Beat (2000) User Reviews

Courtney Love makes this worth seeing

[slhakeman · 6/10 · 13 February 2013]

This is a film drenched in a palpable sadness: the sadness of being gay in the 1950s; the sadness of being a woman in the 1950s; the sadness of being anything out of the ordinary in the 1950s. But I've been rereading a lot of Kerouac lately, and I don't think it would be a stretch to say that the whole Beat Movement was propelled by sadness.

This is also an intriguing film, though I wouldn't call it a great one. Anyone interested in the Beats should see it. But if you don't know the back story of these characters, I can imagine that much of what they do doesn't make a lot of sense.

I thought Courtney Love gave a remarkable performance, surprisingly nuanced, aided by her off center beauty. In Kiefer Sutherland's defense, I'm not sure even Bill Burroughs could play Bill Burroughs. And I wish Kyle Secor and Ron Livingston could have traded roles. I thought Secor captured Allen Ginsberg's manic charisma better, to the extent that when he was on screen, I felt like he and not Livingston, was actually Ginsberg.

Hey daddio

[PaulLondon · 6/10 · 1 June 2001]

Although not a patch on Cronenberg's wild and fabulous "Naked Lunch" this is a pretty solid look at the year prior to Joan Burroughs death (an incident which was also the catalyst for Naked Lunch") Certainly, this is preferable to the boring "The Last Time I Committed Suicide". The director/writer mostly avoids the clichés of the "hey your so square daddio" type to concentrate on the less celebrated 'minor character' of Joan Burroughs as played by Courtney Love. Love captures dichotomy of being a strong woman trapped in a man's world well and there is a beautifully haunted quality to her performance as she goes from good time beat girl to wife of drug addicted Burroughs. keifer Sutherland as Burroughs is not great casting though; he does a good imitation of the voice but doesn't project the same charisma as Peter Weller did in the same role. And this could be the films failing- why is Joan attracted to him? The film shows none of the genius of the man nor any reason why she would tolerate his coldness, his gayness and his drug abuse whilst she is left at home with the kids and thoughts of a love affair that could have been. Still a fairly enjoyable, if minor film

Stylish on a low-budget, but what's the point?

[moonspinner55 · 5/10 · 3 August 2003]

The last dregs of the so-called "Beat Generation"--writers in the early-1950s who used drugs and acted out their social and sexual desires--as gay writer William S. Burroughs has fled to Mexico with his wife Joan, only to see that marriage come to a shattering climax. Stylishly-presented, yet with practically no drive in the narrative (it's tough caring about these bored, reckless people when the direction is so dreamily disconnected). One character, Allen Ginsberg, literally ends up stranded on the roadside (for all we know, he's still there!). Performances are decent, if not dead-on: Kiefer Sutherland adopts a fey-yet-cynical manner that isn't really convincing, and Courtney Love keeps slipping into facile acting tips (faraway looks and open-mouthed depression). Both are watchable, but "Beat" should have been more. ** from ****

Dull Fingers Talk!

[Infofreak · 20 July 2001]

Look I think William Burroughs was one of the most important figures in not only post-War literature, but in pop culture generally. His work and ideas, and those of the other Beats, have had enormous repercussions on all kinds of arts, and have directly or indirectly affected many of our lives whether we know it or not. Burroughs life was almost as fascinating as his work, but you wouldn't know it from watching 'Beat', as it manages to condense some fascinatingly uncliched relationships into a soap-like love triangle.

I was suprised at the casting of Kiefer Sutherland at first. He isn't an obvious choice to play Burroughs, but he tries hard to humanise him. Unfortunately the thin script doesn't give him much to go on. Likewise Ron Livingston (best known for 'Office Space') does fairly well as Allen Ginsberg, but the script doesn't convince with it's simplistic, almost stereotypical drawing of a complex figure. Lastly, Courtney Love is fine as Burroughs second wife Joan Vollmer, but once again the writing simplifies a multi-layered person into an easy to grasp "character".

