Tarnation

Oh great, a mentally unstable guy got iMovie on his new Mac. Let's watch while he tries out every setting in the effects pack. Oh, he's only got 15 minutes of childhood footage to work with? Shoot some self-portrait talking head shots with a home video camera. Wait, that's not long enough to release? Show all the footage again, while he adlibs some more voiceover. Wait, he has nothing to say? Ok, add some more effects. Did we reach 80 minutes yet? Ok, call the studio, let's release this baby!

Not bad, the rawness of the filmmaking makes it compelling. But at times it feels sensationalistic and it exposes the danger of autobiographical filmmaking, that the lack of distance makes it difficult to know what is compelling on its own terms. As interesting as the whole situation is, there are too many segments I just don't care about.

At best Tarnation is a touching documentary. Some of the more obscure scenes and chep effects seem out of place.

This movie made me wonder why filmmakers want their films shown to an audience. I know why commercial filmmakers do ($), but what about this video diary? What earthly reason would he have to share his family history with the world? On the face of it, the film seems like a love letter to his mother, but would a love letter include the agonizing "pumpkin" scene? The sense I got was that his pain was real, & Renee's story was authentically moving, so on an emotional level, the film worked for me.

Its really difficult to critique such a personal work, less a film then an extension of the director's mind trying to deal with these issues. On this second viewing I cannot help to admit that Caouette suffers from some pretention in his work, places where as a director he put together this footage in a way that seems slightly self-centred and goes against even the versions of himself found within it. Its still a deep and powerful work, one whose technical rawness is part of the emotions felt.

"A kaleidoscopic found-art project that looks to redefine the nature of documentary filmmaking." - Ed Gonzalez

I didn't find this movie interesting in any way.

One mans documentary over his own suffering. Kind of crazy and it is crazy. Something to psychologist to look at, maybe not suitable for average Jack's. Good film music though.

An unusual but not groundbreaking film, belonging to an obscure tradition of autobiographical film diaries like Jonas Mekas' Journey to Lithuania and David Perlov's Yoman. It is set apart by its kaleidoscopic, music-video-like editing of very disparate source material. Fragments of Caouette's touchingly messed-up biography and family history intersperse with bits of laid-back experimental whimsy, creating a very personal work, not wholly communicative, alienating to some.

If you only watch one PowerPoint presentation this year, make it this one!

I give the guy credit for trying...or maybe that's the problem. The story here is actually interesting, but the "psychedelic whirlwind" the summary talks about doesn't add to the narrative but just detracts from it. He's trying too hard when he doesn't need to be. There's also a few scenes where Caouette comes as self-centered and annoying (and I don't feel this was intentional), which doesn't help.

Though I was somewhat disappointed to discover that some of the documentary's most intense scenes were reenacted, I don't understand the criticism of Caouette documenting his life for the sake of public viewing simply because he's not a celebrity. Everyone has a unique story to tell, and Jonathan is no different. He has an amazingly strange, harrowing, interesting story to tell, and it's remarkable how much of this was caught on film over the course of decades.