I'm so confused... I watched the trailer on Hulu and thought, "this could be good background fodder" as I do my skin care routine lol it turned into essentially two different movies... First, it had the Paris Hilton crew from a decade or two ago, which is what I expected. Thought it would be entertaining because of things said and done by the socialites. Suddenly became a story about a transgender woman who seem to have a false narrative of her relationship with Tinsley Mortimer I would've watched both, but the trailer was most certainly false advertising. The title doesn't even make sense based on what this actually turned into being about.
23 Reviews
Umm, what?
MaryChula878 July 2023
I saw the trailer on Hulu and thought it would be a fun deep dive into what the trailer & title of the movie called it, 'The making of an IT girl'. I was excited to watch it and revisit that time in the early 2000's when pop culture was OBSESSED with socialites, heiresses, and debutants. The first 1/3 of the movie delivered on that, focusing specifically on Tinsley Mortimer who despite always seeing her name and pictures in magazines & blogs, I was pretty unfamiliar with at that time. It shed some light on how she & other 'It' girls of that era made their mark in society and the media and all that goes on to get into and stay in the spotlight; From going to Diet Doctors in order to fit into designer sample sizes, getting a publicist, interviewing people who wrote about these girls or helped craft their image and brand etc. So far so good, and then the movie took a hard left and went into the life of a then anonymous blogger who wrote about these socialites. I initially thought it was a little side story that would help segue and tie everything together but it really didn't. The rest of the film is about the blogger, literally. There were parts that connected the bloggers world to that of the socialites he wrote about but the majority of it felt irrelevant to the film and unnecessary. Honestly I was very confused about what I watching, I had to double check that it was still the same documentary and that I hadn't accidentally changed it. Towards the end it dips back in to Tinsley very briefly and gives a vague description of her "downfall" which really wasn't a big deal as much as it was a change in the times. I wish the filmmakers would have dug deeper into her life and her fall from grace and how perspectives have shifted from then to now. They didn't, it was very surface level shallow. Again most of the focus being on the blogger from who he was then to today. Overall, the trailer & description was straight up false advertising, it's 2 films and 1 but only one of them is what's being advertised. The documentary was very disappointing and underwhelming, a choppy & confusing mess that had me scratching my head wondering why Tinsley Mortimer even agreed to be in this and asking myself wtf did I just watch?
As shallow as the it girl phenomenon was
califeris28 May 2023
At first you think you're going to learn about the media obsession with NYC socialites in the 2010s, which I find interesting. It starts off OK seeming to be an overview of how people like Paris Hilton and pals blew up on the scene. I was expecting to hear more about all those girls and who they really were behind the parties and clothes. There are some interesting characters who share their stories in the first 40 mins. But that's all tossed in the garbage because apparently the Director didn't have a real vision for the story. The focus swiftly turns into being all about a striver from the Midwest who gains a brief entre into the NY gossip journalism scene. Things take a very unexpected turn from there, Involving theft, drugs, tons of plastic surgery, a gravity defying boob job, and hair as straight as an iron. It's not as interesting as it sounds.
Some of the facts seem distorted. All in all a few bad things went down, and people were hurt. But no socialites were harmed in the making of this movie. Bottom line it's not worth 90 minutes of runtime.
Some of the facts seem distorted. All in all a few bad things went down, and people were hurt. But no socialites were harmed in the making of this movie. Bottom line it's not worth 90 minutes of runtime.
Not What I Was Expecting...
michellemccarran17 May 2023
And that's my fault. I should've read the description provided here on IMDB instead of trusting the trailer I saw on Hulu.
I thought I was getting a documentary about the rise of the late 90s/early 00s "It" girls of NYC. We did get several minutes of that primarily focused on Tinsley Mortimer, who I really didn't know that much about back in the day. I was glad they didn't devote that much time to Paris Hilton, because I've seen enough of her story already, so it was good to learn about one of her peers. I kept waiting for the documentary to start dissecting the forces at work to make these girls happen in detail, but it never happened. Then it suddenly shifts to the story about the kid behind a blog about these It girls and their milieu.
This person's story (and I won't give away spoilers about their identity) just wasn't very interesting. They themselves came across as sad, depressed, insecure and still in search of their own identity. As one of their own friends observed, this person had their own reality, which didn't necessarily coincide with everyone else's. I don't mind an unreliable narrator in fiction, but prefer to avoid them in real life.
Overall, I felt the documentary could've been so much more. New York Magazine just did a big article with multiple covers about the "It Girls" of times past. I was hoping for something more about the history and the impact of It girls on the culture.
I thought I was getting a documentary about the rise of the late 90s/early 00s "It" girls of NYC. We did get several minutes of that primarily focused on Tinsley Mortimer, who I really didn't know that much about back in the day. I was glad they didn't devote that much time to Paris Hilton, because I've seen enough of her story already, so it was good to learn about one of her peers. I kept waiting for the documentary to start dissecting the forces at work to make these girls happen in detail, but it never happened. Then it suddenly shifts to the story about the kid behind a blog about these It girls and their milieu.
