In the Court of the Crimson King: King Crimson at 50

As a lifelong fan I have been waiting for a good documentary about one of my favourite bands - or any documentary for that matter. Again a cliché is proven right on the (easy) money: good things come to those that wait.

I never thought I would get this close to this most hermetic of bands and especially not to the Hermit In Chief: Robert Fripp. This film proves once and for all he's not (only) a cantakarous old sod, but also a deeply funny and intensely emotional man. And as a guitarist, one can only stand in awe of his dedication to his craft.

Seeing a whole host of band members from the recent to the distant past speak of the band that in every instance changed their lives - for better, for worse or both. It is truly heartwarming that Bill Rieflin, who during the making of this documentary had stage four colon cancer, is made into a focal point all on his own. Not only the life of a band, but also the lives of the band members come to light.

Even if you have never heard of King Crimson, you will be entertained by this well constructed documentary, filmed unflinchingly up close, and the quality and hilarity of the interviews, conducted in such places as on a stage, in a dismal van and at a candlelit dinner table. Deep earnestness and light-hearted taking the piss are around every corner. Just like in life, really.

A worthy tribute: irreverent, spiky and funny. So do take a seat in this Court and bow your heads to the majesty of King Crimson.

This promises to be much more (a clever history) than it is (a fawning backstage tour of a current show), and had opportunities to be a) a deeper history of the band and b) wittier. Anybody who has watched Robert Fripp's home videos (of him and his wife covering a wild assortment of rock and pop tunes) knows he has a sense of humor, likes rocknroll music, and can be quite amusing and self-deprecating. The documentary focuses (much of this is connoted by editorial choices, as we frequently see Fripp walking away to do something more important) on the peeved, obsessive Latin-professor aspect of Fripp, which, while real, isn't the whole enchilada, and without being complicated by the rest of his experience and personality, the impatient-professor schtick is interesting for about 70 seconds. The film-makers lined up most of the surviving members of King Crimson from the last 50 years and got them narrate about 1.2% of their experience of the history of the band. The film spends more time lavishing its camera's eye on, I am not kidding, roadies and tech-men tinkering with equipment backstage for a current show, as they field inane questions, and mutter responses as good-naturedly as they can in the circumstances, rather than on any sort of evolutionary (or crisis-based) story of the bands called "King Crimson." About 30% of the film is such backstage or empty-house tedium--this doesn't develop into a concert movie. So there are at least two main categories of "lost opportunity" here: this isn't a concert film; this isn't a history of the band. Yet the film-makers also lined up, among many members of Crimson over the years, Ian McDonald and Michael Giles, the original reed and drum section of the band--their appearance gives hope that origins and musical anecdotes (how was the song that gave the film its title made, e.g.?) are forthcoming. McDonald and Giles may not have another opportunity to narrate the early history of the band. They left the band after its first two Lps to make a funky, major-key (in contrast to Crimson's dark heft) record (still famous; it was frequently sampled in hip-hop), a classic of its 1970-moment, and unmentioned here. Nope, no time for history from these players. Pete Sinfield, the band's original lyricist is on camera for about 30 seconds and obviously could have been a trove of witty history; after a funny note on Greg Lake (the band's original singer, pre-"Emerson, Lake, and Palmer") as a young man (the only mention of Lake in the whole documentary, though the band's current singer was obviously hired largely because he can do a spot-on Lake imitation), Sinfield vanishes; John Wetton, the singer and bassist of what I think is the most interesting (mid-1970s) version of the band, is not mentioned. Bill Bruford and Adrian Belew (former long-term band members), are, gratefully, allowed to speak at some intelligent length, but again, in bits that convey the quality of working with Fripp, not how their versions of the band came together. I have yet to see any film that explained how this band evolved, somewhat like a transformer toy, throughout the 60s, 70s, and 80s. In 1972, e.g., there were two completely different versions of Crimson (one in the spring, on tour in the USA, and another, the Bruford-Wetton version, that toured England in the fall) of the band, both quite good, and both entirely different, though they played many (not all) of the same songs. The documentary lavished too much attention on the stage-preparations of this current, grandiose cover-band version of Crimson (a three-drummer, + keyboard, + etc. Version of the band) as though it were a church of Fripp service, while it could have narrated more history about each significant version of the band.

