Street Thief

According to a standard dictionary definition of ‘documentary’ it is a film or program based on or re-creating an actual event, era, life story, etc., that purports to be factually accurate and contains no fictional elements. It would appear that lately some film makers are taking some liberties with this genre. There are some films that try to emulate the style of a documentary creating the so called mock-umentary such as the work of writer-director Christopher Guest with such films as ‘Best in Show’ or ‘Spinal Tap’ Then there are directors such as Michael Moore who has come under fire for allegedly fabricating certain scenes and events portrayed in his films. In the 2006 Tribeca Film Festival the definition of ‘documentary’ once again came under scrutiny. It was there that director Malik Bader presented his lasted film ‘Street Thief’ as a documentary. The film was engrossing as it followed a burglar as he plied his felonious craft explaining the techniques used be a successful criminal. The thing is the criminal depicted in the film bore an uncanny resemblance to Bader. The talk started that this was concocted; a fabricated work of complete fiction. A&E is presenting this film on television so you can decide for yourself. The question of whether is it fair to present a film as a documentary when it is all staged. After all the definition sited above does allow for re-creating events and that has become the center of the controversy. The film holds together as fascinating no matter what and that may be the point the director was trying to make.

As the film opens we see a man waiting in his car. He is parked in the shadows, lighting up a smoke and waiting. He is outside a local supermarket in Chicago, watching the people inside. A short while later a man is shown climbing up the side of building, cutting wires to disable an alarm system. The ma approaches the glass door to the now closed store and breaks in. The camera watches from outside as the man darts around in the darkened. There is the sound of a drill and then man walks out as if nothing has happened. We are finally introduced to the subject of the film, Caspar Karr, a professional thief. In a voice over he recounts tales from his childhood as he counts the piles of cash before him. One Halloween his Grandmother took him to the local supermarket. They went to the candy isle and she proceeded to dump boxes of candy into her purse and then into his trick or treat bag. They walked out of the store and he realized that they got away with it. This was the start of what would be a life of crime. During the film Karr is interviewed by an off screen voice. When asked what he would do if he wasn’t a thief Karr admonishes the interviewer to stick to what he does not anything deeper. He has set the parameters for the film to the techniques and methods of being a thief, not the motivation.

Karr begins to expound on the methodology of his illegal trade. For example he loves to hit nightclubs since he can case the place for months without drawing undo attention to himself. He is not the impulsive ‘snatch and run’ thief. He plans carefully each of his jobs ad looks down on those thieves of opportunity. He also likes to rob Mexican supermarkets and stores in lower income areas. They are usually an all cash business just ripe for the taking. There are also some interviews with somewhat less successful burglars. There lack of success is evident in that the interviews are conducted in the interrogation rooms of a prison. One interviewee does go a little more into his motivation. Actually it comes across almost like a justification for why he started to steal. In this case his boss owed him. Still, the main focus of the film is Karr as he relates his trade secrets and agues with the unseen filmmaker about over stepping their intended purpose. Part of Karr’s life is avoiding relationships. He doesn’t want or need a girlfriend. After all she might break up with him and tell her next boyfriend that she used to data a robber. Prostitutes are able to fulfill his biological needs with out the baggage of a relationship. Like his profession all that matters is the cash. There are a lot of scenes of Karr eating and driving around in his car. While driving around the streets he is like a shark, watching the people, looking at the stores and their security, always aware of the money changing hands. He is constantly on the lookout for the next job. As the film progresses he takes the crew through a complete cycle of a robbery. There is the appraisal to determine if the job is doable. Then the preparation, figuring out just which methods will be needed. Then, finally, the execution as the cameras seems to follow him on an actual heist. To accomplish a robbery Karr has to be a jack of all trades. He must know out to defeat an alarm system or cut the power to a business. He has to master bypassing locks and safes. For him it is all in a day’s work.

Malik Bader has created a film that has the look and feel of a documentary. It employs the techniques of Cinéma Vérité to give the audience an intimate view into the life of a criminal. In posted interviews Bader does defend his position stating that unlike something like ‘The Blair Witch Project’ his film is based on actual robberies and the experiences of real thieves. The excitement in this film comes from the vicarious thrill the audience gets when they feel they are actually watching a robbery. The intention of Bader was to create something that would pull the audience in and to that end he did succeed. Even though I knew about the controversy before I watched the film I found myself getting into this person’s life, regardless of whether he was real or not. After all there are such people around us everyday. Bader has taken the genre more as stylistic approach here than literally. Okay, it is a hoax, there is no way around that but it does represent a novel and imaginative way of telling a story.

Posted 06/13/07