This person's story (and I won't give away spoilers about their identity) just wasn't very interesting. They themselves came across as sad, depressed, insecure and still in search of their own identity. As one of their own friends observed, this person had their own reality, which didn't necessarily coincide with everyone else's. I don't mind an unreliable narrator in fiction, but prefer to avoid them in real life.
Overall, I felt the documentary could've been so much more. New York Magazine just did a big article with multiple covers about the "It Girls" of times past. I was hoping for something more about the history and the impact of It girls on the culture.
The narcissism is REAL
chrissy041818 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I went into this thinking Tinsley, Olivia, Nikki, and Paris would be the most vomit inducing part of this, but sadly it wasn't even close. I cannot tell everyone to avoid this more. It could be interesting if it actually focused on the socialites and that world instead of being a centered around a blogger that is a cheap knockoff of Perez Hilton. Morgan is the star of her own mind and so deeply narcissistic it's hard to have any empathy for her. I clearly should have read more about what this was about because I hadn't really thought it would be about a blogger, but about the subjects and how and why they had such a power over media outlets in the early 2000's. This is 90 minutes I will never get back and I hope this can save someone else from making the same mistake.
Not what the trailer was about at all...
SinemaSarah19 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
After watching the trailer, I was excited to see a doc about the Y2K socialite era, how they climbed to the top, some scandal and where they are now...
Well...the first like 15-20 focused on that a little...mostly on one specific socialite. Then like the flip of a switch, the documentary shifted to a completely different story...about some forgettable gossip/socialite fan girl site, and the "writer" behind it. You could tell by the way they introduced talking about the site, the people who created the documentary were a little biased. The whole story that wasn't addressed in the trailer at all about the writer moving to the big city, getting an great job, only to squander their money and good luck on obsessing over a drug dealer they fell for, while obsessing over New York socialites, and the world they'd never be in...The pathetic "off camera" scene with the director comforting the writer, while she broke down, was ridiculous. The writer themselves droned on and on in an awful monotone slow whisper, it was super cringey. The only where are they now I got was the sad writer...they're now a trans sex worker...literally the worst documentary I've ever seen. They should at least change the trailer, and show what this doc is ACTUALLY about...
I honestly don't know who most of these people are
PaulsLaugh20 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
And I'm not an unworldly person, but other than the unavoidable Paris Hilton, I never paid much attention to that social scene. Never heard of Tinsley Morgan or James Kurisunkal, now known Morgan Olivia Rose.
Going to six parties a night? I never knew the fake fame business could be so rigorous. If these folks are raising money for charity, they are spending a lot time and money on themselves doing it.
As for this documentary, since I wasn't too familiar with it, I found enlightening the amount money and time poured in cheap banal vapidness. At least Capote did the Black and White Ball. However, this film never focuses. The filmmaker doesn't want to critique or alienate that world too much and it takes a while before we realize the sultry narrator is a transwoman who made her way into that world as a bright, young college kid from Illinois. And it's a transform shocker. Kudos to Morgan. She at least looks like the women she once glowingly wrote about.
Morgan née James, is the best part of film, but her literate narration and insight is not enough to offset Tinsley Morgan's self absorption. The old Southern deb claims she wants to be real housewife, not a "Real Housewife." I don't believe her. The film narrative itself is all over the place and glosses over the history of the earlier socialite world mixing with plebs. I'm thinking of Edie Sedgwick.
Even so, it is still fascinating look at something I've tried hard to ignore to my own ignorance. This time period takes place just before the big internet 15-minutes fame hit, when anyone has a shot at becoming a pseudo-celebrity and influencer. This presentation of a fab public image is the the cultural norm. It's all flash and what is substance. Morgan thinks she should be an internet influencer, but I daresay this was filmed before the Bud Light "Crisis."
I hope things turnaround for Morgan Rose, just judging by her prose narration, she's a good writer. If Hulu or someone else hasn't signed a book deal with her, they should.
Going to six parties a night? I never knew the fake fame business could be so rigorous. If these folks are raising money for charity, they are spending a lot time and money on themselves doing it.
As for this documentary, since I wasn't too familiar with it, I found enlightening the amount money and time poured in cheap banal vapidness. At least Capote did the Black and White Ball. However, this film never focuses. The filmmaker doesn't want to critique or alienate that world too much and it takes a while before we realize the sultry narrator is a transwoman who made her way into that world as a bright, young college kid from Illinois. And it's a transform shocker. Kudos to Morgan. She at least looks like the women she once glowingly wrote about.
Morgan née James, is the best part of film, but her literate narration and insight is not enough to offset Tinsley Morgan's self absorption. The old Southern deb claims she wants to be real housewife, not a "Real Housewife." I don't believe her. The film narrative itself is all over the place and glosses over the history of the earlier socialite world mixing with plebs. I'm thinking of Edie Sedgwick.
Even so, it is still fascinating look at something I've tried hard to ignore to my own ignorance. This time period takes place just before the big internet 15-minutes fame hit, when anyone has a shot at becoming a pseudo-celebrity and influencer. This presentation of a fab public image is the the cultural norm. It's all flash and what is substance. Morgan thinks she should be an internet influencer, but I daresay this was filmed before the Bud Light "Crisis."
