Tag: Documentary

Day four of Musical Week also falls on a Thursday. Hmmm. That is my documentary review day. Can I do it? Of course I can do it. When you think “musical” and “docuementary”, the only real cross over would be some sort of concert movie. But! There hasn’t been a sweet teen sensation concert movie for over a year. The last one was the One Direction movie.

So instead I found Metallica Through The Never. You may have guessed it already, but this concert movie/movie has a lot of Metallica music in it. And all of it comes from actual concerts that they filmed the footage at from a few concerts on one of their tours. However there is also a small story in here, clearly fictional with actors, set to Metallica songs, to give us a very strange movie hybrid.

They must have thought a regular concert documentary was boring and for teeny-boppers. So they wanted something more.

The story itself is just about a boy, Trip (Dane DeHaan), a roadie for Metallica, who kind of just has to run and get stuff. Well, during the concert, he has to go and find a package in truck that ran out of gas. Get the truck gas, so it can deliver the package that is very important, for reasons.

But chaos has broken out in the streets. Death, riots, destruction, and maybe some supernatural things as well! And who is The Rider (Kyle Thompson)? Is he the Sandman?!

I picked a concert photo so you all wouldn’t call me out on shenanigans.

I am not a huge Metallica song by any means. None of their songs are on my iPod, but I recognize the famous ones, and I know to make fun of the driver due to his anti-Napster campaigns.

Despite that, I was surprised at how many of the songs played I honestly recognized. Probably at least half of them. So that was a bonus. The music didn’t sound terrible either and it fit the story they were telling nicely.

The story itself? Well, it felt like an acid trip. No crazy colors, but all the other elements were there. At points it was terrifying, mostly it was weird, but it was definitely entertaining.

In fact, I wanted way more of the story and way less of the concert scenes. That is a terrible complaint, I know, for what amounts to a concert film. But because it is a hybrid, I expected more time focused on the story. I would guesstimate the average movie went 75% concert, 25% story.

It should go without saying that if you hate Metallica music, or the genre of music, you won’t gind any enjoyment in this movie. I thought it was a okay experience, and what I can tell, a good first effort for this fantasy concert genre.

I picked the documentary DamNation not just because it shares its name with one of the best Magic cards in history.

Nope. I did it purely because I liked the title and it was about a subject I actually didn’t have a huge knowledge set on ahead of time. I still like learning, so sometimes I use documentaries to learn more and not just confirm what I already think I know.

Clearly this one is about dams, but it took awhile into the picture before I could tell if it was pro or anti dams. That’s a good sign, because at least early on it was pretty biased just giving information on the history of dams, talking about their pros and cons and how they affect people (people who live by them, energy, jobs). But have no doubt, this is definitely a documentary set out to tell us why dams are bad for the environment and why we should start to get rid of them.

No matter where you go, damn kids and their spray cans, amirite?

It is simple: most dams aren’t as necessary as they once were a hundred or two hundred years ago. Some would argue that a lot of those made weren’t super necessary back then either, but the dam hype went throughout the US, especially the west, and that is where we are now. But a lot of our energy comes from other sources and they aren’t helpful, so they want dams to be taken down, rivers restored to their natural habitat so that nature can be enjoyed and fish and animals can reclaim their homes.

Oh yeah, they are also super against fishing hatcheries, which makes sense from many points of view. It’d be hard to argue against that.

However I found myself not necessarily agreeing with everything that they were saying. I don’t think we should get rid of all the dams and I don’t give a damn about a lot of fish. Restoring nature? That’s cool I guess. Pretty things are pretty. But rethinking dams that exist and find out which ones we can get rid of without hurting our economy and improving the landscape? Well, why the fuck not.

Another plus, this is a very well put together documentary. They talk to a lot of experts in many fields, the cameras used are very high quality, they have a lot of footage to work with in the construction and deconstruction of these dams. It was very well researched and that is what I hope the most for when I see a documentary.

Not being a nature crazed individual (I prefer the indoors), I can still go along with the points made and I am glad that I learned about a potential biological problem by picking a nicely named documentary.

Every once in awhile, I like to watch a documentary that has something to do with religion. Not frequently at all, just 1 out of 10 maybe. They usually bug me, they can come off as self righteous (heh?)

Even if those documentaries are ones I might agree with, I still glare at them and tend to find myself way more critical. But I picked The Unbelievers for no good reason. Probably because of the awkward title.

The Unbelievers is about two men who you may have heard of, Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss.

Krauss is a theoretical physicist and works at Arizona State University and Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist from Oxford. They are maybe even more famous for being atheists, writing books about it and going around talking about it on talking tours!

Oh hey, that is what this documentary is about. These two, being in debates, talking to groups, and hanging out with each other as they talk about ways to bring down Jesus.

But at least they do it openly and not in shady dark business rooms.