It speaks volumes that Cronenberg's surreal 'Naked Lunch' manages to give a much richer and more convincing depiction of these tragic events than the more "realistic" 'Beat'. Perhaps the only way to really deal with the Beats on screen is to aim closer to the approach of their own poetry and prose. The definitive movie portrayal of Burroughs, Ginsberg and co has yet to made. I hope one does eventuate as it's a story that NEEDS to be told!

wow - this movie is dreadful.

[sweet-pea · 1/10 · 11 May 2003]

really, quite an appallingly modern performance of the story of william s. burrough's ill-fated wife, joan. the entire cast is horridly miscast while courtney love turns in an offensively bad performance as joan (oh, she was a vacuous vamp? well that would explain her involvement in the literary scene). it's as if the characters from friends dressed up and tried to understand beat poetry - no nuance, no understanding, and apparently little historical research. unless you like the beats and enjoy torturing yourself, this movie is a big miss.

Norman Reedus

[MrDaynes · 7/10 · 5 July 2007]

I enjoyed this film, the actors being excellent & NORMAN REEDUS a talent I had not previously had the luck to experience. Courtney Love & Keifer Sutherland are spot on as the duelling couple. Ron Livingston's part as Ginsberg is brief yet assured, & the dialogue is crackling. I bought this for £1 in Sainsburys whilst doing the shopping. It's one of my best DVD buys, actually. It's certainly an ambitious film, yet it works.

The scenes are the right length & the director never gets consumed with his subject- this could easily have been an obsessive project. All in all, a worthy look at the moment when Burroughs became a writer.

What a joke!

[backwardiris · 2/10 · 13 August 2001]

This should not be considered a respectful tribute to a group of literary inventors or the "Beats" if you will. However eccentric & dysfunctional the relationship between Mr. & Mrs. Burroughs happened to be, the tangled-up story of their life together shouldn't have been portrayed by Mr. Sutherland & Ms. Love. . . no sir! The cinematography partially made up for such obscenities, hence me giving the film a rating of 2 & not 0.

I love you like a hole in the head

[KMW2000 · 7/10 · 9 August 2001]

I wasn't expecting much (truth be told) but was quite pleasantly surprised. As much as history equates to fiction (and from what I've heard/read this movie must be taken as a work of near-fiction.. "sources" being what they are..) this story still made for a pretty good motion picture. Courtney Love is a very good actress, and not many parts is she better suited to than that of Joan Burroughs. I liked her performance. Keifer Sutherland also made a pretty convincing Bill. The guy that played Lucien Carr (Norman Reedus?) was also impressive.

As "interpretive" as the story was I didn't resent it as much as I thought I might. I imagine William Burroughs, were he still in the land of the living, might have had a few issues with this film but hey, movies always without fail in-one-way-or-another romanticize the truth (truth, truth.. mmmm.. ponder it) and the movie DID do that.. but not as grotesquely as it could've and for that, if nothing else, I liked it. Well-observed (in a secondary, nobody-here-was-actually-there, speculative kind of way) the story still flowed (aided by the, in my opinion, very good performances.) Keifer made William Burroughs seem to have emotions, and strong ones at that, which was interesting.. as you never really picture him like that. (Going by the tone of his spoken-word recordings maybe? the dour face? the slightly contemptible countenance? I don't know.. you just never think of him as the howl-at-the-moon type.. I think Keifer's attempt at humanizing him was quite admirable really.)

The script wasn't bad (could've been MUCH worse.. riddled with beatnik cliches..) there were no real cringe-worthy moments (no-one said anything to the effect of "are you hip to all that jazz" etc etc.. which was a relief.) I liked the movie overall. It's no major statement, and you'd do infinitely better to read some of the great biographies out there if you want an overview of the tale and the beats in general, but the movie is a harmless, and quite enjoyable, footnote.

I liked the quotes at the end (their attempt at a summery i suppose..) especially the gorgeous quote from Lucien Carr. Oh yes and Ron Livingston was also in fine form as poor old lovelorn Allen Ginsberg.