I hope things turnaround for Morgan Rose, just judging by her prose narration, she's a good writer. If Hulu or someone else hasn't signed a book deal with her, they should.
What the heck was that?!
virginiansullivan18 May 2023
This film doesn't know what it is. Would have loved to have watched a film about NY socialites, etc. But this devolved fast into a story about a former fact checker intern who is now a trans prostitute and has delusions that he was somehow part of that world. Separately - could have been 2 different interesting documentaries but the bridge between the two didn't ever show up.
This film doesn't know what it is. Would have loved to have watched a film about NY socialites, etc. But this devolved fast into a story about a former fact checker intern who is now a trans prostitute and has delusions that he was somehow part of that world. Separately - could have been 2 different interesting documentaries but the bridge between the two didn't ever show up.
This film doesn't know what it is. Would have loved to have watched a film about NY socialites, etc. But this devolved fast into a story about a former fact checker intern who is now a trans prostitute and has delusions that he was somehow part of that world. Separately - could have been 2 different interesting documentaries but the bridge between the two didn't ever show up.
Two-films-into-one make for a strange viewing experience
paul-allaer23 May 2023
As "Queenmaker" (2023 release; 93 min) opens, we get an It Girl 101 mini-history lesson, which inevitably leads up to Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie. Along the way, we learn that publicists have a great deal of power, as well as the inevitable blods that start popping up,,, At this point we are 10 minutes into the documentary.
Couple of comments: first, please do not confuse this with the South Korean TV series of the same name that appeared on Netflix not long ago. Second, this US documentary is directed by multimedia artist Zackary Drucker. Third, and this is the most important comment: this documentary is really two-films-into-one: the first one last a good one-third of the documentary, and gives a straight up overview of the New York It Girl universe and all that it entails; the second one runs the remainder of the film and examines who the creator was behind the influential NY It Girl blog called Park Avenue Peerage. The New York Times then drops the bomb when it identifies the person behind the blog. I won't say another word. Just watch. How these two separate movies are stuck into one is a bit of a headscratcher to be honest. I literally was about to abandon the film altogether as I was not interested in the It Girl scene. Turns out the movie is about some else altogether. Which brings me to my last, but not least, comments: the title of the documentary, as shown in the film's opening credits, is "Queenmaker", nothing more, nothing less. It's not "Queenmaker: The Making of an It Girl", as noted here on IMDb and many other sites. This is really annoying. Like we need to be explained what the movie title REALLY means. We are not dumb. We can figure it out. (This also happened with the recent Michael J Fox documentary, which is titled per the movie's opening and closing credits "STILL", but for whatever reason, the movie is now known everywhere as "Still: A Michael J Fox Movie". Stop it already, and show some respect for the moviemakers decision on the actual movie title.)
"Queenmaker" started airing on Hulu recently. I had read a positive review of it in the New York Times last week, and that was enough for me to want to check it out. If you are in the mood for a documentary that takes an unexpected turn left, and then keeps going even more off road, I'd suggest you check it out and draw your own conclusion.
Couple of comments: first, please do not confuse this with the South Korean TV series of the same name that appeared on Netflix not long ago. Second, this US documentary is directed by multimedia artist Zackary Drucker. Third, and this is the most important comment: this documentary is really two-films-into-one: the first one last a good one-third of the documentary, and gives a straight up overview of the New York It Girl universe and all that it entails; the second one runs the remainder of the film and examines who the creator was behind the influential NY It Girl blog called Park Avenue Peerage. The New York Times then drops the bomb when it identifies the person behind the blog. I won't say another word. Just watch. How these two separate movies are stuck into one is a bit of a headscratcher to be honest. I literally was about to abandon the film altogether as I was not interested in the It Girl scene. Turns out the movie is about some else altogether. Which brings me to my last, but not least, comments: the title of the documentary, as shown in the film's opening credits, is "Queenmaker", nothing more, nothing less. It's not "Queenmaker: The Making of an It Girl", as noted here on IMDb and many other sites. This is really annoying. Like we need to be explained what the movie title REALLY means. We are not dumb. We can figure it out. (This also happened with the recent Michael J Fox documentary, which is titled per the movie's opening and closing credits "STILL", but for whatever reason, the movie is now known everywhere as "Still: A Michael J Fox Movie". Stop it already, and show some respect for the moviemakers decision on the actual movie title.)
"Queenmaker" started airing on Hulu recently. I had read a positive review of it in the New York Times last week, and that was enough for me to want to check it out. If you are in the mood for a documentary that takes an unexpected turn left, and then keeps going even more off road, I'd suggest you check it out and draw your own conclusion.
Ummmm, what did I just watch?
superlisa-0740621 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
This started out strong in that it promised spillage of some piping hot tea, but ends being a devastatingly sad story about how Morgan had this huge glow up but then still blows the chance of living out her dream of being BFF with Tinsley by saying that she doesn't want to be a part of the "socialite" life. Really makes me feel so sad about Morgan being too insecure to go live her best life, like her literal fantasy, in real life. And I'm not sure why Tinsley agreed to be a part of this? I have so many unanswered questions, but I have no idea who most of the "famous" people in this were. Like what was I supposed to take away from this movie??
