"In Your Dreams" movie documentary - What did you think?

[Dex]

I think the most likely scenario is that Stevie got caught up in emphasizing how "old" the poem was and "English" just slipped out, being a word that she associates with "old"ness. It may have just been a slip of the tongue.

[WildHearted]

Originally Posted by Dex

I think the most likely scenario is that Stevie got caught up in emphasizing how "old" the poem was and "English" just slipped out, being a word that she associates with "old"ness. It may have just been a slip of the tongue.

Maybe she assumed because of the phrasing and the language he used, that it was actually written in Old English. Of course, it wasn't at all and was half a dozen centuries too late to have been.....

[Dex]

Originally Posted by WildHearted

Maybe she assumed because of the phrasing and the language he used, that it was actually written in Old English. Of course, it wasn't at all and was half a dozen centuries too late to have been.....

I hadn't thought of that! It's a possibility too. I'm amazed at what people think qualifies as "Old English".

I honestly think she just slid "English" in to balance out the sentence and wasn't really thinking about what she was saying much. It'd be interesting to know what she does think when consciously asked about Poe. Although perhaps we're better off not knowing.

[DashingDan]

I think I'm being so fussy/pissy about the "Old English/ancient" thing because I watched the doc again this weekend (I attended a screening in Cambridge, MA in early April) and I realized how absolutely, ridiculously boring and 'colored' its story is...this from a storyteller of truths.

I was so caught up in it all at the April screening that I thought it was mildly fun. But, it's downright embarrassing at times, engaging rarely and filled with vain puffery for the remainder.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by WildHearted

Maybe she assumed because of the phrasing and the language he used, that it was actually written in Old English. Of course, it wasn't at all and was half a dozen centuries too late to have been.....

Yes. I think that's it. No one is going to think Mark Twain is English, because of the way he writes, the language he uses, but some people probably would think Henry James is.

Poe's so closely associated with Boston though. If Stevie thought about it a little, I'm sure she'd remember that.

Michele

[michelej1]

Review: In Your Dreams, June 13, 2013

[I thought I recognized that producer Stevie sniped at, but I never knew his name]

http://www.montrealgazette.com/enter...106/story.html

Film about Stevie Nicks is less a documentary, more a love-in

By Bill Brownstein, The Montreal Gazette


MONTREAL — The Fleetwood Mac concert scheduled for Tuesday at the Bell Centre has been cancelled. So, about the only way local fans will now be able to catch Mac member Stevie Nicks, the raspy, enigmatic, Grammy Award-winning singer, is through the magic of celluloid: the documentary In Your Dreams: Stevie Nicks, opening Friday and running only until Monday at Cinéma du Parc.

But Mac fans be warned: this doc doesn’t focus on the fab foursome, but rather on the collaboration between Nicks and former Eurythmics frontman Dave Stewart in the production of Nicks’s solo disc In Your Dreams — released to mostly glowing reviews two years ago.

Nicks and Stewart are also credited as co-directors and co-executive producers of this film. Which means that they let viewers in on the pop-music world they wish them to see, and not necessarily the warts-and-all pop-music world that an outside director might have depicted.

As such, the doc begins with gushing testimony from a gaggle of Nicks fans who declare, among other things, that she is one of the greatest voices of our times. No doubt. Certainly, her distinctive vocal stylings helped elevate such Mac tunes as Gypsy, Landslide and Rhiannon to iconic status. And certainly several cuts on In Your Dreams will probably stand the test of time, too.

Point is, Nicks’s vocals speak for themselves. There is no need for gratuitous aggrandizement and grandstanding here.

But it seems that Nicks adores herself as much as her fans do. Which means that those not as intensely fanatic about Nicks could have difficulty with aspects of this documentary love-in.

This same group of observers could also have difficulty with a level of Nicks’s pomposity, particularly when it comes to her comparing herself to Bob Dylan as a writer. She also has the gall to inform management at the hotel in Italy where she is staying that the poem she penned while there and is presenting them will have immeasurable cultural value down the road.

Nicks has much to be proud of without having to hammer us over the head about her ability as a singer and songwriter. At 65, she remains a vital force and can compose and croon with the best of them. Probably because she is one of the very few women of her epoch still cranking it out, she feels compelled to blow her own horn — particularly when it is the senior Jaggers and McCartneys of the pop world who seem to get most of the press for their ability to endure and to continue to pack the big rooms.

Maybe there is an element of truth when Nicks proclaims at the beginning of the doc that she and Stewart have decided to “defy” the recording industry, to bring out a disc, “from our tribe to yours,” that will remind people of the grand old ways of the business — evidently a more pure and noble period in the last century when those in the biz were all saints.


But this rant really starts to veer off the deep end. This is the kind of poppycock rock talk that could induce projectile hurling among the squeamish.

Sure, between Nicks’s solo and group efforts with Fleetwood Mac in that period, more than 140 million albums were sold. But lest we forget: those hazy, crazy years were fairly turbulent for Nicks, who had to overcome major drug-dependency issues and who, rumour had it, had been associated with witchcraft.

