Taking Woodschlock

doctorsmoothlove

"If you remember Woodstock, you weren't there." I've heard that statement my entire life and seen it reproduced on T-shirts, bumper stickers, and posters. Maybe it's true. Since those who went can't remember anything about it, no Woodstock film would be recommended. I've researched film depictions of Woodstock and discovered some on-the-fringe documentaries do it justice. Like any Hollywood film about Woodstock of all things would be sincere.

The film follows Elliot Tiber who lived with his parents in Bethel, New York. His small town was mired in economic stagnation and no visitors had any reason to go there. Elliot was crucial in organizing the music festival that lasted three days from August 15 until August 18. His family owns a motel but couldn't accommodate all the attendees and most of the event was held at a nearby local farm. Elliot meets many bizarre people, including a transgender retired Korea veteran, a performing troop who lives in his parents' barn, and a drug-using couple from California The film was adapted from a memoir written by Tiber and focuses strictly on his experience. It's an interesting approach. Many people probably never heard any music, despite the legacy attached to the performances. Still we don't even hear anything in the background. It would have been a nice touch. Instead, Danny Elfman loads the screen with Oingo Boingo riffs that seem generic, just like everything else in this movie (more on this later).

Elliot is the main character in a sea of hippie stereotypes and pre-conceived expectations about everything else. His best friend is a traumatized Vietnam veteran who still shouts to invisible opposition. How original. Why is this guy even in the movie? Elliot may have actually had a friend like that but his inclusion has no purpose here. It comes off like a half-baked way to put the film into historical context. A naked troupe of singers lives in the Tiber's barn. Why are they there? To protest to the locals. What about the transgender Korea veteran? Nope. Just a chuckle from Elliot and cheap, disposable humor. What Elliot's encounter with a hippie couple from California? An extended LSD trip. This isn't Woodstock. I want to be immersed in the concert (or whatever else) when I watch historical dramas like this one. Maybe an entirely fictional movie would have been better. Then, a director would have been forced to create a feeling of what Woodstock was like instead of using our conception.

A coworker once showed me a Facebook group in which users lamented the fact they weren't born in a more "exciting" time (1930's-1940's). I wouldn't want to be alive then, but I appreciate their general idea. The 1960's was an era of great cultural change, made manifest by the Woodstock Festival. Nothing comparable to it has happened since then. The goth and emo subcultures haven't produced anything close to it and remain too obscure to stage a Woodstock. It's my hope that the internet would permit another event like this, but it won't occur for some time. We won't get to see it with our youth, so we will need good films to keep us updated. That, of course, is my strongest problem with Taking Woodstock. It has none of the music we would expect to hear and its attempt to be a character study is unsuccessful because of its generic character portrayal. For a film directed by Ang Lee, it is surprisingly insincere and trashy.

score 4/10

doctorsmoothlove 21 October 2009

Reprint: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw2144880/