Morgan is the only redeeming character of this messssssy doc
xxmvtqbx16 August 2023
I think Morgan is really pretty. I follow her on social media and she looks like an ephemeral goddess or like an exotic Asian Barbie doll.
I don't know why everybody else is stuck on being "misled" or this being two docs in one... I can't imagine how Morgan might feel with all this negative feedback, especially considering she's trans (men being "misled" liking her only later figuring out she presented differently before; the two in one concept, best of both worlds ts trope, etc She comes across as really thoughtful and well put together.
Maybe people are daft or are just secret Marxists because the synopsis and previews for the film clearly indicate some type of unmasking... not a deep dive into socialites or the early 2000's, that was just a jumping point for the audience to meet Morgan where she www at 17, and nothing more.... I mean for all the gripes I've read why did you people even watch the whole thing only to trash it because it doesn't compare to some 2 min trailer that has images of Hilton ad nauseam?
I agree the storytelling is kinda murky. Zackary Drucker's previous works always reveal a betrayal of the subject... they always end up like an emperor with no clothes... why she would constantly misgender Morgan and make the crux of the movie this "reveal" is... beyond me.
I used to follow PAP and James and the kid has been in transition for l two decades. This whole judging her thing is stale and I see the movie for what it is: a flawed portrayal of a beautiful brown girl who had to be framed by white blonde women and (what seems like) bashing by her friend (singular: one friend) and people assuming she's delusional, mentally unwell and all sorts of accusations... just to have her story told and they never told her story really. That's where the movie loses me and us.
I hope Morgan writes a book about herself or starts a tv series. I'd read or watch. Time for her story.
I don't know why everybody else is stuck on being "misled" or this being two docs in one... I can't imagine how Morgan might feel with all this negative feedback, especially considering she's trans (men being "misled" liking her only later figuring out she presented differently before; the two in one concept, best of both worlds ts trope, etc She comes across as really thoughtful and well put together.
Maybe people are daft or are just secret Marxists because the synopsis and previews for the film clearly indicate some type of unmasking... not a deep dive into socialites or the early 2000's, that was just a jumping point for the audience to meet Morgan where she www at 17, and nothing more.... I mean for all the gripes I've read why did you people even watch the whole thing only to trash it because it doesn't compare to some 2 min trailer that has images of Hilton ad nauseam?
I agree the storytelling is kinda murky. Zackary Drucker's previous works always reveal a betrayal of the subject... they always end up like an emperor with no clothes... why she would constantly misgender Morgan and make the crux of the movie this "reveal" is... beyond me.
I used to follow PAP and James and the kid has been in transition for l two decades. This whole judging her thing is stale and I see the movie for what it is: a flawed portrayal of a beautiful brown girl who had to be framed by white blonde women and (what seems like) bashing by her friend (singular: one friend) and people assuming she's delusional, mentally unwell and all sorts of accusations... just to have her story told and they never told her story really. That's where the movie loses me and us.
I hope Morgan writes a book about herself or starts a tv series. I'd read or watch. Time for her story.
So Much Deception
fayandray18 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
No way would I have watched this documentary had I known what it was really about. The trailer and thumbnail picture/movie poster in no way indicates that it was about the bloggers holding a pedestal on one hand, a trash can in the other and how they wielded these tools to create a new type of celebrity. And certainly, neither the trailer or poster indicated that it was going to be about one specific blogger.
Now that I'm finished with it, I realize that the doc's mini-description here on IMDB is the most honest thing about it: "In the height of heiress-era NYC, an anonymous blogger infiltrated Manhattan's elite, brings socialite celebrity to new heights. When the website creator was unmasked, the mastermind was not the one anybody expected."
I cannot tell if the director was purposely obtuse in her editing of the the first half of the film, because even until the "reveal", I didn't know I was watching something about a blogger from the aughts. I really wanted to watch something about the history of the period, but instead there is more deception and pain when Morgan is introduced. I mean, even the way the "reveal" is handled told me that the director was trying to get a certain reaction - it felt very much like Maury and Springer.
Morgan's ex-bff says she doesn't have a good relationship with reality, and it's quite evident when she's telling the viewer about things that couldn't have happened. For example, she said her company sent her a car for work in the mornings.... LOL um NO; I worked in the city for a couple of years - no way an intern is getting a car every morning. And then her obsession with straight Tommy. Even years later she talks as if they had any sort of relationship.
Then there's all the horrible things she did to her family. There was a shot of her parents in front of their family home - very humble beginnings. She tells people that she borrowed against an inheritance to pay for drugs, partying and presumably all the cosmetic work. I call BS on that, especially when she admitted her parents went into bankruptcy because of all the borrowing.
I get that this person is in pain, but what is the reason to put it on display like this? Sure, it's a funny tidbit that she's behind the "Gossip Girl"-like blog, but is it deserving of all this (both negative and positive)? I wonder why the director wanted to tell this story at all, given that this whole thing was handled like a reality show. This doc didn't do anything to make me feel anything except disappointment in humanity. I give it a 6 for decent production values.
