PDA

View Full Version : Howl



Howard Schumann
01-13-2011, 12:56 PM
HOWL

Directed by Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman, U.S., (2010), 84 minutes

“I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix, angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to the starry dynamo in the machinery of night…” So begins the poem “Howl” by Allen Ginsberg who was one of the most respected writers and acclaimed American poets of the so-called Beat Generation of the late 1950s, poets that included Jack Kerouac, William Burroughs, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Gregory Corso and others. The poem about sex, drugs, politics, and race shocked many people when first published with its explicit language and sexual images and became a cause célèbre leading to an obscenity trial in San Francisco that tested the limits of the First Amendment. According to Ginsberg, reflecting the culture of the fifties, “If you could write about homosexuality, you could write about anything.”

Directed by Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman, the film Howl is a celebration not only of the poem but of the artist who, amidst the turbulence that surrounded its initial publication, sought to define his own identity. It is a non-linear work that interweaves a reading of the poem by actor James Franco as Ginsberg with animation by the graphic artist Eric Drooker, a dramatization of the obscenity trial, and an interview with Ginsberg culled from the poet’s own words. The film begins with the young Ginsberg reciting “Howl” in a coffeehouse to a young and approving audience. As the poem is being read aloud, the spoken words are animated on screen. Though expertly conceived, the animation creates a literal interpretation of the poem that fails to convey its power and beauty.

According to the poet, he never planned to publish “Howl” because he thought some of the language might offend his father and thus felt free to write anything that came to mind, knowing that no one would ever read it. Consequently, “Howl” delivers a wild torrent of words filled with lines about radical politics, drugs, and homosexuality conveying images that are often erotic and sometimes scatological. The poem may not always be understandable but, especially as read aloud, is filled with a rhythmic pulse that is pure music.

The poem describes people who are in love, in pain, and in joy, people “who howled on their knees in the subway and were dragged off the roof waving genitals and manuscripts, who let themselves be fucked in the a*s by saintly motorcyclists, and screamed with joy, who blew and were blown by those human seraphim, the sailors, caresses of Atlantic and Caribbean love, who balled in the morning in the evenings in rose gardens and the grass of public parks and cemeteries scattering their semen freely to whomever come who may.”

The interviews reveal Ginsberg’s mental state and how he ended up in a mental hospital, his only way out being to lie to the doctors that he would pursue heterosexuality. His friend in the institute, Carl Solomon to whom the poem is dedicated, however, had no easy way out, having to endure electro-shock therapy and a strait-jacket. Ginsberg’s mother, Naomi, was also in a mental hospital for an unknown illness before she died. These troubling personal events in Ginsberg’s life are integrated into the film in a way that is very moving although, because most of the poem consists of readings and conversations, the film itself is not very cinematic. Ginsberg’s homosexuality is one of the strong components of the film and there are scenes of his relationships with Neal Cassidy and Peter Orlovsky with whom he loved and lived with for most of his adult life.

Using actual court transcripts, Howl also dramatizes the courtroom drama with attorneys played by Jon Hamm and David Straithairn arguing the case before the judge (Bob Balaban). Ginsberg himself was not at the trial since it was brought against the City Lights Publishers and Lawrence Ferlinghetti. The witnesses consisted of academics and literary figures either condemning the poem as worthless and without merit or praising it as an innovative and important work of art. The judge in the case eventually determined that the poem had “redeeming social importance,” a landmark decision.

Franco’s performance captures the energy of Ginsberg’s poetry and his feelings about his life and art in the interview but overall fails to convey his warmth and humanity, his spirituality, his playfulness, or his progressive political views. In short, it succeeds in capturing most everything about the artist except the very qualities that make him so inspiring. As the film ends, we see updated information about those mentioned in the film while, in the background, we hear Ginsberg singing “Father Death Blues,” a moving ode to the death of his father in a version by the aging poet as he nears the end of his life. “Father Breath, once more farewell. Birth you gave was no thing ill. My heart is still, as time will tell. Genius Death your art is done. Lover Death your body's gone. Father Death I'm coming home.” Though Allen Ginsberg is now home, his art will never be done.

