Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

RipDelight This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Clifton Johnson A tragic look at fame, addiction and how one gifted young woman was destroyed by both. I cannot say that I found this film enjoyable, partly because almost every single shot came from the paparazzi. But I could not look away. None of us could.

sofi-60768 The documentary is about the great jazz- slash pop singer Amy Winehouse, how she lived her life, her passion for her music, and at the end, at the age 27 sadly died from her many years of bulimia, drug and alcohol abuse.I personally think that the documentary is a great idea, to give an insight of what the great British singer struggled with on and of the stage. No life is perfect, but that may be an underestimation for Amy's life. The only thing that brought pure happiness and joy to the life she lived, was when she wrote her songs, played her music and were with the love of her life, Blake. It's definitely a very strong telling and got my mind start questioning some things, but also cleared some things I have been asking myself earlier before I watched the documentary. For example is her lyrics more understandable to me now. I know now that "stronger than me" is about her older boyfriend who became the woman in their relationship as the time went by, "back to black" is Amys relationship to Blake before he left his former girlfriend, where he played ping-pong between these two relationships, but particularly her prizewinning hit "rehab" have crossed my mind many times, but now I understand the lyric perfectly. I have often wondered why her dad was mentioned, that she didn't wanted to go to rehab, and her dad agreed that it wasn't necessary. I never understood that part, but now I know this was the reality. Amys father had her unconditionally love, and that was a priceless power to give the man, who abandoned his family when Amy was about seven or ten years old. I'm torn between what I think about how the documentary is put together. I like the idea that it's videotapes from her whole life that have been put together, and then having the people who meant something in her life talking in the meanwhile, but then again it's just a shame that the quality is really shitty, because of a lot of shaking hands holding the cameras. But when that have been said I think it's an extremely teach-full documentary that I probably will look back at when I see or hear about another famous person who is being followed and getting a hard time from the journalists and his/hers fans.

Kathrine Kjeldsen Ravn 104D 10. Klasse UngdomsCent In this documentary, we follow Amy Winehouse through her journey towards becoming a highly admired and world known artist. We get a look inside her mind, and an insight in how she felt and acted when she was alone or with friends, with no cameras rolling. We see how her music was her savior, but also her destruction. She wasn't meant for a life like a celebrity, and a dangerous combination of her becoming so, and getting into a very stormy relationship ended up with her dead by a heart attack caused by a serious abuse of alcohol and drugs.I find that this documentary is heartbreaking and dark, but in a good way. It truly describes Amy's life for better or for worse. I have never been a big fan of Amy, and the only thing I ever remember hearing about her was from my mom when I was little. She was quite upset on the day of her death, and wouldn't stop talking about what a shame it was. Back then I didn't really put a lot of thought into it, but while watching this movie I truly understood how sad a story it actually is. She sure had an outstanding talent, but she was just never meant to be famous. She struggled a lot with her mind, and yet her managers - and even her own dad - kept her in the spotlight at all times. In the beginning her music was her savior when she went through a rough time. It helped her get over heartbreaks, and process her thoughts and feelings. And what a shame it is that something that beautiful and peaceful must be consumed by fame, paparazzi's and the media. I must admit that with the pressure she was under twenty-four-seven it doesn't surprise me that she reached a point where she couldn't take it anymore. She was a fragile and misunderstood human, but the surrounding world didn't take this into consideration. What makes this documentary so outstanding and probably one of the best I have seen is, that it hasn't been made to entertain. It has been made to tell a story, and because it is so raw, it gets truly sincere. It's an honorable attempt at showing her meaningful lyrics, and great successes, but at the same time the self-harming and declines from where it all first started.

