Howl (2010) is not a good movie, however I’m not upset about it. The expectation one may have for this movie is that it will be a drama in a conventional sense but such isn’t the case. I am of the opinion that Ginsberg’s Howl, like most poetry, cannot be adapted into movie format unless through some allegorical/experimental nature. The producers behind the movie were smart enough to not adapt the poem itself in a movie and instead chose to go a different route. Thus in the essence of “beatitude,” Howl (2010) is an unconventional movie. Because of this direction, I cannot think of this movie as a “movie” but instead as a love letter to Allen Ginsberg in motion picture form. Despite my criticism of Howl (2010) as a movie, as a student of a Beat Literature course I am deeply appreciative of what the movie explores with the knowledge of the Beat Generation.
Allow me to walk you across the layout of the plot if you haven’t seen it. Howl (2010) is a movie split into intermingled unique sections. There is Allen Ginsberg’s (played by James Franco) reading of Howl at the Six Gallery Reading in 1955, the obscenity court trial in 1957 (the defense lawyer is played by John Hamm), an interview with Ginsberg in his apartment where he talked about his life and influential experiences, and an animated demonstration of Ginsberg’s Howl in an epic spectacle.
In the movie, there are multiple Beat Generation characters shown and mentioned such as Carl Solomon, Neal Cassady, Jack Kerouac, Peter Orlovsky, Naomi Ginsberg, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, and Burroughs (mentioned only). Ginsberg’s relationship with these characters are explored such as his friendship with Solomon and Kerouac, his affair with Cassady, his grief for his mother, and his romance with Orlovsky. The trial explores several societal implications about the poem. There is a debate about what is literature, and the two schools of thought clash with one another. There is also speculative discussion about what the results of the trial would spell for the future of literature and free speech. The animated sections abstractly and incredibly encapsulates the world of Howl. The despair and tragedy behind the lines “I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness” is represented in this vibrant world full of raunchy images and sequences (while it can be argued that the under-budget and dated animation doesn’t work, I think it enhances the experience). Part II with Moloch is a terrifying world with images of terror. Part III is an epic conclusion to the poem (I highly recommend seeing this). It is satisfying to fantasize the toppling of “Moloch” and the “I am with you in Rockland” is so powerful.
Throughout the movie, as you see the epic poem play out, the discussions in the trial about the legacy of the poem, and Ginsberg’s recounting of life, you learn and understand that Howl is a deeply personal poem for Ginsberg. It is Ginsberg. The thing is I didn’t understand Howl when we first read it in class. Of course, we read essays and other writings talking about it, but while reading it, I felt indifferent. However, through this movie I felt Howl’s violent-power, vibrant-life, and the breath of its soul. Ginsberg’s love for poetry, his connection to loved ones, and his experience as an experience is all demonstrated in Howl.
As far as criticisms go, they range between petty and major. First and foremost: James Franco as Allen Ginsberg. I am just not a fan of his acting; it felt too much like an act and it was very distracting. I do see the appeal in him portraying Ginsberg; Franco vaguely looks like a young Ginsberg especially with the glasses. Despite that, I felt like Franco’s portrayal of Ginsberg with unnatural dialogue delivery made it difficult to look past. He sometimes pulls it off while he is reading Howl but other times it's too much. Not to mention the fake beard Franco has, it is really distracting. Most importantly, after this movie, you will absolutely HATE Franco’s vocal fry. The vocal fry in this movie is off the charts and once you notice it, it will not shake your mind.
My major criticism has to do with the format of the movie. While I deeply appreciate the world of the Beat Generation more after this movie, I think the format of the movie was not ideal. In fact, I think it would have been better to not make a dramatized movie at all. While I liked the intermingled sections, I think they are all effectively doing something different that doesn’t genuinely portray all the components of the story well enough. There are so many ideas in this movie that there isn’t a strong one. The movie tries to tell you at the end that Howl was primarily about Ginsberg’s attitudes of his sexuality, and while this isn’t out of left field, it doesn’t feel properly expanded upon. We learn his coming out to Kerouac, his affair with Cassady, his love for Orlovsky, and his fear of his family reading his works, but these are tied up as soon as they are brought up. I wish this were more explored. I wish we could watch Ginsberg’s experience more closely rather than just “I did and felt this and that's that!”. If one were not in a Beat Literature class and they watched this movie, they would be terribly confused and not understand the necessary nuances of the world that the Beats depicted. I think my feelings generally are, it should have picked one idea and ran with it. The result is several movies in one with a lot of interesting ideas but not satisfyingly laid out.
To wrap up my review, I want to address that I liked this movie. I think it is a well intentioned love letter to Ginsberg and the world of the Beats, but I do not think it was executed well as a movie. Despite this, I honestly may still watch many of the movies on the list, especially the ones everyone else reviewed. I think the world of the Beats is interesting and I’d love to explore it more even if they aren’t quality movies.