Now that I'm finished with it, I realize that the doc's mini-description here on IMDB is the most honest thing about it: "In the height of heiress-era NYC, an anonymous blogger infiltrated Manhattan's elite, brings socialite celebrity to new heights. When the website creator was unmasked, the mastermind was not the one anybody expected."
I cannot tell if the director was purposely obtuse in her editing of the the first half of the film, because even until the "reveal", I didn't know I was watching something about a blogger from the aughts. I really wanted to watch something about the history of the period, but instead there is more deception and pain when Morgan is introduced. I mean, even the way the "reveal" is handled told me that the director was trying to get a certain reaction - it felt very much like Maury and Springer.
Morgan's ex-bff says she doesn't have a good relationship with reality, and it's quite evident when she's telling the viewer about things that couldn't have happened. For example, she said her company sent her a car for work in the mornings.... LOL um NO; I worked in the city for a couple of years - no way an intern is getting a car every morning. And then her obsession with straight Tommy. Even years later she talks as if they had any sort of relationship.
Then there's all the horrible things she did to her family. There was a shot of her parents in front of their family home - very humble beginnings. She tells people that she borrowed against an inheritance to pay for drugs, partying and presumably all the cosmetic work. I call BS on that, especially when she admitted her parents went into bankruptcy because of all the borrowing.
I get that this person is in pain, but what is the reason to put it on display like this? Sure, it's a funny tidbit that she's behind the "Gossip Girl"-like blog, but is it deserving of all this (both negative and positive)? I wonder why the director wanted to tell this story at all, given that this whole thing was handled like a reality show. This doc didn't do anything to make me feel anything except disappointment in humanity. I give it a 6 for decent production values.
Just awful
nmqttcwp19 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Like many of the other reviews, I was expecting more depth into NYC during the 90s and early 2000s. I remember reading Perez Hilton, Breakup Girl, Gawker, Ted Casablanca for fun gossip and blind items. Then it all got mean so I stopped. Maybe it was the start of social media and the evil it can do. But this show wasn't really about that. It was about a mentally ill person from the midwest who wrote about these people without even being in NYC. I lost interest when I realized that was the intent of this.
Don't waste your time because I actually feel like I lost brain cells watching an hour of it.
Don't waste your time because I actually feel like I lost brain cells watching an hour of it.
Not as Instagram advertised...even a little.
browneyedmurmur2 June 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Based upon the trailer Hulu put out on Instagram, I thought this movie would be a walk down memory lane, focusing on the famous faces featured in tabloids and fashion magazines in the early 00s.
Not so much.
While the likes of Tinsley, Paris, and Olivia are mentioned, the movie is actually about an obsessive and delusional blogger who wrote about them, imagined himself a part of their world, developed a drug habit, became infatuated with his straight drug dealer, and then became transgendered.
Once I realized the film's subject matter wasn't as advertised, I quit watching.
Don't waste your time.
Not so much.
While the likes of Tinsley, Paris, and Olivia are mentioned, the movie is actually about an obsessive and delusional blogger who wrote about them, imagined himself a part of their world, developed a drug habit, became infatuated with his straight drug dealer, and then became transgendered.
Once I realized the film's subject matter wasn't as advertised, I quit watching.
Don't waste your time.
Not all that
vbjtkzvn18 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
First thing, I have zero interest in the base topic- New York socialites in the 80's. Just none. The "surprise"isn't a big surprise in 2023. It all seems superfluous and pretentiously silly. The cocaine fueled party scene of the 80's is stale, even in retrospect. That decade, those scenes, the fashion, the self- obsession and all that it entails is tiring. No wonder the fade was real and as uninteresting as these narcissistic characters. There are much better ways to spend your time, maybe cook something, plant something, make something, DO something besides watch this. Narration is uneven and annoying. Not recommended.
Unfocused directing.
eveluna-768-28760630 August 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Big letdown about the it-girl phenomenon of the 90's. Wanted a good documentary investigating movie and got an opinion piece about a unknown blogger. Who cares? Apparently "the director" who made this documentary about her. The death of Casey Johnson was told by another reporter who showed compassion for the one socialite who was unique in her compassion and humbleness. I didn't know she was a drug user. She was going to take her family's company into the future. There were stories inside each of the real documented queens. Hopefully a good producer and director will take this subject and make it a gem of a documentary.
The Tinsley Show with a Side of Surprise!
thejdrage9 June 2023
This seems to be a total vanity project - done by I have no idea, with the viewpoint of I have no idea.
A few reviewers have said this isn't what they expected. That's exactly what this is! Not what anyone expects. You cannot figure it out since it isn't any one thing.
It does follow and praise Tinsley Mortimer a LOT. She seems to be the It Girl on that side.
Then there is the Other side of It. Now THAT's the real It Girl.
The story behind her is as fuzzy as all the other It Girls. (The ones we all know if we are watching this "documentary") I actually wanted to know more about her and how she got to where she was.
Unfortunately, as with the rest of this "doc", that story, too, is lacking.
HOWEVER - I most certainly wish her well.
