Cate Blanchett and Succession‘s Harriet Walter get profoundly gentle in tonight’s Documentary Now!
This parody of Philippa Lowthorpe's Three Salons At The Seaside goes so softly it barely qualifies as parody at times
TV Reviews Cate Blanchett
Last week, while discussing Documentary Now!’s fourth season premiere, I wrote at some length about the show’s tendency toward synthesis—the idea of jamming two big, silly ideas drawn from the vast world of non-fiction filmmaking together, and seeing if they make something more, or at least something funnier, than the sum of their parts. Tonight’s sophomore installment of the season, “Two Hairdressers In Bagglyport,” isn’t that kind of Documentary Now! episode, though—even if early press releases cited two wildly disparate documentaries as its inspiration.
No, this is the other kind of Documentary Now! episode: One of those ones where directors Alex Buono and Rhys Thomas, and writer Seth Meyers, have narrowed down their taste for specific recreation to such a fine point that there are any number of scenes from tonight’s episode that you could probably slip back into the original work, with very few people the wiser. (Whether that sort of hyper-faithful recreation leaves the episode with a sufficiently strong identity of its own…well, we’ll get to that in a minute.)
The source material, in this case, being Philippa Lowthorpe’s 1994 TV movie Three Salons At The Seaside, an examination of the lives of a number of elderly women, as filtered through their rituals and regimens at their hairdressers’ in Blackpool, England. Low-key, gentle, and a little mournful, Lowthorpe’s film is an utterly gorgeous slice of human existence, with its subjects melancholy and funny in equal measure as they recount tales of family, the allure of duty-free shopping, and an absolutely enormous number of stricken or dead husbands. (It’s also only 40 minutes long, and floating around freely on YouTube, if you need something else to watch tonight.)
“Bagglyport” pares things back to just one salon, and drops Cate Blanchett and Harriet Walter into the center of it, but beyond that, the premise is essentially the same: Watching women reflect on their lives in a space that would be sacrosanct, if it wasn’t so deliberately open and warm. Meyers’ script amps up the absurdity where it can—a conversation about the “death book” the salon keeps to track people’s passings (a real holdover from Three Salons) includes a runner from Walter about a notorious black widow who used to frequent the shop, and the periodic postcards from clients abroad evolves into a very gentle kidnapping plot that’s quite funny in the banal responses it provokes. But all involved are so beholden to the soft tone of the original work that there’s only so far that any one thing can go.
That includes the one deviation “Bagglyport” takes from the overall non-plot of Three Salons, and the other source of inspiration the show’s producers have cited for tonight’s episode: R.J. Cutler’s 2009 doc The September Issue, here represented by the production of the salon’s annual look book, with Walter’s Edwina standing in for hyper-meticulous Vogue editor Anna Wintour. (The town’s photographers apparently hate her guts.)
The September Issue is not an especially cold film, as it happens; Cutler and his crew even managed to eke some genuine human moments from the closely guarded Wintour. But it has a sharpness that cannot survive in the warm glow of “Bagglyport,” an eroding effect that ends up leaving the whole endeavor with the style book feeling more like an extended, ultimately sweet subplot than anything else. (If we’re meant to see something of Wintour and former Vogue creative director Grace Coddington, whose prickly, artistically passionate relationship forms the core of Cutler’s film, in the interactions between Edwina and Cate Blanchett’s Alice, it’s been diluted down to undetectability.)
None of which, I’d like to be clear, is to suggest that “Two Hairdressers In Bagglyport” isn’t good. It’s very good: warm and bright and funny and refreshing, a lovely palate cleanse from the heightened absurdity of last week’s episodes. But it does raise the question of whether it’s good in ways that are distinct from the qualities it lifts wholesale from 3 Salons At The Seaside. The Documentary Now! crew clearly have a deep affection for the original film—the number of perfectly recreated shots, from the distinctive rounded parking lot of a salon, to the repeated interstitials of a little girl skating past the shop, to the loving way the women’s hair is photographed, is genuinely surreal—but it leaves them with very little to get a handle on of their own.