To be fair, this is more of a movie about them talking about why science and reason need to be used more often in debates. To ignore stuff like cultural backgrounds or religious reasons to make political policy, but instead use logic and their brains.

A fair reason I guess.

But also it seems like the last 25% of it was to support the Reason Rally, a fest in DC about atheism and reason. Alright, another okay fest. I guess.

At this point you might be able to read complete apathetic-ness towards the topic of the film. I was definitely interested in the documentary when I sat down to watch it. But then it felt like nothing happened throughout it. Why should anyone care about random celebrities and their opinions on these two men? We don’t.

Do random cherry picked snippets really help drive points home? No. If they wanted it to be actually intellectually challenging in any way, they show us larger unedited segments of some of these debates they took part in. Makes it seem like they are hiding the other side. If they want to show they are in the right, they should be able to show why in response to what the other side says.

It just seems extremely forced, not fair, and on top of it, boring because of it. If this thing was two hours long, showed a complete debate and maybe an intro and after math, it would do far better for their cause than what we are given. Instead, this documentary just feels like a waste of time.

Happy Thanksgiving! For those not reading this on Thanksgiving, happy day!

Thanksgiving movies really don’t exist, so in general, my Thanksgiving reviews have had one theme. Parts of Thanksgiving dinner. And no, I haven’t reviewed a movie called Turkey yet. But I did review both Butter and Milk, so my dairy should be done. Let’s start with some of the main sides.

King Corn is a slightly older documentary now, 2007, which is the old limit for reviews from my website. I try not to do anything before 2009 now, unless there is a special occasion. Like…a holiday!

King Corn is a decently famous early documentary about corn and how it has infiltrated our very existence. I am willing to wager before this documentary, it wasn’t as common knowledge what was happening in the corn industry and how it affected everyone in the United States. And maybe, just maybe, how it made us fat.

Those two boys are going to eat the entire field on that truck. That’ll do it.

The two main guys are Ian Cheney and Curt Ellis, two friends who moved from Boston to Greene, Iowa to have an experiment. They both have family roots back to this area, and they asked to borrow one acre of someones land, to grow corn, to see how the whole process works, and see how much money they can make.

Of course, once they do, they find out how everything is paid out to them by the government, and purely in terms of how much land they produce. But the farmers and now have much bigger farms than ever before, and produce way more than is necessary, but the flat rate from the government makes it okay to do that. They don’t have to worry about the economy fluctuating, just the growing and production of corn.

And now corn is in everything in terms of high fructose corn syrup. Literally everything. Pure sugar. Maybe making us fat? Definitely doesn’t help.

Either way, this was a very eye opening documentary at the time, but given in such a simple way. It is about two guys farming, so of course it is a simple story, but it isn’t able to go hard after anyone driving the factors. It can’t get us into a corn syrup factory, we don’t get to hear from any policy makers. Just farmers farming, mostly. And so a simple documentary, although interesting, gets a simple grade.

Time to tackle a big fish.

Roger Ebert. A lot of people like the guy. Like, a super lot of them. Especially people who like movies. Especially people who consider themselves to be movie reviewers or critics. And then there is me, Geophysicist by day, and movie watcher by night. And I can say I never really cared one way or another.

When Ebert died, a lot of people I knew in real life wanted to talk to me about it and make sure I knew and what I thought about it. I thought that it sucked that someone died of course, but it didn’t affect me in any negative way.

For those that don’t know, before Ebert, movie reviewers were basically interchangeable. But he came in with a fancy vocabulary, an ability to write a review quickly, and a way to connect it with the every man that he became a big deal, even winning a Pulitzer Prize. He is probably the sole reason movie reviewers/critics exist as they do today. Whether that is a good thing is debatable of course.

And of course, this documentary, Life Itself, titled after his book, tells the story of his life and career and was filming during his final months alive.

He turned into a poltergeist when watching movies, apparently.

You can’t talk about Roger Ebert without talking about Gene Siskel. For over 20 years, these two Chicago men got to go on television and argue and talk the new movies in theaters that week, and the crowds loved it. No one could compare to those two and those two opinions became the only opinions that seemed to matter.

But we also get to hear about Ebert’s career in college, his first journalism jobs, and what he did after the TV show. He was also an early adopter of really liking social media/internet it seems, and wanted all of his life’s work online for anyone to read. Which is why his name is a website, and they have people posting reviews to carry on his legacy there.

And of course, we also get his family life, his children, his wife, and the final months of his life, the surgeries, and the setbacks.

Now for someone who didn’t really care about the man, I found myself surprised when his death occurred that I was tearing up a little bit. That’s some quality film making. The narrator is reading excerpts from his autobiography throughout the film, so it is really easy to feel like I knew the man by the end of the movie. Roger Ebert was a fascinating individual, and well, it sucks that he is gone.

