Type in any movie or show to find where you can watch it, or type a person's name.

User Comments for: All the Beauty and the Bloodshed

AlfieSGD says...
one year ago
"All the Beauty and the Bloodshed" is a documentary about the life of the US photographer Nan Goldin. The focus is on her artistic career on the one hand and on her activism against the notorious Sackler family on the other. Both parts are interesting in their own right. Unfortunately, the film also sometimes feels like two separate documentaries. Occasionally, just when you feel like you're really getting into one of the two topics, a sudden jump to the other one pulls you out again. There are certainly points that could connect the two areas. But they don't really become clear. In the end, however, the documentary still works very well.
Like  -  Dislike  -  200
Please use spoiler tags: [spoiler] text [/spoiler]
smallkindnessesmp3 says...
7 months ago
All the Beauty and the Bloodshed.
Like  -  Dislike  -  000
Please use spoiler tags: [spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Saint Pauly says...
one year ago
Like an Oreo: there are two distinct parts but they eventually come together in your gut.

There are two documentaries here, the first is about photographer Nan Goldin and her departure from suburbia to the New York art scene of the 70s-80s.

The second is documentary is about P.A.I.N. (Prescription Addiction Intervention Now), Goldin's advocacy group out to combat the Sackler family (multi billionaire pharma giants who gained the lion's share of their wealth by pushing first valium and then oxycontin on an unsuspecting public).

At the beginning, the juxtaposition of these two documentaries is a little jarring, but as the film progresses we settle into the concept and filmmaker Laura Poitras succeeds in reconciling the two disparate halves.
Like  -  Dislike  -  000
Please use spoiler tags: [spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Obione_TdG says...
one year ago
From the trailer and the praise it received, it was one of the movies I was waiting the most. In part it is a documentary on an interesting topic. The biographical part of the protagonist was a bit boring. The documentary about the Sacklers instead represents what a documentary should not be: the scandal was explained in very vague terms, for someone not from US it was a bit difficult to grasp all the details. And it highlighted and imposed a single point of view, that could be fine in this case as it is an agreeable point of view, but a documentary should allow the audience to build its own opinion, not to force one, whatever agreeable or not. This is my take on this, others may disagree however.
Like  -  Dislike  -  000
Please use spoiler tags: [spoiler] text [/spoiler]
The_Argentinian says...
one year ago
Like the other user said, there's two docs here. I was more invested in the activism part (although it wasn't anything that we haven't seen from the average AJ+ or Vice short video) than the life of the woman.
Like  -  Dislike  -  000
Please use spoiler tags: [spoiler] text [/spoiler]
miguelreina says...
11 months ago
[Filmin] As in the work of the photographer, the relationship between the personal gaze and the political comments is more than close, and thus a film is built that turns out to be deeply intimate but also radically political. Laura Poitras offers such a close portrait that she herself appears at the beginning of the film recording Nan Goldin, as if she were an inseparable part of this story. The film contains such a careful narrative that it can be considered the best of the filmography of a director who is building an absolutely fascinating chronicle of our society.
Like  -  Dislike  -  000
Please use spoiler tags: [spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Back to Top