Friday, January 14, 2011

Woodstock (dir Michael Wadleigh, 1970)

Responses (400 word minimum) to Woodstock. Focus on themes, or specific scene shots, or some other aspect of the film or its social, cultural, musical context. Due by the end of Tuesday.

21 comments:

  1. Michael Wadleigh’s documentary Woodstock was not only an artistic masterpiece it set the standard for all music documentaries the succeeded it. The cinematic simplicity conveys such a world changing concept that, much like the festival itself, it leaves a supreme legacy. The film definitely causes the viewer to question if they are witnessing fact or fiction. There is no script, no trick photography, and the details were not embellished upon. It is as raw and as pure as the spirits that witnessed and took part in it firsthand. Woodstock, both the film and the festival, was a masterpiece that unfolded as naturally as a fresh bud waking up to greet the morning sunlight.
    The culture was at such a drastic crossroads that only something “biblical” could bridge the gap. When Swami Satchidananda spoke to the crowd he materialized the importance of this festival and its absolute necessity. Our society at that time was not only a polarized divide but the American image in the eyes of the world was one not to be desired. Something had to be done to lay these negative feelings to rest; something electric. Images of innocence ubiquitously flooded the scenes to effortlessly convey that spirituality and peace go hand in hand. From the children running around to the peace sign clad nuns an unavoidable theme occurs. We are all, in fact, one. Woodstock brought out the best in humanity and allowed the culture at the time to take stock of the current status in America; and to question it.
    The split screen imagery in the film exemplified the duality that society was facing. Blacks against whites, young against old, us against them; society at the time was in such a state of tension and opposition that the youth of America craved an outlet, a voice. During Woodstock the director brought these adversaries together. It represented the answer; to not find differences but to find common ground and to compliment each view; not to negate it. To answer Joan Baez’s heartfelt folk song which rallied around protest, The Who galvanized the stage. To pay homage to preceding culture Sha Na Na enthusiastically executed their song, “At the Hop”. The beautiful part about this is that without giving a speech or holding a debate, a solution came to the surface through music; and the audience of the film can benefit from this lesson too.
    Concert goers may have arrived in search of sex, drugs, or rock and roll or for a soul searching spiritual awakening. The citizen’s of Bethel may have had vocal apprehensions and fears and the producers may have faced incredible odds and harbored doubts. However, no matter the motives to make the voyage to Bethel, New York one this is certain. The attendees may have gone to see the artists initially, but by the end of the first day it was apparent that the artists came to see the attendees.

