumare more often than his followers, many of whom come across as likable and even accomplished. In a way, the real stars of this movie are the followers, because it's their sincerity that makes the film something other than what it started out to be.

The highly provocative film Kumare had its world premiere this week at Austin's SXSW Film Festival. The film was very well-received and created a lot of buzz, because of how it was made. Everyone was saying you must see Kumare and not surprisingly it won the Audience Award for Best Documentary.

Kumare is fascinating, because it is somewhere between a documentary and a reality TV show. In the film Director Vikram Gandhi moves to Phoenix, AZ where he pretends to be a wise Indian guru and begins to recruit followers to his yoga sessions. He develops a group of followers and keeps the game going for months. Even though he is making it up, he finds that there are many people desperation for spiritual guidance that are easily convinced and willing to follow him. The film raises lots of questions about spirituality, human gullibility, and the role of spiritual leaders. He certainly shows how easy it is for those with ill intentions to build a cult-like following. The film crew took no money and Kumare attempted to teach a message of self-empowerment to his followers since he always intended to reveal himself to them. The content of the documentary was entertaining, provocative, and humorous. From an artistic point-of-view, the young documentary filmmakers should be commended for raising important questions about human nature and religion.

However, many in the audience seem deeply troubled by their methods of impersonating a guru and lying to people about whom they were and what their intentions. At times, the humor of the film was based on mocking the followers for how easily they were deceived by bogus chants and practices. It was also clear that many people told Kumare intimate details of their lives. While it seems that many of the participants benefited from his teachings of self-empowerment, some were clearly very angry at how they were deceived. While they didn't take money, they were using to advance their careers. There is something deeply exploitative in the way that they were deceived. Kumare raises a lot of interesting ethical questions that should be explored by those who are making documentary films. To put it simply, were the dishonest means that they used to achieve a worthwhile and interesting end appropriate?

It's all about what you take from this movie that matters and makes all the difference.