Did you watch the movie?

Rating: 7/10 (14 May 2006)

This movie is not Oscar material but after reading most of the reviews on here I wonder how many people actually watched it or knew anything about it. It seems that many have a grudge against the director right off the bat and that colored their commentary. Others are posting reviews that look like they're trying to imitate too many neighborhood free newspapers with a lot of Hollywood terminology but no substance. The oddest thing I found though was that most of the reviews refer to the 60s and the 80s?????? The movie makes it pretty damn clear that this takes place in the mid 70s (unless you're drunk and passed out in front of the screen). Maybe the only thing they saw of the movie was a screen capture of Skip's old Cadillac.
I haven't seen the original documentary version of this yet and perhaps that's a good thing because I don't fall into the trap of "it's not as good as the book" or "it's not as good as the original" routine. I grew up in Germany reading Skateboarder magazines and seeing skateboarding turn from a fad (albeit a somewhat lame one) to an exciting sport when the technology and skills changed a lot around '75-'76. This movie doesn't attempt to explain that whole dynamic nor does it attempt to include everyone involved. A previous review brought up a good point that legalities and permissions probably had more to do with leaving some people out than anything else. It tells a fictionalized story based upon a few characters in Venice Beach and their transition from surfers to internationally famous skateboarders and nothing more.
I found it interesting because what we read about at the time in magazines seemed to be about Tony and Stacy (and certainly others) doing all kinds of revolutionary things in the skateboarding world. It wasn't until I watched this movie that I realized that a lot of what we were seeing in magazines was a microcosm of what was going on and what we had assumed everyone was doing in California (and possibly across the USA) was actually only a few kids that were getting some incredible press at the time. It's not a documentary about skateboarding. It's Hollywood and it has a touch of the differences in the characters and their relationships in it. All the main characters in the movie were actively involved in it (and had cameo parts) so I don't think there were any gross exaggerations or distortions of what the overall dynamic was, so aside from sour grapes about a director you don't like or the missing story of a couple of characters of that scene at the time, I think it still makes for an entertaining flick. There most certainly is a storyline where the characters start out together, move in divergent ways and, to a certain extent, come together in the end so I'm not sure where some comments regarding a complete lack of story come in.
As far as the acting is concerned, I'm also pretty curious about the reviews. Michael Angarano is noted as the newcomer in the crowd when he is probably the only one other than Heath Ledger that has had any real exposure before. While some reviewers laud Heath Ledger for his role, they also comment on how it is close to Val Kilmer's take on Jim Morrison or to Johnny Depp. Is that supposed to be a good thing that he reprises another actors role of another character? I saw it as pure Val Kilmer as either Jim Morrison or Doc Holliday and it took me a little while to be sure that it wasn't Val Kilmer while I was watching it. I wouldn't call that the best acting of the movie. I think the "toothy" acting of Heath Ledger was pretty scary at best. As for the skater characters, I think they all played their scripted roles pretty well. Stacy Peralta's character was pretty virginal but then again I don't think that he would write it in any more straight-laced than he was. Tony Alva was at least as big-headed as I remember reading about at the time. I was most intrigued by Jay Adams's (that should be ADAMS not ALLEN for the reviewer that was so familiar with the scene but forgot his name) character as he didn't get nearly as much exposure at the time and I think his story is more interesting than the rest, and at the end of the movie he is credited with being the "seed" of the movement and is also shown showing up the two "superstars" in the final pool sequence.
As someone who watches movies without having any preconceived notions about who is directing it, producing it, writing it, acting in it, etc., I really enjoyed it and after watching it once on Starz and then checking on IMDb.com to see who the actors were and also that most of the main characters had small parts in the movie, I watched it again when I saw it start again on another Starz sub-channel a half hour later.