Stewart, for his part, talks of the obvious pairing between him and Nicks. They have both recovered from relationships, romantic and musical. In his case, it was his Eurythmics mate Annie Lennox. In her case, it was Lindsey Buckingham, with whom she split romantically but with whom she still works both on the solo and Fleetwood Mac fronts.

Stewart rhapsodizes how he stumbled into this “labyrinth cave” that is Stevie Nicks. It’s actually quite the palatial estate “somewhere in Southern California” — as pointed out in the film. Evidently, Stewart has been into filming stuff ever since finding a gold chain on the street and exchanging it for a video camera at an Australian pawnshop.

So when Nicks gave Stewart some of her poetic musings, it was decided they transform them to music and that he capture it all on film.

Nicks takes a back seat to no one. The camera picks up occasional sniping when a producer has the temerity to tell her a lyric isn’t working for him. “Would you tell Bob Dylan what to write?” she asks, almost incredulously.

Nicks also makes it abundantly clear that Edgar Allan Poe is a big influence. In fact, she brings an adaptation of Poe’s 1839 poem Annabel Lee (about eternal love beyond the grave) — which she wrote when she was 17 — out of the vault to bring to musical life in In Your Dreams. Her hope is that it will turn kids on to the mystical poetry of Poe. Nice thought, even though it comes off as a tad too pretentious.

On the other hand, credit Nicks for coming to the aid of wounded U.S. soldiers and contributing to Hurricane Katrina relief. She does have heart.

What this doc doesn’t and should reveal is what drove her from the beginning. All we really learn in one small tidbit is that her grandfather, a struggling country singer, played a role in her musical life.

There is probably much more and much less to the life and times of Stevie Nicks than what is presented in this picture. But it will take someone else to bring that story to the screen.

[louielouie2000]

^This article nails my biggest beef with the IYD doc: there is no conflict/resolution, thus there's really no plot. Which made the whole thing kinda tedious to sit through, even for this hardcore fan. The lack of a plot inadvertantly backfires into showcasing the less than flattering aspects of Stevie's personality, too. Don't get me wrong- as a fan, I'm glad to have even an Instagram-filtered snapshot of how Stevie works & lives these days. At least the album itself is fantastic... that's all that really matters to me in the end.

[soul_drifter333]

Do you mean because there is no "You wouldn't say that to Bob Dylan" disputes?? Because I found that unflattering in Destiny Rules.

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

^This article nails my biggest beef with the IYD doc: there is no conflict/resolution, thus there's really no plot. Which made the whole thing kinda tedious to sit through, even for this hardcore fan. The lack of a plot inadvertantly backfires into showcasing the less than flattering aspects of Stevie's personality, too. Don't get me wrong- as a fan, I'm glad to have even an Instagram-filtered snapshot of how Stevie works & lives these days. At least the album itself is fantastic... that's all that really matters to me in the end.

[louielouie2000]

Originally Posted by soul_drifter333

Do you mean because there is no "You wouldn't say that to Bob Dylan" disputes?? Because I found that unflattering in Destiny Rules.

No, I wasn't thinking of that incident at all, actually. There was quite of bit of tension/conflict resolution during Destiny Rules. Would it be a double or single album? Would the material be safe or envelope pushing? There was a point when Lindsey was threatening to pull all of his recorded material out of the project, possibly imploding the entire album. Which record label was the band going to go with? Who was going to mix the album? Was the band going to get enough rehearsal time in before the tour? The artistic conflict slowly brewing between Lindsey & Stevie was just the proscenium arch framing all of this.

On one hand, the love fest of the IYD doc was a relief compared to the ever-building tension of Destiny Rules. On the other hand, IYD didn't really tell a cohesive story, either. It was mostly a series of little book reports on each of the songs.

[michelej1]

Yes, I do think it would have helped focus and editing if you shape a documentary to build towards something. Like even if we were just building towards the debut at the Wiltern, every scene could be angled as a path on the road to that, with triumphs and setbacks along the journey.

Michele

[vivfox]

Originally Posted by michelej1

In her case, it was Lindsey Buckingham, with whom she split romantically but with whom she still works both on the solo and Fleetwood Mac fronts.
Nicks takes a back seat to no one. The camera picks up occasional sniping when a producer has the temerity to tell her a lyric isn’t working for him. “Would you tell Bob Dylan what to write?” she asks, almost incredulously.

Lindsey Buckingham

[Dex]

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

On one hand, the love fest of the IYD doc was a relief compared to the ever-building tension of Destiny Rules. On the other hand, IYD didn't really tell a cohesive story, either. It was mostly a series of little book reports on each of the songs.

I know what you mean, but in some ways I didn't really mind this. I was never expecting the film to work as stand-alone cinema and I appreciated the insight into the songwriting more than I probably would have enjoyed various moments of tension regarding Sound Mixer choices, etc. The songwriting is my area of interest, and I'm glad the film focused on that. Even if it works as a companion-piece more than a film.