I have to wait for a lot of things. Usually movies. Getting to a movie 3-4 hours early just to wait in a line to make sure I can see it in advance for free. Yes, my time is totally worth that.

Either way, a lot of downtime is felt there, it can suck. But I could watch movies on my phone during the wait, because watching movies before you watch a movie is cruise control to coolsville. Which is why, while waiting for a movie, I watched the documentary The Waiting Room.

Just so we are clear, this makes me cool.

The Waiting Room is about hospitals though! Namely, Highland Hospital in Oakland, California. It is notable for having the most trafficked emergency room in the country. Lot of people, lot of trauma, and of course, an area where a lot of people might not have health insurance so people have to come there when they can’t pay.

But at least they have the raddest attendant ever working the door to calm down the wait time.

The documentary is actually set up in a pretty unique way. First, it is one day of the hospital. Good. Simple. We get to hear the doctors, nurses, secretaries, and financial advisers as they work and discuss the load of people that day. We also of course get those who came in for help and as they get frustrated by their wait or their service.

But none of it is done in a visual interview format. If they are describing their frustrations, or their reasoning, or anything, it is done purely in voice over by the person over footage of them in the hospital or receiving service. The format never takes us “away” from the hospital and helps emphasize the trapped feeling. Or something like that.

Either way, it was really easy to connect with the people waiting and the staff as well.

Better yet? This documentary wasn’t preachy. The director didn’t bring opinions into anything. It was just real people, waiting, getting frustrated, and some of them receiving shitty care and being put in shitty situations. You can derive your own conclusions, if any, from what it is. But at least in 2012, this was a reality for many and it is heartbreaking.

Documentaries, schmockumentaries. I used to have my documentaries on Friday, but now they are Thursday. Let us cope with it and move on.

Let’s talk about video games, because I like video games. I would refer to myself as a gamer, even if my time is much more limited from the activity. I have to watch a lot of movies, and keep up with TV shows. It is a hard life.

But with a vague title for a documentary, Video Games: The Movie (claiming to be a movie?) could be about so many topics. Most likely it will involve the history of gaming and how it is evolved today. And really, that is all I can imagine it being about. The history of gaming.

And video games! And video games through time!

Sure enough, this documentary is mostly about video games and the history. And how systems have gotten better. And why people who play video games are cool. And how indie games are doing stuff. Hey, maybe the title is because of that other documentary, Indie Game: The Movie? I swear there were more topics, but I was so bored throughout the movie that it is really easy to forget.

Here are some of the problems. Outside of video games, it didn’t really have a lot of focus. It goes from segment to segment, about different topics, some interviews with some people, and shit ton of filler footage of just video game footage. That might sound like a good thing, but when there is just randomly 2 minutes of video game segments of various games for whatever topic, that just isn’t exciting to watch. That is boring. The segments are so unconnected, you could put them in any order and the movie would feel the same. They even have musical intro/outros for each section which makes it feel even more disjointed.

Obviously this thing isn’t going to have anything about Gamer Gate, for you people who think it would. Come on now. This thing was made like a year or so ago, and Gamer Gate is only a month or so old.

Another complaint? They show this huge timeline of gaming history and start going chronological through it, but they have major events in it that they skip. Then they start going out of order, going forward and backwards, and the events on the time line seemed to be different and change. And they still ignored a lot of stuff on there. Why show it on a timeline if you aren’t explaining it? The time line was an annoying clusterfuck.

But this documentary is still super boring. Definitely don’t watch it if you like video games. And don’t if you know nothing about them. Just read wikipedia articles.

There are documentaries of all sorts of varieties. There are historical documentaries (technically, most if not all fall under this?), political documentaries, biased documentaries, science/learning documentaries, scary/thriller documentaries and more.

And then every once in awhile, they have documentaries about movies, which is of course extremely appealing to someone who likes watching movies. The movie makers can be subjects of documentaries themselves, it isn’t weird!

And then every once in a longer while, we get a documentary that doesn’t worry about fitting it all in one tiny package, but giving you as much info as they can, all the info they can, with as many people as they can, and saying “fuck your time constraints, you fascist time Nazi!”

That’s right, Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy is a whopping 240 minutes long. That is about four hours for your math inept bastards out there. This documentary doesn’t cut any corners, unless you count the recent reboot of the franchise, A Nightmare On Elm Street. It isn’t featured in this one, most likely because it came out the same year as the documentary, and because who cares about that title? No one. It is a reboot, it is different, it isn’t Robert Englund.

So what does this cover? Well, of course the original concept of A Nightmare On Elm Street with Wes Craven and New Line Cinema, while also going over the start of New Line Cinema, because they made it big off of Freddy. We get the “gay” second film, the really great return of Craven for Dream Warriors, the second highest grossing 4th film which jump started director Renny Harlin‘s career, the clusterfuck of a fifth film, the “final” sixth film with Freddy’s death, and second return of Craven with the brilliant New Nightmare, a lot of info on merchandising and the TV show and it ends with Freddy vs. Jason.