Skip this and see Naked Lunch

[zer0oskul · 3/10 · 29 March 2005]

I popped in the DVD of the story behind William Seward Burroughs II's murder of his wife Joan. I have read a bit of Burroughs and I own an album by him(he really talked like that). Cinematic folly, from plot to presentation to soundtrack(I was expecting space jazz... or just anything to give the movie a feeling of hipness) it is a bummer. The movie's main surprise is that it is so slow in moving forward and building up. Anticipated for a year and a half, I finally got around to it and was more entertained by Wonder Boys. If you don't know anything at all about Bill Burroughs or Jack Kerrouac(who is portrayed in the movie a total of one second, seriously), see this movie and then gradually immerse yourself into Kerrouac and Ginsberg and work over to Burroughs. If you already know anything at all about the hipster beat culture, this movie is a complete waste of time.

Watch Naked Lunch instead.

Aside: The movie's one saving grace over Naked Lunch is that Keifer Sutherland's portrayal of Burroughs is more true-to-life than Peter Weller's performance in the latter.

Don't expect too much from it!

[amine-2 · 7/10 · 25 July 2000]

I saw this movie at the XXII Moscow International Film Festival. However it is very unlikely that Beat will get any awards - I'll be very surprised if it does. The movie itself is not actually bad, it is rather good and full of subtle humor. Most of the cast is just wonderful, although Kiefer Sutherland, is not exactly convincing as W. Burroghs. On the other hand, Ron Livingston did a great job playing A. Ginsberg, as well as Courtney Love playing Mrs. Burroghs. I think I know what isn't exactly right with this movie - the expectations are too high, which is quite natural given the subject matter and the actors. Unfortunately, the movie turns out to be quite ordinary, if not less.

Avoid it

[recluse2 · 2/10 · 21 March 2019]

Slow meaningless boring slice of beat history. I never saw such a group of sad, depressed, depressing people in my life. The film wallows in negativity. The only saving grace to it is the photography---and the upbeat song that plays as the final credits begin to roll.

The best minds he was talking about

[AndytheDirector · 8/10 · 13 August 2006]

A great find for anyone who finds themselves enjoying the Beat Generation literature, this is the story of one of the most tragic and pivotal points in their story, the death of Joan Burroughs.

Lucien Carr and Allen Ginsberg, on the eve of their skyrocket to fame, take a trip to Mexico City and visit Joan and William S. Burroughs. Burroughs has excused himself to Guatemala with a boyfriend, so Joan and the two old friends hit the road, reflecting on Lucien's time in jail, unrequited love, Bill's adultery, and the entire meaning of what exactly Kerouac was romanticizing. If you aren't drawn to the Beats and their story, you may want to stray away. However, if you want a sort of proto-"On the Road" mixed with the true story of the events preceding this pivotal moment in Beat history, you will enjoy this film.

A good film, character development not what I imagined though...

[sharbaug-1 · 7/10 · 7 January 2005]

Okay, maybe I'm too picky but I really wanted this film to show more character development. Maybe it's just the nature of the beast because trying to personify outstanding writers and eccentric personalities like Burroughs and Ginsberg on the screen can be so difficult, but it seemed like this film lacked something. I still enjoyed it. And I enjoyed how the film seemed to focus more on Joan (Courtney Love) and how we were actually made to care and sympathize for her character. Love really is a good actress that isn't given as much credit as she deserves in the media. Kiefer Sutherlands' portrayal of Burroughs as a snakey, dirty old man who cheats on his wife didn't make him have many redeeming factors and for that, I was a bit upset considering Burroughs is one of my absolute favorite writers ever. Ron Livingston's portrayal of Ginsberg didn't seem too true to form based on what I've read about him. But maybe that was what deterred me from really loving this film...because I was too attached to the work of these beat poets prior to viewing it. It's a good film, but if you're a fan of the work of the beat generation--you might be upset that it rewrites your perception of the eccentric personalities of these American literary heroes.

