Howl

The visual spectacle of Howl presented through the film is interesting but at the same time it actually detracts from one's enjoyment of the poem preventing a personal interpretation and instead provides a solidified visual experience. James Franco is indeed miscast as Ginsberg and his beard is laughably false looking rivalling some of the worst wigs. While the supporting cast does considerably better none of the characters are fleshed out enough to care about.

The story of Ginsberg's magnificent poem "Howl" is a great genre blender of both fiction film, documentrary and animation. If you dont know just a little about the beat generation, or happen to be at the movie with someone who does, this might be a little weird. None the less I found it intriguing and educational, cause the trial against the poem (yes it sounds strange) and the verdict, is somewhat a milestone in the whole freedom of speech evolvement, at least on the US. Look out for the beard!

I will humbly admit I had no previous knowledge of this poem or of Ginsberg, or the beat generation. And there were times when I find myself almost drifting off to sleep. But I'm glad I stayed awake because once I adjusted to its experimental and indulgent nature and its maddening but thought--provoking visuals, I ended up really liking it. I may not have totally understood the poem itself, but I think I understood the intentions and yearnings of Ginsberg when he wrote it.

its fictional merit is questionable, but as a film, celebrating art on the borderline between fiction and facts, it holds significant value. It's in animating the poem, combined with Francos voice-over, that makes the film an accomplishment - as a biopic and as a visualization of the poem. The courtroom scenes are bit flat.

James Franco roleplaying Ginsberg - as well as his other vanity projects involving Faulkner, McCarthy etc. - looks way worse now that it's come out he did all this pretentious shit (not knocking the source material, but Franco's intention) basically as a means to sexually assault young women.

Franco gives a great performance and while I definitely see where doctor7 is coming from about the visuals, I respectfully disagree. I see the visuals as a nice touch, but also, it's the film's creators interpretation of the film. Sometimes I ignored the visuals and listened to the words, other times I paid a little more attention to the visuals. I could be biased though in all this considering I enjoy the Beats and I also write.

Well-wrought consideration of the titular poem meshes a scattered biographical portrait of Ginsberg with a well-cast reenactment of Ginsberg’s obscenity trial; Strathairn is particularly good as the rep for 50s conservatism (and providing an interesting counterpoint to his Edward R. Murrow). Franco is a little too indistinct and hazy Ginsberg, but he captures the beatnik spirit – the jagged and spiky animated sequences are just about perfect in capturing the power and spirit of Ginsberg’s words.

An interesting blend of animation, drama and poetry recital

Gave me the best possible introduction to the poet - but ultimately you need to like the poetry to like the film. The animations certainly helped to understand them.

A experimental, beat poetry style applied to a somewhat biography of Ginsberg and 'Howl', which sounds really cool until you see it's just the same sets re-used over and over again, and also super fucking boring.

Score is not due to any perceived violation of Ginsberg's legacy (which I would have welcomed); this is an aesthetic and conceptual abomination in which nearly every member of the cast gives the worst performance of their career.

I learned a lot more than I ever thought I would about Allen Ginsberg and his poem, and also more than I wanted to learn.

I'm sure there's a way to make Allen Ginsberg a more interesting figure to a schmoe like me. Alas, this film doesn't contain any revelations for me. Ginsberg, much like his poem, is a man I respect and appreciate more than find interesting. So, Franco has little to do, but he does what he's got very well. And so, while the poem's imagery is put on full display, sometimes repeatedly, it's never engaging beyond that. Even the courtroom sequences are dry and devoid of much life.

By the time this movie's over, you've spent an hour and a half just working your way through the words of Howl and some related source material, and that turns out to be a surprisingly satisfying thing to do.

As much as I enjoyed this film, I think that the animated sequences that were intended to depict portions of the poem were terribly contrived. For such a crucial function of the narrative I simply have to deduct a substantial number of points for an otherwise good film. Worth noting is Franco's performance as Allen Ginsberg, crafted with care and intelligence, but also with an unrestrained warmth and emotional exultation when reciting Howl at its debut at Six Gallery in San Francisco.

I have a soft spot in my heart for the Beats. The animations did not add much, and may have even detracted. Nonetheless, it tells an important tale.

A flat film, Franco as Ginsberg on Ginsberg. The mistake the film makes is presenting the powerful critical poem initially as hallucinatory, rather than radically literalist. The genius of Ginsberg was in representation of his very real subjects and their treatment not generally but ecstatically specifically, who are all sadly mostly glossed over. The monologue format of the film is confining, and the scope too small, even in the courtroom scenes, a reduction of the obscenity debate anyways.

James Franco was really good at portraying Ginsberg both in interviews and poetry performances. My favourite parts of the film were Franco reading the poem over really cool animation which interpreted the words in stylistic and beautiful ways.

kind of alright. with crappy animation.

The animation and the atmosphere of the reading of the poem make this film. The courtroom scenes are the backbone.

The purpose of this film was essentially to trick the audience into having a poem read to them. Which isn't a bad thing at all. I actually found it illuminating. I feel like I understand Howl a little bit better now. I didn't think that the court scenes stopped the action or anything like that. I found them fairly interesting.

Doesn't work at all as a character study, with Ginsberg himself the only character explored to any degree (and even then not to great detail), & the supporting cast bearly a footnote in the pages of this movie. What "Howl" is however, is an intriguing exploration of the poem itself, and at 80 minutes long, it seems that that was all it was ever trying to be. Franco is impressive, dodgy facial hair aside, and both the animation & courtroom sections of the movie are at the very least thoughtful.

This is not James Francos' best

I will not try to make sense of the poems in the small space given here, but the movie is a real gem.

Deeply flawed but nice effort interspersing reenactments of Ginsberg interviews, the Howl obscenity trial, and animation set to the voice of James Franco reading Howl as G. You can tell the real record is used for the trial's text because it's realistically rugged, but the actors, though good ones, ham it up a bit. Franco, who studied poetry, understands and imitates G well but fails to completely embody. Still, the interview parts are the most interesting thanks to the thoughts G expresses.

James Franco proves that he is one of the best actors working today. This guy is phenomenal and turns everything he gets his hands on into acting gold. He brings the poem Howl to life and he brings Allen Ginsbergs to life. Solid film, the artistic feel was beautiful, and the animation to represent the poem added the final touch that propelled this film to masterpiece. Franco is legit and watch out for him, I see Oscar in his future.

Pretty good performance from Franco. The atmospheres in the poem visualisation scenes make this movie.

The score reflects how the film was presented. The cartoons were cheesy, and while the cast was extremely impressive, James Franco seemed out of place.

Don't come expecting traditional movie, because Howl is documentary as much as it is a movie. Interviews, court records and even poem are recreated with actors and even animation. Narrative flow is very good and the given back story helps understanding Ginsberg's poem. I actually never even heard of Ginsberg before, so for me everything was new and interesting.

Curious and fascinating, while making sense of the time period when every word was subject to scrutiny by the conservative elite. I'm so glad we no longer live in such a patriarchal society...

"Like the counterculture icon that penned the poem that serves as the title to Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman's film, Howl is one odd bird." - Lauren Wissot

James Franco's now tiresome androgyny (so soon?) asks for wink-nod approval of Ginsberg's hero status without adequately delineating Ginsberg's personality or the emotional tensions of the late-'50s era.