GRADE: B+

The poem
http://www.wussu.com/poems/agh.htm

The song (earlier version)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afAAltAmIzA

The song many years later (as shown in the film)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew6ef3nE-E4

Chris Knipp
01-13-2011, 02:18 PM
It was neglectful of me not to review this nice little film, which should be great to show in schools. It's another example of the wildly multifaceted current career of James Franco that he would play Ginsberg. The film has a somewhat repetitious quality, going back over the same material from different angles, and interspersing alternate readings of the poem itself with a somewhat drawn-out restaging of the obscenity trial that put City Lights Books (and Ferlinghetti) in the accused box. However it acquainted me more fully with the poem, which I realized I had never read all the way through, content mostly with the riveting and memorable opening lines (which you also quote):

I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by
madness, starving hysterical naked,
dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn
looking for an angry fix. . .

Hearing the rest of the poem, I was indeed struck, even shocked, at the frankness of many of the lines, and I could well understand how it would have met with outrage in the Fifties. I can't think of much else from that time that's so direct about gayness and sex, other than William Burroughs' more shocking fantasmagoric and outrageous gay sexual fantasies in Naked Lunch (1959), which also met with censorship troubles.

Some have found the courtroom scene tiresome. I find its ending very moving though, and it also helps set the events into a social and political context. Others have found fault with the animations and found them intrusive and unnecessary. I find it hard to disagree with that, though they are endurable. Your comment, Howard, that "the animation creates a literal interpretation of the poem that fails to convey its power and beauty," is probably right. This movie is not the most sophisticated of approaches to the period or the material, though that may be one reason why I think it will work well to be shown in schools. You also may also be right to say the film is "not very cinematic." It's simply workmanlike. It gets the information across. But that information also includes the excitement and enthusiasm of those days when a poetry reading in a little North Beach cafe could be a a world-historical event packed with key artistic and literary figures. The mythology of the Beats is somehow justified. It was a coming together of ideas and personalities that was going to be influential for the next half century and beyond.

As a gay person myself, I don't quite agree with your saying "Much of the focus is on Ginsberg’s homosexuality." I did not feel that. Moreover Cassidy wasn't gay, and this was not a time when gay people were as out as they are now. The internally outrageous Burroughs didn't go around saying he was gay and wore his "banker's drag." His lack of self-identification as gay (despite his provocative erotic fantasies) may help explain how he became a countercultural darling for straight youth in the colleges in his later years. I think you're pinning the film and the topic down too much there or, alternatively, giving it credit for a perception it lacks. The film itself could go further of course too, as you note, it needs to say more about Ginsberg's passions and his politics. And also about the poetic traditions of Blake and Whitman he follows in, as well as his links with eastern philosophy and religion.

It's an interesting note that over the closing credits we hear Ginsberg himself reading the poem and his reading is much stronger than Franco's. Not surprisingly, he perceives its rhythms and emphases far more clearly and there is more passion in his voice. I love Franco but I'm not convinced this laid-back California dude from Palo Alto is the best man to play an anguished gay Jewish poet and political activist from New York City. But hey, his association with the project had a lot to do with getting it made.

A small correction: I don't think you can really say Ginsberg's mother Naomi died "at an early age" since she lived to be 62.

Howard Schumann
01-13-2011, 03:27 PM
Thanks very much for your insightful comments. I was sure you hadn't seen it because I didn't see a review. It is most out of character for you to see a film and not review it (I also have done that on occasion when I feel I have nothing new to say).

I can see your point about the focus of the film but I think it was a key part, not only in the poem but in Ginsburg's interview and depictiions of his affair with Peter. At any rate, it was emphasized more than any other aspect of his character. Anyway, your contribution added to my appreciation of the film and I think we agree on many things.

