I just finished this, and really enjoyed it.
It was interesting you brought this up, as a friend of mine mentioned pretty much the same thing. What I get from both is:
Dylan never liked being told what his place was. In the doc, he's pretty candid about his childhood, going to New York, and the effect it had on him as a performer. When the doc get's to the point where he is finding his voice, and writing his own songs, he actually starts to disapear from his own documentary. I don't think it's as much a mystique thing being portrayed, although it's more than possible, but a discomfort in knowing that any commentary on yourself as an artist is a very loaded question. You say how talented you are, and your an ego maniac asshole, you are self depreciative of your work, and you still come off as a snide asshole. It reminded me of a press conferance with Francis Ford Coppola on the "One From The Heart" DVD, where he is being challenged by the press about his film. Coppola is talking big about technology, and how it's going to change the way films are being made, but when asked specifically if HIS movie is going to bring this change, his response is an almost embarrsed "Gee, I don't know, it's art, it is what it is." Dylan makes no bones about his intent: write songs he felt he needed to write, and sing them. What everyone else got out of it was out of his hands, but he never seemed to change his "song and dance" man stance as an entertainer. This is never going to satisfy people who believed in the image, a image Dylan deffinately enjoyed playing with, but an image all the same. To me, in the current interviews, he comes off as being pretty honest.
The Beatles Anthology (which I also really enjoyed, watching NDH reminded me that I have to pick the Anthology DVD) is a different matter. Paul McCartney has no problem with letting you know they were the best band out their and how important they were to the times, with Ringo backing him up about how magical it was the whole time. As a result, on a whole, you get the more personal aspects of what made the Beatles tick, as opposed to Dylan , where compatriots do the talking. The one thing anthology is missing is Lennon. He was the one Beatle aside from George who never really seemed to buy into the whole "Beatles are the best band ever" mentality. His counter point would of been facinating to what I saw as a very McCartney skewed documentary. A great doc, for all the performances, but a little skewed all the same.
It was interesting you brought this up, as a friend of mine mentioned pretty much the same thing. What I get from both is:
Dylan never liked being told what his place was. In the doc, he's pretty candid about his childhood, going to New York, and the effect it had on him as a performer. When the doc get's to the point where he is finding his voice, and writing his own songs, he actually starts to disapear from his own documentary. I don't think it's as much a mystique thing being portrayed, although it's more than possible, but a discomfort in knowing that any commentary on yourself as an artist is a very loaded question. You say how talented you are, and your an ego maniac asshole, you are self depreciative of your work, and you still come off as a snide asshole. It reminded me of a press conferance with Francis Ford Coppola on the "One From The Heart" DVD, where he is being challenged by the press about his film. Coppola is talking big about technology, and how it's going to change the way films are being made, but when asked specifically if HIS movie is going to bring this change, his response is an almost embarrsed "Gee, I don't know, it's art, it is what it is." Dylan makes no bones about his intent: write songs he felt he needed to write, and sing them. What everyone else got out of it was out of his hands, but he never seemed to change his "song and dance" man stance as an entertainer. This is never going to satisfy people who believed in the image, a image Dylan deffinately enjoyed playing with, but an image all the same. To me, in the current interviews, he comes off as being pretty honest.
The Beatles Anthology (which I also really enjoyed, watching NDH reminded me that I have to pick the Anthology DVD) is a different matter. Paul McCartney has no problem with letting you know they were the best band out their and how important they were to the times, with Ringo backing him up about how magical it was the whole time. As a result, on a whole, you get the more personal aspects of what made the Beatles tick, as opposed to Dylan , where compatriots do the talking. The one thing anthology is missing is Lennon. He was the one Beatle aside from George who never really seemed to buy into the whole "Beatles are the best band ever" mentality. His counter point would of been facinating to what I saw as a very McCartney skewed documentary. A great doc, for all the performances, but a little skewed all the same.
I saw him live at Jones Beach in 1989 and he was horrible. I'd already expected this, having heard his voice deteriorate more and more with subsequent albums from the '80s, but man oh man, at least I'd like to recognize some of the songs. It would take several verses before I'd hear a word or two click from the muttering and then I'd say "oh - I guess he's doing 'Masters Of War'..."
