Having seen this documentary, that is very much the point. In fact, I believe Fielder and Oppenheim intentionally biased the filmography to make you question everything: is "Liz" being intellectually honest?
Does she understand what she did wrong? How does Fielder
actually feel about the subject?
As the film ends, no questions are answered, no facts are presented to push or counter the narratives introduced, it just ends, and you're left wondering what just happened.
To my point, some of these questions have obvious answers, at some points EH is presented as honest, and at some points she is presented as deliberately obtuse. Some things are intentionally played up both in editing and acting to direct you to an answer. It makes you question everything, including the documentary itself, which is why I think it kind of transcends "documentary" as a genre.
As the film ends, no questions are answered, no facts are presented to push or counter the narratives introduced, it just ends, and you're left wondering what just happened.
To my point, some of these questions have obvious answers, at some points EH is presented as honest, and at some points she is presented as deliberately obtuse. Some things are intentionally played up both in editing and acting to direct you to an answer. It makes you question everything, including the documentary itself, which is why I think it kind of transcends "documentary" as a genre.