Unlike most of the intended audience of this doc, I am not a fan. However I have experienced this band live after being given a free ticket. Reading up on the band it seems they have a cult following, particularly from those who were in their teens during the 1970s. They are one of the most well known bands from the Prog Rock era so wonderfully sent up in Brian Pern.

In concert I found them a difficult listen not knowing any of their tracks. Its obvious that some and by this I mean a small minority seem to get something from this band most do not. And that is kind of the problem. I have no difficulty with difficult music as I love artists such as Autechre who would leave your average KC fan in confusion. The problem with this band is it seems to be about reaching a peak experience through virtuoso playing of what are now quite arcane instruments. There is no progress in terms of sonic palate.

This doc aims to shed some light on what goes on behind the scenes in terms of the functioning of the band, the bands relationships, its history and live experience. It manages to explore some of these better than others. What it does not do however is delve particularly deeply into the psychology of Robert Fripp. Using my background however its clear that Fripp displays many traits of obsessive compulsive personality. Which appears to drive his unfulfilled drive towards perfection, his rigid rules and anger when these aims are frustrated. Of course perfection doesn't exist so its always a mission deemed to fail. There is also a need for control over others so its no surprise that relationships with band members have fractured. This doc however does not seem to ask the question of Fripp of whether he is actually aware of his personality flaws or whether he has made any attempts to change these, for the better of his emotional life and those around him. Which was baffling. Particularly when its so obvious what the issues are and that they are easily addressed. It seems this documentary was more keen to maintain the image of Fripp as some type of troubled genius that nobody can fathom. Is that because the film maker is too much of a fan?

If anything its the other band members past and present who make the biggest contribution, although it also seems they do not have a basic grasp of Fripps personality, some appeared damaged as a result.

Thankfully there was not much in the way of music, its a mainly talking heads affair which will suit non-fans more, as the music tends to sound like the soundtrack of a European low budget horror movie. I am thinking Goblin and Suspiria of course.

As for the KC peak experience, I doubt too many will get that watching this doc. While fans may initially warm to it, its actually quite surface level, there aren't many stand out moments, apart from one scene I had to actually check the video I was watching hadn't frozen. This one scene however explains why an in depth or revealing doc about Fripp will never be made. Its because he exerts so much control, particularly over himself, that at no point will he allow others to see below the surface. It would take a doc in which others who know him and free to talk will he be revealed. Talking of which, where was Toyah?

Leave your expectations at the door and go in with an open mind. If you are not already a fan of the band, King Crimson, then this should be easy enough. If you are and you don't already know that this is how to approach their work then I'm not sure what to say. Some interesting "totally missed the point" reviews here. I will say no more about that.

If you want a typical rock-doc about this album, that album, this producer, that sound engineer, this tour, that break-up, go elsewhere. It's already out there. Start with youtube. If you want someone to reassure you overtly that the band you love is the best, or that Robert Fripp is a compositional genius who does not suffer fools glady, go elsewhere. We already know these things.

If you want a truly fascinating, touching, illuminating, baffling, sad, funny, moving and deep dive into the mind of the true artist, artists who put music above all else, and not without personal cost, then go see this movie. Rent it, buy, it, badger your local art-house cinema to arrange a showing. Bring your friends. The smart ones.

This is not glitzy, it is not glamourous, but it is candid and honest. The shooting style is minimally invasive, totally immersive stuff - you know, like when wildlife biologists go camp out with gorillas for months on end until the gorillas start to ignore them and carry on with life as normal. Amies is literally shooting from the hip most of the time here and also asking all the dumb questions (and sometimes bearing the brunt of the fallout for doing so) on the viewer's behalf.

This is a diamond in the rough. It is about music, not showbiz. It is about the transcendent places great music can take you, the dedication and diligence of artists bearing the weight of trying to achieve those heights on a nightly basis for the audience. It is about people. Extraordinary people.

I knew nothing about Crimson King.

I had listened to a little bit of their music and it told me nothing, so I never paid any more attention.

After watching this film, I can proudly say I know very little about the facts, names, impact, etc of the band.

I feel I know what drives the band, what they are trying to do, what cost it comes at, and even maybe what they get out of it.

And I quite like that was the take of the film. I can learn all the data in Wikipedia if I'm so inclined; I can listen to their recordings any time I want; this film fills a different gap.

I'm still not keen on what they create and how they dress it up. But it doesn't matter. This is not a film for fans, it's a film for people who care about a craft whichever that craft might be.