Fascinating paper. The primary point doesn't seem to be that Hetzog has bent any facts, but willfully presents his subjective interpretation of the world.
It is more akin to the idea that all perception, thought, meaning, and opinions operate in a realm distinct from the material world.
The following sentences after your quote make this clear.
>But is Grizzly Man a documentary at all? Is it a "true" or appropriate representation of
reality? Most scholars presently writing on documentary posit that the duplication of realities
through cinema is always fictional because of its use of rhetorical figures and emblematic
symbolism, regardless of claims of objectivity or historical significance. As a filmmaker, Herzog shares this ideological: all documentary is false even if it conveys the myth of objectivity
It is more akin to the idea that all perception, thought, meaning, and opinions operate in a realm distinct from the material world.
The following sentences after your quote make this clear.
>But is Grizzly Man a documentary at all? Is it a "true" or appropriate representation of reality? Most scholars presently writing on documentary posit that the duplication of realities through cinema is always fictional because of its use of rhetorical figures and emblematic symbolism, regardless of claims of objectivity or historical significance. As a filmmaker, Herzog shares this ideological: all documentary is false even if it conveys the myth of objectivity