I went into this documentary as one who was greatly influenced by many of the artists contained within. Whatever the motivation for the film, it serves to remind me that we are all flawed and yet usable by God when we allow Him, in spite of our failures. We see these stories over and over again from the beginning of God's Word til the present. What I choose to walk away with is not animosity, judgement or even choosing of a side. Instead, I feel the documentary just reveals that I have a responsibility to learn from the mistakes of those that have gone before me, and pray that I can become a better person; a better representation of the God that I profess to serve. A better forgiver and lover of God's people, and a better tool set apart for God's hand.
13 Reviews
A look at a conflicted life
michaellonginow21 August 2017
No documentary is perfect. No observer is either. The world, and particularly the music industry and Christian evangelicalism in the 1970s, was a place hungry for answers, full of questions, and there was an undercurrent of passion that came through in music. Larry Norman's music was part of that turbulent current. He was a man trying to figure out who he was as a person of faith in Christ. And like many performers, he found the lights, the cameras, the crowds, the atmosphere in studios became more than what he expected. All of that, and something within, took over. And the result was harm. People were hurt — people dear to him. We all suffer when one we know, maybe one we love, makes mistakes. And Larry did make some. But I look at the wider breadth of Larry Norman's life and work and must say that he was part of a movement (Jesus People) that has shaped what faith looks like in the emerging 21st century. If Woodstock and its performers can be called formative, Cornerstone, Ichthus, and festivals all across the U.S. (where Larry, Randy, Chuck Girard and many many others stepped onto makeshift stages) were no less so. I watched this doc with the eyes of a journalist (I teach it, or try to) and I took its assertions with grains of salt. And I still celebrate the good that came of this brother's musical journey.
Nothing good to say about this film and the people on it
rosnermanagement19 June 2017
Let me start by saying I run a successful music label. I am a Christian and was brought up listening to stone hill and Norman. The people who did this film including so called ex fiancés and friends are doibg the internet equivalent of a sucker punch. The man is dead Randy, what are you thinking ? These is so much wrong with this I don't have the time to start. I could not stay silent when I saw this. I hope you are enjoying the tiny financial payoff because that's all you get out of this horrendous bad judgement call
Sad and Pathetic
thesquirr2 November 2010
The man that is highlighted in this documentary was such a fraud that before he died he charged his minions, the people who have written the reviews below, to lie, cheat, smear, defame and do anything they could to keep people from finding out exactly how he lived his life.
This documentary reveals Larry Norman to be more than simply a flawed human being...but perhaps someone who posed as a Christian while having little if anything to do with the message that he sang and spoke about.
For instance, after his death, a woman and her teenage son came forward to tell the story of how Larry had abused them with broken promises. In fact, this man totally neglected and abandoned his responsibilities with this family that he started, then desperately tried to cover up his actions while doing absolutely nothing to help them. All the while, posing as a Christian singer who sang about God's love.
This is a sad story, but it really reveals exactly who this guy was. Don't listen to the people who slur and defame. Ten to fifteen people in this movie call Larry Norman a complete and utter liar.
So too are his followers.
This documentary reveals Larry Norman to be more than simply a flawed human being...but perhaps someone who posed as a Christian while having little if anything to do with the message that he sang and spoke about.
For instance, after his death, a woman and her teenage son came forward to tell the story of how Larry had abused them with broken promises. In fact, this man totally neglected and abandoned his responsibilities with this family that he started, then desperately tried to cover up his actions while doing absolutely nothing to help them. All the while, posing as a Christian singer who sang about God's love.
This is a sad story, but it really reveals exactly who this guy was. Don't listen to the people who slur and defame. Ten to fifteen people in this movie call Larry Norman a complete and utter liar.
So too are his followers.
Excellent
ddisabatino1 March 2014
I watched this film in various iterations, each of them better and more honed.
His friends and family caterwauled it was unfair. This film didn't tell the half of it.
