Reviews from Customers
3 Days of Mud and Multitudes
What an experience watch "Woodstock: The Director's Cut!" For the entire 3 hours, 45 minutes of this movie, I was completely transfixed by this spectacular Academy Award winning (Best Documentary, 1970) film, with its (then) ground-breaking multiple image, amorphous widescreen formats. I found myself swept back to 1969, the summer of my 18th year, wistfully longing to be there with the rest of those 500,000-plus "hippies", listening to the music, partying, being part of that special three-day weekend... As this fully restored DVD version of Wadleigh's masterpiece shows, it was indeed a special event! This film documents the efforts of a group of musicians, entrepreneurs, and financial backers, who worked for over nine months to bring to fruition the history-making rock 'n roll music festival that took upstate New York by storm on August 15-17, 1969.
With a sure eye for the finest detail, Wadleigh captures hundreds, perhaps thousands, of everyday little incidents, both positive and negative, that made up this special musical event.
Using the multi-image format I mentioned earlier, and widescreen formats of varying aspect ratios (the only way this film can be seen without sacrificing substantial portions of it to television's confining 1.33:1 aspect ratio), Wadleigh presents his viewers with powerfully eloquent vignettes:
The twenty-mile long traffic jams and the interminably long lines of pedestrians hiking to the site of the concert... The reaction of Bethel's local residents, a few outwardly irate, some mildly irritated, but the vast majority very receptive to the half-million strong horde of "hippies" descending upon them... The "scenes from a disaster area:" just how do you provide the basic necessities of sanitation, medical care, and food for a large city camped in a hay field? And what happens when those services are suddenly and arbitrarily stopped?... The countless numbers of people openly passing around joints and pipes and bongs, all getting mightily "wasted," while the bands played on... The sudden downpour and almost instantaneous submersion of the multitudes in thick, gooey mud, while the bands tried to play on... and many, many more...
And through it all, the heart of the film: the music, always the music. Pure rock and roll as it was meant to be... hard edged, lyrical, harmonious, boisterous, folksy, raucous, raunchy, promoting peace and goodwill, almost religious in its fervor...
...Richie Havens passionately strumming his battle-scarred acoustic guitar, all the while soulfully belting out his song "Freedom..." Joan Baez' gentle "organizing" ballad "Joe Hill..." The Who kicking up their heels: "See me, feel me, touch me, heal me," the opening lyrics of "We're Not Gonna Take It Any More," from the rock opera "Tommy..." A perspiration soaked, gravelly voiced, youthful Joe Cocker putting every ounce of his body and soul into his incredible "With a Little Help from My Friends..." Jimi Hendrix' incredible, spectacular, pyrotechnical rendition of "The Star Spangled Banner" and "Purple Haze..." and many, many more...
I have two complaints about "Woodstock: The Director's Cut." First: the sound quality leaves a lot to be desired. Throughout the film, there seemed to be a lot of background hiss and crackling. This was probably caused by the equipment Wadleigh used while making the film; however, modern technology still should have been able to eliminate most background noise. My second complaint: The varying aspect ratios (anywhere from 2.35:1 to 1.78:1) make viewing the movie on a standard television a bit difficult. Some images seem very small even on a 32-inch TV! Still, widescreen is the best format to use when viewing this film.
It matters not whether you're sixteen or sixty; whether you've never been to a rock concert in your life, or you're a grizzled old concertgoer like me; "Woodstock: The Director's Cut" is a film not to be missed!
Great Movie¿bad extended version
I remember seeing this movie when I was a teen and it practically changed my life. I love this movie because not only did it gave us great music, but it documented real people who attended this incredible event. The cameramen went around filming anything at random. Of course, what was interesting was preserved on the final cut. It was a unique event, and Woodstock the Movie captured its essence and spirit. The multi-angle filming is inventive and clever. It literally compressed a 6 hours movie into 3. There was so much to see and tell, how could one frame capture it all?
Now about this director's cut: I was disappointed. I thought it ruined the original's free flowing spirit. Canned Heat is a very good band, but this in-your-face image of the singer was annoying. Who wants to see his sweaty mustache while he's blasting out the blues? Jimi Hendrix's extended piece wasn't that good either. There were some parts of his jam that was monotonous. When Jorma Kaukonen of Jefferson Airplane sang the blues, it was a waste of movie time. It didn't seem to represent the 60's generation. It wasn't even a classic 60's song. I thought the director added more blues for the sake of appealing to the modern viewers. Instead, he destroyed this "time capsule." The director should had added more footage of the people rather than adding musicians singing blues. It just doesn't seem like the 60's anymore.
jefferson Airplane and janis joplin were good though. I was happy to see them included. But sometimes it is not a good idea to improve upon a masterpiece. It was good as it is, that is why it won the academy award. It was special. Instead of extending this great movie, the director should create special features with more music, interviews, footages, commentaries, etc. There was absolutely no need to repaint his masterpiece. It's like adding more into the Mona Lisa because the painter got greedy and wanted it to be even better than it already is.
For this, I have to give this dvd director's cut 3 stars instead of 5.
A Document of a Feeling
It's inevitable that arguments will take place, as they do in these reviews, about what the meaning of Woodstock really is -- many have evoked peace and anti-vietnam sentiments and a great social movement, while others take a more mocking tone and dismiss it as a kind of upper middle class fantasy camp, a sewing of the oats before beginning corporate life.
Not having been alive in the 60s, I only know what I've read and been told by those older than myself, but I'd guess that the first assessment is a bit idealistic, while the second is unfair, and that the truth is "somewhere in between," to fall back on the cliche.
What the film does successfully document, I gather, is what it felt like to be young and hippie and excited about music and social protest and all the things Woodstock at least appeared, at the time, to represent. The feeling is what's embodied in the filmic techniques, the scenes chosen, and the performances themselves, and this makes Woodstock a successful documentary.
The 60s were many things, and no film could capture all of them. Actually, in spite of the fact that it allows itself to get very much caught up in the excitement, I think the film has its moments of ironic distance and sobering reality, such as the port-a-san scene (particularly the extended shot of the average joe cleaning the things).
For a good counterpoint, I recommend the Isle of Wight festival film, which captures the darker, more selfish side of the hippie generation.