A few reviewers have said this isn't what they expected. That's exactly what this is! Not what anyone expects. You cannot figure it out since it isn't any one thing.
It does follow and praise Tinsley Mortimer a LOT. She seems to be the It Girl on that side.
Then there is the Other side of It. Now THAT's the real It Girl.
The story behind her is as fuzzy as all the other It Girls. (The ones we all know if we are watching this "documentary") I actually wanted to know more about her and how she got to where she was.
Unfortunately, as with the rest of this "doc", that story, too, is lacking.
HOWEVER - I most certainly wish her well.
Horrible.
mangos-8848121 February 2024
This so-called "documentary" is probably used by counter intelligence personnel to invoke psychological torture on prisoners of war.
Apart from disjointed story, there is a lot of things that would irritate anyone: bad editing, non-existent directing, a back drop of a wannabe "it" maker who wouldn't be able to make even a voodoo doll. This was long, useless tv-product.
The most annoying thing was this Morgan person, who does his best to be as pretentious as possible.
This person definitely lives in his own little world that has nothing to do with reality.
I have only one question to the people who funded this: don't you wish you just burned your money?
Apart from disjointed story, there is a lot of things that would irritate anyone: bad editing, non-existent directing, a back drop of a wannabe "it" maker who wouldn't be able to make even a voodoo doll. This was long, useless tv-product.
The most annoying thing was this Morgan person, who does his best to be as pretentious as possible.
This person definitely lives in his own little world that has nothing to do with reality.
I have only one question to the people who funded this: don't you wish you just burned your money?
I wasn't misled, I was just a little underwhelmed
773SleepyHollow27 December 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I guess that I'm one of the few people who WASN'T misled by this documentary.
I didn't see the trailer, but something I read about it did correctly lead me to believe that its focus was on the blogger behind Park Avenue Peerage.
I remember reading about this blogger at the time (perhaps I learned of her through that New York Magazine article, which I read back then), and I had always wondered what became of the blogger afterwards... had they become part of the social world in New York? Were they earning a living as a journalist?
According to the NYM article, Park Avenue Peerage had become such a must-read in the NY social world back then, that absolutely I was interested in reading about its author, in the same way that I find someone like Tavi Gevinson, who basically inserted herself into the NY fashion world purely by her own youthful efforts, interesting.
Some more time spent on the blogger's childhood, and what led to the blogger's obsession with the NY social world, and more on what made the blog so compelling for its readers, would have actually made this MORE interesting. (Yes, I thought the problem wasn't too much of the blogger, but not enough.)
I wasn't sufficiently invested in the blogger's story (beyond my pre-existing interest), as it wasn't presented that well.
And... surely the social world could have been presented in a way that made it seem somewhat glamorous or interesting. The way we saw it here made it hard to understand why anyone would aspire to be a part of it in the first place.
I didn't see the trailer, but something I read about it did correctly lead me to believe that its focus was on the blogger behind Park Avenue Peerage.
I remember reading about this blogger at the time (perhaps I learned of her through that New York Magazine article, which I read back then), and I had always wondered what became of the blogger afterwards... had they become part of the social world in New York? Were they earning a living as a journalist?
According to the NYM article, Park Avenue Peerage had become such a must-read in the NY social world back then, that absolutely I was interested in reading about its author, in the same way that I find someone like Tavi Gevinson, who basically inserted herself into the NY fashion world purely by her own youthful efforts, interesting.
Some more time spent on the blogger's childhood, and what led to the blogger's obsession with the NY social world, and more on what made the blog so compelling for its readers, would have actually made this MORE interesting. (Yes, I thought the problem wasn't too much of the blogger, but not enough.)
I wasn't sufficiently invested in the blogger's story (beyond my pre-existing interest), as it wasn't presented that well.
And... surely the social world could have been presented in a way that made it seem somewhat glamorous or interesting. The way we saw it here made it hard to understand why anyone would aspire to be a part of it in the first place.
Mental Illness on Full Display
rkzvxk16 May 2024
This documentary is, along with many other things, blasphemous ("I will create my own American divinity.") There is absolutely nothing redeeming in it. It is wrought with vanity, narcissism, superficiality and a twisted emphasis on self-importance. Most importantly, it's a lesson in mental illness and the degree to which our culture elevates it and promotes it. The lives on display here do not come anywhere close to even fringe-average for the everyday American. Quite honestly, what is portrayed is a stain on America. You'll gain nothing from watching except reassurance that our culture is really as sick and twisted as you probably already thought.
Signed, Took One for the Team (Regretfully)
Signed, Took One for the Team (Regretfully)
How is this criminal not in prison?
diamonddax18 April 2024
Warning: Spoilers
I have never written a review like I am about to write.
This very disturbing, very embarrassing "documentary" is all over the place. Who "directed" this mess and what were they on?
It made my head spin and my skin crawl trying to figure out how this was even allowed to be aired and who fronted the money for it? This was clearly an outcast stalker's revenge out to embarrass Tinsley and her friends. How is no one else creeped out by this whole thing being made?