Blanchett, in her second Doc Now! outing, disappears with practiced ease into Alice, who casually rattles off her own husband’s tragic death in one of the episode’s funniest moments. Walter, meanwhile, displays none of the venom familiar from Succession or Killing Eve (or Anna Wintour, for that matter); instead, she modulates just the slightest amount of weary crispness into her voice, ultimately revealing that Edwina’s frustrations are primarily with herself. There are no bad guys here, because that would conflict too strongly with the vibe—even if it might have opened the door to some sharper jokes.
As a recreation of, and an advertisement for, 3 Salons At The Seaside, then, “Two Hairdressers In Bagglyport” is a wonderful piece of TV, an amazing effort at importing some of the original’s warmth for a much larger, more modern audience. As an original piece of standalone comedy, though, it’s a bit of a softer sell.
Stray observations
- I did first watches of both Three Salons and The September Issue ahead of viewing tonight’s episode. (The latter probably unnecessarily on reflection, although I certainly didn’t mind it.) I do wonder if I should adjust my process a bit, though, because “Bagglyport” would have hit differently if I’d waited to watch Salons until afterward.
- For half a second, when Alice opened the box with the style books at the end of the episode and gasped, I thought it might contain the kidnapped Mary’s head. (I know, I know; it’s grim in here for me, too.) I don’t know if that kind of sudden swerve to horror would have made for a better episode, but it certainly would have been a bit more distinct.
- Thank you in advance, by the way, for forgiving me for not indulging in the show’s running joke about this being Documentary Now!’s 53rd season on the air in the text of my reviews; it’s a very cute joke, and I love it, but it’s just easier to keep the review itself grounded in the real world.
- Another Armisen-light week: As postman George, he pops up a few times throughout the episode, most notably in a bit poking fun at the “girl skating” transitions.
- “And the bricks gave way—bricks he laid, it should be said..” Blanchett’s deadpan as Alice is very good; she’s such an amazing chameleon that it helps sell the sincerity of some very silly lines.
- Buono and Thomas take their recreations of the shots highlighting the casual, expert way the women’s hair is actually styled very seriously; not hard to imagine them responding to such lovely displays of craft.
- Edwina, receiving another postcard: “Majorca! That’ll be Mary, look at that beach…isn’t that lovely. Oh, she’s been kidnapped again.”
Alice: “Should I put out the ransom bucket again?” - Of the various monologues that dot the episode—all of which are extremely faithful to Three Salons—I think my favorite has got to be the woman recounting her refusal to listen to doctors about whether or not her husband was dead.
- “And then there’s Geraldine, lost nine husbands between 1971 and 1984. Of course, that was before we knew she was The Plumpton Poisoner…”
- The ending is extremely sweet—as is the preceding monologue from Walter about choosing the photos.
- Poking around on Letterboxd, there’s definitely been an uptick in interest in Three Salons At The Seaside since it was announced as an inspiration for this episode several months back; there are worse impacts an episode of Documentary Now! can have.
- And that’s a wrap for this week! Back next time for “How They Threw Rocks,” the show’s take on 1996's When We Were Kings.
35 Comments
After three seasons they’re running out of documentaries to spoof, arent they? This was the very first episode where I had no idea what they were doing a parody of.
I’m amazed they haven’t done a Ken Burns spoof. They’d really have to flex their creative muscles to tell a comedic story in his style, but they’ve been so dedicated to intricately recreating other docs, so I don’t see why they would be intimated by doing one based largely upon still photos.
Actually…it can be done comedically.Pillows and Blankets – Community: Season 3, Episode 14
Oh my how could I forget that one! A classic. Maybe Documentary Now figures a Ken Burns parody has already been done, for that reason. Still I’d love to see their take on it.
And this pretty good parody –
If anything, you’d think he’d be the easiest to parody — there are actual plugins for various video editing software called something like “Ken Burns Effect” for zooming and panning over still photographs, mimicking his signature style. Although Burns himself has been moving away from that lately, either because it has become cliched or because as he moves mostly into the later 20th century, there are plenty of video clips he can use.
I’ve never watched Documentary Now because I suspect I would never know what they are parodying. But Cate Blanchett and Harriet Walter is a hell of a draw.
