'Deadliest Catch' leaks a fishy post-production tale

It is hardly shocking news to learn that a reality television show might be playing fast-and-loose with the facts. We should probably be far more surprised, in fact, when something depicted as realistic is actually proven to be. Yet the revealing investigative story exposing alleged editing trickery on the hugely popular Discvovery Channel series "Deadliest Catch" -- uncovered by crack Hollywood Reporter TV scribe James Hibberd in today's edition -- nonetheless proves to be disturbing on many levels considering the heretofore credible source. We might expect deception on most unscripted network efforts, which tend to consist of hundreds of hours of raw footage stitched into a storyline in the editing room. But a respected documentary series of apparent nonfiction like "Deadliest" is presumed to be above the sort of fabrication that's suggested here.

You'd think we might know better by now, that there would be a tacit audience understanding that smoke and mirrors and the mere perception of the legitimate trumps the genuine article nearly every time. Our gullibility evidently knows no bounds. Or maybe it's just that it feels so hopeful to temporarily place our well-founded cynicism on hold every now and then, simply because it's so reassuring to believe. Then we get burned through some fluke-like leaked document, and we're pummeled back into our skeptical shell.

In a "Deadliest Catch" production outline document obtained exclusively by the Reporter, Hibberd reports that Tuesday's fourth season premiere of the Alaskan crab fishing series that's been nominated for seven Primetime Emmy Awards engaged in creative editing that attached supportive footage onto one particularly harrowing storm scene to enhance its dramatic impact. The "life-and-death peril," Hibberd reports, is culled "from different days of filming" a month or so apart. While Discovery executives denied any use of re-enactment footage in any edition of the series -- the production company dismissing the outline in question as an early draft -- it's reported that the sequence as written in the outline "does match what appeared in Tuesday's episode."

OK, so what does this mean and why should it matter? Here's what, and why: It means that "Deadliest Catch" at least occasionally plays closer to "Spurious Hatch." It's really difficult to say if that's too harsh a judgment, since we don't know if this type of dramatic license represents a one-time aberration or a more chronic propensity to mislead. But if we believe there is fire where there's smoke, it may mean this simply is the first time "Catch" got caught in its own fish net. And if that's the case, it's less a documentary than a partially fictionalized work of staging, driven by re-enactment and crafted storyline.

Again, I'm not at all suggesting this is the case based on the evidence so far presented, simply that it's possible. And if this is indeed a recurring production conceit, it's journalistically appalling, of course. It would contemptuously presume the audience needs the thrill-meter synthetically amped-up and can't be entrusted to buy into real life as it stands.

We may find a partial clue as to the show's true authenticity in last year's Emmy nominations. "Deadliest Catch" earned one for Outstanding Picture Editing. Not that this necessarily means squat. But it might.

(Photo courtesy The Discovery Channel)

Comments

[billybob]

Hey, dude, you shouldn't be ragging on my favorite show til you get your facts straight.I read that article. Since when are September and October "months apart?" My calendar shows them right next to each other. You using your own, fictional calendar? Anyways, thanks for writing about Catch. It is one cool show.

[burtsboss]

Sorry, but I smell a rat. This is the best someone can do to discredit a production which has to boil down some 10,000 hrs of footage into 16 hrs of television??

My first thought is, shame on the press. I can see how some jackass with an axe to grind or in pursuit of personal gain might pursue this BS, but it's plain strange to see it taken seriously by the entertainment press, which really out to know better.

First of all, "Deadliest Catch" is a Discovery documentary program which seeks to entertain and inform folks about a very difficult job in the Bering Sea. I don't think they've ever billed themselves as the "60 Minutes" of crab fishing. Second, even "60 Minutes" uses b-roll images to set the scene, establish location and build drama. So do Berlinger-Sinofsky, Errol Morris, The Maysles and just about every other documentary filmmaker out there. In fact, it's virtually impossible to make a film with strictly sequential & contextual footage, and only someone with no knowledge of film would think otherwise.

The only real issue here should be whether actual stories were manufactured. If "Deadliest Catch" did indeed fake a story about a person, a disagreement, a ship breaking down or one of the many other dramas which takes place within this show, then that's bad.But on that front, the press is silent, because there's simply nothing to report.

Simply put, this dog don't hunt. Must've been a very, very slow news day.

[air max]

it is not a advertisment, just share my shopping experience with everybody. hope you have a nice day, and could enjoy the good shopping.

[air max 90]

nice trick

[nfl jerseys]

this post is the beast .the information you have give is exactly what I am looking for.

[air max 95]

could enjoy the good shopping.

[ghd purple]

they offer 24 hours online service, and very very good customer service.

[christian louboutin]

hello my friend hwe are you

[nike shox]

now join us, cuold enjoy 75% discount coupon code, please dont hestitate, take actions.