Last night Dan, his girlfriend Nicole, and I went to see "The Devil and Daniel Johnston" at Springfield's independent cinema The Moxie. We enjoyed the movie very much and I think it's one of the best doc's i've seen in a long time. The director did an excellent job of getting out of the way and letting the story tell itself. Too many times it seems like when you see a documentary it's just one person hyping a favorite pet subject of theirs. And while there are instances of that in this film (no one's perfect) i still think it portrays it's subject in a very honest, sometimes brutal light. I think the instances where the film got a bit carried away are the Brian Wilson referenced sequences and there was a mention of Dylan in there as well. For people who aren't familiar with Dan Johnston's work to hear him compared with those two might be a bit much. I found it to be unnecessary as I believe his songs stand up well on their own. The film was great in its storytelling of Johnston's life; you felt as though you really got to know and care about Johnston and those who knew him intimately. Of course, this being Springfield we had to put of with teenage girls giggling throughout the film at Johnston's misfortune. Most noticably at times when other theater goers and I were on the verge of tears. . . ahhh the ignorance of youth, what can you do. At least the town now has an independent cinema, let's hope it lasts.
I also had the opportunity recently to see Crash. Harris' wife, Kelly had borrowed it from a friend and we watched it a couple weeks ago. This is where the diametrical opposition comes in. Whereas The Devil and Daniel Johnston was great, Crash was horrible. In a way it was everything it's name implied. . . like a car-crash it was a sometimes beautiful thing to look at but in reality it was just an ugly mess. Or as Harris said, "That was just a bunch of stereotypes stereotypically doing stereotyped things.", and i'd have to agree.
3 comments:
Yes, Crash was horrible. What it says more than anything is what passes for an honest discussion of the entirely sick state of race relations in that country. Somehow it was supposed to make a statement, but I made a point to erase it from my memory about 5 minutes after it was over. As with most movies, the most compelling thing was the trailer.
Objectivity, however, is passe, though, hoops, so don't use it to justify a documentary (which sounds good, I admit). Just picking up an old argument *rotating Clinton Fist looms overhead*
I didn't mean that the movie was strictly "objective", i just didn't want to go through and explain everything that happens in the movie as most reviews do. what i meant was, the way in which the story was told (keeping in mind liner, non-linear, etc.) was very reflective of DJ's personality which consists of many things but the predominant one being his mental illness defined as "manic-depressive with illusions of grandure". The movie, while being linear for the most part, told his story in a way that felt, kinetically, like you were inhabiting the mind of someone of that nature.
Oh, I was mostly just giving you a hard time.
I have yet to jump on the mangosteen train, though. I am, however eating all kinds of lichees and other things that are very similar. I mean, once you open all of these fruits, they look the same, and have very similar pits, but they taste different. And the Thais tend to buy them in bunches, and I mean bunches. It seems that you can not just eat one lichee, you must finish the entire kilo. Was the same with the durien. I mean, they go for it....eat that sucker (but it is huge!!)
As for the documentary, once I am in the land of no intellectual property rights, I will look it up.
Post a Comment