10 Most Controversial Documentaries Ever Made

Welcome to WatchMojo, and today were counting down our picks for the most shocking, disturbing, or otherwise questionable documentaries ever released. Some spoilers to come!

#10: Capturing the Friedmans (2003)

This grim documentary, directed by Andrew Jarecki, follows Arnold Friedman and his son, Jesse, in their criminal trial. This duo, who taught computer classes to young children, was accused of sexual violence against them. Although the Friedmans pleaded guilty, they claimed they had done so under fear of going to trial and getting harsher sentences, and that no crime had been done. Did they abuse anyone? Was this a case of moral panic run amok? Jareckis even-handed impartiality received criticism, as well as the directors eventual belief in the pairs innocence. Plus, when the film was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature, some of Friedmans alleged victims protested. Its a riddling case, all right.

#9: Jesus Camp (2006)

Chilling and sinister, this documentary about a charismatic Christian summer camp is scarier than most horror films. The documentary follows children Levi, Rachael, and Tory as they attend Kids on Fire, run by Becky Fischer and her ministry. Fischer is open about her attempts to indoctrinate children into conservative Christian beliefs, employing tactics used by Islamic fundamentalists. These include the denial of evolution among other scientific theories, as well as hateful preaching against homosexuality and abortion. The outrage and controversy over this camp following the documentary led to its shutting down. Sadly, questions about indoctrination being a form of abuse are still relevant.

#8: Nanook of the North (1922)

One of the first feature-length documentaries, Robert J. Flahertys film proved contentious. Initially beginning as a travelogue, the resulting film focuses on the life and practices of an Inuit family, led by the titular Nanook, in the Canadian Arctic. Soon, however, accusations of fictionalizing, staged events, and even falsification arose. Nanook was actually named Allakariallak, and his wife was actually Flahertys. And although the Inuit had already begun using guns and other Western technology, Flaherty encouraged them to hunt traditionally for the purposes of the film. Despite its technical achievement, the controversy over Indigenous representationand misrepresentationcontinues on.

#7: Blackfish (2013)

Directed by Gabriela Cowperthwaite, this film follows orca Tilikum, and the plight of orcas at SeaWorld in general. Captured and harassed by his fellow orcas, Tilikum developed patterns of aggression, even attacking and killing trainers. The documentary also captures harrowing footage of orcas being captured and taken away. SeaWorld was also scrutinized for its practices and claims, including that their orcas had a lifespan comparable to those in the wild. The theme park came out against the film, claiming inaccuracy, exaggeration, and even exploitation. Who is exploiting whom? Valid exposé or not, it is a film searing in its condemnation.

#6: The Bridge (2006)

Inspired by a 2003 article of the same theme, this grisly film follows jumpers off the Golden Gate Bridge, most of whom die in the process. Director Eric Steel filmed the bridge for a full year, avoiding publicity to lessen the chances of notoriety jumps, and even interviewing one survivor. The film did save people from jumping when they could, with the trained film crew successfully preventing six jumps. Still, bridge officials accused Steel of lying to them about his project, with Steele defending himself, saying it would have been rejected if he had told the truth. After the documentary, there have been reports of an increase in jumping. Exposure is always a double-edged sword.

#5: Titicut Follies (1967)

This Frederick Wiseman exposé on mental health hospitals and institutions is undoubtedly a controversial one. Following inmates at Bridgewater State Hospital, the film captures horrific scenes of cruelty, including force-feeding, nudity, barren cells, and even bullying from members of staff. Even before Wisemans film was released, the Massachusetts state government tried to prevent its release, claiming the documentary violated the privacy and dignity of the inmates. Then in 1987 the families of seven inmates sued both the hospital and the state for abuses. The film was allowed to be seen by health care professionals and finally released in 1992 to the public on TV. This one really touched a nerve.

#4: Super Size Me (2004)

One of the most well-known documentaries of the early aughts is also one of the most contentious. The film follows director Morgan Spurlock in his experiment; eating only from McDonalds three times a day for one month. Spurlock captured his deteriorating health for that month in a dazzling exposé on the fast food industry. What the documentary didnt disclose was the directors heavy drinking during its filming. Other people have attempted to replicate Spurlocks experiment with much less dramatic resultsas in, some even lost weight while on this diet. McDonalds retired the super size option even while defending themselves against the directors claims. Its a mixed bag, but this documentarys influence cannot be denied.

#3: The Act of Killing (2012)

This film follows the Indonesian coup of 1965, which led to the killing of communists and others opposed to the new regime. Director Joshua Oppenheimer went to Medan to interview some of the participants in the slaughter, who either brag about the killings or deny it altogether. He even asked two of them, Anwar Congo and Herman Koto, to re-enact their killings. This searing insight into these murderers inevitably sparked criticism, specifically, on indulging the killers twisted perspectives. Congo and Koto have come out to say the film was honest and true. This provocative take on these familiar crimes shows the psychology of killing.

#2: Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)

Michael Moore had already generated massive criticism for the alleged inaccuracies in his documentary, Bowling for Columbine, about the Columbine school shooting. But this award-winning film about the Bush presidency proved to be even more controversial, especially among conservative groups. The documentary posited that the reasons for the U.S. invasion of Iraq ultimately followed the logic of American oil interests rather than the tragedy of the 9/11 attacks. The documentarys claim that the Bush administration flew members of bin Ladens family out of the country was also contentious. Although many of its claims are largely tame today, its conclusions still have the power to unsettle.

#1: Triumph of the Will (1935)

No documentary, however inaccurate or grisly, can ever come close to this infamous one. This beautifully shot film is also an ugly propaganda piece on the Nazi Party in Germany. Directed by Leni Riefenstahl, with Adolf Hitler himself as the unofficial producer, the film follows the Nazi Party Congress in Nuremberg in 1934. Needless to say, the film was criticized, mocked, and lampooned almost from its inception. Riefenstahl herself was a participant at the rally, although she claimed she didnt know about the Nazis antisemitism. Apart from its obviously despicable politics, many just deemed the documentary boring and unconvincing to anyone but a true believer. Still, its influence in filmmaking, with its use of now-standard cinematic techniques, lives on.

Which other documentary do you know was hugely controversial? Let us know in the comments down below!