The Velvet Underground

'The Velvet Underground' is certainly artful and reverential to its subject. No stranger to music, Todd Haynes also made the fictionalized Bowie story 'Velvet Goldmine' (1998) and mysterious Dylan fantasy documentary 'I'm Not There' (2007)). Making the definitive VU documentary is something of a holy grail for film makers, but I'd say Haynes enjoyable film achieves its aims partially.

It's fair to say The Velvet Underground blazed the trail for punk and indie music 70s and onwards. Lou Reed, John Cale ... but so much more! Brian Eno famously once said: "Their first album only sold 10,000 copies, but everyone who bought it formed a band". For Haynes film, the music nerd in me would have liked more information about the various songs (titles, albums, dates, producers etc.), even art history like this needs its points of reference. I guess it wouldn't bother most newbies as info can be checked easily these days, but I'm old school and like films to organize and document their subject matter, too difficult to catch everything in the final credits.

If you are coming to The Velvet Underground for the first time, they were only together roughly 1966-1970 so their music isn't hard to navigate. Counter intuitively, tackle the studio albums in reverse order. Start with the 4th and final 'Loaded' (1970), great songs by Lou Reed as he contemplated a solo career ('Sweet Jane', 'Waiting For My Man', 'Rock'n'Roll'), then go back to their eponymous 3rd (1969), 'unplugged' beautiful achingly sad songs in a story cycle again by Reed ('Pale Blue Eyes', 'Candy Says', 'Beginning To See The Light'). The band's 2nd 'White Light/White Heat' (1968) is chaotic and avantgarde, but its song 'gems' shine through all the noise, Cale and Reed shared the songwriting duties but it was to be Cale's last as a band member ... and finally there's 'The Velvet Underground & Nico' (1967), legendary, but so much written about it already. Live album '1969' is a nice homage to Reed's guitar playing, and 'Live at Max's' is a very collectable if poorly recorded bootleg of the band late career. Happy exploration!

Nice to hear people like John Waters and Jonathan Richman among many others contributing to Haynes' film ...

Todd Haynes' artful documentary on the pioneering art rock band fronted by Lou Reed and John Cale takes almost 40 minutes before Reed and Cale even meet. Haynes doesn't use narration but he builds his movie with ample footage from the time period. He creatively makes the link between the avant-garde and the "underground" which sets the stage for the band to flourish.

By hooking up with Andy Warhol and becoming his 'house band', the Velvet Underground not only got attention, but it also guaranteed that film and still photography would document their every move. They never sold many records at the time, but their influence was profound.

The interview subjects range from John Waters to Warhol scenesters like Mary Woronov, to go along with the generous archive footage. It paints a vivid picture of the rise and premature fall of the group (Co-founder John Cale only appeared on the first two albums; singer Nico only on their debut). Reed, of course, became a rock icon as a solo artist, but, the band's impact stands apart as a singular achievement, something which Haynes captures brilliantly.

Oddly limited in scope. I knew it was a standalone two hour job but found myself doubting that- given the first half was given to pre-band. This was of course fascinating.

But we end up with a 20 minute breeze through the Doug Yule era and I adore those albums.

No reformation covered either.

Visuals wonderful - but bizarre sound mixing (at least for my experience anyway) which meant you couldn't hear the commentary over the music so I had to watch with subtitles on. Which gave an interesting experience in realising that "my" Velvets lyrics have subtle, distinct differences to those that are apparently true.

It was not the full three-sixty on the band, but centers on their sound in the Reed-Cale era and rather than spend much time on theory, it focuses on who Lou and John were as people in order to explain it, delving into the environment they lived and created in. It also eventually compares them to contemporaries, but again, here it prefers to compare who they were in attitude and emotion. When John and Lou split, when the band starts winding down, the movie also starts winding down. I'm fine with all that. Visually, I felt like it was interesting, but not mind blowing. Personally, I didn't need to it to be a visual masterpiece to be satisfying. I didn't need it to interview every former flat mate or girlfriend, I didn't need it to chase down every subplot in the band, I didn't need a happy ending. I wanted a piece on Lou and John and what made the band what they were. It's a two-hour piece on that.

The Velvet Underground: Documentary about the band and their artistic/social milieu. Many interviews, some bitterness fro Lou reed: "Andy Warhol produced The Banana Album in the sense that he was live in the studio when it was made". But y0u also see them together when Warhol was dying, friends again. Split screen is used to good effect, often using a loop of John Cale or Reed blinking when more info/clips are on the other half. Moe Tucker the VU drummer and sometime singer didn't like hippies, the West Coast or Frank Zappa. Demo tapes of Venus In Furs and Waiting For My Man plus many other VU songs. Great Music Social History film. Directed by Todd Haynes. 8/10.