I just purchased my ticket for a screening of When You're Strange (with Depp's narration) for $12. The film will show as follows:

Sunday, June 21

Time: 10 pm
Place: Festival Theater - Westwood

Wednesday, June 24

Time: 2 pm
Place: Regent Theater - Westwood

There are 306 seats left for June 24 and 400 seats left for June 21.

Call 866-345-6337. Ignore the prompts, stay on the line, they'll pick up. Phone hours 10 am to 7 pm.

Be there or be square!

Thanks for the info. Sounds tempting.

10 pm on Sunday was really untempting, but the Wednesday thing works for me, as I am currently 'between jobs' as they used to say!

P.S. The festival folks said to please spread the word, so if you wanted to post this elsewhere, it couldn't hurt!

Thanks. I will do that.

It's not up on festival's official site, as it was only arranged in this last week or so, once the Depp narration was cut in. Tom announced it on his blog, at the News tab, but didn't indicate the second show.

I'm so jealous. Hopefully, the film will make it's way to New York soon.

I think this is the beginning of a national situation. Doubt you'll be waiting much longer.

Should be interesting with the changes in narration and having Depp do it. I'll be interested to see what you think of the film.

I'm looking forward to it. Tom is right that the film needed an actor to narrate. Depp is the perfect choice - he's got the box office draw and he's a seriously good actor. The woman I talked to this morning sounded impressed that Depp was on board, and seemed to know what was going on - she interrupted me and said, yes, they were cutting his narration in on a rush basis, to get the film into the festival, and please get the word out.

Mews you gonna put up a personal review here after seeing it? I wish you a great time.

That's great. We'll I can tell you the footage is going to take your breath away. The quality and presentation is nothing short of shocking. It will be great when everyone can at least get ahold of this in DVD format.

I'll put a review on the Rockphiles blog and also over here.

A friend of mine who is in the distribution business tells me that the film will 'street' this summer, courtesy of Rhino.

Does 'street' mean it will be out on DVD or in theaters? It's June now, and it hasn't been released to theaters outside of a few film festivals.

Good question. I've been wondering about that too. Out of a selfish point of view I want it to be released on DVD so everyone will be able to see it after all this time of talking about it.
When it first will be released in theaters it will take forever to hit some countries in Europe. I think it will be hard to find a theater that will play WYS in Holland I think.

Far as I remember from Tom's blog, there was international distribution interest right after Sundance.

I hope so Mews. There is so little info to find. The only info that is there is on Tom's blog?
Really wish the Doors camp would provide some updates about how it is going.
If you and Dan didn't post about the screenings coming up I think hardly anyone would know about it.
That's problaby why so many tickets are still available I think.

The LA Film Festival still has not been authorized to make an official announcement, but they may do so this weekend - just a guess, mind you.

Oh I see, I guess I missed that part. Hope they will make an official announcement soon. The sooner, the better. Get that news out there and tickets sold.

Just got back from the screening, so here's my first impressions.

Westwood was a zoo, but I found parking very quickly, right across the street from the Regent, and although the show was sold out, I got a good seat off to the right, of the main block of seats, so just me and two women who likely had seen the Doors back in their early days. We got a bit of a late start, because of the huge amount of people. Ray and Robby made a quick entrance through a side door, but were spotted by and got applause. Robby quickly waved and sat down, Ray played to the crowd a little more, of course. I'd say the crowd was largely film types, Doors fans from back when, with a smattering of young men. I was the only one with an empty seat beside me, and it stayed that way, happy to say.

The producer of the LA Film Festival got up and read a short note from Tom DiCillo, who was unable to attend, and then off we went.

Is it a great film? Yes, for casual Doors fans and those wanting to know more about the band and the times. Ferrara's footage was very well utilized, and the editing was seamless. It opens with a segment from HWY, while Jim Ladd is heard announcing Jim's death from the original broadcast.

