... such as what happened to the Bouvier/Beale money that bought the 28 room mansion that mother and daughter live in and is in disrepair? I know that Big Edie was divorced in 1931, and it sounded like "little Edie" had the advantages of an expensive education through college, which would have been right before WWII. What changed? There is no narration here, nor do the documentary makers ask questions. They just let the cameras roll and record whatever happens. Big Edie is in her late 70s yet retains a kind of beauty. However, she talks over little Edie whenever they are in the same room, making it difficult to understand either woman.What is clear visually is that they are both living in squalor. A cat defecates behind a very old portrait of Big Edie and both Edies laugh about being glad somebody gets to do what they want? Nobody tries to clean it up. Big Edie spends her time on a filthy mattress with stuff she might need stacked on top, yet seems to have no trouble with mobility. They make food for the cameramen including pate on crackers that looks like cat food on crackers. I would want a tetanus shot first.Little Edie has a mountain of regret. She talks about how she wanted to be a dancer, how somebody wanted to marry her but her mother drove him away, and how she has been taking care of her mother due to her health on and off since the second world war. She mentions how much she hates the country and misses the noise of the city. Little Edie is remarkably well preserved. When this film was made she was 56 but she could pass for forty. She color coordinates all of her wardrobes including her scarves and headdresses that hide her alopecia, yet she won't mop the floor. Shades of faded feelings of being aristocracy perhaps? Another question I had that went unanswered was where were big Edie's sons? Both lived into the 1990's, yet they are nowhere to be found. Maybe they had the sense to get out of Dodge.Why are these recluses the subject of a documentary in the first place? Because big and little Edie are Jackie Kennedy Onnasis' aunt and cousin, respectively, and because Suffolk County was trying to evict them based on the condition of the house and grounds - there was no running water at one point - until Jackie supplied the funds to get the estate up to snuff.Don't look for lots of answers here, because there are really none. It is just a fascinating portrait of two recluses who have slipped into their own form of normality although it looks horrifying to outsiders.

You should see this unique film because you have never seen anything like it before. A landmark documentary style film that is spellbinding to watch, somewhat like watching a train wreck- you can't take your eyes off of it. An eccentric mother and daughter, the Bouvier-Beales, from an aristocratic French/American family, live in poverty in their crumbling mansion with cats and raccoons. This is all true and shown in stark reality with camera work and editing that is what I would describe as effective in this case, although somewhat unorthodox. It is difficult for me to perceive it as exploitive because the two women seem to enjoy having company and performing before the cameras, but the exploitive/invited paradox is one of this strange phenomenon's compelling aspects. Another factor complicating this aspect is that apparently it was their cousin, Lee Bouvier Radziwill, who initially contacted the film-makers although she later renounced the results. So the film crew did not just wander in; they were invited into the project (as it was originally conceived) by a responsible and highly-placed relative.It is hard to put "Grey Gardens" into perspective, but consider that although these women both lived long lives (both lived to be over 80 years old) we are seeing their lives at their nadir. Would a film showing a short period of anyones's life at its absolute low point be flattering to that person? One can only wonder what types of mental conditions or co-dependencies we may be observing while watching "Grey Gardens", and of course it is somewhat sad, but don't miss this film. You will probably never forget it.

In SALESMAN, we saw traveling salesmen going door to door peddling copies of The Big Book of Jewish Fairy Tales (as comedians Bill Maher, Jon Stewart and Lewis Black call the bible); in GREY GARDENS, we see the Rich as they slowly rot away in their crumbling castles. This is rot as seen from the Inside. No, not "rot," per se; rather, DECOMPOSITION: slow dissolution. Slow decay, on full display. "You shouldn't have a contact with The Outside World," "Big Edie" warns her mostly bed-ridden mother before pirouetting around the house like the young child she proclaims herself to be (her obsession with her looks and her weight aren't necessarily strange, but this self-proclaimed "eternal youth" is). GREY GARDENS is often difficult to watch, simply because there's not a lot going on- and, if not for the family name, it's unlikely anyone would've EVER heard of these two recluses. I wasn't particularly moved by it, but I'm sure the late Shirley Jackson would've understood.

This is a cringe-worthy effort to try to make interesting the sad lives of two lonely people that had given up on trying to improve their lot in life, preferring instead to look back at a more illustrious past, and the missteps that brought them to their current condition. Sadly, I sincerely believe hat if there had been no connection to Jackie Kennedy, this would never have received the attention, and indeed, critical acclaim it has managed to attract. This distant relationship does not redeem the film in any way.I believe this was the Maysles' first real film, and it shows. The camera work & audio would be passable for a film-school project from the 70's, but just barely. This film could have used a lot more editing - it might have made it more watchable. I watched this film as one would an accident on the highway; with sympathy for those involved & with gratitude that I would soon be gone.Sorry, judging from the other reviews I am in the minority, but I've nothing good to say about it. Awful. Simply awful.