After recently having viewed John Lennon: Love is All You Need, I can't help but feel a tinge of dissatisfaction with the documentary. I am vaguely familiar with the music of John Lennon and The Beatles; having been born in the early eighties and the younger sibling of recovering hippies; the music was rather enjoyable, but the band members themselves remained an enigma.I was hoping this documentary would have shed to light some of my curiosities regarding this once living legend.Unfortunately the documentary veers into a very strange direction as soon as mention of Yoko Ono is made.
The film has a very strong start and is rather entertaining and enjoyable.The archival footage featuring Lennon and The Beatles was very interesting and it was nice gaining some insight into the lives of these former giants. Seeing them being themselves and carrying on as regular people was very refreshing considering my only conception of them was nothing more than a bunch of drugged out rock stars.I genuinely did gain a lot more insight than I thought I would have taken from the film, but it would have been nice to see more on the bands cultural impact not only in England, but across the pond as well.
It was also enjoyable seeing and hearing from Lennon's former wife. I honestly was unaware of the fact that Lennon had been married previously and for such a considerable amount of time.Cynthia Lennon struck me as a very real and humble person who was not at all impressed with her husband's fame, but simply wanted to be with the man she loved.Mrs. Lennon's and thoughts also seemed very pleasant and uneventful of the events that occurred following the breaking of their union.
The documentary however does take a strange turn once Ms. Ono comes into the picture, and these events are also very reflective of the times Lennon and she were living in.The main focus from there on out seems to have become how Lennon changed drastically as a person, whether choosing different forms of artistic expression or becoming more reserved with his British sense of humor.I get the impression that the film became a smear campaign against Yoko Ono from there on out.The focus should not have been the changes she may or may not have brought upon John Lennon, but rather the positive influences she brought into the union and in his musical career. I don't feel Ms. Ono should constantly be seen as a scapegoat for The Beatles demise.She was merely a misunderstood person who happened along at an awkward moment within a talented man's life.
The documentary however does take a strange turn once Ms. Ono comes into the picture, and these events are also very reflective of the times Lennon and she were living in.The main focus from there on out seems to have become how Lennon changed drastically as a person, whether choosing different forms of artistic expression or becoming more reserved with his British sense of humor.I get the impression that the film became a smear campaign against Yoko Ono from there on out.The focus should not have been the changes she may or may not have brought upon John Lennon, but rather the positive influences she brought into the union and in his musical career. I don't feel Ms. Ono should constantly be seen as a scapegoat for The Beatles demise.She was merely a misunderstood person who happened along at an awkward moment within a talented man's life.
My main complaint against the documentary is that it does not seem to have been very well produced or thought out. The majority of the interviewees are not always named as they speak on screen, nor is their relation to Lennon disclosed.Cynthia Lennon for example is not referred to as Lennon's former wife, but rather must be deduced via context clues.This is very much the case with various other persons who appear throughout the film.
No comments:
Post a Comment