Larry got done in by his ego. He couldn't back down from his pride. I watched him lose his grip on reality. It was extremely sad. He had some talent, but he got lost in the performance, thinking he was above it all. Sad, just sad.
This is a film that both Larry Norman and his crazy family do not want you to see. It shows him to be what most people figured, a fraud.
Q: What do you get when you take the Jesus out of "Jesus freak"?
A: Larry Norman
His friends and family caterwauled it was unfair. This film didn't tell the half of it.
Larry got done in by his ego. He couldn't back down from his pride. I watched him lose his grip on reality. It was extremely sad. He had some talent, but he got lost in the performance, thinking he was above it all. Sad, just sad.
This is a film that both Larry Norman and his crazy family do not want you to see. It shows him to be what most people figured, a fraud.
Q: What do you get when you take the Jesus out of "Jesus freak"?
A: Larry Norman
Loved this
pvall1 March 2014
I watched this with a friend of mine, both of us Larry Norman fans. We were a little shocked by the revelations, that he treated other with so much contempt.
And he really did have a baby out of wedlock just like the song says.
I am not sure what his defense is for abandoning his own child. That is pretty pathetic. I have trhee kids. Can't imagine any of them growing up without a father. What kind of guy does this and then spends a lifetime singing about God's love? That is pretty bent, Larry.
You wrote some good songs. Not sure I can make any meaning out of them anymore. pathetic, really.
And he really did have a baby out of wedlock just like the song says.
I am not sure what his defense is for abandoning his own child. That is pretty pathetic. I have trhee kids. Can't imagine any of them growing up without a father. What kind of guy does this and then spends a lifetime singing about God's love? That is pretty bent, Larry.
You wrote some good songs. Not sure I can make any meaning out of them anymore. pathetic, really.
Weak ethical filter for judging anyone....
joedd-994-6735646 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
My biggest issue with the film (that hasn't already been pointed out) is it's a documentary on a man based on approximately 8 years of his life. The other 25 years after the time of the film are not even represented. This time, I believe was Larry's biggest impact. When his music, that was so ahead of it's time, was discovered and copied over and over again. Larry's voice will be heard long after all forget the name Sabatino. Sabatino makes a point to say Larry played at local churches for 20 years like that's a bad thing. My daughter saw him when she was 5 and it still has an impact with her. Larry stayed after for an hour or so and was so happy to just be with other believers. What a kind, gentle man he was. If you study God's history you'll see many people used greatly by God who were not perfect, but they had a common characteristic, their heart was soft to God. I'm not a cult supporter of Larry. If you listened to him live even once you'd know he shared his faults openly. Most of the criticism seems to be that he did some things wrong at parts of his life, OK, add those up, even the ones that clearly aren't true. Scale this with the tens of thousands who will share what a positive impact he was. If there is any story here it was the lack of understanding and judgment the churches expressed at Larry and Randy. I was at a concert in the 70's when he was called anti-Christ from the audience between songs. Even today this movie gets played in all places, churches. Churches that use his music during their hymns. Show me one major Christian evangelist, prophet, or leader who would come through this type of "ethical filter", without any clarification of the remains, without questions. Questions are not convictions, even in our worldly court of reason, but as Christians, well we're supposed to have a higher requirement.
Vindictive reprisal in the guise of a poorly made movie...