No one can see that he was deeply obsessed (and stalked) Tinsley and her friends years ago - to the point of detailing every single thing about them in an online blog? Then he went as far as trying to infiltrate her friend group? Park Avenue Peerage - they all laughed off as a rag mag put out by Tinsley herself. No one can see what it truly was? It was the ramblings of an obsessed stalker. They are so naive that they kept referring to it as "cute". Cute that this boy wanted to be close. Wake up... It wasn't just that it highlighted Tinsley often. He was obsessed with Tinsley. He was one person doing this writing. It wasn't a collaboration of multiple people. Tell me how this is any different than what other stalkers do. I'll wait.
Did everyone completely miss that he actually admitted to STEALING so much money from his parents that his parents had to file bankruptcy. Bankruptcy. Think about that. He stole so much from his parents that he put his parents through financial devastation. And this is just okay?
You can tell he is truly a sociopath because he had zero empathy or remorse for any of it. Every penny he made from this documentary I hope went right to his parents and he didn't keep a penny.
Who does this to their parents- drain every penny they have worked their whole lives for just to give the money to "some random guy" named Tommy that he was obsessed with? Who didn't even give him the time of day back? No one stopped him?
He admitted to buying massive amounts of drugs/gifts totaling over $300,000+++ heavy, heavy drug use, continuing to being a sex worker, catfishing people, stealing and stalking - how are they not in prison?
This is fraud and he is dangerous.
Don't give me some sob story that he is self medicating because of his mental illness.
No - this is criminal. Period.
So this is "just okay? No legal consequences for any of it?
No one sees anything wrong with this? No one sees how criminally insane this whole thing is?
This person had it in his head that he deserved to be rubbing elbows with the young girl elite socialites of New York - why exactly?
All of these girls came from very prominent families, very prominent old money. He literally stalked from afar, started a creepy blog detailing every move these girls made and was determined to infiltrate to get close to Tinsley - the very girl he was stalking?
How has he continued to get away with this?
This isn't scary to anyone? If he could do what he did to his parents - what else is he capable of?
"Already wrote out his wedding announcement many times in his head"? "Son of no one"? What?? That is a slap in the face to his parents - who I'm sure worked very very hard for the money he stole from them.
It was like watching a bi-polar narcissist stalker go through a severe manic episode and then immediately switch to the deep depressive stage without warning. Blaming everyone else for their problems and the life they chose. Over and over and over. Disjointed. Vulgar. Just a total waste of 2 hours viewers will never get back.
Was this a concoction to seek revenge on those he was obsessed with who "mistreated" him in his mind when he was a teenager?
A "remember me"?? (Yet none of them do.) An outcast's payback to the "in crowd" - that was never even his crowd?
Tinsley was very nice and very very naive to want to meet up with him. She extended a beautiful invitation for charity for the animals and not only did he not have the nerve to walk in, he made it all about him and lashed out against Tinsley in that voicemail in a way that is very concerning.
What they did to Tinsley in this "documentary" was appalling. This should have never been set to air. Tinsley tried to reach out to him and he basically slapped her when she has done absolutely nothing wrong. He one minute talks over her and says "let me know how I can help with your event" then says "why am I the one to always support others." What?!?!? This is much more sinister than being passive aggressive.
Tinsley cannot win with this one and someone needs to distance her from him. This is not friendship. This is obsession.
Did you hear the voicemail at the end telling her off? That was envy and jealousy disguised as "poor me" "I have nothing in common with those people". "I'm a sex worker". As if it was Tinsley's fault. Notice how we didn't see Tinsley's reaction to the voice mail. Makes you wonder why she distanced herself from him when they were younger.
HE chose to be a sex worker. He has no one else to blame and yet he was gas lighting Tinsley. He could have taken that 300,000 he stole from his parents and gotten his masters degree, a house and became something in life. He decided to blow it on blow and blowing.
Tinsley has a heart of gold. You can clearly tell she was completely duped into doing this whole interview. The entire time Tinsley looked confused as to why she was even there.
She agreed for them to interview her, she sincerely reached out and invited this person to her event and this person not only set out to completely embarrass Tinsley - they were rude and nasty to Tinsley in the process.
There was no ending. It was like they filmed this rant and all of a sudden ran out of money so they couldn't finish it.
This should be pulled and Tinsley deserves a massive apology for the embarrassment. Tinsley is way too nice to stick up for herself with this. She needs someone to step in and do it for her.
This very disturbing, very embarrassing "documentary" is all over the place. Who "directed" this mess and what were they on?
It made my head spin and my skin crawl trying to figure out how this was even allowed to be aired and who fronted the money for it? This was clearly an outcast stalker's revenge out to embarrass Tinsley and her friends. How is no one else creeped out by this whole thing being made?
No one can see that he was deeply obsessed (and stalked) Tinsley and her friends years ago - to the point of detailing every single thing about them in an online blog? Then he went as far as trying to infiltrate her friend group? Park Avenue Peerage - they all laughed off as a rag mag put out by Tinsley herself. No one can see what it truly was? It was the ramblings of an obsessed stalker. They are so naive that they kept referring to it as "cute". Cute that this boy wanted to be close. Wake up... It wasn't just that it highlighted Tinsley often. He was obsessed with Tinsley. He was one person doing this writing. It wasn't a collaboration of multiple people. Tell me how this is any different than what other stalkers do. I'll wait.