Freddy’s arms have been elongated to encompass everyone in this documentary.

That is a lot of material to go over, and now you know why it is so long. The best part about the length? I didn’t feel like a torture session trying to get through it. It was very entertaining hearing the stories behind scenes, how shots were made, how decisions were decided upon, how casting/directors were chosen. Everything. Including snide comments with Craven and Englund throughout. Hey, they even had a small interview with an actor who had the role of Surfer in one of the movies. He had a say. They talked to people who wrote scripts that were ignored. They talked to everyone. I think the coolest part is when they talked to someone who played one of the roles, they also had them read their script description of the character when they first enter the movie. Made them relatable?

But here is one annoyance. When you hear about stars in these movies, a lot of people will think back to Johnny Depp and Patricia Arquette. The Elm Street series were each of these heavy hitters first roles, and Patricia in particular was the lead in the third film. Yet they don’t get interviewed for this movie? Were they too busy for the franchise that gave them their eventual millions?

Either way, this documentary is an information overload, and only biased in the sense that a lot of the people who worked on one movie will over hype their own work, obviously, or blame others for any failures. If you were a fan of any movie of the franchise, you will enjoy aspects of this documentary. If you are curious about it, you will enjoy this. You can watch it over days and in sections quite easily, and it is on Netflix and will probably stay there forever.

Overall, Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy is a fantastic documentary. I learned a lot, and I will forget most of it. I was worried about finding time for the four hours, but it was a very easy documentary to watch, it ended up not even being a big issue.

No, don’t worry. This isn’t another dang review about another movie about doppelgangers. But if you want to see those check out The Double, Enemy, or The One I Love.

No The Imposter is something much more sinister, much more creepier, because The Imposter is real. That’s what a documentary is, folks.

This is a story about the disappearance of Nicholas Barclay, a 13 year old boy from San Antonio, Texas. This was in 1994, so you probably didn’t hear about it. Which is why you also might not have heard about it 3 years later when he was reportedly found alive in Spain. Kind of messed up and traumatic, but alive.

However, no one could have guessed at the time that it was actually Frédéric Bourdin, a 22 year old French man.

Typical French smug look on his face too.

What can drive a family to think that a complete stranger is actually their missing son? Especially when traits such as eye color, accent, and body type are all different. That is what this documentary strives to answer.

The documentary uses some actual footage from the 1990s, both in terms of hand held cameras from VHS tapes and news footage about the incident. But for the most part footage and narration comes from two ways. From Bourdin himself, and from the family members of Nicholas who are telling their versions of the events of that story.

They also recreated some scenes to add a sense of tension to it all, to recreate the initial call in to police and all of that. And man. EVERYTHING IS SO INTENSE. I was captivated throughout the documentary, I wanted to absorb all of the information. The music they used and the scenes created such an eerie vibe that I was able to label this a Thriller and a Documentary.

Who is to say that documentaries cannot make you scared? Not like someone is going to come out and get you. But at the lengths a person, a real person, might go to in order to get away.

I don’t want to talk more about it, because it is such a unique discovery and journey that the film takes you on. Definitely one that came out of nowhere for me and is highly recommended.

Political documentary! It has been two whole weeks since my last one, so clearly I was already due for another. In reality, while waiting in line to watch a pre-screening, I looked for an unplanned documentary on Netflix on my phone and watched it in the comforts of a lawn chair.

I picked Electoral Dysfunction for two main reasons. One, of course, was its length. Only 90 minutes. Sexy. Good. I only had about 100 minutes before being let in the movie. The movie was also The Judge if you are curious, which I released over a week ago.

The second reason is because I figured by the title that it would be about the USAs Electoral College, the system that I am totally not going to explain here today. Look it up if you want. Here is a wiki page. It is an outdated, confusing, and unnecessary system that never really made sense, but it exists. For whatever reason. So I knew this would be a documentary I could easily agree with and I would rather not get visibly upset while waiting in line to watch a movie, surrounded by slightly familiar strangers.

If the government was really dysfunctional, the national parks would be closed. Oh wait. That did happen.

This one is narrated/hosted by Mo Rocca, known for his work on The Daily Show, so it was a natural fit for him. Most of the film focused on Indiana, home to some of the strictest election laws in the country. Which this film also dealt a lot with. Democrats, Republicans. People who wanted Voter ID laws, people who want every vote to count, and hey, he also talked to some actual Electors.

It was all very comical, as one would hope given the star.

But at the same time, it focused a whole lot on not electoral college stuff, and more election in general. Which is okay, but I would have enjoyed a lot more if I ended up learning something useful about it. An okay documentary if you had to waste an hour and a half in a line with strangers. But not too great.