adrin-65078 Film is one means of probing a truth content of a subject matter. Although documentary and drama framed movies (and there are hybrid types of doc/dramas) are different approaches are there particular characteristic features that distinguish them from each other? Watching Amy and Janis, two feature docs, made me think about the differences between drama and doc as film expression. Documentaries seem to be a particular type of film expression that lays claim to the actual. But documentary films in relation to: subject matter, contents, structure and even form are often substantially the same as drama. So, what of a film like Kapadia's Amy whose content comprises only of actual documented footage and archive material without any externalities of input such as voice over or extraneous music. You might think that produced in this form using only originary primary material that Amy's expressive content makes it completely distinct from any drama based production. However it might be possible to make a film, that used only actual material originating as documentary or archive recordings, whose purpose was to produce an intentional fabrication. You might call such a film a piece of propaganda (Riefenstahl's work for Hitler) or perhaps a fabricated documentary and the latter type of production would almost certainly borrow heavily from dramatic form to fabricate its story, and to that extent would present many of the markers of a drama in making its claim to present truth content. In relation to Kapadia's 'Amy: the girl behind the name', this is the sort of claim that has been made by some of her family. The overwhelming pressure on film makers from distributors producers commissioners is to have a strong story line. Narrative is king. So both drama and documentary types of film have to conform. To find the line through the material that best delivers a story. To disregard elements that don't fit the story, to draw out their characters in those expressive clips that clearly define their role in the story. This pressure is most strongly exerted on contemporary documentary makers, looking for theatrical release, whose editing of originatory material now has to comply with the rules of dramatic form.Both Amy and Janis conform to the pre-packaged populist narrative of the tragedy of the flawed female performer. The message that female emotional frailty combined with isolation and inability to cope with the ravaging demands made by the image of success, lead on to recourse to drink drugs and death. Both films in their different ways package this story and present it as the primary truth content without too much complication or digression. The music of Janis and Amy is folded into the warp of both films. Music which is intense and personal, expressive of states of mind embedded in the films, but not necessarily definitive of either singers' life. It is perhaps in the expectations of the audience, rather than form, that documentary and dramatic material may be significantly different. Audiences for films presented as docs are more concerned with the truth content of the material. Audiences for drama, more concerned with dramatic effect.Dramatic productions are subject I think to different criteria of appraisal by their audiences. In dramatic performances, actors are appraised for their bodies, their physiques, their voices, the delivery of their lines (sincere, authentic) and their mimicking abilities. In dramatic scripts the audience is happy to accept a large measure of dramatic license in the film scenario. Dramas are understood as fabrications. For the audience the issue is whether at some level the drama can be understood as sincere and authentic. In a film presented as a documentary, the audience attends the material with a different subjectivity. In docs the makers and contributors are judged almost exclusively for their honesty. In the documentary film the audience to some extent play a forensic role, almost a type of jury, examining the film looking for signs confirming the veracity, the relatedness, the frankness, the repleteness and moral stature of interviewees and material as it is presented Amy comprises an overwhelming intimacy. The film consists of home movie footage, archive and selfie material: a door, an opening into Amy's life. It presents as intrusion: like looking through someone's diary or going through their room. The mood created is one of privileged access to the private sphere, a construed invasion of privacy. The film, reinforced with Amy's self referential songs defines the mood of its expressive material shaping it into a tragedy, that entwined emotionally with her music, tells the story of the inevitable rise decline and death of Amy Whitehouse. Berg's 'Janis…' also makes use of archive and personal footage. At the core of the film's narrative drive are the songs, interpreted and re-informed by extensive use made of interviews with those who knew and worked with her. The songs speak for themselves: the emotional authenticity of the story of 'Janis'. But the interviews seem to me less satisfactory. They all conform to the expected image of Janis, and come across as perspectives of the past seen through the filter of the present. A present where the hot issues of the past, its conflicts and antagonisms, have all comfortably melded. The interviews seem to reconstruct an idealised version of Janis that seems at odds with an actual Janis, a demanding out of control hurricane of life.Both Amy and Janis are formulaic but each offers a quite difference experience of subjectivity to the viewer. Amy asks the viewer to conspire with the film makers conceit that their film allows them to understand the music by allowing them into the domain of the private. Janis, keeps the viewer on the outside of the material, asking them to understand the music by believing the word of a number of interviewees talking many years after the events they are remembering.