movieman-187

I really liked this movie and what it shows not only about the new york art scene of the 1980s and Basquiat, but about how fame and success can easily lead to destruction. However, at times the movie is hard to watch because the sound is TERRIBLE! I don't understand how clearly talented film makers could take so little time and have so little care about the sound. They clearly took lots of time and care in interviewing many important and interesting players within the scene and Basquiat's life, but often I fell out of the movie simply because i was struggling to understand the bad audio, then starting to wonder why the audio was so bad. Some interviews had clearly exposed clip on mics and that was so much preferred to the other interviews where the audio was either distorted, rustle or clearly just a camera mic. I mean, even the interview done on the analog video camera in the 1980s sounded so much better than half of the interviews that feature prominently in the film.

I want to recommend this movie highly, as I feel its story has a lot of continuity to the artists of today, but i also have to strongly warn them that the audio is so bad that it might not be worth the struggle.

Please! please! Please! Documentary film makers out there, care as much about the sound as you care about the image and content. All three are needed to make a movie work. Nothing is more frustrating than suffering through an interview solely because the sound is bad. Learn something about sound. Care about your sound, or hire some one who does!

I saw a special screening of this film, and special it was. I can't remember a time at the theater that was more wasteful than the time I spent with this movie. It is laughably bad. In fact, most of the audience was laughing at the "dramatic" twists and turns that occur in the film. They are all super-cliche and come out of left field. The acting is universally bad, the cinematography silly and pointless (watch for the 3 minutes in the 3rd act where the movie decides to become an extended music video), the music is uninspired, the sound design flat, and the script....well lets just say that scripts like this don't come along to often. I want to give this film credit for two things. One: The opening steadicam shot, taken directly from "Boogie Nights" really sets up the movie well and made me think that this could be something of quality. Two: The first race (and I am not giving anything away here...) and crash are really well done; however, the film never progresses from these opening moments and just keeps getting worse and worse until you wish that you were shot in the face. 2/10

In this animated short, Goofy plays a teacher trying to reach his pupils. Most of it consists of goofball gags and some slight humor with the way kids of the 50s viewed school. The real reason to watch and study this short however, is for its implicit (and attempt to find humor in) school violence. In the short, "Billy" brings a virtual arsenal of weapons to school, including a gun, slingshot and hand grenade. Goofy eventually, lightheartedly takes these away, disposing of the grenade in the trash can. Billy goes on to cheat off a students paper by "holding him up" with a water pistol, and blows up the school. In the end, "Billy" is seen writing on the chalk board (as does Bart Simpson 40 years later), "I will not bomb the school again." This is another example of Disney naivete and really seems frightening in todays culture. 8/10