The film opens with clips of some of Maier’s former charges, now fully grown, puzzling over how to describe her. They use words like “paradoxical”, “bold”, “mysterious”, and “eccentric”. But if there was one thing they could all agree on, it was that Vivian Maier was very, very private. Following this is Maloof’s exposition of his first contact with Maier’s work. During work on a history project in 2007 for the city of Chicago, he went searching for photographs in an auction house, where he bought one box out of a set that was filled with negatives. Although he ended up not using the photos for his book, he eventually goes through them and begins to notice a pattern of rather phenomenal shots. Having been told the box belonged to a ‘Vivian Maier’ he tried looking her up and found nothing. Then, as the documentary shows with rather typical screenshots of a computer screen, he uploads some photos to Flickr and the work takes off. Before he knows it, he has a mystery to solve. Who could have taken so many photos and then just left them in a box unprinted?

Alternating between interviews with the parents and children who interacted with Maier and shots of her photographs, the documentary begins to explore the puzzle she left behind. Maloof finds his way to a storage unit that is practically overflowing with boxes filled with anything you could imagine. People said she kept everything—and they meant it. Newspapers, clothes, undeveloped film, uncashed income checks, even teeth! Maier was a pack rat, who it seems felt she had to keep everything and take it with her too. Families that hired Maier all described a similar situation; she would arrive with stacks of boxes that could fill a room. Another consistent memory from her charge is that she always had a camera around her neck, and she was always taking pictures. Despite taking hundreds of thousands of photos, nobody ever saw them. All the evidence seems to point to a very secretive woman who would not have wanted anyone to see her work. But then why take so many photos?

Maloof seeks to answer this question as he works to piece together her life’s story. His amateur sleuth work brings him into contact with the New York Public Records office, and he uncovers that Maier did not have much family, but the records that could be found suggest they were equally as private. The limited information that was uncovered about her family leads him to a small town in France where he comes into contact with an elderly cousin, who appears to be Maier’s only living relative. Very few people seem to know anything about Maier or remember her with any real clarity, but Maloof does his best to interview all of them in the documentary.

Maloof interviews other prominent photographers and gallery curators for an insight into the quality of Maier’s work and each of them praised her skill. They spoke of a humanity in her photography that is rarely seen. Her work displayed a sense of humor and a sense of tragedy. Maier appeared interested in what it meant to be human. Her work exemplifies the qualities of street photography. Her subjects were often individuals caught unawares or lightly posed in daily scenes of life. Maier shot in both black and white and color film. Maier seemed to revel in discreetly photographing her subjects and seems to reveal an affinity for the poor; possibly because like them, she struggled to get by. Demonstrating an awareness of politics and society, she addressed tough topics like the Watergate scandal through short films.

Audiences have the ability to see a range of different shots as Maier’s work has been interspersed throughout the documentary. The accompanying by a score of lilting, mysterious music that feels like it speaks to Maier’s character. Despite such beautiful works, the documentary highlights how she, at the time of the film’s release, had yet to be accepted by much of the art world. A number of artists became famous posthumously, yet Maloof faces push back as he tries to bring her the recognition she deserves. As a result of the way she sequestered her work the film and negatives remained incredibly well preserved. As the film ends, Maloof is still pressing on with the development of her film and spreading awareness about her talent.  

Overall, the film does a wonderful job of answering many of the questions raised concerning the secretive nature of her work. The technique of interspersing interviews with scanned works allows audiences to experience it for themselves. However, much like the circumstances around her work, Vivian Maier remains an enigma. Interviews throughout the film told conflicting stories of her character going so far as to reference abuse and neglect. Viewers are left with several questions, including, why did she never reveal her work? Why take so many pictures and preserve the work so well if you intended for them to fade into obscurity? The driving force behind this enormous body of work remains unknown. As a result, despite what the title suggests, Vivian Maier remains as stubbornly elusive in death as she was in life.

The movie took the form of interviewing numerous people who encountered Vivian Maier. At first, Maloof found people who Maier used to nanny for. Later, Maloof uncovered more people from her past. I thought this was a very personal way to construct this movie. It was very interesting how certain groups of people all described her in the same way. For example, many of the people she looked after, called Maier odd and occasionally mean. One woman recalled Maier shoving food down her throat because she would not clear her plate. Towards the end of the documentary, the people in the town she stayed in described her as lonely and short with conversation, tending to sit alone on a park bench. I do think the interviewees could have done a better job of introducing themselves. Eventually,you could figure out what they had to do with Maier, but it was not clear at first.With this documentary already being almost a mystery, it would have been nice to have certain parts just specifically told to the viewer.

The traits that were consistent in the description of Maier were that she was mysterious, secretive, eccentric and a loner. She kept just about everything and often hid her items in other items in boxes with locks on them. Her dress was very outdated and had a walk where she swung her arms out in front of her. Those from her past kept describing her odd habits and then moved into a darker side of Maier. She had a fear of men, suggesting previous assault. One of the women said that Maier would say “all men want is sex” and to “stay away from men.” Mairer had violent outbursts with the children that she looked after, often getting her dismissed from jobs. One of the children she looked after that claimed Maier would construct these “accidents” for her to get a photograph of them. These would include force feeding them or purposely scaring them. Her photography also displayed the everyday events of life, showing the happy and sad moments. She could have been so skilled in capturing the perfect shot because she was around a wide variety of people through being a nanny.

