Every few years, a movie comes out that I know I'll find really unengaging, and then I end up watching it anyway, and, indeed, it's exactly what I thought it would be. I should trust my instincts.
Liked Leto though. Felt so bad for Paulo. Poor Paulo.
Even better than the first one. I've always imagined how weird it would be to interview a documentary subject from an overhead angle, and now that I've seen Paul Stanley answer questions lying down while being caressed by four groupies, shot from directly above, I don't need to imagine it anymore.
Spheeris recognizes a moment and pushes her subjects bluntly, often illuminating a big picture they can't see (or don't want to see). Interesting to note the Reagan era anti-drug…
I dunno, I thought this was great. He's one-upping himself visually and not even trying to go for emotion, which is where his films have often fallen flat for me. The levity lane plays to his strengths. And the same way it's striking when his camera breaks out of its locked off framings, it feels a little poignant whenever the film does go for a moment of pathos.
I'd rank the three big segments like this:
1. The first one…
There's definitely a missing angle. Others have said it better, but the film doesn't quite hit the economic and labor realties behind this subset of people. It's kinda present, off to the side of these great, human glimpses of an America I'm less familiar with. But it feels a little torn between the appealing possibilities of a life with no roots and a soft indictment of capitalism's wreckage. I don't think you can play Amazon apolitically. Still, it's pretty good!…
