For three days in August of ’69, the small New York town of Bethel hosted the biggest party of the century. The “Aquarian Exposition of Peace and Music” drew near 500,000 free spirits happily dazed and confused in the midst of the Flower Era. Easily one of the largest gatherings of music lovers in history, Woodstock was a generation’s way of expressing their disillusionment with their elders, the government they ran and the ultimate example of how life would be if America’s youth ran the show. None of the above is captured in Ang Lee’s newest film, “Taking Woodstock.”
This movie is not about the involvement of The Who, Carlos Santana, Jimi Hendrix or any of the legendary musicians who took the stage in that one magical weekend. This film is not a fictional account of a few hippies and their epic experiences at the concert. Instead, this movie is a biopic of Elliot Teichberg, played by Demetri Martin, the mellow comedic genius behind Comedy Central’s “Important Things with Demetri Martin.”
Based off Teichberg’s book “Taking Woodstock: A True Story of a Riot, a Concert, a Life,” the film tells the story of Elliot, a struggling interior designer and artist who finds himself caught up supporting his Jewish immigrant parents and their hotel business. When the bank threatens to foreclose their “resort,” Elliot searches desperately for a means to save his parents. Luckily, a town called Wallkill recently denied a permit for “a bunch of hippies” to host their music festival. Seeing this opportunity, Elliot jumps at the chance to host the festival on his neighbor’s farm (with a notable performance from Eugene Levy of “American Pie” fame) in their small town of Bethel, NY. The film is an account of how Woodstock came to be through Elliot’s eyes, the interesting people he meets and how the whole experience helps him grow as a person.
In his first major role, Demetri Martin gives audiences a sub-par performance, showing he doesn’t yet have what it takes as a leading actor to take on the role of such a damaged and confused person as Teichberg. There are multiple scenes that yearn for more emotion from Martin, but all he offers is the same stone-cold face that could express a litany of feelings. Sometimes this coldness benefits the character. But when it matters and the audience is looking for some emotional gratification, Martin’s performance falters.
The supporting cast is decent, especially from Henry Goodman (“Colour Me Kubrick: A True…ish Story”) and Imelda Staunton (“Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix”), who play Teichberg’s father and mother respectively. Emile Hirsch’s (“Speed Racer”) performance is wasted as the underdeveloped Billy, a recently returned Vietnam vet haunted by flashbacks seeking the meaning to life. We only get to know him on a shallow level, and it would have been great to see the film delve into his character further,
The most disappointing aspect of “Taking Woodstock,” however, is director Ang Lee (“Lust, Caution”). The movie is littered with underdeveloped or unnecessary characters such as the aforementioned Billy and Michael Lang (Jonathan Groff, “Pretty/Handsome”), the hippie Woodstock organizer.
From a technical standpoint, we see the same Lee mechanisms as always, such as his tendency to include multiple frames of the same or concurrent scenes on one screen. He did it in 2003’s “Hulk,” and he does it to nauseating effect in “Woodstock.”
However, his decision to film some shots with Super 8 and old-school Bolex cameras was genius. The grainy, low quality of this film provides an authentic feel to make some of the scenes actually resemble Woodstock footage.
“Taking Woodstock” is a movie whose cup runneth over with nostalgia. For those who didn’t live it, don’t let this movie educate you. What you see in Ang Lee’s film may strike you as fiction or Hollywood exaggeration of what it was like when 500,000 people were crammed in a few square miles. Maybe to like this movie, you just had to be there.
2 1/2 out of 5 stars.