Ridiculous

[Cosmoeticadotcom · 3/10 · 8 September 2008]

Ask yourself- if there were a film about a bunch of no talent losers who do stupid thing, but without any humor, would I want to watch it? If you say no, good for you. For that is the sum of what the film beat is about. The losers are Beatnik charlatans William Burroughs (Kiefer Sutherland), his wife Joan Vollmer (Courtney Love), and their pals Allen Ginsberg (Ron Livingston) and Lucien Carr (Norman Reedus). OK, Ginsberg at least had talent, but anyone with a brain knows he threw it away. This is a really bad film, and its poverty starts with aimless direction by Gary Walkow, and a script that is utterly devoid of energy, spark, and wit.

The film is basically about the idiotic relationship between bisexual Bill and juiced up Joan, and how he comes to kill her in a drunken game of William Tell with a loaded gun in Mexico City in the 1950s. The film starts with a brief prologue telling us how aspiring newspaper beat writer Lucien Carr's relationships with the others. Their lives are disturbed when one of their friends is killed by Carr and Burroughs leaves New York for Mexico, with Joan. A few years later, Carr and Ginsberg visit Mexico City, where they find out Bill left his Joan and their kids in Guatemala with a gay lover who not so secretly loathes Bill, but pleases him for the money. Carr claims to love Joan, and offers to take her away from all this- or things to that effect. So, he, she, and Ginsberg hightail it, by car, to a volcano destroyed village. Yet, Joan stupidly decides to stay with Bill, who is angry over his gay lover's treatment of him. It's been a while since I saw the film, and I do not care to rewatch it to give its ending away. So, let me just cover my tail by saying you won't be blown away by the ending. Oh wait, it ends with Joan getting shot, and Carr, back in his New York office, weeping.

Oddly, I was weeping, too, at the end of this film, but not for the death of Joan Vollmer, but for the death of the time it took me to watch this crap, as well the commentary which, likewise, left no real impression with me. There are precious few extras, and even were the DVD chock with them they would probably blow, as does almost everything put out by anyone even remotely connected to the Beatniks. That is because they were by and large void of talent and creativity, anomic, childish, immature, irresponsible, and plain old repugnant people who lacked ideas, compassion, sympathy, empathy, and warmth. Did I leave anything out? Oh, yeah, and the acting sucks too. Love should stick to vamping off her dead husband's legacy, Livingston apparently had no clue as to Ginsberg's speech patterns and mannerisms, and the worst of all was Kiefer Sutherland, whose revulsion in a scene where he has to kiss and get 'physical' with another guy is something that has to be seen to be believed. It's that bad. Perhaps the only two good things I can say for the film and the DVD is that the film a) ends and b) shows just how dull, and all the other qualities I described above, these people were. I was actually glad when Bill killed Joan. I wanted to do it myself.

In short, don't waste your time nor money.

*sigh*

[j4bb3rw0cky · 14 May 2003]

Beat was quite possibly one of the most disappointing ventures I've yet encountered. Seeing it on the shelves at Hollywood Video, I promptly put down my other options and grabbed it up. It's rare that a movie about the Beats comes around, and this dharma bum wasn't about to pass it up...much to my chagrin. The movie first and foremost is just downright boring. (I guess I should take this opportunity now to say that I'm a huge student of the Beat Generation. Burroughs and Kerouac are two of my biggest influences in both poetry and prose.) The acting was lackluster with the exceptions of Kilmer's Burroughs and Livingston's Ginsberg (both were bloody perfect). I can't help but feel that Beat was beaten to death in the editing room. There was potential for a great script here, but it was the creative fecal matter of Gary "The Trouble with Dick" Walkow.

One final complaint that has nothing really to do seriously with the film: Would it be too much to ask for Gary to squeeze in more than 0.1 seconds of Jack?

Took several tries to finish.

