JinRoz For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

SnoopyStyle It's 1969. Elliot Teichberg (Demetri Martin) struggles to keep the family motel in the Catskills open. His father Jake (Henry Goodman) is quiet and mother Sonia (Imelda Staunton) is bombastic. They barely have enough to keep the motel open for the summer. When a music festival in a neighboring town gets canceled due to the mayor, Elliot has the idea to expand their tiny music festival. Farmer Max Yasgur (Eugene Levy) is trying squeeze the promoter. Michael Lang is the hip concert organizer. Local Dan (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) leads the locals opposing the hippie invasion. Dan's brother Billy (Emile Hirsch) is a recently returned Vietnam vet. Vetty von Vilma (Liev Schreiber) is a transvestite who does security.Director Ang Lee is not digging deep enough. He also keeps the movie very small in comparison to the vast cultural event. Demetri Martin doesn't have the star power to lead so many characters in such a big story. There is no tension to speak of. There is a lot of fun little touches but none of it really grabs me. I also expect more music from a movie about Woodstock. This has its moments but it's a bit too light-weight.

robinski34 This was not the film that I was expecting, I guessed as much when I saw Ang Lee's name role past in the opening credits, and the notion was confirmed two hours later. I thought I was in for whimsical comedy and free spirited stoner philosophising, but the reality is somewhat different. In the end it is a more personal voyage of discovery for the central character, however once things are set in motion his involvement feels peripheral, and events happen around him, driven by others. There are some stand-out performances, Imelda Staunton is priceless as the protagonist's mother and she and the excellent Henry Goodman create a fascinating relationship that is central to the film. Demetri Martin's turn in the central role is rather low key by comparison, and that may be the problem, since everyone else seems larger than life, his performance gets lost in the 'far out' stuff going on around him. The hallucinogenic scenes are well done, and there is a brief burst of action, centred on Mr. Goodman, but largely the pacing is flat, and this does not help. Perhaps the most telling thing is that this is a 2 hour film about a music festival with almost no musical performances in it. I think that would confound most people's expectations. It certainly did mine.

itamarscomix Taking Woodstock feels naive and simplistic at first. In a sense, it is. There's no real historical insight into why Woodstock was as important an event in 20th century culture as it was. The social-political aspects of the festival are downplayed; the anti-war aspect is barely a footnote. Instead, Ang Lee focused on conveying the spirit and the vibe of Woodstock, which is one of freedom, liberation, unlimited possibilities. It's not a historical document, nor is it a musical film, it's a genuine feel-good movie, and it works on every level. And as much as it's a sweet little human story, it's a clear window into a time and a place. And it draws the viewer in, and keeps him in all the way through.A sincere hats-off for the casting; except for Eugene Levy as an obligatory Jewish farmer, and Paul Dano and Emile Hirsch as obligatory hippies, none of the cast play to their strengths, and they all surprise. Imelda Staunton and Liev Schreiber are both fantastic in very untypical roles. Most surprising is comedian Demetri Martin, whose character develops and grows throughout the film, who delivers an understated, funny, human dramatic role, fantastically natural for a first dramatic feature-film role. Looking forward to see more of him in the near future.

rzajac It's lovely to see a movie on a pop culture theme where the scenes and actors can just... breathe. The direction is excellent, and the actors are up to it. It's particularly wonderful to watch Martin at work; he's a fine actor, and able to create a believable and lovable character.People complain about the lack of period verisimilitude.... Heck, I guess I should just say it, that the flick doesn't make any bogus feints toward reproducing the stage action. But I like that. Yeah, it happened; there was a stage scene, and it was happening and wonderful and all that... but the moral of the movie is that life is a stage that, really, is every bit as happening and wonderful and all that. And that's how it should be.Note that, thus far, I'm talking content. It's a sure sign of how I feel; that the movie mainlines content, with ease and cleverly deployed and understated artifice. But, of course, the artifice is there. All the technical work is great. You'll find the usual elements, and a panoply of special stuff, like split screen and extended tracking shots.One thing that feels really good is the sense that an important element of the Woodstock experience is being promoted through this flick, that one rarely got from the traditional media of the time; the idea that a lot of these massive be-in affaires were simply agglomerations of people who really just wanted to enjoy something together. I like the way the flick delivers this message.