From there, the exploration of the Doors begins, looking at their early days, how the band was put together, and then launches into a recounting of how they were signed by Jac, the first two albums, the clubs, lots of footage from concerts, funny interviews with fans - one got a big laugh, where a girl asks them if they're like the Monkees! I'd say the written material lacks in detail, but for those who don't spend their lives diarying every move the Doors and Jim made, it's basically unimportant. Depp's narration is very low-key and unobtrusive, almost subliminal. Some of the "facts" were startling - i.e., Robby decided that ROTS should be the first single, not LHM. Er ...LHM was the first single, and ROTS the second, driven by radio play. I even let out an inadvertent "what??" at that. Also, the departure to Paris was wrong - April, not the real date of March 11.

Miami is well explored, but so is New Haven, which seems to be where Jim's problems with the establishment really began. As Jim continues to deteriorate, you can see how the other Doors became more and more terrified of what might happen, as he continued his reckless progress, plus the emergence of his alter-ego, Jimbo. Miami broke his spirit. It's sadly apparent that he has suddenly realized that he is not invincible, and the look in his eyes says everything.

It is so obvious that most of Jim's problems stem simply from a sense of alienation and the use of drugs and alcohol to cope with that. Pam apparently got him to a psychiatrist, but he didn't go back. McClure steered him towards poetry, which appeared to refocus him and he was able to find inspiration enough to get to New Orleans, and present the LA Woman material. Ray notes that he literally saw the psychic energy leave Jim, when he sat down on the stage and then couldn't get up again.

That wretched woman from NY is mentioned, not by name though, and she gets laughed at. And so, Jim flies into the sunset.

From there, the filmmakers simply note that, once in Paris, Jim developed a bad cough and Pam had him see doctors, who strongly urged him to give up drinking. Muller's photos are used. The death is explained simply as a heart attack after a night of heavy drinking.

There was sturdy applause, and it turns out it was an audience-involved screening, so we all got to cast our ballot as we left.

Kudos to the editors, who did a magnificent job, Mr. DiCillo for an inspired vision, Johnny Depp for skilful narration, and to Jim, John, Ray and Robby for being The Doors. Without whom, this movie would not burn as brightly as it does.

And, if Jim had gone to any screening, this would have been the one. UCLA, Westwood, Los Angeles Film Festival. And he'd have really liked it, I believe.

The empty seat was for him.

Thanks Mews for writing that. I'm passing it on to some people.

For the story telling it doesn't sound there is much new things in there but that's ok I think. Looking forward especially seeing the footage in great quality.
Still very excited to see this, whenever that may be... yeah not being very patience I know.

Thanks Sally for your review. Loved the part where you said the empty seat was for Jim.
gave a personal touch to your review. Good to see you enjoyed the screening.

Well I am sorry but Mewsy just confirms what the arguments have been about. In other words the film is superficially 'pretty' and has someone really cool narrating in Depp but the film is NOT what it has been passed off to be by Doors management and DiCillo himself which was some kind of ultimate documentary that nails the lies of the Olly Stone movie.
Some telling comments.....

Poor research by Dicillo as even I could have told him that The Changeling was The Doors first choice as a single from LAW and Holzman vetoed that and championed LHM.

Once again we pander to the usual crazy Morrison angle as did Stone as did every documentary made so far.
They all make the same fundemental error of mentioning Miami for it's shock effect but never examining WHY it was inevitable.
Of course these things happened and were worthy of note but there was more to The Doors than two nights on the road.
Stone gets criticised for focussing on the Morrison of Miami but it seems DiCillo does little different.
I am sure the footage is wonderful and Johnny will do a masterful job as narrator but once again I will argue that the narrative is the key to the whole project and once again it seems sadly lacking.
For the casual fan and non Doors fan it will probably be an amazing experience but in 1991 that was the reaction to Stones movie and that was conceived as very inaccurate.
This has been passed off to me as something it clearly is not.

He claims on his blog that his film tops Stone because he makes it clear Robby wrote LMF.....but Stone did exactly the same thing in his movie......DiCillo cannot even get simple LAW facts right and the idea that The Doors favoured ROTS as the first single will now go down in Doors folklore as truth when it is utter bollocks of the highest order.