My main problem is that the time seemed to be divided equally between all of the songs, and to be honest some of them just weren't very interesting. Wide Sargasso Sea? "I describe what happens in the hopelessly mediocre movie, and there's music playing!". We got it, Stevie. Let's move on! I want more footage from the creation of songs like You May Be the One.

[UndoingTheLaces]

I'm actually bored with the documentary format. I watched the whole season of the Cyndi Lauper reality show and as much as I love her I got tired of the cookie cutter way each episode was the same. She'd set out to do something, there would be an issue, he husband and kid would get really frustrated with her, she'd anger a fan and then everything would work out in the end. Frankly, I'd have been just as happy to see how she went through a day without all the drama and hysterics. I'm sure not every day of her life is filled with drama and resolution. Sometimes people have good days and some days things are bad and things don't work out for the best.

In Your Dreams reminded me of the video Dave did for Eurythmics years ago for their We 2 Are 1 album. It was just a fun look at the making of an album. It didn't need to be anything more. We didn't need drama and resolution falsely woven into the story. It wasn't about that. And I disagree with the reviewer that it's all about Stevie bragging about how wonderful she is. I'm sure it was Dave's idea to put the fans in there rather than some attempt of Stevie to make herself look good. And the person who wrote the review obviously knows very little about her. They act like Stevie never had a successful solo career. They only mention Fleetwood Mac and then sort of act like this is a huge disappointment for Mac fans because it's only about one member of the band. That's like saying that Brad Pitt fans shouldn't see Oceans 11 because Brad isn't in the whole movie. And the other thing about that review that bothered me was that the person was that he complained that it didn't delve into Stevie's life more. She pretty much did a great job of that in the Behind the Music special and Oprah's Master Class. Why repeat yourself?

[MikeInNV]

Originally Posted by UndoingTheLaces

In Your Dreams reminded me of the video Dave did for Eurythmics years ago for their We 2 Are 1 album. It was just a fun look at the making of an album. It didn't need to be anything more. We didn't need drama and resolution falsely woven into the story. It wasn't about that. And I disagree with the reviewer that it's all about Stevie bragging about how wonderful she is. I'm sure it was Dave's idea to put the fans in there rather than some attempt of Stevie to make herself look good. And the person who wrote the review obviously knows very little about her. They act like Stevie never had a successful solo career. They only mention Fleetwood Mac and then sort of act like this is a huge disappointment for Mac fans because it's only about one member of the band. That's like saying that Brad Pitt fans shouldn't see Oceans 11 because Brad isn't in the whole movie. And the other thing about that review that bothered me was that the person was that he complained that it didn't delve into Stevie's life more. She pretty much did a great job of that in the Behind the Music special and Oprah's Master Class. Why repeat yourself?

I agree with this. I don't feel like the documentary failed to deliver what had been promised. I thought it was pretty much what Stevie and Dave told us it would be before it was released. It was an inside look at how the album was made, nothing more and nothing less. If you're a Stevie fan, you should like it. If you're not, then of course there's not much there for you. And as far as not having any of the conflict of Destiny Rules, I certainly didn't expect any with Dave and Stevie constantly telling us what a love-fest the recording process was.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by UndoingTheLaces

I'm actually bored with the documentary format. I watched the whole season of the Cyndi Lauper reality show and as much as I love her I got tired of the cookie cutter way each episode was the same. She'd set out to do something, there would be an issue, he husband and kid would get really frustrated with her, she'd anger a fan and then everything would work out in the end. Frankly, I'd have been just as happy to see how she went through a day without all the drama and hysterics. I'm sure not every day of her life is filled with drama and resolution. Sometimes people have good days and some days things are bad and things don't work out for the best.

With the false conflict, the reality shows are actually more scripted than a Shakespeare play. Certainly IYD didn't need that, but I think it could have used a sense of direction.

Even if it had been more chronological from beginning of the recording processs to the end, or if it had been more structured like more dedicated to showing the construction of each song, I think it would have benefitted. I think having an outline -- a natural one, not a contrived one, actually helps a lot with the editing process automatically and some of the extraneous things that I think kind of weakened the documentary would have been weeded out quite painlessly, if they were following a pattern.

For example, if what you want to do is tell a little about each song, give us an origin story (I wish I didn't get as much about Cheaper Than Free's origin as I did), let us hear a demo, give us snippets of the recording process and tell us what changes you made in getting to the finished product. Do it for each song, don't just haphazardly throw it in for some and not for others. When I saw Stevie talking about that missing guitar part in GAG and saying it was better than what they had and causing them to go and find it, I found myself wanting to know about the little things that happened like that for every song.

I don't think that the documentary should have a beginning, middle and ending so much as I think it should have a base and not just meander.

But I'm a person who cherishes the Tusk photo shoot. When you love artists, you just want to see them. The more inane and mindless the better. When you are a fan, you like meandering. I am talking about making this a better documentary for non-fans. And I think that a little cohesiveness and end vision would have helped achieve that.

Personally, I don't care one way or another. I was going to see the stupid thing anyway. I'm upset that the gal has had a hernia and I didn't know about it. I want to see all. But critically speaking, I get how this documentary could have been structured to appeal to and compel a wider, non-fan audience.

Michele