Layton was apparently aware of this and used it deliberately.

The film does not resolve the central questions.

It presents the evidence and the perspectives and trusts the audience to sit with the ambiguity.

The central ambiguity — the question of whether the family knew, suspected, or was genuinely deceived — is presented through the juxtaposition of Bourdin’s accusations with the family’s accounts, without providing a definitive judgment.

The audience is left to form their own conclusions based on their assessment of whose account is more credible, knowing that Bourdin is an unreliable narrator and that the family members have their own reasons for presenting their experience in specific ways.

This formal choice — to present complexity without resolving it — received some criticism from viewers who wanted a cleaner narrative and some praise from critics who appreciated its honesty about the limits of what documentary filmmaking can establish as truth.