Taking Woodstock (2009)

Review:

Ang Lee’s “Taking Woodstock” is a harmless and competent coming of age story. Its based on the true tale of a young man who convinced his rural community to host what would become the most renowned rock concert in history. Ang Lee’s take on Woodstock is nostalgic, sympathetic and fun but it misses out on the soul of

Eliot Tiber (Henry Goodman) is the son of a poor couple who own a run down motel in upstate New York. Eliot has always been a loyal son, willing to help out the family business in whatever ways he can, in spite of his mother’s incessant penny pinching. When Eliot’s parents can’t pay the mortgage on their motel, Eliot scrambles for a solution to their financial woes. That solution, of course, is Woodstock.

Eliot contacts the festival planner, Billy (Emile Hirsch) and they set about convincing local farmer Max Yasgur (Eugene Levy) to rent his farmland out for the festival. Eventually under the right financial impetus Max agrees to let them use his land, giving Woodstock a definite home. What follows is predictable but still fun to watch – a massive population of hippies descend upon a quiet rural community that had previously been inhabited by conservative Middle American types who were not too keen on the liberal ideals of the hippie movement.

The one outstanding performance of “Taking Woodstock” is Liev Schreiber as Vilma, a transvestite who is hired as security for the Tiber’s motel during the concert. Schreiber provides excellent comic timing while remaining straight faced and in his drag the entire film. If there was a moral axis upon which “Taking Woodstock” rotates, it is likely him. He becomes a much-needed friend and mentor to Eliot.

Ultimately, “Taking Woodstock” is not Ang Lee’s masterpiece. That would likely go to “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” (2000) or “Brokeback Mountain” (2005). This film is lighter fare. We get some good laughs at the inadvertent drug mishaps and a police officer who, though looking forward to clubbing some hippies, finds himself taken in by the spirit of Woodstock. There are some beautifully made scenes too, like when Eliot, his father and Vilma peaceful regard a placid lake filled with naked people bathing. And then over the trees, they hear the sound of music – Woodstock has begun.

But I think “Taking Woodstock” outstays its welcome. It’s just a little too long. I got the gist at about the 90-minute mark and it went on for another half hour. Also, the music of Woodstock is largely absent. We sadly do not see or hear Hendrix or Joplin’s performances. In the film, the concert itself is depicted as a monolithic entity, a massive all knowing unity that defied every standard America had long held itself too. I suppose that’s a good way to depict Woodstock - in all its glory and haze - but really I missed the music.

Rating:

On a scale of one to Casablanca, this film is a “The Thomas Crown Affair” (1968).

Review:

It looks good and even feels good, but after a time this film feels like a run on sentence, beating you over the head with the changes its protagonist Eliot is obviously going through during the course of Woodstock. That’s not to say it’s not a good coming of age story. It is, and I liked it fundamentally. The last shot is also marvelous and so very, very appropriate. “Taking Woodstock” takes place mostly on the periphery of the concert itself. The last shot and a few other scenes made me wish for a movie that took place deep within the concert itself. What an angelic monster it must have been.