I am not unique in my childhood love of animals so Jane Goodall was an iconic figure, and her authority was a given. I never thought about her as a human being. As an adult, I stopped watching PBS documentaries because animals in danger stress me out, and it is a natural part of life. When I heard about Jane, a documentary about Goodall, I wasn’t planning on seeing it, but then I reflected on how little I know about her and thought, “Why not,” before heading to the theater. Big mistake!
Most critics adore Jane so I am probably a philistine. The documentary includes unseen footage filmed early in her career, which I was not aware of prior to seeing the film, and is narrated by Goodall. I expected that the movie would be more comprehensive and was disappointed, but I was not misled, just uninformed, so I can’t blame the filmmakers for my feelings.
I learned many things from Jane that I had never considered, but was probably obvious to everyone, but me. Women don’t usually explore the wild alone. A young blonde chick walking around in shorts is seen as sexy, not comfortable at work and wearing appropriate clothing, which is probably the (wrong) reason that she became so well known.
I also found my attitude toward Goodall changing as I learned more about her and her work. It is probably not fair since Jane is primarily about her work and her life, but I never learned about her relationship with the locals other than the visual depictions of them as workers or people in need of medical help. We learn about her mother, who deserves her own documentary and an award for supporting your child’s dreams, her husband, her son and the apes, but not the people who probably did the heavy lifting in her camp. To be fair, later on, we see students who work at her center and don’t learn about her relationship with them, but damn, you’re in Africa, and you don’t have a single story about all the Africans who are wallpaper in the documentary. I thought that her ideal role model as Tarzan inadvertently indicated more than intended.
If you ever want me to internally roll my eyes, tell me that you never thought about guys or marriage then get married two seconds later and to a baron of all men. I don’t believe you! I think that it is fair for a documentary about Goodall’s life to chronicle her relationship with her husband and son. It bothered me that the story ends when she gets divorced because work separates them and eventually sends her son away to go to school. She was still a relatively young woman at that point. So y’all are saying that she did nothing but work afterwards and pine away for her son. Sure. Jane has no problem with comparing and contrasting the pioneering adventurer with the conventional wife and mother, but is uncomfortable exploring who she is outside of work and when she isn’t actively mothering. It is a fictional fantasic omission that betrays a discomfort explicitly referenced early in the film over a single woman alone in the wild with no escort. If the film had never depicted her personal life, which I never cared about before or considered, I would never consider it fully, but here we are. Kudos to Goodall for not giving up on her dreams because of family pressures-her husband did not feel the need to sacrifice similarly so why should she.
Now as an adult, I was actually horrified by most aspects of her research. Human beings are trash so when Goodall gets the chimpanzees to interact with human beings, I understand that she is not considering the future danger that she is placing them in: creating dependence on human beings and disrupting their natural instinct to fear and shun a predator. I liked her polio vaccine intervention, and her unrepentant attitude. At least later in her life, she contemplated her actions and will not apologize, which I respect. If she did not consider the moral implications of her research, I would have silently judged her. I’m happy when she intervenes to save lives, but not if it puts them in danger to fulfill her professional goals and personal dreams. I did think that it was very imperialist of her to choose what delighted her, taking bananas, versus what she condemned, taking other objects and calling the chimpanzees thieves. There is no difference!
Philip Glass, a great American composer, wrote Jane’s score. I’m a barbarian. I found the soundtrack overbearing and too much in the forefront. There were so many Technicolor shots of insect life accompanied by the soundtrack to act as pauses between the scenes, but instead of finding them breathtaking, I thought, “If I see another caterpillar inch along a branch, I swear….” I was foolishly unprepared for the rampant animal violence featured in the documentary: animals attacking zebras and water buffalo and chimp civil wars. I can watch all kinds of violent fictional TV shows, but the circle of life leaves me in a fetal position. Shrug.
Side note: I understand that objectively Brad Pitt and Tom Brady are attractive men, but the way that there are eyes are set apart in their head gives them a simian appearance to me. Their bodies are beautiful, and the Greeks would want to immortalize them in sculpture. Goodall’s filmmaker husband as a young man looked like a chimp to me. I’m the problem. I don’t know what is wrong with me. She says that he was attractive and clearly I don’t understand what makes some men attractive so I’ll just take her word for it. Admitting that you have a problem is the first step to fixing it. Don’t hurt me! Help me!
I found Jane excruciatingly boring and traumatizing. I regret seeing it because my image of Goodall is slightly dimmed. I think that my changing attitudes on human and animal relationships affected my ability to enjoy the documentary so don’t take my opinion as gospel. If you are into Goodall, nature or Glass, definitely check it out, but if any of my opinions sound similar to yours, wait until it is available for home viewing or skip it altogether.