The history of Maier was rather confusing, in the movie you can see she gave out fake names, was very private, hoarded many of her belongings, and had a fake French accent. With all of this, it shows that Maier did not want to be recognized for her work and did not want others to know who she was. Many of the people she babysat thought she was from outside of the United States and were shocked when they found out she was from New York. I almost wish that the flow of her life was more organized. I feel like the layout of the film could have been confusing on purpose since the history of Vivian Maier was rather confusing. Even though as a view this was confusing at times, I feel like the directors did this on purpose in order to make the movie more of a mystery,like Maier herself.

As far as Vivian Maier’s work, it is stunning. The photos are black and white depicting daily scenes in life and some self-portraits. Many of the photographs shown in the movie were of people, but there were some of objects too, for example one was the inside of a trashcan. Maier had a twin lens Rollieflex, which allowed her to be more secretive when taking pictures of people. This added to her secretive and mysterious personality. I understand that the movie is called Finding Vivian Maier, but I felt as though there was little explanation about her work.  The documentary displayed a decent amount of Maier’s work. If the camera was not on one of Maier’s photographs, it was on Maloof, or one of the people he was interviewing. However, Maloof did say he acquired around 150,000 negatives. With this, the amount of her photos displayed was very minimal and I think a montage at the end of the film with more of her work would have been a nice addition. It also would have been nice if the movie makers grouped the photographs. While they were talking about the different places Maier traveled, they could have shown pictures from each place. Instead, the pictures shown almost seemed random.

This would not be a movie that I would have watched on my own. However, after watching it, I found it very fascinating how a woman with such talent kept her work so private. The time and dedication John Maloof put into uncovering the work of the mysterious photographer, Vivian Maier, is inspiring. At the beginning of the documentary, there was very little information on Maier and Maloof managed to piece together large pieces of her life to help us understand who Vivian Maier really was.

In the documentary titled, “Finding Vivian Maier”, the mystery of a nanny, now turned national icon through photography and art, is tracked step by step in order to gain an understanding of just who she had been. Amazingly, she kept her work as secretive as possible while alive and would not have been brought under the artistic spotlight if it hadn’t been for John Maloof. The artistic yet simple basis for Maier’s photos suggests a beauty in the reality of life and the many aspects that come along with it.

The film begins with Maloof explaining how he acquired photographic negative film coincidentally through auction in an effort to write a history book. As he unravels the unique and one of a kind photos, the history of the inaccurately documented woman known as Vivian Maier becomes more complex and more questions arise. Maier brilliantly captured subjects of everyday life, most while on the job as a nanny. One of the most prominent curiosities surrounding her photography is the question of why she kept all of the art to herself, capturing so many precious subjects during the early 1950’s. Perhaps this question is what makes Maier’s work so precious and beloved among the art community.  

The documentary does an exceptional job at interviewing those who can say they had Maier as a nanny, while they recall what they can of being under her supervision. An unrealistic aspect of these interviews was projected through how vividly some of the particular children at the time could recall events now, noting that it has been dozens of years since. For example, one woman claimed that she had been force fed and choked, which revealed the dark side of Maier. Along with this claim, the woman specified that when she was five years old, her nanny repeatedly hit her head on a bookcase because she could not tie her shoes correctly. It seems as though this type of accusation could have been made up in order to have an appearance on the Netflix documentary, keeping in mind that Vivian Maier’s popularity now reaches artists worldwide. Aside from this portion of the interviews, the documentary’s use of recollections by displaying the houses, parks, and locations that she was known for being familiar with gives the observer great visuals for the entire length of the film. It allows a connection to be made between the settings and the photographs. When watching the documentary, I found myself having little to no difficulty forming a mental image of Vivian’s life. Due to her life and travels being photographed first hand, most of the locations and matters that were discussed had pictures to go along with them.This not only led Maloof in the right direction when tracking Maier’s life but made it easier to educate others on her life’s work.

When discussing her photography and style, she was a woman way ahead of her time. Most 20^th century photography included posed subjects of men or women, the depiction of animals such as horses in motion, or depictions of average middle-class society. This is where Maier’s wide array of photographs flourished when comparing it to those of the same time frame. Although an exceptional amount of her photos were of street-based subjects, they seemed to dig deeper than just the basic idea.Of course, all art is subject to personal interpretation, and Maier’s photographs make it quite easy to apply one’s opinion to many of her subjects. For example, a photo of a white child getting his shoes shined by a black child can be deeper rooted regarding racial tensions in the 1950’s. Another example is a photo of an older man and woman sleeping on a bus with her head on his shoulder, interpreted in my eyes as growing old with love until your eyes close for the final time. These serve as examples of where simple photos may have had more complex meanings. The movie suggests these components through the interpretation of her work by some famous photographers of today.

Vivian Maier, leading a secretive yet artistic life, was successfully depicted throughout the documentary. John Maloof successfully revealed her identity to the world, regardless of what she may have wanted. Fortunately for the world of photography and art, the world can now enjoy the work of a nanny doing what she loved. Through the use of her real-life photographs, interviews with people she knew, and other aspects, the movie has given Vivian Maier the recognition she deserved. Not only can those who watch it learn of this woman’s life, but they may learn about what made her work so cherished and world renowned.