Biopic About Jimi Hendrix

[westen44]

There is a new movie about Jimi Hendrix which has been around for a while.  It has already played in Canada and will be playing at SXSW in Austin, Texas soon.  I've known about this movie for quite a while.  I assumed it wouldn't get much attention because it's pretty much a low-budget indie film.  However, now that the director (John Ridley) has just received an academy award for another movie recently, it appears that the Hendrix movie itself will also receive more attention than it might have.  It's called "All Is By My Side."  All the reviews I've read are mostly positive.  Personally, though, I'm very skeptical about the movie.  There isn't any of Hendrix's own music (because the estate refused to cooperate.)  Also, John Ridley appears to be really focused on Linda Keith--at the apparent expense of Kathy Etchingham who was Hendrix's girlfriend in London.

Although Kathy's remarks aren't getting a great deal of attention, I think maybe they should.  According to her, Hendrix is shown as being violent toward her when, in fact, she says he was never violent at all.  I've read about one scene already in the movie in which Hendrix gets angry and both he and Kathy end up in the hospital.  According to Kathy, this never happened.  Nothing violent ever happened.  Kathy also says that the movie shows Jimi as being neurotic, indecisive, and needing way more guidance than he ever needed in real life. 

In Kathy Etchingham's opinion, John Ridley has taken her book about Hendrix and "twisted the facts to fit his own warped agenda."  She says "Mr Ridley has taken the story and turned it into a dull as ditchwater work of fiction while claiming it is a 'true story.'"

Of course, there is no guarantee that everything Kathy Etchingham says is completely accurate, either.  That's obvious.  But her objections should be noted.  I'm certainly noting them.  I haven't even seen the movie, obviously, and there is only so much I can know about it.  But especially considering all these objections I'm seeing by Kathy Etchingham, I do have some doubts about it.  This is what she says in a Huffington Post article:

"A lot of people will go and see it who have never read any of the biographies and they will think it's gospel truth," Etchingham warned. "I don't want it to fundamentally change history."

She has other complaints, but I'm only trying to focus on the basics.  For one thing the actor playing Hendrix is 38 at a time period when Hendrix himself was in his early 20s.  Also, Kathy says the clothes worn by the characters look like something from an Austin Powers movie, etc.  I doubt very seriously if I'll see the movie.  I applaud the effort of the actor portraying Hendrix.  I can see he did pour his heart into this.  But I've already read about too many inaccuracies to be interested in this movie.  The movie critics may love it.  But to me it would be like a Lincoln aficionado going to see "Abraham Lincoln:  Vampire Hunter."

[Pilgrim]

The way I look at it: if you're a Hendrix fan, go, and appreciate the film for what it is - don't nit-pick.  If you're not, pass.

For me - he's a big influence on guitar; he's been dead a long time.  Not that interested.

[westen44]

The way I look at it: if you're a Hendrix fan, go, and appreciate the film for what it is - don't nit-pick.  If you're not, pass.

For me - he's a big influence on guitar; he's been dead a long time.  Not that interested.

I may be a Hendrix fan, but I've also got a background in history.  I'm always interested in historical accuracy.  If someone is guilty of historical revisionism, I'm unlikely to go along with that.  If entertainment wants to distort to try to enhance something, that's just not my cup of tea most of the time.   I also might add that I tend to be a pariah among Hendrix fans because I also prefer to look at what he really said and did, whether it might look good or not.  That doesn't always go over well.  But that's neither here nor there, and has little to do with this movie.  My main point, to reiterate, is that I think accuracy is something which should be adhered to whether it's good PR, PC, or whatever it may be. 

[Pilgrim]

Historical movies must be generally disappointing then, since they inevitably take license with fact to add drama, love interests, gloss over rough edges, shift timelines, or otherwise alter reality.  Sometimes they do it well, sometimes poorly, but accuracy is generally lacking.

Last weekend I caught a couple of hours of the A&E channel's The Men Who Built America.  Wonderful, absorbing series, even though I realize how generalized and dramatized it is. I think its virtues outweigh its faults.

[westen44]

Yes, in general, I tend to avoid historical movies if I already know in advance they're not even accurate.  If I want to watch a fantasy, I might as well watch James Bond or Jason Bourne.  I'm just not a big fan of directors and screenwriters taking too much artistic license.  This movie seems to have delved into that quite a bit.  It reminds me of an American historian who was once criticized because his books took too many liberties with historical details.  He admitted that that was so, and said his writing was more beautiful than true.  I suppose that's fine if you're more interested in focusing on artistry than accuracy.  People, obviously, have different ways of looking at things.  Just yesterday I was reading some comments from someone who seemed to be baffled that anyone would like rock music.  He likes opera and East European folk music.  Yet he obviously feels his taste in music is superior to that of anyone on earth and anyone opposing him on that is a moron, in his opinion.  Needless to say, I didn't even bother talking to him about music at all, although a few others did.  They were harshly confronted by the so-called music expert. 

[dadagoboi]

I may be a Hendrix fan, but I've also got a background in history.  I'm always interested in historical accuracy.  If someone is guilty of historical revisionism, I'm unlikely to go along with that.  If entertainment wants to distort to try to enhance something, that's just not my cup of tea most of the time.   I also might add that I tend to be a pariah among Hendrix fans because I also prefer to look at what he really said and did, whether it might look good or not.  That doesn't always go over well.  But that's neither here nor there, and has little to do with this movie.  My main point, to reiterate, is that I think accuracy is something which should be adhered to whether it's good PR, PC, or whatever it may be.