    ReplyDelete
  2. In the summer of 1969 half a million people came together in Bethel, New York to completely immerse themselves in some of the most important music of the decade. There are several themes floating around Woodstock: unity, peace, anti-war sentiment, the ‘60’s counterculture, drugs, revolution, and so many more; but I find that the most important theme is the most basic one: the gathering of mass amounts of people to celebrate a common love: music.
    Since Woodstock there have been a number of music festivals, though none can ever compare. The most notable modern music festival is Bonaroo which has become more of a cheap excuse to take drugs, and less about the music. Of course drugs were heavily involved during the festival, which is shown in the film, but as more of a side note, they were not as idolized as they are today.
    When planning Woodstock, Michael Long said that he expected, at the most, 200,000 attendees, no one expected over 500,000 people to show up, especially the financial backers who ended up turning the festival into a free concert. The fact that the backers would give the go-ahead to potentially lose millions of dollars just to give the people free music speaks volumes about the time and the people. It showed that the people's love for the music was more important than the money.
    In the film the mere fact that people came together to celebrate the music moved grown men to tears. Director Michael Wadleigh frequently focused on the crowd and you get to see just what kind of people the festival attracted. Some may call the attendees the counterculture of the '60's, others, including the attendees themselves, called them freaks, however Woodstock attracted not just the “social outcasts” but people from all walks of life, from hippies to traditional families and even a group of nuns. Though all these people may not have associated with each other outside of the festival they could find something in common in the music.
    Through his camera work, Wadleigh shows not only the audiences respect, but his as well for the musicians. When the director shows the crowd you see the whole audience watching the artists with complete awe and admiration. Another notable technique Wadleigh uses is that while the musicians are playing, he doesn't just use little snippets of their songs, he shows entire songs which displays an unique style of appreciation for the musicians.
    Along with respect for the music, there must also be a show of gratitude for the attendees who endured harsh weather, displeased locals, and bad acid just to see the bands play. In the middle of the festival there was an intense storm that would have discouraged most concert-goers today, but instead of letting it get their hopes down the crowd saw the positive side in it and stood firm during the rain, remaining ever-faithful to the music.
    You could write about the other themes Woodstock explores like love, pacifism, rebellion, or the reckless abandon of it all, but no matter what it is, it's all in the music.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wadleigh documented an epic music festival. The biggest music festival Bethel New York had ever seen. This sleepy vacation spot turned into ground zero for five hundred thousand plus, of music and love fueled people. It was great watching it unfold. Wadleigh’s use of the split screen which showed the building of the stages on one side, and the thousands of people arriving on the other gave you a sense of anticipation watching it all build up to one of the most notorious concerts in American History.
    It was apparent that all the people were there to rock, and express themselves. The bands were epic. One of the most interesting parts of Woodstock was that there were so many types of music represented in the event. With musical statements coming from rock all the way to folk. Yet, somehow it all managed to mesh into a huge melting pot. People were there to gather, listen to music and basically love each other. The fact that some of this was drug induced did not seem to matter. This was a festival of unity, peace, acceptance, music and youth. People were often shown looking out for each other. Tents were set up for people who may be having bad trips. When a person came down he or she helped the next guy and so on. It is still referred to today as an epic festival and what is almost always noted about it, is that it was massive and peaceful.
    Woodstock was more than just a huge concert filled with youth, music, drugs and love. It was so phenomenal because of what was going on in the outside world politically which made the festival so unique and memorable. This was one of the most politically charged times in American history. There were strong opinions about the Vietnam War, race, and sexual expression. This was a revolution of the youth of America. Woodstock became known for peace and love, a statement the youth of America were making while so many adults were war bound. The Vietnam War was in full swing and there were political folk musicians and speakers. They all had a right to their opinion. And Woodstock was the perfect venue for it. Just the fact that five hundred thousand people could be in one spot in such a controversial time in history with no violence is mind blowing, and I would venture to say unrepeated.
    The cinematography of this documentary was also notable. It was shot with detail, up close and personal. It was almost as if you were on stage with the artists performing. The energy of the festival translated well in this film. The bands had immense energy. Even when the weather changed for the worst and it began to rain, people seemed to still be having a blast, making the best of whatever came their way. If peace and unity were the goal, then tons of great bands playing in one spot was just the cherry on top.
    This film documented Mike Lang and Arty’s vision to unite people though music. A festival of all festivals. The Woodstock festival was celebrated then, and will always be celebrated as a festival of peace, unity, love and rock n’ roll history.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The documentary on Woodstock could best be summed up in the single image of the black singer with no teeth, Richie Haven. He wore his soul right out there on his sleeve, he tore at the guitar and with his long fingernails, he ripped out a song everyone in that audience felt, and sung along with. This one character called all of the many different wide eyed audience members into an almost religious union, their common creed being their common plight, and their common call being their united desire for peace and love and harmony. And when he sung for them to clap, they did, and they did more, their unity becoming powerfully evident. The crowd had been sitting before he asked them to clap and as he asked them to join in further, they did that and more, they stood in a wave of people. It is truly powerful to behold.

