Howl

In 1957 poet Allen Ginsberg wrote a poem that was placed on trial. The company who published it was being accused of printing offensive material.

If it wasn't for the cast I don't think I would have seen this film. I had not seen a trailer and only read a synopsis and seen who was in it. I thought it would be about the trail of the publisher. However while that is in the film it is more about Allen's poem. A large majority of the film is a reading of the poem which is accompanied by animated sequences. I'm not a terribly huge fan of poetry. It is not a form of expression that appeals to me. So this aspect did not interest me too much. I would have preferred more information about the trial. The one interesting aspect thought that is brought up in the trial scenes is how you judge writing to have literary merit. Allen's poem is well written and good but because it has some provocative material it is deemed to not have literary merit. The professors they get to testify seemed to be giving opinions and not stating facts so it all comes down to interpretation.

James Franco is certainly one of the best actors working today. He is able to a variety of roles and in different styles. He is excellent in this film and seems to capture the character of Allen Ginsberg really well. Another disappointing part of the film is the support cast. Not so much with their performances but with the material they are given. John Hamm, Mary Loise-Parker, Jeff Daniels and David Strathairn are all characters in the trial but only seem to be reading the court transcripts and do not have any emotion or depth.

Not the film that I was expecting. I'm not blaming anyone but myself. I think a love of poetry and/or Allen Ginsberg would help with your enjoyment of the film.