Erin StapletonFetch Me My Gun, Love
August 9th 2008 14:08
"Gonzo: the life and work of Dr Hunter S Thompson" Alex Gibney (2008)
When this many people are willing to kiss this much long-cremated arse, it's liable to put me off someone. A little bit. Hunter S Thompson. I named my cat after him, for fucksake, but this sort of worship, that most of the interviewees in the film are guilty of, is just stupid. I get embarrassed for sycophants on their behalf. Plus, you know, despite their best efforts, he comes across, like so many 'great' people, as a selfish, irritable misanthrope on a personal level, mostly because he couldn't stand the willful ignorance of others, but, he had a strong sense of justice on a global scale.
Watching this documentary made me feel similar to the way I did when I read "Kingdom of Fear". And I know how this is going to sound, but I am so embittered by it. The no-fun aspect of being part of my generation is overwhelming sometimes. Yes, Thompson had his heart broken as he saw the "high water mark" of the 60s in San Fransisco and watched the tide roll back. Saw the failure of something good, on a fairly epic scale. But at least he had that opportunity to be part of something when the potential for change for the better was still there.
And I'm not going to acknowledge those corporate, 'within the system' little initiatives for 'social responsibility', because that's very different from something that's visceral, alive, everywhere, and is people at your door, and down your street. It was there. No matter how ill-defined or hypocritical, and no matter how misguided, there was still some hope back then, or, you know, so it would seem. And not to be overly dramatic, but I can't really see that anymore. Stuff like what was happening in 60s will never happen again. And certainly not in my generation. Of swine. (Ha ha.) I feel cheated. Prove me wrong.
So the film. Was really, mostly a fairly stock-standard approach to the po-pomo documentary. Very staid. It had the Steadman drawings, some archival footage, some photos. It has interviews with Hunter S Thompson's friends and both his ex-wives, but, it was more than a little impersonal. It was like the film was confused about whether it wanted to concentrate on his books, his invention of 'gonzo' journalism, or his life. It flitted between the three without showing any real insight or depth in any area. It mentioned people like Oscar Acosta (Dr Gonzo) without elaborating and really, that's more interesting than Johnny Depp as surrogate Thompson, reading out his writing.
There's no mention of the Rum Diaries phase of Thompson's life, which, again, is a fairly major omission. The film briefly mentioned the 'lull' in Thompson's writing after both the 'Fear and Loathing' books and refused to really acknowledge all the books he'd written after that time. The film began with a mention of how September 11 inspired Thompson to write again, but didn't come back to that except to draw cursory comparisons between George W Bush and Richard Nixon.
However, I have just read the 'Hell's Angels' book, so I really appreciated seeing Sonny Barger interviewed, sitting there, an old man, with one of those fake voice box things for when you have throat cancer. And, I've read "Fear and Loathing: Campaign Trail '72" so it was also kind of exciting seeing what George McGovern looked like, and seeing footage of the actual candidates in action, during those moments in history that I've read about. Lots of, 'so now I see...' type things. But if one hadn't read those books, and wasn't interested in American politics, I can imagine the film being rather dull. And for those who had, it didn't tell us anything we didn't already know - it just put faces to names.
6.5/10
When this many people are willing to kiss this much long-cremated arse, it's liable to put me off someone. A little bit. Hunter S Thompson. I named my cat after him, for fucksake, but this sort of worship, that most of the interviewees in the film are guilty of, is just stupid. I get embarrassed for sycophants on their behalf. Plus, you know, despite their best efforts, he comes across, like so many 'great' people, as a selfish, irritable misanthrope on a personal level, mostly because he couldn't stand the willful ignorance of others, but, he had a strong sense of justice on a global scale.
Watching this documentary made me feel similar to the way I did when I read "Kingdom of Fear". And I know how this is going to sound, but I am so embittered by it. The no-fun aspect of being part of my generation is overwhelming sometimes. Yes, Thompson had his heart broken as he saw the "high water mark" of the 60s in San Fransisco and watched the tide roll back. Saw the failure of something good, on a fairly epic scale. But at least he had that opportunity to be part of something when the potential for change for the better was still there.
And I'm not going to acknowledge those corporate, 'within the system' little initiatives for 'social responsibility', because that's very different from something that's visceral, alive, everywhere, and is people at your door, and down your street. It was there. No matter how ill-defined or hypocritical, and no matter how misguided, there was still some hope back then, or, you know, so it would seem. And not to be overly dramatic, but I can't really see that anymore. Stuff like what was happening in 60s will never happen again. And certainly not in my generation. Of swine. (Ha ha.) I feel cheated. Prove me wrong.
Hunter S Thompson
So the film. Was really, mostly a fairly stock-standard approach to the po-pomo documentary. Very staid. It had the Steadman drawings, some archival footage, some photos. It has interviews with Hunter S Thompson's friends and both his ex-wives, but, it was more than a little impersonal. It was like the film was confused about whether it wanted to concentrate on his books, his invention of 'gonzo' journalism, or his life. It flitted between the three without showing any real insight or depth in any area. It mentioned people like Oscar Acosta (Dr Gonzo) without elaborating and really, that's more interesting than Johnny Depp as surrogate Thompson, reading out his writing.
There's no mention of the Rum Diaries phase of Thompson's life, which, again, is a fairly major omission. The film briefly mentioned the 'lull' in Thompson's writing after both the 'Fear and Loathing' books and refused to really acknowledge all the books he'd written after that time. The film began with a mention of how September 11 inspired Thompson to write again, but didn't come back to that except to draw cursory comparisons between George W Bush and Richard Nixon.
However, I have just read the 'Hell's Angels' book, so I really appreciated seeing Sonny Barger interviewed, sitting there, an old man, with one of those fake voice box things for when you have throat cancer. And, I've read "Fear and Loathing: Campaign Trail '72" so it was also kind of exciting seeing what George McGovern looked like, and seeing footage of the actual candidates in action, during those moments in history that I've read about. Lots of, 'so now I see...' type things. But if one hadn't read those books, and wasn't interested in American politics, I can imagine the film being rather dull. And for those who had, it didn't tell us anything we didn't already know - it just put faces to names.
6.5/10
| 28 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Timothy Powell
subjective determinist
Bad men
meditations while in genetics lectures