    Richie Haven wasn’t handsome. Some might even say the opposite. And though that sounds shallow, and perhaps rude, I think it was intentional of the camera to focus on him so intently. To heighten his imperfections, to show in all absurd honesty where he falls short by so many standards of society both then and probably true of all time. They did this because when he sung, he was transformed into more than the shallow idea of being handsome, he was transformed into the almost dangerous moving and inspiring figure we all revere and yearn to find. He was honest, he was raw, he was intense, and most importantly he was an embodiment of truth. The documentary honed in on this, one image to bind all of the images, one sound that summed it all up. This, to me, was the backbone of the documentary. This was the summary of the documentary’s overall theme.

    A common theme throughout the documentary was the theme of working together. Elsewhere, this theme was carried mostly by visual means. The camera showed a rag tag collection of skilled and unskilled workers standing side by side building the stage, putting up cranes, rolling out fences and guiding crowds. Everyone had a place, and no one seemed upset on camera. Instead, everyone seemed more than willing and more than ready to pitch in and lend a hand. The people who came to this event were portrayed as less of a problem, and more of as a group of nice young people. Those very words often said throughout the documentary by various people both in town and on the farm. The ultimate showing of this, and the unity of so many diverse people, is shown by three Nuns walking down a muddied path, one turns and gives the peace sign. Unity, even in diversity.

    I’m not sure if the documentary is portraying the whole truth, or just what they want us to see, but it portrays a truth they see and wonderfully so. The whole piece pulls together, binds the themes and shows us a powerful image of a time in American history that shoved our nation just a little bit further down the road of development. The documentary itself is almost as powerful as the event, perhaps, in some ways. The music and the images, the themes, and statements on that style of life and approach to social ideas, all come together in one harmonious and inspiring piece. Very enjoyable and very interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wooodstock was the foundation for what music festivals were in the past and still are today. It was the first major festival of its kind, with over a half a million people in attendance it sparked an epidemic for audiences and performers alike. It was set in the time of the Vietnam war and at the time seemed to be ground zero for people to protest the violence and fighting and show the world that people can live amongst each other in peace. Michael Wadleigh's documentary of Woodstock came out a year or so after the event and gave those who did not attend for whatever reason an inside look at what it was all about.
    One aspect of this documentary that I found particularly interesting was Michael's use of the split screen video where there was two different events going on each on different sides of the screen. In past movies and documentaries that i have watched I have never seen this done to the extent this director uses it and I really enjoyed it. I feel there may be different reasonings for why he does this. The first thing I noticed about it was toward the beginning while the stage is being set up it flips to split screen, simultaneously showing the workers constructing the stage and the party goers traveling in and lining up at the entrance. I thought it was really cool to see two completely different viewpoints of how these people experienced Woodstock.
    As the film goes on we see this split screen emerge again but this time its hard to reference the times they are taking place. It seems to me like there is just so much usable material taken from this event that it just makes sense to show two events at the same time. A lot of this is just raw footage of hippies expressing themselves in all kinds of interesting ways.
    My last interpretation as to why the split screen was utilized is to capture the emotion of the audience and performers at the same time. It really does a great job showing how the performers feed off the audiences emotion and in contrast how the audience reacts to the music.
    Woodstock seems to be the founding father of the hippie peace movements through music festivals and I feel this documentary was and excellent depiction of how it really was to be there at that time.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The 1970 documentary Woodstock cultivates an encompassing depiction of a three day music festival in Bethel, New York on Max Yusgar’s 600 acre dairy farm. Directed by Michael Wadleigh, the film sheds light on not only the most powerful influential music of that time but also the collective ideologies of the counter culture aimed at peacefully dismantling main stream 1970 America.
    The film lures the viewer into the film with the beginnings of a great music migration. Showing the open plains of the dairy farm, the domestic means of upkeep by the locals, the production crew and the thousands of migrating spectators, one can only wonder if the expectations of the future days to come are truly fully anticipated historically. Wadleigh enhances these interactions through brilliant creative mediums. The split screen technique accentuates the great magnitude of the means necessary for such an event to take place. The spoken word segments create an intimate awareness between the event and the viewer through personal connections of all involved. The energies are beginning to rise and the viewer can feel it.
    With helicopters flying above and thousands collecting below, the musicians appear overwhelmed and enticed. The message of love, peace and anti-war is evident throughout. This profound wave of peaceful energy is the pumping force in the director’s choice of performance selection. The opening act of Richie Havens’s “Freedom” is evidence of this motive. In correlation, even the spoken word between each segment offers cognizance in the succeeding music’s message. For example, Joan Baez expresses the frustrations and concerns with the imprisonment of her husband before bellowing her chilling take “Sweet Chariot” and “Joe Hill”. The imagery and sound stimulations have a clear incentive. This film is documenting a revolution of peace and as well as creative expression of that revolution.
    Showing colorful clothes, colorful vehicles and colorful personalities depicts this creative force to be the representation of that peace. These open souls intake the issues of the surrounding present day and search for solutions with no discernment of guilt or fear. These bold characters embrace every creative notion as a possible solution. Even the organizers denounced the requirement of paid emissions declaring the emancipation of music to all. The spectators are seen strutting, lounging and playing with each other in a communion of historical magnitude.
    In contrast and conclusion, the film appears to offer the viewer the opportunity to articulate all the components of its entire for the individual observer: a drug induced chaos or a true revolution.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Michael Waldleigh’s 1970 documentary on Woodstock better known as “Hippie Fest” was one of the greatest and or the greatest captured music documentary’s of the past present and future generations. Waldleigh captured everything from beginning plans all the way to the after math of the three day festival in ways that were unique and unheard of at that time with the introduction of the “split screen” where it shows 2 different things on one screen to capture not only the performer but also the crowd reacting to the performer . Acts varied from first gig the Credence Clearwater Revival to local Bob Dylan and also the Beetles , the doors and many others consisting of a total of 32 acts.

