The documentary "The Nine Lives of Marion Barry" tells the story of a politician whose career started with success and ended with scandal. Directed by Dana Flor in 2009, it recounts the life of the former mayor of Washington D. C., Marion Barry. In his first two terms, he was adored by the public, having advocated for the Black population and started organizations that provided jobs to many. In his third term, however, his career took a turn for the worse when he was arrested for the use of cocaine. He was re-elected shortly after his release, but continued to fail drug tests, as well as cheat on his wife. This documentary follows the changes in both his political career and personal life, and shows how Marion Barry's actions affected the people of Washington D. C. The documentary took a balanced position, including arguments both in favor and against Barry.
I felt this documentary had a great contrast between the two sides of Marion Barry. The first half depicted him as a hero; someone all the people loved and looked up to. It focused solely on the good he had done for D. C., and for a short time even made me want to believe he was a good person. This purely positive interpretation was very persuasive, and was a great build up to the second, more negative half of the documentary. In this part we see a drastic change in Barry. It focuses on his drug abuse and arrest, multiple affairs and poor treatment of his wife, and how D. C. crippled because of his lack of care towards his job. This greatly changes the perspective of the viewer, allowing them to see a new side of Barry. I thought the drastic change between the two halves of the documentary was a good representation of the drastic change in the behavior of Marion Barry between his terms.
However, in the second half it felt like some of the negative information was missing. The first half of Barry's accomplishments was very in-depth, but parts of the second seemed rushed. There seemed to be many bad things Barry did that were not included, or only briefly touched upon. For example, there was mention of Barry hiring people that were not qualified for their political jobs. I found this action interesting, and something that for me greatly takes away Barry's credibility, but there was not much focus on it. I would also have liked to see more detail on the effects of D. C. after Barry's multiple re-elections. Brief information on an increase in crime and drug use in the city was included, but I felt the documentary could have benefited from a larger focus on how his actions affected everyone in D. C., not just his supporters.
Overall, I thought the documentary was very informative and well-executed. The tactics of contrast and comparison used between the two halves kept it interesting and intriguing. While it could have included a little more information on his negative actions and effects, I felt the two legacies of Marion Barry and how he was viewed by the people around him at both times were accurate and well represented.