MovieChat Forums > The Office (2005) Discussion > Roy makes no sense

Roy makes no sense

posted a month ago by avortac4 (3541)
4 replies | jump to latest

When you really think about it, you can realize almost nothing makes sense because of the DOCUMENTARY angle.

I mean, how can there ever be 'secrets' people tell to the camera, when every single individual in the office can EASILY JUST WATCH THE DOCUMENTARY and see everything. The things they show..

..why doesn't anyone ever contest that? Did they really HAVE to show Meredith taking her clothes off (not in detail, but they showed THAT it happened, which can be embarrassing, so no one thought to tell the camera crew to not show that part or they will sue?)..

So when you think about it this way, Roy makes absolutely no sense.

Roy is absolutely, 100% CLUELESS as to what goes on between Pam and Jim when they (Roy and Pam) are together, and even afterwards. How can this be, when it's ALL EXPLICITLY SHOWN IN THE DOCUMENTARY?

How can there EVER be a misunderstanding, when all you have to do is watch the documentary to see how it all happened? Roy can't get jealous and try to attack Jim, because he should know from the documentary that it was all innocent, and all. He should WAIT to see the documentary before attacking Jim, right? RIGHT?

Also, he should ABSOLUTELY attack Jim, because the documentary CLEARLY SHOWS very suspicious things, like Pam and Jim KISSING when she's drunk at the Dundies, and Jim not pulling away or trying to not kiss her, which indicates at least something..

Of course ALL the other stuff that goes on would mean that any even slightly temperamental 'Chad' (or alpha) would definitely have punched Jim's face blue and purple quite many times during this show. There CAN'T be misunderstandings or not knowing things, when the DOCUMENTARY SHOWS IT ALL TO EVERYONE.

I could go on, but I think I made my point - the whole 'Documentary Aspect' makes everything about Roy nonsensical and weird, why would he act like he does if we can easily just watch the doc and know exactly what went on?

Roy makes no sense.

Then again, almost nothing does, when you look at it from this aspect - for another example, when Michael gets lost, he's CONSTANTLY followed by the camera crew. Who probably have phones, cars, other ways of communications and transport, so they could just take Michael back, or at least call the other camera crew or ANY of the about thousand and five options they have. But no, they let Michael wander around and not lend him any money when he wants to go eat, etc... it makes NO SENSE whatsoever.

Michael could withdraw his consent to being filmed if they don't help him or something. Taking video of Michael is apparently worth a lot of money to them, so WHY WOULD THEY NOT HELP HIM?! They are THERE all the time!

So yeah... pretty much none of the characters make any sense, because they show and confess to the camera so much, and later don't want it redacted.. and because they can simply watch the documentary and see and hear all the secrets and confessions, so they can never be fooled or kept in the dark. How can anyone blackmail anyone (Phyllis vs. Angela), when everyone can know everything JUST BY WATCHING THE DOCUMENTARY?

And. So. On.

[–] AP (5259) a month ago

In the show, the documentary wasn’t airing while all this was happening. It came out a year after they stopped filming.

[–] cv1cv (398) a month ago

BEWARE! Avortac4 is a troll trying to waste everyone's time with such idiotic comments. Look at his posts. He doesn't think anything in any film makes sense. His post may seem like it makes sense in the first sentence or two. But he always quickly wanders off into a completely idiotic idea, and then writes a wall of text that makes no sense. And his sole purpose is to waste your time, thinking he's cute for doing so. Don't feed the troll. If you write a comment, you're giving this troll EXACTLY what he wants. Don't comment after my comment.

[–] daveyh (590) a month ago

sorry cv1cv, I might be "feeding the troll" here ha ha!
I'd expand on the OP though and say that it goes beyond any individual character - it's the problem with the whole documentary style, given how long the show ran for.
It's hard to believe that cameras would focus on an individual office for nearly 10 years, unless they were trying to make some bizarre version of Boydhood. Even if they did, they'd certainly condense the coverage into one series or maybe even a movie (sort of like a dull version of Hoop Dreams). They wouldn't release so many stand-alone series of it. They'd probably not even run it chronologically, instead maybe focusing on one individual each episode and contrasting their appearance, habits, social lifestyle etc over the course of the filming.
That's possibly one place where I'd say the Engish version has the advantage - because there were only 12 episodes of the original spoof-documentary run, and all supposedly taking place within a 3 month time frame, it makes the fly-on-the-wall documentary idea plausible. (the Christmas specials were treated as a follow-up show after the original had aired)
Also at the time the English version was conceived, in 1998, fly-on-the-wall documentaries (also known as "docusoaps") were all the rage in the UK. Even by the time the show is supposed to be set though, in early 2001, they had become tired and were fast being replaced by reality shows.
By 2005 in America, when the filming starts, this kind of documentary making would be very outdated.

[–] daveyh (590) a month ago

just to go back to my initial response to the OP, I remember even as far back as season 2, when I first watched the booze cruise episode, that moment when Jim looks at the camera that's following him and quietly says to it "I'd save the receptionist!" - I remember thinking then, 'as if you'd say that knowing that what you've said could be broadcast at any minute.'
I think the longer the show ran for, though, the more of a joke it became - when Michael leaves mid-way through Season 7, one of the last things he says to the camera is "let me know if this ever gets shown" or words to that effect