    Woodstock brought many different races , ethnic groups, religious groups, and ages to New York including nuns of all people. Now who would have thought? The people of Woodstock were free spirited unbridled souls coming together for one cause and that’s peace. Many of the festival goers were teens and had saved up and skipped town to come to this concert hoping for the best and to catch a glimpse and take part of this once in a life time experience. People were so different at that time , didn’t have a care in the world living each day as its your last .

    Many drugs introduced their selves at the concert such as marijuana and cocaine and also acid. One part that stood out to me was when an announcer came on the intercom and said that there is acid being passed around that is bad acid but it is not poisoned acid be cautions if you are going to use.

    When the concert started there was an admission price but when people started piling in they had to make it a free concert tearing down all the security fences that were put up days before.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Woodstock…. So many things can be said about this event and the film documenting it. Woodstock happened in 1969, a time when our country was in political turmoil. What the creators of Woodstock set out to do was bring people together in a harmonious peaceful manner while celebrating our one universal love… music, and I’d say they were successful in their attempt. But in the documentary something I feel that is widely over looked is the fact that Woodstock was a drug culture and people went there to very much so do drugs and listen to music not so very different then the festivals of today. Sure the documentary clearly capture the essence of the 60s and what they were about but you cant tell me that everyone in that sea of people really knew or gave a damn about what was happening around them or to their country.

    Lots of people can go on and on about how the attendees of Woodstock did something, that they made a stand in those three days, but the same things that were going on then are still happening now, and people are still fighting the good fight. Music rocks and so do drugs and ya if your in the mood alittle bit of culture is nice (this can be seen in the film when some of the concert goers practice yoga). I think that’s what the film really set out to do is bring awareness to new and interesting cultures to the masses as well as making money.

    Hell if I know what these people felt, their world was a different world than mine… people now are depraved and ruthless and this is evident with Woodstock 99. I can see in this film that it appears people cared more back then or at least some did… something like Woodstock was a new idea almost a new form of protest… that’s the difference from Woodstock and the festivals of today. At Woodstock they seemed to think they were making a difference. When you go to a festival like Bonnarooo your not changing shit your there for the drugs and the music.

