Watch Hendrix For Free

Simply Perfect

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

This is a movie that attempts to do nothing except exploit the Hendrix legend to make some money. It is a Walt Disney version of his life that tries to say as little as possible and offend as few as possible.Jimi Hendrix was a very complex man who was a brilliant musician. I had the pleasure of seeing him perform in 1967. He was the only person I ever saw who could play lead guitar while singing simultaneously. Having said that, this movie I think is geared for people who were too young to remember him during his life. If you are old enough to remember Jimi Hendrix then this movie will have little appeal. A lot of ground is covered, but so very little time is spent on events that they become blurred and almost irrelevant. During the recording of "Electric Ladyland", one of the greatest rock albums ever by the way, the bassist becomes frustrated as accuses Jimi of treating him and the drummer as if they were groupies. Perhaps there was truth in that, but there was nothing in the film leading up to that scene that would have given evidence that this was so. This is but one example of the rush to cover too much ground.All in all, this film is a cheap exploitation of Hendrix that might be useful as a history lesson for people under 40. But is is a fake history, so buyer beware.

This movie completely misrepresents Jimi Hendrix and is disrespectful to his memory. Besides the fact that the acting by Wood Harris was abysmal and made James Hendrix look like a fool, there are other deeper flaws. The writing is terribly lazy. It picks out certain moments from Jimi's life and incorporates them into the script without any true insight on the background of the experiences. And once it's in the script, it barely casts any real insight on James's life or true character. For example, Jimmy had a very rocky relationship with his father, and got very little support from him. The writing didn't even bother to touch on this at all. The writer seemed to be stricken by a severely one-dimensional view of James's life, or at least may chosen one. In the last of the two or three scenes that briefly elaborate on James's relation to his father, the script consisted of mere small-talk, and then Al stating his mother would be proud. It doesn't even bother to touch on the true-life familial instability. It seems as if this would've been "too hard" for the writers. Hendrix barely interacts with anybody besides his lawyer and managers. Hendrix actually had real relationships with other people, including his fellow musicians, who didn't merely whine at him when he did too many takes. After the Experience breaks up, the plot doesn't even touch on the relationships he had with his new band members, the arrangement of the Band of Gypsys, and the final band mixture of the Experience and Band of Gypsys which combined Billy Cox and Mitch Mitchell. In a sense, all of these arguments have to do with the technical and literary aspects of the film-making. Sure, this type of representation of Jimi Hendrix is good for the average complacent viewer, but for anyone who is genuinely wanting to know something about Hendrix's life, the tragic thing is how much of a misrepresentation this film is. The real problem is that the people in charge of this film actually had the disrespect to even make this movie after getting denied the rights by the Hendrix estate to actually use his original music. The filmmakers decided it would be okay to make a film about Jimi Hendrix, even if they would have to substitute Jimi Hendrix's playing with covers by an anonymous guitarist whose playing did not even come close to conveying Hendrix's true musical genius. That, and all of the songs "played" in the film are songs that he had performed that weren't even his own compositions (Wild Thing, Like a Rolling Stone). The fact that they had the audacity and the disrespect to just go along and make the film under these conditions is staggering. Essentially, they made a film about Jimi Hendrix, yet his music was in the background of the plot while his LEGAL TROUBLES took the foreground. I would say one of the primary fascinating aspects about Jimi Hendrix is his music, considering that is what he is so famous for. His musicianship was incredible. His playing was certainly along the lines of a virtuoso. Not only that, but a very powerful aspect of Jimi Hendrix's music that is often taken for granted these days is that before him, NOBODY PLAYED LIKE HE DID. Nobody at all. His style was absolutely unheard of and original. Neither this aspect of his music or his original songwriting were touched on at all in this film. Instead, this film focused on half-truths about Hendrix's so-called deterioration. Something the film failed to touch on, yet was a big part of his life in 1970 - he was working on a brand-new double album with all-new material, First Rays of the New Rising Sun. He didn't just become a big hopeless baby of a wreck, as the film portrayed him to be. His death is shrouded in mystery and it can't just be displayed as an intentional overdose. A very false picture of his life is presented: that Jimi Hendrix overdosed on drugs due to immaturity and an inability to cope with fame like a reasonable human being. It is such a disservice to his memory that he was portrayed like this. If you want to really know Hendrix, read about him. Not just a brief mini-biography, read a book about him. Or two. And above all, listen to his music. Peace out.

All of the actors did a very good job of portraying their characters, I've seen plenty of footage of most of the key players and I thought it was spot on. Still, when people are playing Britons they should hire British actors, not Canadians.Otherwise though, it was a bad film. The story lagged through the first couple of years of his fame and then flew through the last few. Could have profiled Billy Cox more, he was a very good and close friend of Jimi's and deserved a higher profile. As well, when making a film set in the 60s, people should have 60s clothing and hairstyles, too many people looked like they were straight out of the year 2000.If you want to see Hendrix, there are many good films of him, better to see those instead.

I found the movie to be very good! I have been a causal admirer of Hendrix for a while, but the movie really gave me real interest for him. I really like Wood Harris in the roll...he looked and acted much like the Jimi that I have seen. The story seemed accurate from additional reading/research that I have since done. But keep in mind it is a movie and subject to someone's interpretation, just as all stories are.As far as the comment about the money hunger family...Because they have been duped for so long I think they have a right to do as they please. However, no one really knows any of those details! It really would be par for the course if no one even bothered to ask them.I recommend this movie.