Queen Of Versailles Documentary Analysis

When discussing documentary filmmaking, a common argument that arises is one of ethics. Many argue that it can be the ethical responsibility of the filmmaker to make an effort to portray their subject in the most accurate and “true” way possible. These types of ethics become controversial in such documentaries as Lauren Greenfield’s Queen of Versailles, wherein the editing of the film depicts the Siegel family in an accurate yet subsequently negative light. In Queen of Versailles, editing is used to portray the frivolity and unsustainability of the lifestyles of the incredibly rich and powerful.

Because the editing in Queen of Versailles so frequently emphasizes the negatives of the Siegel family’s lifestyle, the notion of ethics comes into question. Throughout the film, the idea of power comes into question in that it is understood by the audience that the filmmaker has control due to their access to media institutions and power over the documentary images and ideas presented (Nash 2011). This causes the question of whether the

For example, after the recession begins to affect the Siegels and they are forced to let go of most of their housekeepers, a particular emphasis is made on how slovenly and chaotic their home becomes. This is particularly shown by how quickly unsustainable having dozens of pets to take care of becomes for the family, with lingering shots depicting their neglected lizards and rodents having starved to death in their cages and still more shots of their overworked maid attempting to clean up the messes left by all of Jackie’s eight dogs by herself. These shots show an example of the filmmaker exerting their influence over the viewer’s idea of the subjects by exaggerating negative imagery associated with the Siegel family’s inability to adjust to their newfound