    I feel like the film is a time capsule of what once was. The attitude and experience of Woodstock doesn’t exist anymore. I really enjoy how the film was shot. The film is shot in a very hands on experience and not so much in your usual Hollywood manner. It feels like your right in the mess of it all, walking around enjoying music and stopping to talk with new and interesting people. The split screen was a great idea; it gives you two views of the event. One of my favorite is when the cut screen goes in effect and shows you two sides of Woodstock, the event organizers scrambling to get stages and stands set up while on the other side of the screen you see the festival goers arriving and going threw their own kind of hell to get in to the show. In all this film set out to show people a different side of life and I think they accomplish that, it’s was something never seen before and something that can never be replicated

    ReplyDelete
  12. The documentary Woodstock: 3 Days of Peace and Music directed by Michael Wadley captures the spirit of the American youth in 1969. Woodstock was a three day music festival that was held in Bethel, New York in the summer of 1969. During the three days of the festival, thirty-two acts performed outdoors in front of 500,000 people. Originally the concert was supposed to be on a small scale where concert goers were supposed to pay for a ticket for entry, but when people from all over the country started showing up and it became clear that many more people were going to be showing up than expected, they let everyone in even if they did not have a ticket. The primary investors lost money in the production of this project, but that was ok with them because it was about much more than money. In the documentary you can see that Woodstock was about people coming from all over to immerse themselves in the rock and roll music of their time. It was about freedom, unity, peace, anti-war sentiment, spirituality, and love and drugs. The biggest meaning of all was coexistence. The festival brought together all races and all cultures for a fun and peaceful time. America’s youth at the time wanted to separate themselves from the older generations and prove to them that they could make it on their own and that peace was possible to achieve. During the three days of the festival they never once had to deal with violence from the very large crowd. There were no police, no troubles, and no hassles. Everyone worked together and made the best of every situation, even when it started raining. At one point they had to close the New York Freeway because of all the people that showed up, so they had to fly in the food and set up kitchen booths so people could eat. There were forty-five doctors who volunteered their time for no pay. Everyone pulled together to share and care for their fellow human beings. There were three performances that stood out the most to me; Joe Cocker’s “A Little Help from My Friends”, Country Joe McDonald’s “Next Stop is VietNam”, and Jimmy Hendrix’s own version of the Star Spangled Banner on electric guitar. These three performances stood out the most to me because they got the biggest reaction from the crowd. While these songs were being performed the crowd would stand up and cheer loudly and sing along. Watching it gave me a sense of hope and happiness. They made powerful statements and I can only imagine what it must have felt like for those who were there in that crowd. I’ve always wished I could have been alive during that time because my father was born in ’51 and my mother in ’54 so I grew up listening to this music. I love this music. It was a wonderful documentary.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The documentary Woodstock: 3 Days of Peace and Music directed by Michael Wadley captures the spirit of the American youth in 1969. Woodstock was a three day music festival that was held in Bethel, New York in the summer of 1969. During the three days of the festival, thirty-two acts performed outdoors in front of 500,000 people. Originally the concert was supposed to be on a small scale where concert goers were supposed to pay for a ticket for entry, but when people from all over the country started showing up and it became clear that many more people were going to be showing up than expected, they let everyone in even if they did not have a ticket. The primary investors lost money in the production of this project, but that was ok with them because it was about much more than money. In the documentary you can see that Woodstock was about people coming from all over to immerse themselves in the rock and roll music of their time. It was about freedom, unity, peace, anti-war sentiment, spirituality, and love and drugs. The biggest meaning of all was coexistence. The festival brought together all races and all cultures for a fun and peaceful time. America’s youth at the time wanted to separate themselves from the older generations and prove to them that they could make it on their own and that peace was possible to achieve. During the three days of the festival they never once had to deal with violence from the very large crowd. There were no police, no troubles, and no hassles. Everyone worked together and made the best of every situation, even when it started raining. At one point they had to close the New York Freeway because of all the people that showed up, so they had to fly in the food and set up kitchen booths so people could eat. There were forty-five doctors who volunteered their time for no pay. Everyone pulled together to share and care for their fellow human beings. There were three performances that stood out the most to me; Joe Cocker’s “A Little Help from My Friends”, Country Joe McDonald’s “Next Stop is VietNam”, and Jimmy Hendrix’s own version of the Star Spangled Banner on electric guitar. These three performances stood out the most to me because they got the biggest reaction from the crowd. While these songs were being performed the crowd would stand up and cheer loudly and sing along. Watching it gave me a sense of hope and happiness. They made powerful statements and I can only imagine what it must have felt like for those who were there in that crowd. I’ve always wished I could have been alive during that time because my father was born in ’51 and my mother in ’54 so I grew up listening to this music. I love this music. It was a wonderful documentary.