Despite its issues gaining a company for distribution, “Nanook of the North” was received with great reviews from both critics and fans. Previously many of the documentaries being made were either “fakery” or exploited as a creative outlet to give “western audiences a reassuring feeling about” imperialism on native populations (Barrow 24). Flaherty’s objective in creating his film was not in concordance with previous filmmakers (Barrow 23). He considered “Nanook” a closer look at the traditions and lifestyle of the Inuit people and a way to show his “admiration for them” in hopes that others may share in it (Barrow 45). It was different for a documentary on this topic to display native peoples in an admirable light. More often, they (being, Inuits, Native Americans, aboriginals, ect.) were illustrated as loyal, happy yet marginalized individuals, a product of western colonization that oppressors could stomach.
In order to capture “the courage of [a] family unit,” Flaherty employed filmmaking tactics that some would consider unethical despite his noble intentions for the film (Nichols 44). An example of this would be the obvious exposure to harsher conditions than the Inuit people he filmed were used to. Flaherty also ignored dangerous when watching behind his camera while his “social actors” attempted the capture and killing of different large and potentially aggressive mammals (Nichols 45). In short, the ethics of filmmaking, especially with non-fiction or documentary were not yet being fully discussed by the industry or the public. However, it’s my opinion that documentaries are the hardest of film genre to sell to an audience, at least mass audiences and I think, Flaherty, knowing this used to the best of his capability caution when taking necessary risks in order to make “Nanook” more exciting and therefore successful as a film. The more successful, the more coverage, meaning more would become interested or at least familiar with native life and culture in the north.
The film was a global success. There was ice cream named after Nanook and when he died it was written about in newspapers all over the world. Its success lives on; many filmmakers have stated that it’s one of the best documentaries ever made or at least the most influential. Although, Nichols describes the film as a “gigantic reenactment,” it is a reenactment done with care, historical-valor and a heartfelt objective.