The SUBJECT of this documentary is fascinating, and the people are interesting. Unfortunately the filmmaker does too much of the talking, never asks important questions (or at least can't get important people to talk), and the film doesn't so much conclude as peter out.
"Following Sean" is not really about Sean Farrell; this is a midlife-crisis on film, but it pussyfoots around the filmmaker's own life and fails to draw the parallels that would really tie up the story.
Ralph Arlyck moved to the Haight-Ashbury section of San Francisco back in 1969 to study filmmaking. His environment was a natural subject (although the Summer of Love had ended two years before, while back in Ralph's home state there was this music festival...) Anyway, Arlyck made a student film about a local hippie child and found fame, a career, and love. But life swept him along and away, until 30 years had passed, and fame was only a memory, he was untouched by fortune, his grown children laughed at his memories, his father was sarcastic about his career, and his wife needed to be on her own for a while. So Arlyck decided to go back to where it had all started for him and see what had become of that child and the others who were part of the story - to see if he could make sense of the '60s. And that's the bulk of this film.
This isn't some cut-and-dried docudrama with an omniscient narrator talking us through each segment of a structure - it's an investigation, which is fine, and Arlyck himself is inevitably a big part of the story; his sarcastic and skeptical voice is entertaining. He's trying to come to terms with his own life, and what the days of his youth really meant, but he needed to get OTHER people to do more talking.
I think the story of Arlyck's own parents and its correlation with Sean Farrell's grandparents is interesting - but we need to hear SOMEthing from Sean's mother - she seems to be content to let daughter Debbie do the talking for her, and Debbie is wrapped up in her own problems and completely dismissive of the past. How did she come to marry John Farrell, and what did her parents think about that? Just how true WAS the stuff Sean told Arlyck back in '69: exactly how often DID Sean smoke or eat pot? Kids say the darndest things, particularly when they think adults want to hear them. What did Sean think of his life growing up in the Haight? Why on earth does he want a Russian mail-order bride? On the Arlyck family side there's a little too much my-happy-home, but with hints of deep problems that are never discussed. I'd've loved to hear Arlyck's wife's thoughts about the '60s too....
Of course, the rough beast that was actually slouching toward midtown Bethlehem in '69 was Sean's father John, and we do get something of him, at least. I knew a number of John-Farrell types back in the day, rich kids whose life choices seemed to have no consequences for themselves, but big ones for other people. That seems to be the conclusion we're left with - John is still slouching around (not around San Fran of course, prices have gone up up UP) but he's getting old, and going mobile isn't a long-term option in a world of healthcare costs and palimony. Arlyck discusses his own parents' radical past, but that was aimed at economic opportunity and intentional community - their commune, warts and all, is a far cry from John's deteriorating situation, a likely burden on his own long-suffering children.
The post-finale song, Lori McKenna's "Never Die Young", is an inspired choice - it ends the film with a sense of wistful regret. Without it, there wouldn't really be a conclusion.
"Following Sean" is not really about Sean Farrell; this is a midlife-crisis on film, but it pussyfoots around the filmmaker's own life and fails to draw the parallels that would really tie up the story.
Ralph Arlyck moved to the Haight-Ashbury section of San Francisco back in 1969 to study filmmaking. His environment was a natural subject (although the Summer of Love had ended two years before, while back in Ralph's home state there was this music festival...) Anyway, Arlyck made a student film about a local hippie child and found fame, a career, and love. But life swept him along and away, until 30 years had passed, and fame was only a memory, he was untouched by fortune, his grown children laughed at his memories, his father was sarcastic about his career, and his wife needed to be on her own for a while. So Arlyck decided to go back to where it had all started for him and see what had become of that child and the others who were part of the story - to see if he could make sense of the '60s. And that's the bulk of this film.
This isn't some cut-and-dried docudrama with an omniscient narrator talking us through each segment of a structure - it's an investigation, which is fine, and Arlyck himself is inevitably a big part of the story; his sarcastic and skeptical voice is entertaining. He's trying to come to terms with his own life, and what the days of his youth really meant, but he needed to get OTHER people to do more talking.
I think the story of Arlyck's own parents and its correlation with Sean Farrell's grandparents is interesting - but we need to hear SOMEthing from Sean's mother - she seems to be content to let daughter Debbie do the talking for her, and Debbie is wrapped up in her own problems and completely dismissive of the past. How did she come to marry John Farrell, and what did her parents think about that? Just how true WAS the stuff Sean told Arlyck back in '69: exactly how often DID Sean smoke or eat pot? Kids say the darndest things, particularly when they think adults want to hear them. What did Sean think of his life growing up in the Haight? Why on earth does he want a Russian mail-order bride? On the Arlyck family side there's a little too much my-happy-home, but with hints of deep problems that are never discussed. I'd've loved to hear Arlyck's wife's thoughts about the '60s too....
Of course, the rough beast that was actually slouching toward midtown Bethlehem in '69 was Sean's father John, and we do get something of him, at least. I knew a number of John-Farrell types back in the day, rich kids whose life choices seemed to have no consequences for themselves, but big ones for other people. That seems to be the conclusion we're left with - John is still slouching around (not around San Fran of course, prices have gone up up UP) but he's getting old, and going mobile isn't a long-term option in a world of healthcare costs and palimony. Arlyck discusses his own parents' radical past, but that was aimed at economic opportunity and intentional community - their commune, warts and all, is a far cry from John's deteriorating situation, a likely burden on his own long-suffering children.
The post-finale song, Lori McKenna's "Never Die Young", is an inspired choice - it ends the film with a sense of wistful regret. Without it, there wouldn't really be a conclusion.