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The documentary Woodstock: 3 Days of Peace and Music directed by Michael Wadley captures the spirit of the American youth in 1969. Woodstock was a three day music festival that was held in Bethel, New York in the summer of 1969. During the three days of the festival, thirty-two acts performed outdoors in front of 500,000 people. Originally the concert was supposed to be on a small scale where concert goers were supposed to pay for a ticket for entry, but when people from all over the country started showing up and it became clear that many more people were going to be showing up than expected, they let everyone in even if they did not have a ticket. The primary investors lost money in the production of this project, but that was ok with them because it was about much more than money. In the documentary you can see that Woodstock was about people coming from all over to immerse themselves in the rock and roll music of their time. It was about freedom, unity, peace, anti-war sentiment, spirituality, and love and drugs. The biggest meaning of all was coexistence. The festival brought together all races and all cultures for a fun and peaceful time. America’s youth at the time wanted to separate themselves from the older generations and prove to them that they could make it on their own and that peace was possible to achieve. During the three days of the festival they never once had to deal with violence from the very large crowd. There were no police, no troubles, and no hassles. Everyone worked together and made the best of every situation, even when it started raining. At one point they had to close the New York Freeway because of all the people that showed up, so they had to fly in the food and set up kitchen booths so people could eat. There were forty-five doctors who volunteered their time for no pay. Everyone pulled together to share and care for their fellow human beings. There were three performances that stood out the most to me; Joe Cocker’s “A Little Help from My Friends”, Country Joe McDonald’s “Next Stop is VietNam”, and Jimmy Hendrix’s own version of the Star Spangled Banner on electric guitar. These three performances stood out the most to me because they got the biggest reaction from the crowd. While these songs were being performed the crowd would stand up and cheer loudly and sing along. Watching it gave me a sense of hope and happiness. They made powerful statements and I can only imagine what it must have felt like for those who were there in that crowd. I’ve always wished I could have been alive during that time because my father was born in ’51 and my mother in ’54 so I grew up listening to this music. I love this music. It was a wonderful documentary.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The documentary Woodstock: 3 Days of Peace and Music directed by Michael Wadley captures the spirit of the American youth in 1969. Woodstock was a three day music festival that was held in Bethel, New York in the summer of 1969. During the three days of the festival, thirty-two acts performed outdoors in front of 500,000 people. Originally the concert was supposed to be on a small scale where concert goers were supposed to pay for a ticket for entry, but when people from all over the country started showing up and it became clear that many more people were going to be showing up than expected, they let everyone in even if they did not have a ticket. The primary investors lost money in the production of this project, but that was ok with them because it was about much more than money. In the documentary you can see that Woodstock was about people coming from all over to immerse themselves in the rock and roll music of their time. It was about freedom, unity, peace, anti-war sentiment, spirituality, and love and drugs. The biggest meaning of all was coexistence. The festival brought together all races and all cultures for a fun and peaceful time. America’s youth at the time wanted to separate themselves from the older generations and prove to them that they could make it on their own and that peace was possible to achieve. During the three days of the festival they never once had to deal with violence from the very large crowd. There were no police, no troubles, and no hassles. Everyone worked together and made the best of every situation, even when it started raining. At one point they had to close the New York Freeway because of all the people that showed up, so they had to fly in the food and set up kitchen booths so people could eat. There were forty-five doctors who volunteered their time for no pay. Everyone pulled together to share and care for their fellow human beings. There were three performances that stood out the most to me; Joe Cocker’s “A Little Help from My Friends”, Country Joe McDonald’s “Next Stop is VietNam”, and Jimmy Hendrix’s own version of the Star Spangled Banner on electric guitar. These three performances stood out the most to me because they got the biggest reaction from the crowd. While these songs were being performed the crowd would stand up and cheer loudly and sing along. Watching it gave me a sense of hope and happiness. They made powerful statements and I can only imagine what it must have felt like for those who were there in that crowd. I’ve always wished I could have been alive during that time because my father was born in ’51 and my mother in ’54 so I grew up listening to this music. I love this music. It was a wonderful documentary.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Woodstock, the name undoubtedly conjures up many different thoughts for many different people. Woodstock the film takes the viewers dreams and makes them tangible. This documentary film by Michael Waldleigh allows for a insight into the 60’s counter culture and into the music that was the catalyst for so many. Waldleigh does a great job of taking all the music and events of a entire revolutionary weekend and funneling them into about four hours of film. I really enjoyed the way he captured the intensity of musicians playing. Starting with Richie Havens capturing his raw emotion uplifting 200,000 plus people from their grassy seats. Personally I believe Waldleigh got incredibly lucky by having Richie start the festival. Such a powerful voice and so much emotion is in his performance and if the audience wasn’t able to feel it at the start of the scene, one can understand just how much the music means to a generation fighting to keep the peace while struggling to keep their freedom, when Richie Havens is seen strumming his guitar and lip singing, while walking off stage and showing his dedication in the sweat that falls off his face.

