![Buy No Direction Home: Bob Dylan [2005] DVD starring ~ Bob Dylan, for ONLY £5.50 from DVD-shopper.co.uk. Online DVD shop in association with Amazon](/i/dvds/logo.gif){kind=logo}
No Direction Home: Bob Dylan [2005]
Product Details | Similar Products | Customer Reviews![No Direction Home: Bob Dylan [2005]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51CBXR44X4L._SL160_.jpg) | Starring: ~ Bob Dylan, List Price: £19.99 Our Price: £7.98 You Save: £12.01 (60%) Availability: Usually dispatched within 24 hours ![View more information about No Direction Home: Bob Dylan [2005] at Amazon](/i/c/view.gif) |
|
 | Product Details: Studio: Paramount Home Entertainment Region: 2 Number of Discs: 2 Format: Full Screen, PAL Rating:   Sales Rank: 2866 | | Look for similar DVDs by genre:
| | Customers who bought this item also bought:
| | Customer Reviews: Just a pawn in their game (19 September 2007)No Direction home is a documentary over 2 discs charting the rise of Bob Dylan and his affect on music and the world. Disc 1 is somewhat harder to watch, spending a lot of time talking to other musicians about the music scene in general, lots of live footage of other bands and not enough Dylan. While it is interesting it's more a history of folk music than a Dylan documentary. Disc 2 follows on but features Dylan far more closely. The documentary includes a vast amount of archive footage that is fascinating to watch. Everything builds until Dylan eventually introduces electric performances to his sets and his fans cry out against him. I have watched these discs and have a much greater appreciation for Dylan as a songwriter and performer. Compelling, but a sleight of hand (09 November 2006)Undoubtedly a rivetting watch, but when pondered later then some doubts creep in. Scorsese is a great film-maker, a weaver of stories and impressions. I'm not sure about his capacity as a documentary-maker. Does he get to the heart of Dylan in these seminal years? Does he confront - and take a view on - the contentious issues surrounding Dylan in these years? In many ways he sidesteps them. Instead, he focuses on the musical millieu in which Dylan lived, but by over-emphasising influences, he downplays Dylan's own creative genius. Am I the only one who thinks there was far too much Liam Clancy in part 1, and far too little original Dylan? I share the point made by another reviewer that it would have been good to have got complete performances. I was hoping Scorsese might have unearthed some remnant of Dylan's first BBC appearance, in the play 'Madhouse on Castle Street'. There was instead far too much of some pretty annoying performers, especially in part one. The piece avoided taking sides on the issues raised by early biographies like Scaduto's - the accusations of people at the time that the young Dylan was pretty ruthless, and that the protest phase was a piece of cynical careerism. I don't agree with that view - but it would have been good to have had it refuted. Actually, we got very little on Dylan the person - OK, I don't want an expose of sordid tittle-tattle, but it's remarkable that Sara Dylan never got a mention. Of course, one might argue that it was all about the music; but if that's the case, it seemed to be obsessed with the 1966 live material lifted from Eat the Document and its out-takes - as I recall it, there was not a single mention of Blonde on Blonde. This is an amazing omission, given that it appears on everyone's lists in the top five of greatest ever rock albums. Yet it's not mentioned!! The comments by Dylan were wonderful to hear - when have we ever seen him so relaxed and apparently straight in his comments? A suitable follow-up to the incredible Chronicles vol 1. But even then ... Dylan was interviewed by Jeff Rosen, from his entourage and very much a protector of the 'image', not by Scorsese, and again some of the key questions don't get answered. Overall, extremely watchable, but frustrating in parts. Good to hear from the late Allen Ginsberg: a little more from Joan Baez, Bobby Neuwirth, surviving members of the Band, a little less from Liam Clancy, would have made it even better. And how about complete footage of those 1966 gigs (and how about the 1965 BBC-TV show. Did they wipe it????) Scorsese's Dylan (21 October 2006)Martin Scorsese's film No Direction Home, which I watched last night, provided an absorbing three and a half hours of insight into Bob Dylan's early life and his emergence into prominence and controversy in the mid sixties. I mention the duration of the movie because I can rarely sit and watch for so long without my attention wandering. Not in this film. Before remarking on the content of the film, it is worth considering Scorsese's direction. I recommend this film to anyone interested in watching or in making documentary film. The way in which archival material, concert footage and interview segments are integrated and paced is masterly. The film really tells a story and creates an atmosphere: I felt as though I was there. Scorsese's experience in making feature films has enriched his direction of this film. Although comparisons are silly, it may be his best film. It sent me back to The Last Waltz for comparison of his method. The film's most valuable asset is Dylan's own recounting of his past, and the most striking point about it is how much interview time in Dylan's early years was wasted in asking often trite questions of this most intuitive mind. He rarely answered them, and often could only express his irritation of the questioner. Scorsese's film of the contemporary Dylan rarely presents the questions, content to record what he has to say. Hibbing, Minnesota is stripped bare. Even Dylan's evasiveness, when dealing with his more questionable behaviour to friends and colleagues, is revealing. There is a conflict between Scorsese's intention to make a coherent narrative and Dylan's lifelong habit of crossing borders and categories, throwing dust on his trail and refusing to be pigeonholed that adds an interesting tension to the viewing. The main thrust of Scorsese's film is the impact of Dylan's crossover to electric instrumental accompaniment. Listeners then had become divided into self perceived groups, the folk 'purist', social conscience type and the mindless consumers of pop pap who just enjoyed the music, and Dylan outraged everyone by moving between these groups freely. His motives were neither pure nor particularly self aware. From the perspective of our own times the differences between these types of