But I don’t really think that should be the only point. I’ve seen almost every episode so far, but have seen almost none of the real docs they’re parodying. But I know the ‘documentary genre’ well and have watched thousands of hours of the wide variety within the artistic genre, that I automatically ‘got’ each DN! episode right away.These creators are the experts at the craft. The art works on multiple levels – referentially funny and intrinsically funny.
You really don’t need to know the source material. It can add another layer, sure, but every episode is well-crafted enough to be funny and engaging in their own rights.
Ehh, maybe. i dunno. I think its funnier if you know.
Funnier, sure. But as long as you’re familiar with basic documentary formats there’s plenty of amazing jokes on their own merits. People I’ve shown Juan Likes Rice and Chicken or Original Cast Recording: Co-Op absolutely loved them and none of them were familiar with Jiro or Company.
I like documentaries and watch some, but not as many as a lot of people around here. I rarely know what they are parodying and I love the show. It is hilarious even without context.
I watch very, very few documentaries, so I kind of consider myself a test audience for whether the show’s comedy works without that frame of reference. I’m happy to say almost all of them have been very funny even to a tabula rasa — pretty much the only one that I didn’t really enjoy was “Original Cast Album: Co-Op,” which was much-praised by the doc fans and theater kids that seem to be a big chunk of the show’s fanbase, but maybe depended a little too much on the source material to connect with me.
nah, its not like im some expert on em, a few of them were pretty well known, youd probably know a few. Theyre usually big ones like “thin blue line”, etc
Blanchette came to them specifically with this idea. So it’s definitely more obscure but I think they welcomed the opportunity to get her back.
I think they don’t even really have to worry about that. There are probably thousands of hours of documentaries from the last 70 years to lovingly parody. Plus, they could simply do style parodies like Weird Al.
well sure-they wouldnt literally run out-i meant more like theyd run out of well known ones-i just dont think a parody of something is as funny if you dont know whats being parodied.
Tbh I hadn’t heard of Grey Gardens before watching Documentary Now. I also hadn’t heard of this one, but it doesn’t take away from the show in my opinion.
the grey gardens one was so good i think its as funny even if you dont know the source.
to me it does.
they’ve always oscillated between popular docs and more obscure ones. if you’ve been familiar with all of them up until this point i think that says more about your documentary viewing cred than the show.
i didnt find any of them obscure-i didnt think i was an expert on docs or anything-just certain ones are known-grey gardens, thin blue line, roger and me, etc
I was really surprised to see this was written by an American. It taps into a very Northern English comedy style of understatement, repression, and low and pessimistic expectations of life. I really loved it.
Another enjoyable episode.Was I the only one thinking “Mary” was a scam? Hey let’s put $10k in the pot. Once that was realized she shows up with the duty free and the salon owners got the money.
I also thought it was a scam, but a scam Mary was running on everyone including the salon owners. Mostly because it seemed to have happened several times.
Surprised you didn’t mention the roller skating girl attacked the postman and as a result had to assist him for community service.
That was a fantastic payoff to that gag.
i actually think it’s best to watch the episode and then the real doc after. at least that’s been my experience.
I’m going to try that for next week, it definitely over-shadowed things a bit this time. I do at least two full watches of an episode for review anyway (initial impressions and then a second sweep for great lines or details I missed) so doing a watch before and after watching the doc will probably be helpful.
We watched the Company spoof recently, from a past series. It’s lovingly made, has a great cast but… is not very funny. It’s short and felt long. And I wondered if it was _because_ it had a great cast. There’s a certain laziness in that.
which one was the company spoof, was it co:op the musical?
That’s the one. And it was well made, the songs worked, etc. And yet… it wasn’t very funny.
Documentary Now! is confusing to me. There is a Season 1 and a Season 4. Also, IFC runs giant blocks of old sitcoms, and during the time and day when this show is supposed to be airing, it has “Everybody Loves Raymond” listed. Since I’m one of those people who still has a DVR, I will set it to record ELR and hope for the best, since I want to see this show.
Is it just me or did Mary appear first talking about an alcoholic gin problem in the salon though obviously in denial about it (unless there are several Mary’s in there)? I have a weird feeling that money didn’t go to a kidnapping. But if it did go to a actually saving her from a kidnapping good for her.😅
I also thought the box of books was going to be Mary’s head. >sigh<