    Michael Waldleigh and his team do a fantastic job storytelling with the use of split screens. His use help the audience to get a feel of how overwhelming ever aspect of the festival truly is. For example, near the beginning of the film he is interviewing the local towns people and and getting their reaction to the festival and it attendee’s. While listening to the testimonials of the residents he splits the screen into two sections and in the second he shows aerial footage starting at the stage. The cars and the people seem endless and these shots really help to speed the story along while not loosing any of the substance. Waldleigh and his crew have done an amazing job presenting the festival in every aspect and showing the audience what fueled that show and its music. The key was interviews, the interviewed everyone from audience, producers, and even just the towns people. Woodstock the film does exactly what I think a documentary should do. Present the situation to the viwer and allow them to make their own educated decisions. Overall a great work of art but you don’t need me to tell you that, the academy award it won speaks for itself.

    ReplyDelete
  18. jason elery

    The three-day Woodstock music festival in 1969 was a landmark event of the 1960s peace movement, and Michael Wadleigh's “Woodstock: 3 Days of Peace & Music” is a brilliant artifact of rock & roll history. It's much more than a chronicle of the hippie movement, however; this is a film of historical and social importance, capturing the spirit of America in transition, and the Vietnam War protest was fully expressed through the music of the time.

    I thought Michael Wadleigh did a superb job of portraying the nation’s sentiment to the hippy counterculture by interviewing several of the local town’s people before the festival had begun. In one scene, one young hippie was having a revealing conservation with a local man and his family where it became evident that neither of them could relate to each other because of a clear generational gap and cultural differences. The footage of the exchange was a very clever way of putting an emphasis on the disconnect between mainstream society and the new counterculture we all know and love, the hippies.

    The spirit of peace and unity at Woodstock is captured early on in the movie. Footage taken of a crowd of over (half a million strong) expresses the heart of the event. From skinny-dipping hippies to accidental overdoses, to unpredictable weather, mid-concert childbirth and bad LSD, the reflections of the festival participants give an honest sense of family that is shared by all including the performers. After several interviews with some of the festivals hippies, creators, and performers, we begin to see that Peace and Love really is the atmosphere and not just hippie talk. I was shocked to learn in interviews with some of the organizers that none of them were very concerned with making a profit, or losing millions of dollars because they felt that Woodstock was a message of love and peace that could change the world. WOW!