This kind of shit was heavily criticised in 1991 when Stone gave a heavily biased image of Morrison to the public which has been believed ever since.
The least Di Cillo could have done is gotten a fact checker not just blindly believed the bullshit just 'cos a Door told him it was true. How long do we have to wait for a documentary that actually finds out stuff about The Doors and relates it to an audience instead of just passing off total shit as some kind of truth?

Regardless of how wonderful and unique the footage is and regardless of what a coup it was to get an actor of the calibre of Johnny Depp whom I am sure will have an affection for The Doors the film stands or falls by the Historical narrative and it seems it is no more relevant in that department that the MTV or the VH1 docs of the 90s.

Thanks for the review. It sounds as if the film could've used a little more fact-checking, but it still seems like it was a whole lot better than Oliver Stone's mess.

I loved the last line of your review. Very touching.

How can you come to such a conclusion?
Stones movie was a Hollywood film made for profit and to appeal to mainly a non Doors audience criticised for inacuracies and a focus on a wild drunken Morrison.
It was supported by ALL THREE Doors regardless of the amount of whining a certain individual has spent the last near 20 years induldging in.

This is a real documentry supported by ALL THREE Doors made for a predominantly Doors oriented audience which is seemingly full of inacuracies and has it seems a focus on a wild drunken Morrison.
So what exactly is the difference here?

Is it you folks like the guy who did the new one and don't like the guy who made the Hollwood film because even sight unseen it is obvious that DiCillo does not surpass Stone in the research department and a whole bunch of new Doors bullshit seems set for the new century.

I have no real like/dislike of either of them but am intelligent enough to see that the Stone movie was not a documentry but a Hollywood bio pic made primaraly to turn a profit in which ALL THREE Doors shared and WYS is supposed to be some definitive documentry that will educate Doors fans and put to rights the supposed sleight of Stones movie.

And before anyone comes out with some pathetic 'you haven't seen it so don't diss it' blah blah ...so what? ....I never saw the Doors or met Jim Morrison but have been exprssing opinions about both for 40 years.

Jim really was a wild drunken man. He brought this on himself. He's a rock and roll star. Plain and simple. Sure he's a poet, but Jim was wild drunken rock star, and he probably knew it. Anyone who emulates tragic, drunken poets and Greek gods like Dionysus is giving off that impression because he wants people to worship him and buy his records. Show Business. And if the fans judge him for his wild exploits and drunken arrests.... Well, blame Jim.

First of all, I do not know Mr Dicillo.. so "liking" him is a non-issue for me.

Secondly, my post was directly related to Sally's review... as I have not seen the film myself. I did not come to any "conclusion", and cannot do so until I do see the film myself.

From reading Sally's review, I got the impression that WYS was a damn sight better than The Doors movie (and she can correct me if I read that wrong). I also remember Jim's review after seeing it at Sundance, and he told me it was much better than Stone's horrible piece of garbage.

I can only base my opinions on the reviews I'm reading from these people.. both of whom I trust would say "it sucked".. if indeed it did.

I am also intelligent enough to know that the Stone film was not a documentary. I never said it was.

Again, I cannot come to any "conclusion" until I see the film for myself, which I hope will be in the very near future.

Well yes of course he was......so why have Doors fans been whining about Stone for the last coupla decades?

The point I was labouring to make is that this so called documentry is of no real difference from any of the others....inacurate, focusing on Morrison the drunk etc etc....but it should be

I am sorry Dianne but if this is NOT a conclusion then I need a new thesaurus.

QUOTE (gotothelight @ Jun 25 2009, 04:04 AM)

but it still seems like it was a whole lot better than Oliver Stone's mess.

