Who Killed Nancy?

On October 12th 1978, Nancy Spungen was found dead, slumped against the bathroom wall of room 100 in the Chelsea Hotel, New York City. Nancy was the girlfriend of Sex Pistols base guitarist, Sid Vicious. Barely coherent from drug abuse and other excess', and with a history of violence and unruly behaviour, Vicious was quickly charged with the killing and then promptly died of a drug overdose before it went to trial...

Case closed, police happy, but many knew that there was far more to tell...

Director of this piece is one Alan G Parker, a self confessed punk rock fan and a man who has made something of a living out of writing about punk and Sid Vicious in particular. Alan is the same age as myself, someone who was in the first year of senior school when punk rock exploded on to the British public, and just like me, it impacted to the point that we still wear our punk ethos like a badge of belief more than honour. Does that make him biased for finally presenting facts about the events surrounding Nancy's death? Does it make me foolish or in biased league with him for trumpeting this picture? All I can personally say is that many many punks from back in the day have always been baffled as to why no in-depth investigation was forthcoming after Vicious left the mortal coil and thus closed the Nancy Spungen case. Here, finally you are presented with evidence and interviews that will at least give you the chance to make an informed decision. Rest assured, tho, that I'm fully aware that Sid may well still have done it, but presented with the facts, both medically, and incredibly by unreleased police evidence, it appears unlikely - but that's just me of course!

If many outside of the punk rock circles actually care is another thing? But if you are reading this then one would like to think you have an interest in the subject at the very least. Already the first reviews on IMDb point to the film being amateurish, hello! Do you know what the punk mantra is? No sane person who knows their onions with British punk rock could claim Vicious was a hero, we all know he was limited in ability, prone to cruelty, and by and large a cretinous (acting) persona. He however holds a place in many people's hearts as the guy who defined a look, with the iconography being hard (impossible) to ignore. Whilst the fact that with his, and Nancy's death, actually signalling the end of real punk rock as many of us knew it, any story involving him is obviously of special interest to the discerning British punk rocker.

It's just nice to see a film prepared to show what a dope he was whilst simultaneously giving credence to us punky cover up conspiracy theorists? And then some.

The film plays out more as a story of Sid and Nancy with out the gloss of a Hollywood production, in fact the subject of who actually did kill Nancy is merely a strand in an all encompassing story. Do not be fooled into thinking this is an hour and half of detective work, because it's not. We are taken thru a time line that fleshes the bones of these punk rock skeletons. Those in search of a Sex Pistols soundtrack should also be advised that it's not here, we do however get a fabulous and rich soundtrack by the likes of The Buzzcocks talented guitar man Steve Diggle, and honestly it's worth a listen.

It's no Filth and The Fury, and it's far removed from the arty veneer provided by Alex Cox's wonderful, but ill portrayed, Sid and Nancy (1986). But Who Killed Nancy? is not only an essential watch for old punkers like me, but also for those who like to have a peek at the other side of the coin once it has been tossed. 9/10

"Just another dead junkie" - the laconic verdict of the New York police, who seemed not too interested in six lots of fingerprints around the walls, all of them belonging to known felons, and who simply charged Sid Vicious with the drug-fuelled murder of his girlfriend Nancy Spungen.

To the weird cast of interviewees who drive this sordid narrative, that is a vile slur on the sensitive and caring Sid of their increasingly dim and distorted memories. But if you die at 21, you soon morph into some kind of martyr-legend, so we are supposed to keep a straight face while the two of them are seriously compared to Romeo and Juliet. Near the beginning, a voice-over laments "Underneath that exterior, there was a really nice guy." Further in, we catch an example of this niceness, when he tortures and strangles a cat, which then has the impudence to release bodily fluids in its death-throes.