[That70sHeidi · 3/10 · 8 October 2005]

Frankly, I know nothing of the people portrayed in this film. When I did look them up, I was pretty amazed at the ways they lived their lives, and how clean and sane this movie made them out to be.

That being said, it took me several tries to really finish this movie, because it just didn't grab me or hold me. Sure there's some catchy dialog, some witty barbs back and forth, but overall, it's not really a story about very much - everyone is unrequited, destroying themselves, and wallowing in it.

I'm one of the people that feels Courtney Love is a waste of space, and was quite surprised to find her in the movie. However, she looked clean, healthy and sane, and did a very good job with the acting. Her eyes were clear and shiny and when they removed the awful red lipstick she was passable as being the object of men's affections. In reading up on her character, however, I think the script fell short of portraying Joan as the Great Thinker that history has made her out to be. Joan comes across more as a stalwart supporter for her husband, both as an artist and a man, instead of an independent mind trapped in a woman in love. Her barbs and pointed exchanges with him are a sharp contrast to how she expresses their relationship to others during her trip with Lucien and Allen in Mexico. Essentially, what could have been shown as a brilliant mind in a tragic body was passed over in favor of some quotable lines and a love triangle.

The rest of the cast did quite well, and although I'm no great fan of Kiefer Sutherland's acting, he elicited compassion for Burroughs with a despairing quietness in the last half of the movie.

The scenery is beautiful, but the sound needs work. Frequently I found myself turning up the volume and rewinding to catch dialog, and the background noises fade out and in seemingly at random.

Overall I think the story could have been far more compelling with less love and more brains. If nothing else, it gave me some research subject to find the REAL story behind these figures.

Boooooring!

[=G= · 6/10 · 18 October 2002]

Does "Beat" give deep insights into the psyches of the handful of writers who many people think started the Beat revolution, precursor to the Hippy era, with their poetry and literature? Nope. "Beat" zooms in on a fragment of the life of Will Burroughs and his wife Joan (their Mexico tenure) as it dogs through its superficial examination failing to conjure anything of historical significance or even good drama save Joan's unusual demise. "Beat" is a technically good film which is artful, well cast, well acted, etc. However, there simply isn't enough meat on its bones or depth of the characters to make it a worthwhile watch. In a word, boring. (C+)

Beat poets society

[jotix100 · 5/10 · 26 September 2009]

Somehow, the lives of those men and women that epitomized the so-called "beat" generation, were not as interesting, or even fun, the way Gary Walkow, the writer and director of "Beat", the movie, tells it. The world of that crowd that were so influential in poetry and literature in the middle part of the 20th century, was just plain boring.

We are introduced to the main characters of that movement, namely, William Burroughs, Alan Gingsburg, and Jack Kerouac, plus the people that formed their inner circle, Joan Vollmer Burroughs and Lucien Carr. Homosexuality, promiscuity, drugs, and liquor was what made these people live for. In the period where the action takes place, most of their literary work had not yet surfaced. Their generation love to shock and question values that were held sacred until they began to expose their theories.

The film concentrates on the tragic figure of Joan Vollmer. Married to a bisexual William Burroughs, she was left alone most of the time while he went into his 'adventures' with willing young men, that, for some reason, or another, went along for the ride. Joan liked Lucien Carr, but she was unable to commit to him because she was afraid to abandon Bill, and her two children. Her life ends up tragically in a freakish accident that served perhaps as a departure point for their group.

Courtney Cox plays Joan Vollmer. Her take on the woman, being her own inspiration, or the director's, as going through a haze. One never gets to know her, or what made her tick. Kiefer Sutherland, as William Burroughs, gives an understated performance. Norman Reedus has better luck with his Lucien. Mr. Reedus with his boyish looks seems even younger than his character. Ron Livingston appears as Allen Ginsburg.

Lacking Account with a One Note Story

[LeonLouisRicci · 6/10 · 14 May 2016]

Truth be Told, there has yet to be an exceptional Film made about the "Beat Generation" and the Misanthropes that Created the Style that was Influential and moved Cultural Barriers. One can Hope but it's not going to be an easy undertaking.

