Seen: May 20th, 2007
Format: DVD
Rating: 5
I went to the an alumni function last weekend; a trip to the Art Museum. During that trip a friend reminded me of the von Bismarck quote which is paraphrased "If you appreciate the law or sausage, you should never watch either being made". He suggsted that this might be extended to include the making of art in some cases.
This film seems to agree with him.
There's a fundamental problem with this film for me: I don't think Daniel Johnston is a genius. I know that many people do. I know that they revere him for his music and art and consider him revolutionary and perhaps even a future legend. I just don't agree. Neither of us is right, this is just a matter of opinion. I feel the same way about Kurt Cobain.
If you know about Johnston and appreciate his art, this film may be very compelling to you. The filmmakers care about him, and have gone to great pains to document his life to date. They've taken great care to present it objectively and have culled a large volume of historical media to create the film. It stands as an accurate representation of Johnston's artistic existence.
If anything, the film may be too objective. It's almost clinical in its presentation at times. While this shows a high ethic standard in the project, it also makes it more difficult to connect with the subjects. As a non-fan, this film would never draw me in. As a fan, it may appear sterile and cold, perhaps missing entirely the feelings of the world that drove Daniel in various directions.
Contributing to this is that fact the film is primarily a montage of historic media. There are hours of film shot by Daniel and his friends. Audio diaries that he made as his life progressed. Archival footage from TV and various performances, sketches, paintings and other artwork. Assembling all this history intercut with interviews, imbues the film with a authenic feel that is hard to deny.
But ultimately, this is a film about an artist's continual battle with his own sanity. That he is ill is not in question. This isn't about "friends and family" intervening to quash artisitic sensibilities. This is about a man who has placed himself, friends, family and the general public in physical danger. This struggle, to filter the madness while allowing the creativity to flow through is a very real one in Johnston's case, one he fights daily.
In the end, for me, this becomes a documentation of insanity rather than an artist's life. In the case of Daniel these are the same thing, but lacking the ability or interest to appreciate his work, it falls short for me.
The Good: Frighteningly accurate and complete
The Bad: Excruciating detail
The Ugly: The distinct correlation between genius and mania