music seem less extreme: both were commercial entertainment; listening to a protest song was often a substitute for more committed action. Yet at the time the difference was important to those who were there. From the conflict that ensured, the boos and the cries of traitor, there would emerge something new in pop culture, the pop music artist, and Scorsese doesn't let us forget it. One disadvantage to this emphasis is that it focuses on the same period and phenomenon as Pennebaker's Don't Look Back, which is even quoted in Scorsese's film. The Pennebaker film (a masterpiece) has been available on DVD for some time, and most watchers of No Direction Home would be familiar with it (note the similar inspiration between the two titles). The film reveals Dylan's background, and then moves on to an overview of the music he grew up listening to, from Hank Williams to Muddy Waters, fascinating to those interested in developments in popular music. The society of Dylan's youth is sketched in vividly: Cold War, Greenwich Village, the folk music scene, the civil rights movement, the birth of folk-rock. The controversy over Dylan's move to electric instruments in the mid 60s is shown through concert footage. We see the Dylan who found, used and then dropped Woody Guthrie, Joan Baez and many others. One comment, that Dylan was like a sponge, reminded me of a similar comment about George Gershwin, who absorbed, or 'stole' elements from all the popular cultures of his time. But transformed them. This was the Dylan who became, unexpectedly, a pop star, who poured out a stream of literate, introspective pop lyrics which made pop culture 'respectable' to the intellectuals and had a transforming effect on the way popular music was presented by other artists. In a way Dylan could be said to have re-invented pop music in this period. So, everyone has his Dylan. In the 60s Dylan was for some The Genius; for others he was The Poet; for others again he was The Traitor. These are all projections of our own that tell us what we are looking for. No wonder Dylan dodged like crazy. Today if you become a star you deal with it by making it a persona, or you self destruct by taking it all seriously. Dylan survived because he had many personas. This film is Scorsese's Dylan. We'll never know Dylan's Dylan. Scorsese's film covers the period 1941 to 1968, when Dylan suffered injuries in a motor cycle accident when he was about 26 years old. Therefore the film does not deal with a lot of important things about Dylan: his marriage and family; his influence on popular music, especially on the Beatles; the literary value of his song lyrics and his stature as probably the greatest of popular song writers; his use, even quite late in his career, of traditional melodies (which is common folk practice); the creation of country rock; the disintegration and self healing recorded on Blood on the Tracks; his various religious affiliations; and his non musical activities such as paintings and novels. If anyone reading this knows Martin Scorsese would they ask if a second film is going to be made covering this material? Probably the elusive Dylan would consider it too defining and completing a study to be made in his lifetime, but you can only ask. Great In Places But It's Hard To See The Wood Through The Trees (28 August 2006)In many ways 'No Direction Home' is great. There are wonderful and informative interviews (even with Bob himself) and the story is richly detailed though there is little really in the way of real critical debate. The main problem is there is so much detail about people and events that are peripheral to the main storyline it becomes increasingly difficult to get a grasp on the main outline of the events in the life and times of Bob himself. This is particuarly true in the first half of the film which seems like a jumble as many less than important features (such as a clip of Johnnie Ray) are shown in an effort to show every aspect be it musical influence, or the introduction of an acquaintance in an attempt to fully encompass every aspect relating to Bob. It would have been far better to just concentrate on the basics with the aid of a narrator for a clearer guideline to the essential points. For all its detail however there's never a mention of Bob's birthplace Duluth. Near the end of the first part and for the whole of the second part of the film things begin to settle down somewhat and we are left with a wonderful tribute to Bob which is a pleasure to behold. The clips from the 1966 British tour are truly wonderful - it's just a pity those clips aren't in full. To get a greater/more effective film overall an awful lot of pruning is required. Sometimes to tell a story simply is a more effective route to take. Two Most Popular Arts: Music and Film (15 August 2006)One word to describe Dylan's music whilst on his infamous steam-roller-roller-coaster tour of 1966 is raw. Raw as Dylan's harmonica solos of the early sixties, raw as his folknik hero's appearance of those ealry acoustic days, and raw as the gathering of seemingly endless information on his transition from folk to rock made in this monumental piece of "rockumentary". If one listens to the music today from that tour on the "Bootleg Series: Volume Four" CD, the painful rawness still affects them as profoundly as if they were the people cheering in the background, or even quite possibly as if they were the man who called out "Judas!" to preceed an unrivalled rendition of Like a Rolling Stone. "No Direction Home", he bellows out in the chorus line, as whiny as his folk-singing days and containing all the quickly gathered wisdom and maturity he held by this point. Here is a mapping (not neccessarily a chronological mapping) of everything which contributed to that maturing which brought about the greatest song-writer and lyricist of modern times. This - amidst stiff and infinite competition - is without doubt the most comprehensive analysis of Dylan's early years ever created. The streaming and open-hearted interviews with Dylan are as insightful as anything to be found concerning the artist. Other interviews with people who knew him from when he arrived in New York City in the early Sixties provide added depth to this, and viewers end the mammoth film star-stricken by the regular appearances from other acclaimed and famous artists and poets such as Joan Baez, Pete Seeger, Liam Clancy and Alen Ginsberg. This is a must-see for any Dylan fan, and indeed anyone with a genuine interest in music of any era. |
