I watched these movies back to back, which made for an interesting contrast. Both are set against the backdrop of political and social turmoil in the country, both stories are centred upon cults of personality for their chosen subjects. However, the Dylan film uses the politics of the day merely to set the time and place, the music is presented as a literal travelling circus meant as a distraction from important real life problems. Of course, NWA's music was a intended as an encapsulation of the real world, and was entirely reflective of their environment. Dylan is a fascinating and befuddling character. Each evening he dresses up as a half-zombie, half troubadour clown, constantly looking worn down by living a rock star lifestyle. But when he hits the stage he breathes fire, projecting an intensity and purpose every bit as lucid and intimidating as what NWA were doing.
Between the two Martin Scorcese directed Dylan docs, I preferred "No Direction Home" by a wide margin. Many rock fans knew next to nothing about the folk scene of the 50's and 60's, other than the fact that Dylan was a part of it. That doc turned the scene into a living object filled with colourful characters and impassioned live performances. The interviews in "Rolling Thunder" are a mix of real and made up characters, and the faux-documentary aspect left me confused rather than amused. It's interesting to see the likes of Joni Mitchell and Roger McGuinn caught in Rolling Thunder's orbit, tagging along with the tour and jamming with Dylan in their downtime. And as I already mentioned, the main strength of the doc is its many outstanding stage performances. Even Dylan admits at the end of the doc that the tour meant nothing and accomplished nothing, it was a fun thing to do at the time, but didn't have a broader cultural impact and was a money loser to boot.
"Straight Outta Compton" goes the extra mile in its quest for realism. The camera frequently catches its subjects at close range, it's almost like you're watching a live Go Pro feed from a person who was standing in the room at the time of the action. Indoor scenes are dimly (and grimly) lit, scenes of violence are appropriately chaotic. I think the story arc leaned too far into "Behind the Music" territory, searching for a fall and redemption that wasn't really there. Dre and Cube were far more successful and relevant after leaving NWA, Eazy E floundered but still made a bundle of money off of Ruthless. I don't know all the details, but was Jerry Heller any more corrupt than the average music exec? The artists are always the last ones to get paid, I'm not excusing it, but Heller is clearly cast as a uniquely evil villain of the project whereas the moral failings of the NWA members are largely glossed over or ignored (Cube's anti-Semitism, Dre's domestic issues, E's promiscuity). For the most part I enjoyed the movie for the same reasons I enjoyed, say, Anton Corbijn's "Control", in that it brilliantly reconstructs a bygone era and makes you a fly on the wall for moments that fans have longed to see.
No comments:
Post a Comment