The "Three Amigos" William Burroughs, Jack Kerouac, and Allen Ginsberg along with Their Buddy Lucien Carr who became a Footnote but was much More than that both Intellectually and Spiritually, are so Detached from the Everyday in Every Way, are a Complex Bunch.

This Movie was and is a Troubled Production. At times it Looks Wonderful with On Location Splendor and Intrigue and at other times it Reeks of Amateur Filmmaking. The Sound Production is Awful sometimes rendering Dialog Fleeting and Weak. But the Worst Part is the Editing and General Montage and Storytelling.

It seems Hacked Together. The Cast do Their Part with Compelling Performances. Really it is Burrough's Wife Joan, Played with Cunning Self-Confidence and Her Alluring Beauty that the Camera Embraces, Courtney Love, that is the Focus.

Overall, it is more about the Romantic Entanglements of the Group and has very Little to Say about Literary Motivations or the Cultural Criticisms that Elevated the Scribes. The Movie is Surprisingly Absent in its Concern about the "Beats".

It is Definitely Required to have a General Knowledge about the Real Life 'Characters" for the Film to have any Relevance beyond its Soap-Opera Storytelling.

In what must be the most Extensive Post Ending Text On Screen, the Movie, by Virtue of, Ironically the Printed Word, has a Detailed Account of what the Movie Could or Should have Explored, at least Somewhat.

Lame and Uninformative

[randomfrosh · 4/10 · 2 December 2003]

After seeing BEAT (2000), I was thoroughly disappointed. Always being curious of William Burroughs, I was under the impression that this film would highlight important events throughout his life and give a detailed synopsis of his rise to fame. Boy, was I wrong...

BEAT does nothing of the sort. It is simply the story (could it even be considered a story?) of Joan Vollmer's escapades with Lucien Carr and Allen Ginsberg through Mexico while Burroughs is away in Guatemala with his homosexual lover. It seems as though the focus here is on Vollmer, NOT Burroughs. I sat patiently waiting for a dramatic trajectory to come forth, but waiting was evidently a waste of time. Nothing even remotely interesting derived from this film...except for maybe the fact that I learned that Burroughs speaks in poetry...(???)

And I digress. Unless you want to watch a film that has little to do with Burroughs and more to do with Vollmer, Carr and Ginsberg, I doubt you should rent BEAT. The film is lame and uninformative.

4/10 stars

Everyone is a Victim

[caspian1978 · 6/10 · 3 August 2020]

Everyone in this movie along with its audience is a victim. Each character is portrayed as an innocent victim while they are all in fact part of the problem of their own lives. Courtney Love teases us for her entire performance. We try to connect with her as the victim mother and wife but she is partly to blame. Kiefer Sutherland does a terrible job portraying William S. Burroughs because he is not gay. An uphill battle, Sutherland had very little to go on since he had no connection to his character. Allen Ginsberg is in the movie just to be there. He literally goes along for the ride as he is a harmless victim in this story. Much like having Jack Kerouac show up for less than a minute, Ginsberg's part is just as pointless. My final grip I have with this movie is the portrayal of Lucien Carr. No matter what you believe, Lucien Carr was never a victim. Although he may have been victimized in his youth, he is in no way a protagonist or should be given any feeling in such. Carr used his circle of friends just as much as Burroughs, and nobody sees him as a victim.

Good!

[siempreinexorable · 9/10 · 22 October 2008]

More motivated by the recreation of the beat generation than by the film acting and production, I was gladly surprised by the respectful treatment of Mexico in this movie: the staging without trials of a country plagued by centuries of poverty, in the 50s, has in addition a careful photography and stunning natural scenarios in which the plot remains unalterable, professional and carefully conducted.