And I did not say 'YOU' I said 'you folks'...based on the anti Stone posts that fill places like this forum.
I doubt any Doors fan will say the film sucks and this kind of 'defensive' post detract from a sensible debate on the documentry.
If someone criticises this they are immediately jumped on with this kind of comment


Establishing a divide between nay sayers and yes sayers in that yes sayers are more reliable than nay sayers instead of a proper debate on the subject matter.
Of course few of us have actually seen it but even with the trusted reviews from people I too hold in high esteem as individuals and opinion wise it is obvious that what was presented when this project first saw the light of day and what actually is on offer are two different entities.
It may sound trivial to highlight the ROTS single angle from LAW but this kind of thing is exactly what Stone was accused of. Remenber the cupboard burning scene which for years a campaign of hate was directed at Stone for including this scene. But the events happened as they were portrayed.




I never said you did!

Oddly enough, that's not the Jim that I find interesting.

I've been reading "Break On Through" again, and the authors believed that not really very long into the Doors' fame, fans wanted to see something wacko happen at the concerts, like Jim getting arrested and stuff like that. That would be a major drag for me if a concert I paid for and looked forward to attending, was cut short by Jim's antics or some riot or something. I would rather the guys just perform the songs. I like their appearance on Danish tv the best out of all their filmed performances, I thought it was brilliant and Jim sounded and looked great. I don't like "antics." But then, I'm not a young person in 1968.

lol... then perhaps you should buy a new one. Conclusion.. by definition... is a final decision. My using the words "seems like" in my post certainly is not a conclusion. There was nothing emphatic about it. It was my take on the review I read and that's all.

Since you were responding to me, your comment about being intelligent enough to know that Stone's film was not a documentary appeared to be directed at me. I see now that it wasn't.

For me, the main difference between Stone's movie and this documentary is that I really enjoyed sitting through the documentary, and got a good idea of who these guys were at the time, why Jim went the way he did, and what happened along the way, stripped down to basics. Some of the close-ups of the faces and eyes of the band as Jim gets worse and worse are striking, and say a lot more than lines and lines of dialogue and explanation. Btw, Alex, those two inaccuracies are the only ones I spotted. Others probably wouldn't care that much. I don't think this is intended to be used for study purposes, just to get a picture of who the Doors were, juxtaposed against the times that surrounded them.

Stone's movie is a stupid comic book without the real guys and a LOT of made up nonsense as well, i.e. Pam didn't live in Venice - they met at a club on Sunset. Just for starters. I still haven't been able to sit through more than 20 minutes - maybe - without making a sound of disgust and turning it off.

When this one goes to DVD, I'll be happy to watch it several times. But, if possible, it needs to be seen on the big screen, to get the full effect. Like the sound of the Shelby roaring down the desert highway for example, the wounded coyote on the road, Jim getting out to lay a towel over its head, as it lies dying, as a metaphor for the end of Jim and the Doors, after Miami. This image shocked the audience, btw.

It's the real deal, it's the real Doors, it's the real Jim Morrison, and it's very well made.

You need to see the movie. He was not really a wild, drunken man - it was an act that took him over until he became the part he was playing. Not a good thing for someone of Jim's very high level of intelligence. Michael McClure was able to pull him out of the depression that resulted once he realized he was spiralling down into a trap, and refocus him towards his poetry. If anyone stepped in to Jim's life to try and change his direction, it was McClure, aided by Pamela.

Wild, drunken rock stars don't read the classics in their early teens - perhaps you can point me to one I might have missed, but Jim was exceptional.

You can't 'blame Jim' for anything. This movie will hopefully help people to see that Jim was a product of the times, as was the band itself, and that the drinking and drugs were exacerbated by external events more than Jim's internal mechanisms. If he hadn't been in rock music, I doubt he would have been a wild, drunken anything.

Sure, they do, Jim. If you want another example I believe Iggy Pop was at the top of his class in high school & voted the most likely to succeed. If he accomplished that I guess is up to the indivduals definition of success.

Jim may have had alcohol problems even if he didn't become a rock star. Jim was already acting out as back as FSU, drinking a lot and leaving the empty bottles in the room of his grandparents house. He was arrested in FL which there's a mug shot that's widely distributed on the internet. & he continued and accelerated at UCLA. If he went into another line of work he probably would have had problems with alcohol & acting out he was well on his way before getting to L.A.

