Advertisement
Other stories by EdwardHavens
RSS Feed - ReviewsTaking Woodstock
By EdwardHavens
August 26th, 2009
There is a great movie within Ang Lee's "Taking Woodstock." But as it stands now, the story is bogged down with too many characters and situations taking the focus away from the heart of the matter.
It should have been a simple enough tale: a young man from the Catskills takes action to help save his family’s motel when he hears of a big music and arts festival losing its permit from a neighboring town. There’s a star-making turn for stand-up comedian and minor cable television personality Demetri Martin in the leading role of Elliot Tiber and potential award consideration for Henry Goodman as Tiber’s father. Sadly, though, Lee and his longtime writer and producer James Schamus decided to make this simple story concerning a big event as big as the event itself, throwing in far too many minor characters (and then casting known commodities to justify their addition) and subplots which are immaterial to the event being covered, leaving the film without a cohesive balance. Is this movie about Elliot Tiber and his experiences at Woodstock, or it is about Woodstock and this one person’s role in making it happen? It’s possible Lee and Schamus never figured it out for themselves and hoped nobody would notice it either.
There is, for example, a minor subplot involving the exasperating Dan Folger as the leader of an experimental theatre group living and working in a barn on the Tiber’s property. The theatre troupe have no more than three or for minutes of screen time, and they seem to only exist to get naked for a cheap laugh in two scenes, but they do not add anything to either Elliot’s experience or the Woodstock venture. They exist solely to show us something anyone who might be seeing a movie about Woodstock would already know: it was a time of free love and free expression. Check. Ditto Emile Hirsch’s recently returned Vietnam Vet. Whether or not we were alive during the Vietnam conflict or seen any of the myriad of movies about the hostilities in Southeastern Asia, Billy exists only to remind us some guys came back with severe mental issues but were still people. Check and check. There’s indie film fave Paul Dano, with the cute Kelli Garner, to add a head-trip scene for Elliot. And there is Liev Schreiber, as a cross-dressing ex-Marine no less, showing up towards the latter half of the movie to pretty much make sure we get to see Elliot’s uptight mother Sonia (the usually reliable Imelda Staunton going way overboard with the Jewish mother routine) get high on hash brownies. Sure, that scene leads to one of the film’s few seemingly genuine poignant moments, but by the end of the scene, some viewers will probably notice Sonia’s actions go counter to things we’ve been lead to believe up to this point.
Another minor subplot involves Elliot discovering his burgeoning homosexuality. Lee and Schamus imply Elliot was only becoming aware of his true sexuality during the days leading up to the festival, yet Elliot was living a life of a gay man for years, and proclaims to have participated in the Stonewall Riots that lead to the start of the Gay Rights movement. This isn’t covered in the movie, and wouldn’t be known to most moviegoers unless they were very familiar with Elliot’s life story to begin with. Elliot’s sexuality does not matter to his involvement in the Woodstock experience, and is nothing more than an additional distraction in a film full of distractions.
As I re-read this review, it sounds as if ”Taking Woodstock” is a complete and total failure as a film, which it is not. As previously stated, both Martin and Goodman are exceptional in their roles individually, but the magic really takes place when the pair is together. And if the young lady playing Tisha, the girlfriend of Woodstock producer Michael Lang, looks at all familiar to you, it might be because Mamie Gummer is the look-alike daughter of the First Lady of American Cinema, Meryl Streep, and goes a long way towards showing she has what it takes to be the next Meryl Streep. And, without little surprise, Eugene Levy shines once again in a small role as dairy farmer Max Yasgur, who allowed his farm to be the place where the massive concert would take place.
Director Ang Lee is at his best when he focused on capturing the insanity happening at the Tiber’s motel as the Woodstock group invades to set up their base camp, or when trying to capture the Woodstock experience from the point of view of someone who is there but just can’t quite get to the center of the action. At times, this movie feels like a natural extension of Michael Wadleigh’s 1970 documentary about the festival, utilizing the same split-screen format, slightly grainy film stock and live music from the show.
I am willing to admit “Taking Woodstock” may not have been personally satisfying because of my upbringing, my familiarity with the event, the artists and their music, and the time during which it all happened. It’s possible those under the age of thirty might find all of this fascinating and engrossing. In my views, there is a lean, mean movie inside, waiting to bust out of all the unneeded side activities. Hopefully, Lee and Schamus will be more alert to their main storyline in whatever they do next. They’re still the best of the sadly fallow list of modern writing and directing teams, and I’ll still anxiously want to see whatever they come up with next.
My rating: C+