Chris Knipp
01-13-2011, 07:20 PM
I try to cover a lot of what I see but I miss some, often for no particular reason. I agree gayness was emphasized re Allen Ginsberg, but I didn't get the impression it was the main focus of the film. Especially not with somebody as straight as James Franco playing him. Of course this is not the first time James has played a gay man. I don't think we disagree radically on this movie at all. I think we'd both agree it's a nice little movie about an important topic and good to have, but not a masterpiece.

I can't figure out how to change my Filmleaf signature (does anybody know?) or I would change mine to show my list on my website of all the movies I saw in 2011, which is here. (http://www.chrisknipp.com/writing/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1642&p=1660#p1660) You will see that there are at least 20 of them I didn't review.

http://www.chrisknipp.com/writing/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1642&p=1660#p1660

Howard Schumann
01-13-2011, 07:58 PM
I try to cover a lot of what I see but I miss some, often for no particular reason. I agree gayness was emphasized re Allen Ginsberg, but I didn't get the impression it was the main focus of the film. Especially not with somebody as straight as James Franco playing him. Of course this is not the first time James has played a gay man. I don't think we disagree radically on this movie at all. I think we'd both agree it's a nice little movie about an important topic and good to have, but not a masterpiece.

I didn't say it was the main focus of the film but it was a strong component. Anyway, I did modify the reference a bit.

Chris Knipp
01-13-2011, 08:36 PM
I added above a link to my website's list of movies seen in 2010, which shows twenty I saw but did not review. There may be more and some I forgot to list.

http://www.chrisknipp.com/writing/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1642&p=1660#p1660

Chris Knipp
01-13-2011, 08:45 PM
Gayness has to be a strong component of a movie about Allen Ginsberg. It was a big part of his life. Other big components also of the film were his life, his family his friendships with the future "beat" poets and writers, and above all the controversial history of the poem.

Howard Schumann
01-13-2011, 09:08 PM
I added above a link to my website's list of movies seen in 2010, which shows twenty I saw but did not review. There may be more and some I forgot to list.

http://www.chrisknipp.com/writing/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1642&p=1660#p1660

Wow, you sure saw a lot of movies in 2010. Puts me to shame. I saw only 81 the whole year including repeat viewings.

Chris Knipp
01-13-2011, 09:19 PM
As I said I may have seen more (new) movies this year than any previous year, but I am not sure that this was an outstanding year. Etc. My whole comment on this issue can be found on a new best lists thread for 2010 which is here. (http://www.filmleaf.net/showthread.php?3005-Best-movies-of-2010-lists)

I hope you will add your list of your favorites for 2010 there, though you may want to wait. I have seen nearly all the releases of 2010 that were of any interest me and many that weren't so I am ready to publish my list. I look forward to corrections however, if I have made mistakes about dates and releases. I didn't list Manoel de Oliveira's STRANGE CASE OF ANGELIKA as a best unreleased because it has been released in January of 2011. But of course there is always a lot of room for debate, even if "DE GUSTIBUS NON DISPUTANDUM."

Howard Schumann
01-14-2011, 12:42 AM
I will add my list eventually but I think I would rather wait until the end of the month because, unlike you, I haven't seen everything from 2010 that I want to.

When I do publish my list, they will be ranked in order from 1-20. They will also be my choice of my favorites not divided into any categories.

I do understand your desire to do this, however, because you have seen so many more films than I have and it would seem daunting to have to limit it to 20. On the other hand, however, one does not get a clear sense of which films you liked the most when your list consists of 40+ films..

Chris Knipp
01-14-2011, 12:46 AM
I'll put my reply on the BEST MOVIES OF 2010 -- SO FAR thread here. (http://www.filmleaf.net/showthread.php?2873-BEST-MOVIES-OF-2010-so-far&p=25552#post25552)