Review: Taking Woodstock
Filed under: Comedy, Drama, New Releases, Theatrical Reviews, New in Theaters, Focus Features

It's no accident that at the very beginning of the movie, the title shows up broken into three words, one on its own separate line: Taking. Wood. Stock. The immensely likeable comedian Demetri Martin plays Elliot Teichberg, a menschy young guy who is spending his summer at his parents' ramshackle motel in the Catskills in yet another attempt to stave off their foreclosure. He has a life back in NYC, sure, but his work as an interior designer and painter isn't going so well, and his friends are all leaving for San Francisco. Elliot, or Ellie as his parents call him, is the consummate Good Jewish Boy – he runs the local Chamber of Commerce, helps around the hotel, and withstands his Russian mother's browbeating (played by Vera Drake's Imelda Staunton).
It's only sheer luck and desperation that leads him to call the Woodstock folks after a nearby town decides they don't want a hippie invasion after all. The rest, as they say, is history, much to Elliot's bemusement. Obviously, though, the free love and plentiful drugs help grease the wheels of his own individuation, as the Summer of Love draws to a close and the darker era of Altamont and Manson creep closer.
Based on a memoir by Elliot Tiber (originally Teichberg) and Tom Monte, Ang Lee's Taking Woodstock has a lot crammed in its 121 minutes. The camera-work is, of course, gorgeous, from the verdant fields of upstate New York to Elliot's psychedelic experience that turns the ocean of concert-goers to an actual ocean, but by the third act, the hippie montages feel self-indulgent and distract from the juicier parts of the story – the people themselves. The hippies are a shorthand for the different and the strange that everyone in the small town around them feels.
Elliot, as we learn from a phone call that alludes to Stonewall and, a bit later, the appearance of Vilma, a transwoman who says she is a friend of a friend, is gay and probably not out to his family. (Tiber's memoir acknowledges he was closeted to his family at the time.) His friend Billy just got back from Vietnam and plays at PTSD but is obviously suffering, as he wonders if he should go on a second tour because "over in 'Nam, I'm fucking normal." When Elliot asked Vilma if his dad knows what she is, she simply says, "I know what I am. That does make it easier for everyone else." Even the townspeople turn against the Teichbergs and the Yasgurs, who own the land where Woodstock takes place, dropping anti-Semitic slurs against both families for their participation in the festival.
Then there are the threads picked up and dropped – why, for instance, an eccentric immigrant Jewish couple from Brooklyn would allow a bunch of arty theater people take up residence in their barn, and the extremely brief interlude with Elliot's sister, obviously not the favored child and neither seen nor mentioned after the siblings briefly meet in New York. Billy is briefly explored but ignored once he has a semi-epiphany in the mud that ends in a hug with his old buddy. And it's especially aggravating to see Mamie Gummer wasted in a barely-there role that's spent hiding under a giant floppy hat. Paul Dano's cameo as one of the best trip buddies on film, however, is well worth noting. (In his role in Gigantic earlier this year, Dano's character Brian and his brothers and father, celebrate Christmas by taking 'shrooms and running through the woods. Hmmmm. Coincidence?)
When I left the theater, I felt no more or less of a desire to romp in the mud to "Purple Haze" than I did before, but I was surprised at how much I liked this little movie. Demetri Martin, long the patron saint of awkward guys who do comedy and get lots of indie fan girls, is an excellent anchor for what is a somewhat unwieldy film. Although Staunton could be accused of overdoing the Minsk mamalah thing, a development later in the film sheds some welcome light on her character. And, I have to say again, Liev Schreiber definitely earned my respect for playing a transgender person with an elegance rarely seen in film today. There's not a wink or a nod in sight except at the very beginning when she flashes Elliot both the gun she has strapped to her thigh and the bulge in her underwear.
So before Wavy Gravy's peace police gave way to the hell of the Hell's Angels in Altamont, as the acid trips soured and turned all helter skelter, Woodstock left no one untouched, from the townspeople to Elliott, who is finally given leave to, you know, take stock.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-28-2009 @ 8:00PM
akaison said...
Given the homophobic behavior of the star, and the fact they cut out much of his gayness from the story, I am not interested. I am glad it was able to make you like it. But just like Beautiful Mind and movies like it, I am done with American filmmaking with regard to washing the gay out of history.
Reply
8-29-2009 @ 11:43AM
Jenni Miller said...
I don't understand. Who is it that's being homophobic? Eliot Tiber's memoir indicates that he was closeted to his family, although not in NYC, and the story reflects that; I don't think "Hollywood" cut out the "gayness." Especially given the fact that Ang Lee and screenwriter James Schamus also did "Brokeback Mountain."
