DVD Review - Air Guitar Nation
Posted by Jay C on August 16th, 2007
Filed under: News, Reviews
The ongoing rise in popularity (and bankability) of the documentary has definitely effected the overall direction the format has taken. For some, the documentary evokes memories of high school science class; the quiet fluttering of the 16mm projector and the sighs of boredom. That was then, but in the year 2007…DOCUMENTARIES ROCK! (Possibly the uncoolest statement ever typed in caps.) Gone are the days of the staunch, educationally driven films so commonly associated with non-fiction movie making. Personally, I think there’s always been a fine selection of alternative non-fiction films. The only difference is nowadays there’s more being made and they’re much easier to find. Yes, there’s no denying that the documentary has let its hair down, and Air Guitar Nation could be the perfect example of the lighter side of non-fiction filmmaking.
Director Alexandra Lipsitz follows two men, David “C-Diddy” and Dan “Bjorn Turoque” Crane, as they battle on stage in a series of competitions in hopes of becoming the world’s greatest air guitarist. What is air guitar? Well if you don’t already know and you haven’t already done it, you probably aren’t reading this, so I won’t waste time explaining. The film begins at the east coast air guitar championship, the first of its kind, where C-Diddy, an Asian, Hello Kitty loving, kimono wearing madman gives the fake performance of a lifetime. Ultimately, he ends up becoming the east coast champion, leaving underdog Bjorn Turoque sitting in a close second place. Although the rules of the competition aren’t completely explained, there is mention of extra points for ‘airness’, a term that represents the point at which the performance becomes an art. What’s more interesting than the competition itself is the unexpected popularity of the event. People are turned away at the door as lines form around a packed-to-capacity New York City night club.
The competition then moves on to LA as C-Diddy takes part in the west coast finals. Little does he know, Bjorn Turoque has taken it upon himself to fly out and compete again. Unfortunately for him, he loses once again, scoring even worse than the first time. But that doesn’t stop him from raising money to fly out to Finland for the air guitar world championship. This is where things get a little unusual. Men in wheelchairs, dressed as Jesus, completely nude; all on stage trashing around to the best guitar solos they could find. We’re also treated to some air guitar training courses as Finland’s now retired world champion shows everybody what it takes, both mentally and physically, to be the best of the best in the world of air guitar. C-Diddy finds himself among some tough competition, and starts to feel the pressure as the first American, along with Bjorn Turoque, to compete in the world championship. This is where the film gets really fun as I found myself actually rooting for these guys to make it to the end, and Bjorn’s story gives the audience an underdog to root for. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again; I simply love tournament films.
I will admit that the film took me some time to get in to. At first I was completely confused by the sincerity of the interviews and found myself thinking ‘These guys are full of shit.’ The serious attitudes combined with the ridiculous topic felt almost like the film was heading into ‘mockumentary’ territory. I just didn’t know who to trust. But as the film progresses, it’s made clear by both Dan “Bjorn Turoque” and David “C-Diddy” that there’s a definite line between their personal lives and their onstage personas. The interviews weren’t necessarily insincere, they were just in character. The only other gripe I had with this film was the apparent tension felt by the American contenders in the Finland competition. As C-Diddy and Bjorn meet with fellow air guitarists from around the world, they’re met with a sense of antagonism from some of the contenders. The director implies that there’s a negative response towards the American contestants stemming from the U.S. involvement in the war in Iraq. A somewhat ungraceful montage of war imagery and clips of President Bush felt completely unnecessary and a little unfocused. Perhaps a more subtle approach may have worked, but the injection of politics into air guitar may have slightly bordered on pretentiousness.
Air Guitar Nation is yet another one of those documentaries that thrives on its quirky subject matter. While some might question the merit of a feature length film devoted to the supposed art of the air guitar, I’ve learned to never trust your initial instincts with films like these. In fact, I tend to find that the weirder and more unlikely a subject, the more pleasantly surprised I am in the end. (I’m sure there are definite exceptions.) Although Air Guitar Nation isn’t technically slick and the stakes aren’t really that high, it’s still a lot of fun. Watching passionate people compete in a tournament that requires no real skill is a refreshing reminder that everybody has a calling, and in the end, it doesn’t really matter if your guitar is real or not.