The outstanding performance of Courtney Love, personifying Joan Burroughs, is enhanced by her proverbial beauty in a performance that well deserves to be considered an icon in contemporary cinema. Courtney's big close ups emphasizing "I dare you" can take your breath away. Norman Reedus, in the role of Lucien Carr, gives a slight hint enacting his duties at UPI and clarifies his role in the beat movement. In the film cast Ron Livingston as Allen Ginsberg gives the picture of the introspective young adult he was. Kiefer Sutherland, as William Burroughs, has better lines than acting… yet, his presence is a must.

Finding Mexican actor Luis Felipe Tovar was a surprise. With his eloquent Mexican touch, he embodies a federal policeman in a Michoacan state country road. Memorable. His click on the words in Spanish is his natural; Tovar is definitely a character in alternative Mexican cinema.

The abuse of amphetamine "Benzedrine" and homosexuality are seen on screen without judgments and are merely descriptive elements of the narrative construction, as befits the vision of Gary Walkow, Beat's director.

Highly recommended.

Very Slick & Visually Interesting

[pomspringz · 8/10 · 28 February 2007]

The bulk of the film takes place in Mexico City with side-trips to more remote areas. The scenery outside the City is lush and lovely. The interactions among the actors reflect these locales. I found the film extremely watchable, and was fascinated with the performances. All the lead roles are clearly developed. I loved Courtney Love. She is as beautiful as a modern day Anna Magnani and never has a bad scene. Seeing Kiefer Sutherland in something so unlike his "24" role is a delight. Ron Livingston's performance is controlled and finely honed. Norman Reedus presents raw energy. The cinematography is excellent with wondrous scenes of light and color. One can almost smell the tropical foliage. This is decidedly Courtney Love's movie, since she plays Burroughs' tragic wife. The interactions of these characters, based on real-life people during that time period, is a mesmerizing glimpse into lives in emotional turmoil.

An excellent movie about William Burroughs before he became a famous literary icon

[Edwin-21 · 9/10 · 29 April 2000]

I saw the premiere of this film tonight at the USA Film Festival in Dallas, Texas. Prior to this movie, I knew very little about William Burroughs. The producer, Donald Zuckerman spoke before the showing. He explained that after the film's showing at the Cannes Film Festival, they decided to completely re-edit the movie. As a result, the final film print of this movie was not finished for our festival(or compatible with our theater). As a result, we viewed the movie in the theater on a VHS video projected on the screen with a LCD projector and two speakers (on stands) set up on each side of the screen. The producer took some questions before the movie began and stated that the film was closely based on actual factual events. He stated that they did not use "one" specific source (or screenplay) but accumulated the facts from many verifiable sources. Mr. Zuckerman stated that all the scenes were filmed at the actual locations where they took place. The Mexico apartment footage was filmed at the actual location where William Burrough's and his wife Joan lived. The film makers used the apartment across the street because the actual apartment had been demolished.

I enjoyed the movie immensely. There were some initial distracting sound problems, but you won't have these in a normal showing. After the audio problems were fixed, I was glued to the screen. The movie begins and ends during the period before the group of friends became famous. Keifer Sutherland, Courtney Love, Ron Livingston, and Norman Reedus all did a superb job in their performances. Courtney Love was amazing and captivating in her role of Joan Villmer.

Anyone interested or just curious about William Burroughs or the Beat era should definitely see this movie. I gave it a nine.

in defence of

[deffodark · 10/10 · 15 April 2006]

god, i don't even know how long it has been since i saw this film. it must have been spring of 2000, because i was on holiday to Los Angeles and saw it at that city's film festival. big surprise, i thought courtney love was amazing in this production. boo hoo to all you naysayers insisting she only plays herself and blah-blah-blah. all madonna does is play herself, and she does not even do that convincingly. what courtney love possesses is a preternatural ability to forget the camera is present. what this comfortability in front of the camera does, is provide an opportunity for her 'star quality' to shine. i believe people accuse courtney of only playing herself because she is so comfortable on screen it is assumed that she must have deep familiarity with the role.