Doc Corner: 'Tiger King' is a Disturbing Mess
Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 5:00PM By Glenn Dunks
Tiger King: Murder, Mayhem and Madness is the undisputed king of the internet right now. A zeitgeist that has steamrolled over a society that has been stuck inside, isolated with little else to do but binge and over-indulge on anything that distracts the mind and the body. Scratch beneath the veneer of its sneering Christopher-Guest-goes-to-the-trailer-park milieu and Tiger King proves to be lazy at best, morally corrupt at worst. Expanded out to an over-confident seven episodes, directors Eric Goode and Rebecca Chaiklin dig their series deeper into grimy, ethically dubious territory with little of that digging towards something substantial.
The story of Tiger King, though, is certainly interesting. How could it not be considering the ever-escalating crime saga of Joe Exotic, a private big cat zoo owner and operator whose life gravitates towards weird and weirder. He’s a true drama queen...
He has two husbands, an arch-nemesis who maybe killed her own husband and fed him to tiger,s an employee whose arm gets torn off, and acquaintances like a former cocaine drug lord who went on to own his own big cat zoo (and, as it turns out, was on stage with Britney Spears during her famous “Slave 4 U” performance at the VMAs in 2001).
As you can see—the title is accurate. There is indeed murder, mayhem and madness. Unfortunately, what it doesn’t have, just like a lot of these docu-series, is anything in the way of style. Beyond the Netflix house style, I suppose, which is nondescript in nearly every way. I guess they’re like Marvel that way (they hold the same sort of cultural sway, too, come to think of it). That turns out to be the least of Tiger King's problems, though.
It doesn’t take long into Tiger King’s 5-hour+ runtime for signs of something amiss. Five minutes, in fact, when the production team are distracted from their initial mission upon the discovery of a man transporting a snow leopard in the back of a very shady-looking van. “What is a snow leopard doing in the back of this hot van”, Goode asks. Would most of us call the police? I would hope so. And while the narration claims it is what set up a deeper dive into what makes people keep big cats in captivity in America, these opening moments eventually ring loud as warning signs of a production that has little interest in what is morally right and more interested instead in getting a wacky true crime story. One that, it is very easy to argue, only appears to unfold the way it does because of the direct involvement of the production crew who appear to gode these people on to do terrible things and spent five years filming animal abuse and an unfolding litany of suspicious, dangerous behaviour. I can almost hear the sound of rubbing their hands together in glee.
We could be here all week if I went step-by-step through everything about Tiger King that got my blood boiling (you can add misgendering one of its most significant figures, something I just discovered today). But I could overlook parts of that if the production was doing something with it all beyond blood-splattered yee-haw gawking for cheap laughs. What the series actually wants us to think about all of these ghastly humans besides, ‘gee, look at these white trash sideshow freaks’ is beyond me. Like last year’s Fyre documentary, the whole thing was so deeply unpleasant of an experience that even the momentary joys that are found in its absurd detours (skeletons in car passenger seats, jet ski montages and so forth) are too dipped in nihilistic meanness to elevate the material. With each new deranged character who is introduced, fodder for Hollywood casting memes that have only sought to highlight how it’s all one big joke, we learn less about them.
Similarly, across seven episodes, the unfolding menagerie of Joe Exotic and his cohort of animal-abusing dimwits never stops or even slows down to assess what story it really wants to tell. Like most Netflix docu-series, it is far too long with no clinical eye laid upon its runtime to decide what is essential and what can be done without. While its editing is technically proficient—especially when factoring in the assorted video sources to be corralled into one series—with no real ebbs or flows, it comes across like a young child reading a book report (or in this case, a very detailed crime report).
Ultimately, Tiger King is a failing of its production team. Feature-length periods of character assassination are coupled with an uncaring eye towards blatant animal cruelty and sexual predaciousness that mixes uncomfortably with class mockery and pungent misogyny. None of these horrific monsters get more than a second concerned glance when there is a perfectly superficial elbow to the rib and a smug grin to be done instead. I shudder to think at what was captured and not included because it didn’t fit neatly into the wacky narrative.
I understand the appeal of Tiger King, I do. Especially now in both isolation and the age of T***p. But it also disturbs me. The news that Kate McKinnon of all people is preparing a dramatic adaptation is frightening beyond words. It’s a series that grows more soul-deflating as the days go by. But because I want to leave it on something positive: I think Don’t F**k with Cats was actually very good and does better a lot of what Tiger King does not.
Release: Streaming now on Netflix.
Emmy chances: Definitely. Sigh.
Doc Corner, Netflix, Tiger King, cats, documentaries, streaming, zoology
Reader Comments (22)
This came across as someone who was already tired of it before they saw it.
