Michael Hann

Revelatory and grubby: Framing Britney Spears reviewed

The programme makers use the same questionable methods as the people they are castigating. Plus: Ozzy Osbourne and Stewart Lee

A woman scorned: Britney Spears. Credit: Red Arrow Studios/© Felicia Culotta 
issue 20 March 2021

The most headline-grabbing of these three pop docs was Framing Britney Spears, part of the New York Times Presents documentary series, and a bit of a worldwide sensation. It was both revelatory and grubby. As many have noted, the footage of interviews with Spears as a prepubescent and teenager was so deeply unpleasant, so unrelentingly sexual, that it seemed to come not from 20 years ago, but from Neanderthal times. The simple accumulation of the public record was horrifying. No wonder people such as Jimmy Savile were able to thrive. If television interviewers could ask a teenage girl about her breasts, about whether she was having sex, then is it any wonder young women could be treated as sexual chattels behind closed doors?

The second half of the film, though, was troubling for different reasons. It concentrated on the conservatorship of Spears — the legally enforced control of her life and finances — by her father Jamie.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in