film-critic01827 March 2011
I cannot express how disappointed I was in this film - on numerous levels. The first was being duped into initially believing that this movie was made with any sense of fairness or objectivity. It clearly was not. Next is the poor quality of the film - both in content and in low production value. It feels more like a school project in which someone has strung together a series of home movies shot by vacationing relatives than a documentary. And for a good (albeit very uncomfortable) laugh, the awkward animations simply cannot be beat. What on earth was he thinking when he asked someone to make these? The final disappointment has been witnessing the public behavior of the filmmaker, who relentlessly attacks anyone disagreeing with his point of view and reduces himself to name-calling at nearly every turn, with particular venom inexplicably reserved for Larry Norman's surviving relatives. A bit of that is on display here in the lone 10 star review on this site. With every word he seems to remove another brick from the wall that was his credibility. How can we trust someone to tell the story of another's life when he plays so fast and loose with the truth in his current everyday dealings? This movie is unpleasant in many ways, but the questionable ethics behind the film and the director's poor treatment of others is perhaps the most unpleasant and saddest of all. The good news for the rest of the world is that its poor quality and obvious vindictive agenda has resulted in a tepid reception, as evidenced by lack of sales and a "tour" that had to be cut short after only two screenings due to lack of interest. Turns out others value truth more than the filmmaker, and have opted to pass on this film. A wise choice.
Fails the Truth Test
coughlin-212 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
If there is one absolutely minimal requirement for a documentary film, it is that it must at least try to present the truth. Documentarians have a special obligation to the world as they are documenting history for posterity. If they fail to accurately represent the truth, they have deceived countless people for a prolonged period until someone comes along and corrects the record. This film is not just careless with the facts, or accidentally reporting inaccuracies, this film is a deliberate effort by the filmmaker to misrepresent the facts about a highly accomplished musical evangelist and respected teacher and leader in the Christian community. In short, it is a hit piece.
David Di Sabatino, who has only one other film to his credit (which was also a hit piece on a Christian leader, Lonnie Frisbee), broke every rule of honest documentary film making. First of all, there is no documentation in this documentary. My dictionary gives the following definition for a documentary: 1. Consisting of, concerning, or based on documents. 2. Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film. Yet, in this film, the filmmaker sought out and included statements only from people who had grudges against him. There were a great many people who knew Larry Norman very well for an extended period of time whose statements were not sought. When family members offered to provide documentation falsifying the film's claims they were rejected and not even mentioned in the film. The strongest and most slanderous allegations of the film are pure innuendo. The few people with grudges who derided Larry were represented as typical cases of people that knew Larry. They were not.
Furthermore, with one minor exception, no one interviewed in the film had been involved in Larry's life in over 30 years! There are many people that have expressed shock by the overt and destructive lies that they heard in this film and that have said they personally know the allegations presented to be false or contrary to their experience, yet their opinions were not included.
See the film, but watch it with a critical eye.
David Di Sabatino, who has only one other film to his credit (which was also a hit piece on a Christian leader, Lonnie Frisbee), broke every rule of honest documentary film making. First of all, there is no documentation in this documentary. My dictionary gives the following definition for a documentary: 1. Consisting of, concerning, or based on documents. 2. Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film. Yet, in this film, the filmmaker sought out and included statements only from people who had grudges against him. There were a great many people who knew Larry Norman very well for an extended period of time whose statements were not sought. When family members offered to provide documentation falsifying the film's claims they were rejected and not even mentioned in the film. The strongest and most slanderous allegations of the film are pure innuendo. The few people with grudges who derided Larry were represented as typical cases of people that knew Larry. They were not.
Furthermore, with one minor exception, no one interviewed in the film had been involved in Larry's life in over 30 years! There are many people that have expressed shock by the overt and destructive lies that they heard in this film and that have said they personally know the allegations presented to be false or contrary to their experience, yet their opinions were not included.
See the film, but watch it with a critical eye.
Biased vindictive nonsense
rml-757-3961905 August 2013
This film is biased nonsense. The director has cut and edited to suit his own argument rather than based his film on what he discovered, and worked hard to 'diss' the subject of his film. Since the film has been released many parts of the film have been refuted by those interviewed and evidence has been put online to show how flimsy and biased much of the film is. Whilst Larry Norman was no saint (which is surely part of his appeal!) neither was he the liar, trickster and fraudster this film suggests. Larry Norman produced many albums of sincere, questioning and honest songs rooted in an open and questioning Christianity that engaged with popular culture and mainstream rock music.His influence is still felt today. This film is best avoided: listen to Larry Norman's LPs such as Only Visiting This Planet and So Long Ago The Garden (MGM original version) instead.