Thank you Glenn. I cannot believe people who I thought had taste where telling me to watch this; laughing it up over how "trashy " the "characters" are and ignoring all the animal abuse.
I have avoided watching this
Joe has become this kooky, fun, cult like figure (to some) but in reality he’s a sexual predator who abused people and animals. The response to the show has been so bizarre.
I have no interest in this bullshit.
I feel you're more upset with society not rejecting this than you are with the filmmakers lack of ethical integrity.
Lengthy paragraphs about what is bad and unethical about it, but sure a couple of references to public reception of it (one of which is just a fact about its popularity) is what you pay attention to. Nice to know in a pandemic some things never change...
Glenn, really smart article as always, and very nice to see you defend yourself in the comments. As a fellow writer for the site, I am sometimes shocked at how disrespectful the comments can be in response to the writing. Like, awesome to disagree, but do it intelligently.
I think you bring up some terrific points about the role the filmmakers had here, as there are many moments when you're wondering where they got the footage, what they're recreating, what they've egged on, etc. But I do think they were smart about keeping to the main theme, which of course is exploitation. Basically all three central animal owners made their livelihood by exploitation of those beautiful animals, and the filmmakers I think cast a nice complicity our way for how easily all humans fall for wanting to be close to them. The desire for the average person to meet and pet one of them overrides our better instincts to stop and think...wait a minute...
they hit that point time and time again, in ways on the nose and subtle, and in that i think they succeeded well. yes, of course i realize the irony of a documentary about exploitation taking on tactics themselves exploitative. that was indeed troubling.
i think the fascination for most people, myself included, is that it is that case where reality is truly stranger than fiction. if you wrote this story and had actors commit to the roles like that, nobody would be believe it. it would feel SO over the top. yet here it is...
congrats on all the good writing and the launch of so much good discourse.
I thought most of the documentary used archive footage from his own reality show?
I saw the trailer for Don't F**k with Cats but never got around to watching it. But the ending note renew my interest. Maybe write about that!
They did mention the gators burning, albeit briefly. His first husband was really upset about it because those were his gators. The Baskins are upset because they were told the documentary was going to be blackfish for big cats. Although I think thats what the directors were planning on doing at first until they met these characters and discovered the feud brewing between them. It’s easy to understand how the directors got distracted and refocused their documentary, it’s the same reason why this is such a phenomenon. It’s hard to look away from a train wreck.
Why so upset? Is it the quarantine?
Also, you have typos in your article.
I don't agree but an interesting take!
The series is unfocused, for sure. The directors clearly had one idea, then jumped to another, then another, etc. throughout the filming process. There's a way to do a true crime/character-driven documentary without feeling so...gross. The Aileen Wournos documentaries by Nick Broomfield played in similar territory without feeling like a Jerry Springer marathon. There's not enough story in Tiger King to justify seven episodes, and the episodes are padded by providing plenty of opportunities to gawk at the subjects like you paid the extra fee to go behind the curtain at an old timey freak show.
As well written as this article is, I wonder what the point of is one THIS site. Half the comments indicate that there is very little interests in the latest nausea inducing pop-corn crime doc that Netflix turns out every week it seems. During these difficult times what a lot of us need are articles on great cimina, maybe hidden gems that we have overlooked and now have time to catch up on. Again this is very well written, just feels like it on the wrong kind of site.
Gary, my understanding was that most that went up in flames, right?
Z, the point is because there's not much out there at the moment + I watched this and wanted to put into works what I wasn't seeing out there.
Glenn, but there are dozens and dozens of articles about this doc and dozen and dozens about the lack of focus on the animal abuse and the unfortunate focus on human freakshow. This feels more at home at EW than at The Film Experience.There is nearly endless content across the multiple streaming platforms that don't have such well written write up such as this, so I'm not sure what is meant by your comment that there is not much at there at the moment
YOU
YOU ARE CRINGE
I’ve heard a couple of production companies considering Guest for the lead role. And surprisingly, in a Sally Field in Lincoln aging-up scenario, Shelley Long for Carole Baskins, which is so inspired I could cry.
Agree with Z and some of the dissenters too. As the saying goes, ‘They can’t all be Claudios’. EricB, you can’t in good conscience stand behind your first paragraph when as a contributor to the site you allow ‘unintelligent disagreements’ such as typically from Peggy Sue and thevoid99, for examples, to slide by without any notice. I’m not sure if you are like Nathaniel and have personal relationships or pet favs amongst the commentariat, but you almost cross into virtue signalling or being a hypocrite if you do not. I look forward to you calling out all who post comments so wildly against the spirit or the site, regardless of their links to Nathaniel, yourself or other contributors.
One can never say no to Netflix shows due to their intense story telling and production values.
I tried to watch this but had to stop it midway. It's hard to see how trash some people can be and still make it to the greener side of the grass.