Sid's own death is given a lot too much prominence, considering that it is technically off-topic, having occurred a few months after Nancy's, and this is a sign of the shapeless direction of the film. It is mainly an impressionist picture of the Sid and Nancy story, showing that she was effectively murdered not by a person but by a particular culture, where the decencies are ridiculed, crime and debauchery glamorised, and all limits and restraints shoved aside. Significantly, the film is often padded-out with blurred images of slow-moving shadow-figures of uncertain gender, just drifting about in some limbo.

That is at least symbolic of the chaotic last months of their life together, holed-up in Manhattan's Chelsea Hotel, following the break-up of the Sex Pistols. The Chelsea, as presented, takes bohemianism to giddy heights - dealers everywhere, little groups meeting on the stairs, total strangers wandering in and out of rooms.

It may sound like a schoolboy's dream, this life of non-stop hedonism, but nobody could have called Sid and Nancy a happy couple. If the film reveals anything, it is just how well-earned was the label 'Nauseating Nancy'. Superficially, you could start to find her vaguely attractive in the pop-eyed Molly Parkin style, but a closer look reveals a terrifying madness. Women loathed her piercing voice, and just wanted to get away. And although she claimed she would make a good manager for Sid, that was not too likely, considering her habit of dropping banknotes all over the reception area without noticing. Indeed, some say it was a particular pile of banknotes, found missing from their room, that pointed to the killer, supposedly a mysterious gay dealer who thought he'd been swindled.

But any attempt to explain it in terms of likelihood or logic is doomed, against the general background of narcotic blundering about that clearly left Nancy bleeding to death, slumped awkwardly on that bathroom floor. 'Who Cares Who Killed Nancy?' might have been a better title. The cops knew what they were talking about when they said they had better things to do.

This is an intriguing murder mystery chocked full of junkies and punk rock stars. A must see!!

I've long outgrown the phase of my life when I was deeply fascinated by Sid and Nancy but I have read Nancy's mother's biography And I Don't Want to Live This Life about Nancy's schizophrenia and troubled adolescence, as well as seeing the ubiquitous Sid and Nancy fictionalization of their strange short lives. So I walked into this doc with pretty low expectations, curious as what it would even be about.

It's a fair representation of the underground pre-punk and punk scene in New York City by the people who lived through it, which is honestly probably the most compelling aspect of Who Killed Nancy? Rather than solving the mystery of the title person's 1978 murder. Let's face it - most of us bought into the story that an angry, mentally ill, and addicted Sid Vicious "accidentally" committed manslaughter in the middle of an argument accompanied by domestic violence.

But now I don't know, there are so many details that never came to light publicly until this documentary was made, apparently. It tracks because it was difficult to solve murders 40-50 years ago compared to today and no one really cared about a couple of "has been" junkies living in the latter days of the Chelsea Hotel.

This film is structured around the question of who killed Nancy Spungen, companion to Sid Vicious. The weakness of the film is that the filmmakers have not structured the film in a rigorous way to make their case questioning the conventional wisdom on the matter.

The actual effect of this lack of strict focus, is paradoxically, a masterpiece in capturing the character and spirit of both the people involved, and of the music scene that they came from.

Punk was, and is, purposely confrontational, and many punk documentaries are effectively impaled on these clashes; stuck on the 'spikes' of punk, and never really capturing a complete image of either the people or the scene. In setting out to chronicle a death, this film has actually captured that life.

It would probably be foolish to imagine that any film can actually tell you all about punk; who has seen a documentary that actually even had all of the important bands in it? This film is not all of punk by any means, but it is one of the best documentaries to have come out of it, and that is what really matters.

If you are focused on the film from the perspective of the mystery however, this film is still a great success, at least if you would like to make up your own mind. Most films of this sort would have the filmmaker smacking away with remark after remark, all up and down the length of the film, like a cook tenderizing a piece of meat. In this case, it seems like such remarks had to be pasted onto the end of the film, but since both sides of the evidence are presented relatively naturally along the course of the film, the effect is to create overall, an unusually unbiased presentation. This documentary is rough around the edges, but it is great.