The first 20 minutes you see:
The picture accidentally bounce presumably from the camera man losing grip.
The story also barely allows 3 minutes for each significant to be digested before it cuts to another important moment, really poor editing. After say 20 minutes I was laughing at how we had skipped through 2 decades of her life scene by scene. Never really resting on one place or time.
I think it's a shame because she seems like a really interesting woman but if you can't rest on one place or time for a few minutes, the story has no emotional impact and is hard to follow. I would love to see this footage worked into a documentary-drama, where after each scene a historian gives further details. Alternatively they could have used some clever exposition and decided what part of her story they wanted to focus on. Anything but this 'style' of production'. Never seen such bad editing in my life.
I think it's a shame because she seems like a really interesting woman but if you can't rest on one place or time for a few minutes, the story has no emotional impact and is hard to follow. I would love to see this footage worked into a documentary-drama, where after each scene a historian gives further details. Alternatively they could have used some clever exposition and decided what part of her story they wanted to focus on. Anything but this 'style' of production'. Never seen such bad editing in my life.