Review of Rock & Roll

Rock & Roll (1995– )
6/10
A Decent History
13 June 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I think this film was decent in providing an understanding of Rock and Roll. I would agree with the reviewer above who said that covering a lot of the pieces was nice, but to gloss over Michael Jackson, Bruce Springsteen, The Police, Sting, U2, and many others I didn't feel was a good directional choice. I liked the first few parts that covered the 50s and 60s, however I feel that the film would have been better off trying something different with the middle of it like the poster above said. It also seemed that they had Phil Collins on a boat and forced him to answer questions for each of the 10 films, which is fine, but I really grew to resent Collins before the end of the series. I also felt they overstated the importance of The Sex Pistols in rock and roll as well. It seemed that the directors locked in a group and that's all that was covered in a particular episode. They also glossed over Nirvana, while focusing basically an entire hour on party music. I agree with the poster above who said that the film would have been better off going in depth with the real stars of music, instead of asking Phil Collins what he thinks of everything.

Overall, for a summer class it was nice to watch this film and see different artists that I may have missed throughout history, but I felt that they made their agendas and biases too obvious. I also wish my professor provided more insight on this subject, but alas.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed