First of all, I'm neither Nirvana lover nor Nirvana hater. I didn't pay much attention to the band in its heyday. It was Cobain's performance of the last piece played during the MTV unplugged, which got my attention. I find the Nirvana's music OK and in my opinion beyond the mainstream standards. Even back then. In today's standards it would be light years beyond, because today there's no music in the mainstream.
Secondly, I'm reluctant to call this a "documentary" at all. It's just a mash up of private recordings along with babbling how Kurt Cobain miserable was. There are barely some dates or facts, interviews with record company members are missing completely. It just spins around a depressed heroin addict, who in fact was a pretty good poet. But that, along with the main subject of Cobain's and Nirvana's success, music, is almost not mentioned at all. The only interesting thing was the first part of animated cartoon, which seems to be narrated by Kurt himself. The rest is just kind of junk which was bothering not even Kurt Cobain back then, but is bothering other artists of today as well. This piece of low life thrash is nothing more than polished tabloid journalism. Did you hear Kurt and other band members their general opinions about the interviews? They didn't like them. They didn't like to be covered by media parasites. Sadly, the market demand was and is still very big, because the moronic so-called "fans" would do anything to get more of their idols (gods). For example PJ Harvey expressed the sickness of "journalists" (more correctly "paparazzi"), who are trying to strip the artist to the bone, so they could deliver either "biography" of "documentary". Similar thing happened to Tom Waits as well. An unauthorized biography book was published few years ago. People, would you be please so kind and leave your favorite musician/actor/princess alone, especially if they wish not to be bothered? And by the way how the hell could this Montage of Heck be "authorized", when the subject is dead? Is there a mention in his testimony, that the personal tapes should be put on the big screen? Those kinds of intimate personal recordings shouldn't be published this way at all. Never, ever.
To me it seems it was exactly this type of media coverage, which helped Kurt Cobain to pull the trigger. But I didn't know him, so I really can't tell. Still, this isn't a documentary. This is a tabloid journalism flick for the reality show freaks.
If you've paid to see this garbage, you're the part of the problem.
Secondly, I'm reluctant to call this a "documentary" at all. It's just a mash up of private recordings along with babbling how Kurt Cobain miserable was. There are barely some dates or facts, interviews with record company members are missing completely. It just spins around a depressed heroin addict, who in fact was a pretty good poet. But that, along with the main subject of Cobain's and Nirvana's success, music, is almost not mentioned at all. The only interesting thing was the first part of animated cartoon, which seems to be narrated by Kurt himself. The rest is just kind of junk which was bothering not even Kurt Cobain back then, but is bothering other artists of today as well. This piece of low life thrash is nothing more than polished tabloid journalism. Did you hear Kurt and other band members their general opinions about the interviews? They didn't like them. They didn't like to be covered by media parasites. Sadly, the market demand was and is still very big, because the moronic so-called "fans" would do anything to get more of their idols (gods). For example PJ Harvey expressed the sickness of "journalists" (more correctly "paparazzi"), who are trying to strip the artist to the bone, so they could deliver either "biography" of "documentary". Similar thing happened to Tom Waits as well. An unauthorized biography book was published few years ago. People, would you be please so kind and leave your favorite musician/actor/princess alone, especially if they wish not to be bothered? And by the way how the hell could this Montage of Heck be "authorized", when the subject is dead? Is there a mention in his testimony, that the personal tapes should be put on the big screen? Those kinds of intimate personal recordings shouldn't be published this way at all. Never, ever.
To me it seems it was exactly this type of media coverage, which helped Kurt Cobain to pull the trigger. But I didn't know him, so I really can't tell. Still, this isn't a documentary. This is a tabloid journalism flick for the reality show freaks.
If you've paid to see this garbage, you're the part of the problem.