Did everyone completely miss that he actually admitted to STEALING so much money from his parents that his parents had to file bankruptcy. Bankruptcy. Think about that. He stole so much from his parents that he put his parents through financial devastation. And this is just okay?
You can tell he is truly a sociopath because he had zero empathy or remorse for any of it. Every penny he made from this documentary I hope went right to his parents and he didn't keep a penny.
Who does this to their parents- drain every penny they have worked their whole lives for just to give the money to "some random guy" named Tommy that he was obsessed with? Who didn't even give him the time of day back? No one stopped him?
He admitted to buying massive amounts of drugs/gifts totaling over $300,000+++ heavy, heavy drug use, continuing to being a sex worker, catfishing people, stealing and stalking - how are they not in prison?
This is fraud and he is dangerous.
Don't give me some sob story that he is self medicating because of his mental illness.
No - this is criminal. Period.
So this is "just okay? No legal consequences for any of it?
No one sees anything wrong with this? No one sees how criminally insane this whole thing is?
This person had it in his head that he deserved to be rubbing elbows with the young girl elite socialites of New York - why exactly?
All of these girls came from very prominent families, very prominent old money. He literally stalked from afar, started a creepy blog detailing every move these girls made and was determined to infiltrate to get close to Tinsley - the very girl he was stalking?
How has he continued to get away with this?
This isn't scary to anyone? If he could do what he did to his parents - what else is he capable of?
"Already wrote out his wedding announcement many times in his head"? "Son of no one"? What?? That is a slap in the face to his parents - who I'm sure worked very very hard for the money he stole from them.
It was like watching a bi-polar narcissist stalker go through a severe manic episode and then immediately switch to the deep depressive stage without warning. Blaming everyone else for their problems and the life they chose. Over and over and over. Disjointed. Vulgar. Just a total waste of 2 hours viewers will never get back.
Was this a concoction to seek revenge on those he was obsessed with who "mistreated" him in his mind when he was a teenager?
A "remember me"?? (Yet none of them do.) An outcast's payback to the "in crowd" - that was never even his crowd?
Tinsley was very nice and very very naive to want to meet up with him. She extended a beautiful invitation for charity for the animals and not only did he not have the nerve to walk in, he made it all about him and lashed out against Tinsley in that voicemail in a way that is very concerning.
What they did to Tinsley in this "documentary" was appalling. This should have never been set to air. Tinsley tried to reach out to him and he basically slapped her when she has done absolutely nothing wrong. He one minute talks over her and says "let me know how I can help with your event" then says "why am I the one to always support others." What?!?!? This is much more sinister than being passive aggressive.
Tinsley cannot win with this one and someone needs to distance her from him. This is not friendship. This is obsession.
Did you hear the voicemail at the end telling her off? That was envy and jealousy disguised as "poor me" "I have nothing in common with those people". "I'm a sex worker". As if it was Tinsley's fault. Notice how we didn't see Tinsley's reaction to the voice mail. Makes you wonder why she distanced herself from him when they were younger.
HE chose to be a sex worker. He has no one else to blame and yet he was gas lighting Tinsley. He could have taken that 300,000 he stole from his parents and gotten his masters degree, a house and became something in life. He decided to blow it on blow and blowing.
Tinsley has a heart of gold. You can clearly tell she was completely duped into doing this whole interview. The entire time Tinsley looked confused as to why she was even there.
She agreed for them to interview her, she sincerely reached out and invited this person to her event and this person not only set out to completely embarrass Tinsley - they were rude and nasty to Tinsley in the process.
There was no ending. It was like they filmed this rant and all of a sudden ran out of money so they couldn't finish it.
This should be pulled and Tinsley deserves a massive apology for the embarrassment. Tinsley is way too nice to stick up for herself with this. She needs someone to step in and do it for her.
Started off vapid, then got real
lalamachete-2978618 May 2023
Being from Hollywood, born and raised, I have a strong distaste for elitists and socialites. This doc started off this way, and I thought about turning it off when I saw Paris Hilton. Then this unknown Morgan Olivia Rose pops up. Just a beautiful woman. I love the honesty and rawness of Morgan. I love that Tinsley was honest about her life as well. Thank you for letting the world know that not even the richest have perfect lives, and instead we should all strive to be the best version of ourself for ourselves, instead of seeking approval from the masses. I wish Morgan further success and hope she finds her soulmate and happiness.
What happens behind the sense
johnsonmelissab1 June 2023
This is a wonderful documentary that provides a unique and fresh prospective on an industry where we often see the same scandals recycled again and again. Morgan Olivia Rose's story is one of the most compelling I've heard. This documentary does take a look at what goes on in the background to really make an "It Girl" but much more interesting is the life story of Olivia, who's writing is responsible for making several of the known "It Girls" of our time. Her story highlights a range social factors and the toll this industry takes on those both in and out of the spotlight. I would defiantly recommend watching this!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