8-29-2009 @ 3:27PM
akaison said...
Jenni:
The movie itself is not homophobic. I am sorry my prior post is confusing. The star of the film has had issues with gays as discussed at AfterElton and Towleroad:
"Demetri Martin showed up on The Tonight Show to promote Taking Woodstock and successfully managed to dispel any interest I had in seeing the damn movie. He went on at length about how stressful and weird it was playing gay and kissing a guy (all while Conan tittered and f**king Shaquille O'Neal slid quickly away from him on the guest couch). Towleroad has a full transcript and the video."
http://www.afterelton.com/blog/dennis/after-elton-briefs-8-18-2009
I don't need to know how "uncomfortable" Martin felt kissing a guy or playing gay. I am tired of Hollywood's approach to gay characters in which there is something "icky" about being gay. Do the film or not, but don't have these campaigns afterwards that reinforce homophobia as okay. If you as an actor don't like kissing a guy, then don't kiss one. But it would be the same thing as a white actor saying they don't want to kiss a black actor.
Contrast this to European treatment of the subject, even in their soaps, like here:
http://gaydaytime.blogspot.com/
There is more maturity in their soaps and actors than we have in our movies and actors. There is something wrong with that.
As for the movie, my point is how they downplay that element. Not that they do not include it at all.
8-28-2009 @ 10:52PM
realitysurfer said...
Please take a moment to check out my new LSD Documentary film.
POWER AND CONTROL :LSD IN THE 60's
Features the CIA LSD Brothel in San Francisco (MK ULTRA), Groucho Marx's LSD Trip....Doc Ellis pitches his no-hitter while high.
Tim Leary's Miricle of Good friday Experiment is explored with one of the original PREACHERS who took part.
LSD and the Protest Movement, JFK & LSD plus more.
All posted for free at this youtube link..please share this knowledge.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZdz0G4lG6k&feature=channel_page
Reply
8-29-2009 @ 1:45AM
Kerry_McC said...
I've been hearing really mixed reviews but feel relieved to hear that you liked it despite its flaws. Being a fan of Ang Lee and an even bigger fan of Liev Schreiber, I will definitely go see it.
Reply
8-29-2009 @ 4:48AM
ed.santiago said...
I have been waiting months for this film to hit the screen, almost went to the midnight showing. What a total disappointment. A complete letdown. Ang Lee turned an iconic moment of American history into "his" coming out of the closet statement. As a child of the Woodstock era and a filmmaker, I felt totally cheated.
IF Ang Lee wanted to make a "gay" film, he should have called it "Return to Brokeback Mountain". That way the audience would have known what to expect. I got no sense of the music, the bands nor the political mood of country. They were all glossed over, damn it, how could you do a film about Woodstock and not include those elements.
I have seen my last Ang Lee film.
This is the third time that I have tried to post this comment
Reply
8-29-2009 @ 8:58AM
Mary said...
All I can say is...don't waste your money...interesting story line that I thought was going to culminate into the concert...a movie about Woodstock with no music? I am very very disappointed.
A movie about coming out is fine and interesting in that day and time...but dont bill it as a movie about woodstock...bill it as a young jewish boy coming of age in the 60"s for gods sake!
8-29-2009 @ 11:54AM
Jenni Miller said...
I'm sorry you were disappointed by the movie, but I think your comment opens up a whole can of worms.
1. That because part of the story arc is about a young man -- who, yes, is gay -- decides to take charge of his own life, get out from his parents' thumb, and do what HE wants to do that it's now reduced to a coming out movie.
2. That the idea of a movie being about coming out would be reductive and worthy of dismissal.
3. That it's Ang Lee's "coming out" movie and he should have just made "Return to Brokeback Mountain." I wouldn't go so far to say that it's homophobic, but it is certainly dismissive and snide to say that this movie might as well be a sequel just because its main character is gay. And to say that it's Lee's "coming out" movie is just preposterous.
8-29-2009 @ 9:36AM
Max said...
It's Altamont, not Alameda.
Reply
8-29-2009 @ 11:25AM
Seth said...
Thank you. I am always disappointed when someone tries to speak of the past like they know what they are talking about when they obviously do not.
8-29-2009 @ 11:37AM
Jenni Miller said...
Thanks for catching that, Max. I fixed it.
Seth, although I referred to the wrong city in California to obliquely refer to the 1969 concert in Altamont, which I should have fact-checked but didn't, it's somewhat obvious I'm aware of what happened given the context, don't you think?
9-06-2009 @ 10:33PM
Jill said...
Lived it in the '60's and loved the movie
Reply