When a filmmaker directs a documentary of a living subject, no doubt they want their stamp of approval. It’s not only good publicity, but shows you did a good job in your work. For R.J. Cutler, both couldn’t be further from his reach with his new doc on Martha Stewart. As it turns out, pissing off Stewart was a bad move.
While Martha Stewart admitted she liked the first half of the documentary, as a whole she has major problems with it, calling out R.J. Cutler for his misuse of resources and leaning too heavy on easy headlines. “R.J. had total access, and he really used very little. It was just shocking.” She added that Cutler constantly removed fun stories that Stewart shared and instead chose to put a major spotlight on her infamous 2004 trial which revolved around her involvement in a stock trading scandal, resulting in her spending five months in prison. As she put it, “It was not that important. The trial and the actual incarceration was less than two years out of an 83-year life. I considered it a vacation, to tell you the truth. he trial itself was extremely boring. Even the judge fell asleep. R.J. didn’t even put that in. The judge was asleep at the bench. I wrote it in my diary every day.”
Martha Stewart also claimed that Cutler misled the audience into suggesting that she is in poor health at age of 83. “Those last scenes with me looking like a lonely old lady walking hunched over in the garden? Boy, I told him to get rid of those. And he refused. I hate those last scenes. Hate them.” He, too, used unflattering camera angles, which he insisted on using despite Stewart’s request. Something like Martha, as with so many of celeb-driven docs, is no doubt going to drum up a ton of viewers based on the subject’s prominence alone. With that, it too could drive undeserved speculation as to Stewart’s condition (she actually had a damaged Achilles’ tendon and isn’t suffering from age-driven frailty). That said, it is ultimately R.J. Cutler’s film and he doesn’t really have to adhere to her requests.
Cutler has gone on to defend Martha (the film, that is), saying, “I am really proud of this film, and I admire Martha’s courage in entrusting me to make it. I’m not surprised that it’s hard for her to see aspects of it…It’s a movie, not a Wikipedia page. It’s the story of an incredibly interesting human being who is complicated and visionary and brilliant.”
But perhaps the most damning move on Cutler’s part came down to the music: Martha Stewart wanted either Dr. Dre or her BFF Snoop Dogg to score the doc, which we must say would have been dope.
Do you think the director should have followed Martha Stewart’s requests? Or does he have the final say?