I Didn't Like The Malice At The Palace Documentary, But Not For The Reasons You May Think

Yesterday I had the misfortune of watching the Netflix documentary “Untold: The Malice At The Palace” a film all about the Pistons/Pacers brawl from 2004. I posted a review on my YouTube channel. I’m not going link to that review because quite frankly, the review isn’t very good. Sometimes Chris fucks up, and this is one of those instances. It has since been taken down solely due to the fact that I didn't believe it was up to snuff with the content I usually create. This won't be my last fuck up. The review was subpar, but since the subject matter is relevant, I figured I’d come on here and write in more detail about what it was that really didn’t work about this documentary for me. I hope I’m able to get my message across to the people who have told me to kill myself over the last 24 hours because I had an opinion on a movie. It’s a difficult film to navigate through because even 17 years later, there’s so much emotion that people have towards this event. There is still an entire generation of people that believe that if this brawl doesn’t happen, the Pacers not only win the East, but probably win an NBA championship. I do not agree with us. I do not believe that simply because they dominated in the 9th game of an 82 game season against the defending world champions that this would’ve guaranteed them an NBA championship. Would they have had a much better shot? 100%. That is indisputable. I need to make it clear, the Pacer slant is not why I dislike this documentary. Everyone can have their own opinion about what might have happened if not for that brawl. This documentary’s flaws run much deeper. I can’t stress that enough. I do not give a shit if you think the Pacers would’ve gotten bounced in the first round or won an NBA championship. A bad documentary is a bad documentary.

The biggest issue I had with the movie itself was the fact that on a filmmaking level, I feel like it’s really poorly put together. It’s very short, but despite its short length, it felt longer than it was due to the poor pacing. The editing wasn’t particularly good and unlike a lot of the best documentaries, you didn’t come out of it feeling like you knew anything that you didn’t already know coming in. I understand that pretty much all documentaries are going to have some sort of slant to them. One of the funniest documentaries I’ve ever seen was Bill Maher‘s “Religulous” from 2008. While I found that movie to be genuinely humorous, it didn’t even attempt to have any sort of balanced discussion about religion. But I didn’t care, because the movie entertained me. I’d been tipped off to the fact that this thing was going to be pretty Pacer-centric, so I was prepared for that. In general I wouldn’t have had a problem with that if the documentary would’ve actually tapped into some things that we hadn’t previously known coming in. I’m under the belief that Ron Artest (or Meta World Peace) is actually a very fascinating guy. I think his career arc is really interesting, but the movie spends maybe five minutes talking about that. 

I think of one of the important jobs of any documentary is to make you feel like the subject matter is worth discussing. I had the opportunity to watch the Val Kilmer documentary “Val” on Amazon Prime the other day and I really came away from that film with a greater sense of appreciation for Val Kilmer both as an actor and as a human being. The Pistons/Pacers brawl in 2004 was a massive deal that opened a lot of doors for discussions about NBA culture, race and fandom. It was a really divisive, polarizing event. This documentary captures none of that. For some people, I'm sure it will. I wish I could've gotten more out if it.

I probably should’ve said this upfront, but if you like this movie, fine. I really don’t care. In fact, I’m glad you liked it. I say this without any condescension. I wish I could've loved it. I don’t have that much intent on spending more time arguing with people about this documentary. I was around when the Malice At The Palace happened. It was a huge deal. I’ve seen the footage of Ron Artest jumping into the stands probably about 4,000 times in my life. The ESPN 30 for 30 documentaries have shown that you can take a really well-known sporting event, show it from a different angle and make you see things from a different perspective that you hadn’t previously seen before. I think this was really a great opportunity to take what was one of the darkest moments in NBA history and give us a new perspective that we hadn’t previously witnessed. Whatever personal bias I may have about what happened that night doesn’t really matter. On a technical level, I think it’s simply a poorly made film that takes a story that is really interesting and kind of sucks out everything that made it such a big deal. If you want watch it, go ahead and watch it. I’m sure many people already have. There’s going to be people who are going to enjoy it and that is fine. Personally, I view it as a massive missed opportunity.