Jay C on





August 17th, 2007 00:41
Quirky subjects are being sought out everywhere! You can only hope that nobody makes the time travel movie before you!
After movies like Spellbound and Murderball being nominated for avademy awards and getting good reviews, studios (major or minor, mainly minor I guess) are willing to pick up documentaries like this in addition to the ones dealing with extreme preaching issues.
I know you love tournament movies, but what about telling us how it stands compared to other tournament movies? And I don’t just mean documentaries… Since you seem to be advocating the breaking down of walls between documentary and fiction (something I, for the record, feel is stupid) why not compare this to ‘Bloodsport’, ‘The Wraith’ or even ‘Victory!’ ? Do you think this documentary can hold up against films like that, or does it only work because it is real?
I’m not trying to be an asshole here, but you have said numerous times that you think differences between documentary and fiction are much more fluent and fluid than most people realize, and some of your favorite documentary filmmakers (forgive the presumption) like Herzog, Morris or Berlinger/Sinofsky definitely alter reality without extremely scrupulously to make a story compelling and gripping. I know they didn’t make tournament movies per se, but I think it’s a point worth discussing, when you review one, or any documentary for that matter. Does it hold up against the best fiction has to offer in its genre?
And in some cases, especially with the *exploitational* Berlinger/Sinofsky stuff, is it even worth being labeled documentary?
August 17th, 2007 00:44
Shit erase the ‘without’ in the line that starts with ‘Berlinger/Sinofsky’. Sorry for losing thread!
August 17th, 2007 12:59
I was disappointed when this only played around here for a few days before it disappeared and I can’t wait to catch up with this on DVD.
Great review Jay.
August 18th, 2007 11:27
“Since you seem to be advocating the breaking down of walls between documentary and fiction”
Huh? Not even sure what that means.
“when you review one, or any documentary for that matter. Does it hold up against the best fiction has to offer in its genre?”
I’m not about to start comparing every documentary film i review to fictional counterparts, or wonder how well it would work as a fictional film. It is what it is. But in this case, I will say that i’d prefer Air Guitar Nation as it is, a documentary, rather than the Andy Samburg/Vince Vaughan/Ben stiller or Christopher Walken comedy it probably would’ve became if it were made into a ficional comedy.
“And in some cases, especially with the *exploitational* Berlinger/Sinofsky stuff, is it even worth being labeled documentary?”
Which Berlinger/Sinofsky films have you seen? I don’t find them exploitative at all. Didn’t we have this conversation before?
August 18th, 2007 20:54
The first part is referring to your statements on the filmjunk podcast there they have alot more similarities than differences.
As for the second part, you make it sound like I was demanding something from you. That wasn’t my intention. I just think that sometimes, your reviews lack abit of that perspective-thinking, which ultimately is just a taste thing I guess.
The Berlinger/Sinofsky comment might seem a little out of left field for this, I can be a bit scattered at times. I’ve seen the Paradise Lost movies and Some Kind Of Monster. The one I had major issues with was Revelations, because it seemed to me that Mark Byers was an obvious mental case, who thrived on being the center of attention, and they as directors exploited his condition without hesitation. It didn’t sit well with me at all, wether or not he did it is a completely separate issue.
Some kind of monster is in the same vain. Even though I think it’s one of the best movies I have seen, and I think James Hetfield is one of the most charismatic people I’ve ever seen on screen, I think the movie was slated too much towards inducing a story, and creating an arc. Even on the commentary they seem to be constantly defending themselves by talking alot about how they didn’t write one line of dialogue in the movie, how they would never tell people what to say etc. as if to justify the major manipulation going on.
As for having this discussion before, I definitely don’t remember it. Sorry if we did, I guess?