Bad film by a bad director
tstrike00726 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I have to say that I was really disappointed in the poor quality of this movie. It was like watching a high school project for history day. Check that - I have actually seen much better high school projects than this. Poor sound quality, no creativity with camera angles, and filmed in 4:3 for crying out loud! And what was up with the narration? I felt like I was listening to a golf announcer.
And what about the inconsistencies in the film? Example (Potential Spoiler): At one point Daniel Amos stated that the way Larry released one of their albums represented the end of their careers in the Christian music industry. Yet later the film says that they went on to be very successful in Christian music after Solid Rock and released more than a dozen more albums.
What poor story telling.
I hope someone with more skills takes on this project. The story deserves much better than it got.
And what about the inconsistencies in the film? Example (Potential Spoiler): At one point Daniel Amos stated that the way Larry released one of their albums represented the end of their careers in the Christian music industry. Yet later the film says that they went on to be very successful in Christian music after Solid Rock and released more than a dozen more albums.
What poor story telling.
I hope someone with more skills takes on this project. The story deserves much better than it got.
Vindictive Gossip Under the Guise of Documentary
Venge16 June 2023
Larry Norman touched the lives out hundreds of thousands of people, giving them hope, and uplifting their spirits with his inspired songs and live performances. Larry songs still, many years later, hold a precious place in my heart. There is hardly a day that goes by that I do not hum "I am a Servant" to myself."
And here we have a film, made barely a year after Larry Norman succumbed to a heart attack, that sanctimoniously seeks to "expose" the "real" Larry Norman. We have his ex-girlfriend telling us what a phony he is .... oh, his ex-girlfriend, no less. Thank GOD none of my ex-girlfriends have never been interviewed about a story of my life!! This self-centered blessing talks about how Larry just "faked" his heart problems ... oh, really? If the lad was faking it, why then was he hospitalized numerous times with heart related issues? Why did he have an operation to install a defibrillator? Why, pray tell, if he was "faking it" ... (the shrew comes right out and says that it was for money!!) ... did he die of a heart attack at the young age of 60?
This trash is a disgrace to documentary film making.
And here we have a film, made barely a year after Larry Norman succumbed to a heart attack, that sanctimoniously seeks to "expose" the "real" Larry Norman. We have his ex-girlfriend telling us what a phony he is .... oh, his ex-girlfriend, no less. Thank GOD none of my ex-girlfriends have never been interviewed about a story of my life!! This self-centered blessing talks about how Larry just "faked" his heart problems ... oh, really? If the lad was faking it, why then was he hospitalized numerous times with heart related issues? Why did he have an operation to install a defibrillator? Why, pray tell, if he was "faking it" ... (the shrew comes right out and says that it was for money!!) ... did he die of a heart attack at the young age of 60?
This trash is a disgrace to documentary film making.
Only the music is good.
acoustics-092537 March 2023
I saw an outtake or perhaps it was another interview by this director with Randy Stonehill and his wife - they claimed Larry had a man crush on Randy. This wasn't brought up in this documentary and that's the only good thing about it except for seeing clips of Larry playing live. It is poorly done, as most vengeful films are. I work in the music industry and know dozens of famous musicians and many of them have the problems that come with fame and fortune, and get scared about growing irrelevant. Most all of them have made mistakes. The problem with this film is that they don't offer any proof of their allegations. None. Just interviews from bitter people who were jealous of his success. The producer even threw out that Larry's fundraising for his heart problems was something bad. It's not. So, we know he wasn't perfect and made some bad decisions but we don't know is the whole story. Just hearsay from a group of people with an ax to grind. I don't know why this film was even made. Perhaps it's the work of the devil himself, trying to un-convert all of the people that came to know Jesus because of Larry and his music. I have lost respect for Randy Stonehill for being a part of this fake documentary.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