    Woodstock showcased some of the greatest artists of “our” time and many that are still relevant today but impact of the social and political message of the music becomes much clearer in this documentary because of the way it is presented, with the thoughts and feelings of the real life people that were actually there.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Michael Wadleigh’s documentary Woodstock In a time when music videos have reached epic high-tech proportions twenty-four hours a day with the flick of a switch it was a delightful afternoon for me as I sat back to re-visit a piece of high-life history with the jaundiced eye of the political cynic. I loved this video. I loved the music. Indeed, I studied the undercurrent, with the interest of political science as I've been studying it, in hopes of gaining more insight, and I did. I also had fun, and I'm sure I will have fun every time I watch it. Why is it that everyone looks so YOUNG? (sigh) From Arlo Guthrie to Richie Havens to Joan Baez to Carlos Santana to Janis Joplin to Sly and the Family Stone ah, youth is wasted on the young! And the side interviews and shots of young people wading their way through the crowds, and the over riding theme of peace, love and anti-war...anti-capitalism as well, which more recent Woodstocks have not been able to copy. Woodstock I still has much to teach us, it's not just a walk down memory lane.I have become a huge fan of the music of that era. While I love listening to the music of Jefferson Airplane, Janis Joplin, Joni Mitchell, Jimi Hendrix and such, what I have always longed for is a chance to actually watch them perform. While seeing them perform live is highly unlikely (seeing as how Jimi and Janis have been dead for 30 years and JA did their big reunion a decade ago), watching this documentary is about the best chance I'm going to get. While I would have loved to have been there in person, one thing that I love about this movie is the view that you get. From seeing Ritchie Havens' foot tapping during "Freedom" to watching the expressions on the faces of JA's Grace Slick and Marty Balin as they traded leads on "Won't You Try/Saturday Afternoon"), you definitely have the best seat in the house when you watch this movie. I watched the entire video in one sitting, glued to the t.v. the whole time (except when I got up to dance to Santana's "Soul Sacrifice"). From the interviews with the townspeople to the interviews with the hippies (my fav was the one with the stoned guy as he walked out of the Port-a-Sans) to the incredible music, I think this documentary captures the event very well. The only complaint that I have is not having more footage of the live performances. I would have loved to have seen Sweetwater at their best or Grace Slick belting out "Somebody to Love" or "White Rabbit". Maybe someday they'll release separate video versions of the individual sets played by the artists...that'd be awesome!

    ReplyDelete
  21. I love how the rating explodes with fire while the national anthem is played by electric garter, leaving the title standing alone. Personal this said to me that the film makers are trying to break away from being classified in the rated R. I think they understand that the film must be rated like this but they don't want to the rating to put the viewer in a bad state of mind. The old man’s overview of the concert is a great tool for foreshadowing. It shows how much hard work and planning went into Woodstock. Many people had to come together for Woodstock to happen blacks, whites, old and young. It’s an oxymoron to see productive hippies. I also love the transitional sense when Bob Hite is playing. Michael Wadleigh does a great job showing the pasting of time. The transition began in the day with bubbly music, this show how much fun they were having. As the night went on the mood of the shots changed along with the music. Instead of an upbeat number, it switches to a more dramatic tone because there was much work to be done through the night. Wadleigh used the spilt screen very well also. He displayed two different time lines, but each of the shot has a linking theme. This is a perfect example of the way to truly use split screen. I noticed that the split screen in this film was also used as a transition to get from one performance to the other. My favorite words of the film were during a split screen cut when the men are discussing a way to limit the amount of people, one of the men refers to Woodstock as an influx of humanity. I strongly agree with his chose in words because Woodstock was much more than a music Festival it was an influx of humanity.

    ReplyDelete