Movies aren't history.  Most documentaries aren't either.

12 Years a Slave, Schindler's List, Chariots of Fire all come immediately to mind as playing fast and loose with the facts.  Oh yeah, they all won Oscars.  Worrying about the legacy of a long dead pop star doesn't seem worth the time of a historian.  Hendrix's heirs have done a  great job of destroying it themselves.  I'm waiting for 'The Toilet Sessions, Jimi's Greatest Farts'.

Nothing is ever going to match hearing Purple Haze on my '53 Ford radio @ 3AM Christmas morning after I almost hit a cow on a Miami expressway.

[rahock]

Historical movies and documentaries  can be very interesting and informative, but you've really got to avoid going too overboard with anything you want to consider absolute fact.
Now the internet is completely different. You can't put anything on the internet that isn't true.
Bon Jour
Rick

[4stringer77]

I enjoy a good docu drama as anybody, and I think that's a good term for what they are. Beware of Mr. Baker was thoroughly enjoyable and I realized that what was portrayed should be taken with a grain of salt, but I can understand why completely fabricated events would upset you. 

[rahock]

Did anyone catch that historical masterpiece a year or two ago "Abe Lincoln Vampire Slayer"? As a true lover of the ridiculous, I had to go see it. Much to my surprise, it was a lot better than I anticipated . They mixed in just enough historical fact, and some creative explanations for various events to make it plausible to anyone who believed in vampires to begin with.
If you took the crew who did that movie, turn down the ridiculous factor a couple of notches, and aim them at some historical event to do a documentary and god only knows what they could have the public believing .
Rick

[nofi]

that was a fun movie. no, really. i'm a sucker for stuff like that.

here is my hendrix moment. its about 1 am and i'm working in a gas station on peachtree st. atlanta. my buddy has his car in the do it yourself car wash behind the station. the whole thing is constructed of  metal panels. suddenly i hear this amazing sound blasting from his bitchin' 8 track. the first time i heard it! given the echo of the car wash, the total silence of the rest of atlanta and the black night sky mixed with "the star spangled banner" made it a night to remember.

[rahock]

My Hendrix discovery was kind of special to me also. I bought the first album in some discount store because the album cover looked cool. I didn't see or hear another Hendrix album for nearly six months. Why this cheapo store had such an advanced release is beyond me. They had a record section with about fifty records total. Anyway, I took it home and put it on the record player to give it a listen. I freaked out . By the time it got to Third Stone from the Sun, I was on the phone to one of my best buds who lived down the street. We listened to it   over and over with our jaws on the floor. At that point, I wasn't sure this Hendrix  guy would ever make it. I thought he was fantastic , but I wasn't sure the world was ready him. I played that album for a lot of people that first few months and I got a lot of mixed reviews. Lots of people thought it was great, lots thought he was too far out, but everyone agreed that there was no one else out there who was anything like him .
As it turned out, the world was ready for him. At least a pretty good chunk of the world .
Rick

[Pilgrim]

Did anyone catch that historical masterpiece a year or two ago "Abe Lincoln Vampire Slayer"? As a true lover of the ridiculous, I had to go see it. Much to my surprise, it was a lot better than I anticipated . They mixed in just enough historical fact, and some creative explanations for various events to make it plausible to anyone who believed in vampires to begin with.

My wife JoAnn and I saw that on a whim - and to our surprise, it was a lot of fun!  The scriptwriter managed to find just enough room in history to fit in the premise.  We both enjoyed it.  I love a good "B" movie every now and then, and that was a good one.

[rahock]

My wife JoAnn and I saw that on a whim - and to our surprise, it was a lot of fun!  The scriptwriter managed to find just enough room in history to fit in the premise.  We both enjoyed it.  I love a good "B" movie every now and then, and that was a good one.

I just can't help but think there was at least one SOB in the audience who walked out of that movie thinking it was a true story .
Hey , that's why I will never go to Japan. I watch a lot of movies and the one thing I learned about Japan is that they have way too many monsters running around for me to feel comfortable. Hell, they're right next door to Monster Island and there's no telling what kind of monster might show up on your doorstep at any given time .
Rick

[Dave W]

Movies aren't history.  Most documentaries aren't either.

12 Years a Slave, Schindler's List, Chariots of Fire all come immediately to mind as playing fast and loose with the facts.  Oh yeah, they all won Oscars.  Worrying about the legacy of a long dead pop star doesn't seem worth the time of a historian.  Hendrix's heirs have done a  great job of destroying it themselves.  I'm waiting for 'The Toilet Sessions, Jimi's Greatest Farts'.

Nothing is ever going to match hearing Purple Haze on my '53 Ford radio @ 3AM Christmas morning after I almost hit a cow on a Miami expressway.

Don't forget Argo. 2013 Best Picture for telling the unknown story of events that never happened. Propaganda worthy of Pravda in the 1950s.

[westen44]

I do agree, as 4Stringer77 indicated, that being upset with fabrications is justifiable.  On the other hand, Pilgrim is also correct in saying that historical movies often enhance events.  That's obvious; that's just the way it's done.  I suppose I hadn't quite realized, though, how much it bothers me until now.  Ingmar Berman was my favorite director.  I suspect even he wouldn't have made a movie about Hendrix without changing around the facts.  Considering his fate, it wouldn't be hard to imagine Bergman having Hendrix playing a chess game with Death the way Max von Sydow did in "The Seventh Seal." 

Like Kathy Etchingham said, there will be people walking away thinking this movie is the gospel truth.  It isn't and that's what bothers me.