I don't know why everybody is so upset about the sensationalism of Jim Morrison. It's a legitimate aspect of his personality. Sure he was well read and had some interesting theories & was a great writer, those aspects are also well known & get acknowledged even in Oliver Stone's movie. Most of the reason is Ray's carping about The Doors movie, admitedly it's not the greatest movie, it has a lot of problems with dialogue, what did people expect to be in the movie? Discussions about Nietzsche & Artaud? Val as Jim sitting by the ocean for 2 hours scribbling in a notebook? I think there should have been added a scene of Jim writing but that's about it. Really when you discuss Jim Morrison you can't have one aspect over the other because they're both intrinsic to his character.

Pointing out the fact that you're criticizing a film that you haven't seen yet? How pathetic! I guess this statement renders you immune to any and all criticisms that may come your way, so you are now free to blast away at this film to your heart's desire. There's no need to see it. You read a review on a message board, so you have all you need to know.

By the way, you have albums, videos and written and recorded interviews on which to base your expressed opinions on The Doors and Jim Morrison. You have a review on a message board on which to base your expressed opinions on When You're Strange. They're not really comparable, are they?

The documentary seems to be able to convey that there was a redemptive side to Jim's personality, which Stone's movie appears to have missed. The documentary, btw, does emphasize Jim's writing and poetry, balanced against the rock star guy. I would say that, yes, you can have one aspect over another, and his creative and humane side outweighed the Jimbo side, by how much we won't ever know because Jim didn't live long enough to show what he could do once he stopped being a rock star. He'd only quit for good a couple of months before he died.

Ok, let me clarify some of these "innaccuracies" because this stuff gets propagated. This comes from the film maker himself...so don't jump the messenger (like that helps

"Some of the "facts" were startling - i.e., Robby decided that ROTS should be the first
single, not LHM. Er ...LHM was the first single, and ROTS the second, driven
by radio play. I even let out an inadvertent "what??" at that".

RESONSE: This is an unfortunate misinterpretation of what the film says. The film doesn't say this at all. It states very clearly that Robbie wanted ROTS to be the first single. Then he and the band decided to release LHM instead. And after that song's success they released ROTS. The film states this. The chronology is Stevens is questioning absolutely correct. There is no "error".

"Also, the departure to Paris was wrong - April, not the real date of March 11".

RESPONSE: I researched all the dates as carefully as I could. This date came from NHGOA, Jac Holzman's book, and Densmore's book. If someone has the absolutely, undeniably accurate date that Jim Morrison flew out of Los Angeles I'd appreciate knowing it. I will correct it in the film if it is verified.


I don't understand why people jump all over something until they have seen it themselves. I mean, they have the right to criticize, but it's subjective from passed on info. To me, it's like that little circle you used to play as a kid where someone would start a sentence and by the time it got to the end of the circle - it was all fucked up. Mews may have heard a few things wrong. You gotta admit Mews...this film moved 100 MPH. But you agreed it was a something worthwhile.
I'm not be being paid by DiCillo to make him look good or defend him - I personally think he has something good here. It's always good to clear up innaccuracies...and hey if they are wrong...the guy is open.

I didn't hear anything wrong. If anyone can refute the March date, please do. The Elektra party was March 3, 1971. Jim left soon after that. Not a month thereafter. I'd tend to rely on Frank Lisciandro on that one. He went to LAX with Jim on the first attempt, and though he missed that flight, he took off a couple of days thereafter. Pamela departed for Paris on Feb. 14, to find them a place to live, etc. She didn't wait any two months for him to arrive.

As far as 100 mph, I used to co-own a 39 flathead Ford in the early 70s. I know about speed.

The language in the narration regarding the release of ROTS is misleading. Here are the facts. LHM was released as the first single, no argument between label and band, far as I recall. It did well. By this time, Elektra was part of WEA, and we started getting insistent calls from our local promotion guy, Jeff Trager, that we needed to give serious thought to releasing ROTS as the second single, based on heavy airplay from KSAN-FM in San Francisco, then one of the most influential FM stations in the nation, i.e. 80% of FM stations nationwide would go on their playlist.