Howl (2010) is not a good movie, however I’m not upset about it. The expectation one may have for this movie is that it will be a drama in a conventional sense but such isn’t the case. I am of the opinion that Ginsberg’s Howl, like most poetry, cannot be adapted into movie format unless through some allegorical/experimental nature. The producers behind the movie were smart enough to not adapt the poem itself in a movie and instead chose to go a different route. Thus in the essence of “beatitude,” Howl (2010) is an unconventional movie. Because of this direction, I cannot think of this movie as a “movie” but instead as a love letter to Allen Ginsberg in motion picture form. Despite my criticism of Howl (2010) as a movie, as a student of a Beat Literature course I am deeply appreciative of what the movie explores with the knowledge of the Beat Generation.
Allow me to walk you across the layout of the plot if you haven’t seen it. Howl (2010) is a movie split into intermingled unique sections. There is Allen Ginsberg’s (played by James Franco) reading of Howl at the Six Gallery Reading in 1955, the obscenity court trial in 1957 (the defense lawyer is played by John Hamm), an interview with Ginsberg in his apartment where he talked about his life and influential experiences, and an animated demonstration of Ginsberg’s Howl in an epic spectacle.
In the movie, there are multiple Beat Generation characters shown and mentioned such as Carl Solomon, Neal Cassady, Jack Kerouac, Peter Orlovsky, Naomi Ginsberg, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, and Burroughs (mentioned only). Ginsberg’s relationship with these characters are explored such as his friendship with Solomon and Kerouac, his affair with Cassady, his grief for his mother, and his romance with Orlovsky. The trial explores several societal implications about the poem. There is a debate about what is literature, and the two schools of thought clash with one another. There is also speculative discussion about what the results of the trial would spell for the future of literature and free speech. The animated sections abstractly and incredibly encapsulates the world of Howl. The despair and tragedy behind the lines “I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness” is represented in this vibrant world full of raunchy images and sequences (while it can be argued that the under-budget and dated animation doesn’t work, I think it enhances the experience). Part II with Moloch is a terrifying world with images of terror. Part III is an epic conclusion to the poem (I highly recommend seeing this). It is satisfying to fantasize the toppling of “Moloch” and the “I am with you in Rockland” is so powerful.
Throughout the movie, as you see the epic poem play out, the discussions in the trial about the legacy of the poem, and Ginsberg’s recounting of life, you learn and understand that Howl is a deeply personal poem for Ginsberg. It is Ginsberg. The thing is I didn’t understand Howl when we first read it in class. Of course, we read essays and other writings talking about it, but while reading it, I felt indifferent. However, through this movie I felt Howl’s violent-power, vibrant-life, and the breath of its soul. Ginsberg’s love for poetry, his connection to loved ones, and his experience as an experience is all demonstrated in Howl.
As far as criticisms go, they range between petty and major. First and foremost: James Franco as Allen Ginsberg. I am just not a fan of his acting; it felt too much like an act and it was very distracting. I do see the appeal in him portraying Ginsberg; Franco vaguely looks like a young Ginsberg especially with the glasses. Despite that, I felt like Franco’s portrayal of Ginsberg with unnatural dialogue delivery made it difficult to look past. He sometimes pulls it off while he is reading Howl but other times it's too much. Not to mention the fake beard Franco has, it is really distracting. Most importantly, after this movie, you will absolutely HATE Franco’s vocal fry. The vocal fry in this movie is off the charts and once you notice it, it will not shake your mind.
My major criticism has to do with the format of the movie. While I deeply appreciate the world of the Beat Generation more after this movie, I think the format of the movie was not ideal. In fact, I think it would have been better to not make a dramatized movie at all. While I liked the intermingled sections, I think they are all effectively doing something different that doesn’t genuinely portray all the components of the story well enough. There are so many ideas in this movie that there isn’t a strong one. The movie tries to tell you at the end that Howl was primarily about Ginsberg’s attitudes of his sexuality, and while this isn’t out of left field, it doesn’t feel properly expanded upon. We learn his coming out to Kerouac, his affair with Cassady, his love for Orlovsky, and his fear of his family reading his works, but these are tied up as soon as they are brought up. I wish this were more explored. I wish we could watch Ginsberg’s experience more closely rather than just “I did and felt this and that's that!”. If one were not in a Beat Literature class and they watched this movie, they would be terribly confused and not understand the necessary nuances of the world that the Beats depicted. I think my feelings generally are, it should have picked one idea and ran with it. The result is several movies in one with a lot of interesting ideas but not satisfyingly laid out.
To wrap up my review, I want to address that I liked this movie. I think it is a well intentioned love letter to Ginsberg and the world of the Beats, but I do not think it was executed well as a movie. Despite this, I honestly may still watch many of the movies on the list, especially the ones everyone else reviewed. I think the world of the Beats is interesting and I’d love to explore it more even if they aren’t quality movies.