We did it.

Thanks for your post Mews...and obviously it's good to get it out here. I feel for Tom because it is a dubious task w/ this band because there are so many sources and so many memories...a lot of territory had to be covered and I thought it was done well...as you agreed.
I bet you regret the day you sold the flat-head.

Yeah and I regret selling my 67 fastback mustang with the 289 hi po,but speed kills. You know I'm really looking forward to seeing "When Your Strange' strickley from an archivial pov,I'm sure Tom D did his best using all the footage he could get his hands on.This documentary is important to Doors history and rock history because now that the decaying negative is assembled and has entered the digital world it will exist for many more years to come.Film becomes unstable and if not properly stored and becomes unsalvagable,many a classic has been lost over the history of film making. Also in the end I'm not sure I want to know what flight number JDM was on and what airline,he got on a plane to get away from a life that he could no longer manage,his intentions where to change and he did just that but not the way we all wanted him to.

This is a letter to Tom from Jac Holzman about the film:


Tom - I saw the screening over the weekend and was just knocked out. There have been many attempts at a Doors film AND so many abject failures that I had despaired of anyone getting it “right.” And by “right” I meant just letting the band and their music hit a contemporary audience full blast.

I have lived with The Doors for 43 years and understand that the sheer power and danger of the group had to come out through their music even more than in live performance footage. You got that just right. In the context of all the music that flowed into the mighty rock ‘n’ roll tributary, The Doors still excite, chill, inform and challenge the listener.

The canny addition of the HWY material as context-within-context, the intense editing without showiness, sound mixing , Johnny Depp’s subtle phrasing and solid narration all fuse into one of the great films about music and the crazy, driven people who have no choice but to create it. Pondering the movie later I realized what guts it took for Ray, Robbie and John even to get on a stage with Jim. Only the best and most committed musicians could have made that work.

When You’re Strange viscerally plugs into that tremulous period when The Doors represented the furthest edge to which one might aspire without actually getting arrested. I’ve alerted my associates at Warner Music Group about the June 30th screening in New York. I’ve told them this is a “must see” music movie.
Jac

I seem to remember John recounting in his book that he was surprised that Robby did not want Lover Her Madly to be the first single from L.A. Woman. Could this be evidence or the source of what is stated in the film?

What an honor for Tom D.

That very well could be it. Whatever Robby wanted was ignored, though. I was confused by the narration, which appeared to indicate that ROTS was released as the first single.

Encuentro....Walls critique of this film is a forgone conclusion

Thanks for posting this Jim.

Thank you for posting this information, Jim. I haven't seen this film yet and I will reserve my commentary until I do.

This one response that is dedictated to questioning Morrison's departure date from LA to Paris should have been verified by the filmmaker whos research should have included contacting Jim's family who holds his 1968 cancelled passport. This would have been the passport that Jim would have used when he left the States in 1971. Of course he would have arrived in Paris the next day following his departure which would have been confirmed by the stamp from customs in Paris.

We had a discussion about Jim's 1968 passport awhile back in what we call "the grave thread" as there was a rumor that Jim lost his 1968 passport in Corsica. Had he lost his 1968 passport in Corsica it could not have been used to identify his body and subsequently would not have been cancelled and returned to his family following his death.

"If someone has the absolutely, undeniably accurate date that Jim Morrison flew out of Los Angeles I'd appreciate knowing it." A call to the Morrison family or a representative thereof, could have retrieved Jim's 1968 passport and given this filmmaker the correct date of departure.

I'm looking forward to seeing this documentary.

Very good suggestion, Sara. Passed it on to the interested parties.

Thank you. It's unfortunate that the researchers of this film did not know how to obtain this information before the film ever went into post production.

Today is another big day for the film. It's being screened for buyers in New York. Hopefully, they'll get a distribution deal done soon, and this film will be released wide.