Heart Like A Hand Grenade

[kimmi123]

I think it's underrated. I don't really understand all the criticism around it.

I was never a hardcore fan, but I am a long time fan, dedicated enough to get two Dookie CDs from two different people for my birthday when it was released. I have been listening to their music from then on. I only never paid attention to the band, on how they are or who they are. I just liked their music. I still do.

 

It's only recently I have discovered how interesting they are. HLAHG has a lot to do with it.

Some sections got me right into the heart. Especially live performance of Boulevard of Broken Dreams. I can't remember when it was the last time something got me that badly.

 

So I don't understand why most are saying there's nothing interesting there. There is, especially for someone, who's not into them that much. Maybe it's actually the other way around, therefore there's nothing new for deeply devoted fans, while a casual fan can get a lot of new insights with both, concert sections and "the making of" sections.

[zeldachick14]

I actually really liked it! And because the album of American Idiot is so emotional to me, the movie gave me some emotions too. But you're all right about the weird dancing during Jesus of Suburbia.

[That Dude]

It's been years and years.   Perhaps after they get done promoting RevRad the American Idiot movie can move forward.    Anyone know what happened to that project or if it's even still in the works?      I want it.   

[desertrose]

The UC Theatre ‏@theUCTheatre 2 hours ago

Green Day's documentary, Heart Like a Hand Grenade, is showing for free at 7:30pm tonight at Off The Grid Food...

[Beerjeezus]

I just finished watching this and honestly, it didn't make much of an impression - I didn't expect anything and I'm not disappointed and I can't say I disliked it but it wasn't anything special either. This movie seems much longer than it is (or I overplayed AI for life). Idk, I can't say I learned anything new/interesting and imo, Roecker is bad at executing good ideas - the thing he did for Jesus Of Suburbia is more enjoyable than the official video but kind of doesn't fit into the rest of the movie and it's weirdly cut with the footage from a show. And what made him think that a sequence of WMUWSE, a picture if Jesus and naked Mike would look artistic is beyond me. 

It was ok, but for real, that was it? ?????? Huh. 

[Dakke]

1 hour ago, Jane Lannister said:

I just finished watching this and honestly, it didn't make much of an impression - I didn't expect anything and I'm not disappointed and I can't say I disliked it but it wasn't anything special either. This movie seems much longer than it is (or I overplayed AI for life). Idk, I can't say I learned anything new/interesting and imo, Roecker is bad at executing good ideas - the thing he did for Jesus Of Suburbia is more enjoyable than the official video but kind of doesn't fit into the rest of the movie and it's weirdly cut with the footage from a show. And what made him think that a sequence of WMUWSE, a picture if Jesus and naked Mike would look artistic is beyond me. 

It was ok, but for real, that was it? ?????? Huh. 

I fully agree with you. Broadway Idiot taught us way more about the actual materialization of the musical than this rockumentary did about the writing, recording and production of American Idiot. It was too short, too reliant on live performances and featured not enough of a story which chronicled the creation of the album, which should have always been the focus of this dockumentary.

[RougeRogue]

Although I can agree with the popular criticisms, it's hard for me to take any of it to heart because...seriously guys, it's John Roecker. You were expecting...what, exactly?

He probably had to pay out the ass for 90% of his own footage because, come on, he's hella guerilla, I have to question whether or not he actually had rights to be there as a commercial filmmaker. I don't know the exact story, but if you told me that was also the reason for the amount of time it took to do this, then I would believe that as well. We can't be naive about it- Warner has their hands all over anything Green Day related.

My point is...there's more to the story. You can't compare Broadway Idiot to this purely out of the scope of the projects themselves. BI - backed, funded, intentional. HLAHG - Spontaneous, indie, guerilla.

[Marki.]

23 hours ago, Jane Lannister said:

I just finished watching this and honestly, it didn't make much of an impression - I didn't expect anything and I'm not disappointed and I can't say I disliked it but it wasn't anything special either. This movie seems much longer than it is (or I overplayed AI for life). Idk, I can't say I learned anything new/interesting and imo, Roecker is bad at executing good ideas - the thing he did for Jesus Of Suburbia is more enjoyable than the official video but kind of doesn't fit into the rest of the movie and it's weirdly cut with the footage from a show. And what made him think that a sequence of WMUWSE, a picture if Jesus and naked Mike would look artistic is beyond me. 

It was ok, but for real, that was it? ?????? Huh. 

I still haven't watched the whole thing, only saw some snippets. I'm a bad fan  I need to watch it over Christmas, but seems like I'm not missing that much. I need to know what is that thing with naked Mike about though  

[Beerjeezus]

22 hours ago, Dakke said:

I fully agree with you. Broadway Idiot taught us way more about the actual materialization of the musical than this rockumentary did about the writing, recording and production of American Idiot. It was too short, too reliant on live performances and featured not enough of a story which chronicled the creation of the album, which should have always been the focus of this dockumentary.

Yes, exactly. Broadway Idiot is much better. I hoped HLAHG would go much more in depth about the writing process, they should have interviewed the band instead of making us listen to songs we've heard a million times. One of the few moments when it looks like they tried to get the band talking is the scene when they have their heads stuck in a piece of black cloth and can't stop laughing about it - this pretty much sums up the problem this movie has.

Also, BI got me excited for the musical, HLAHG was sort of boring and made me consider taking a break from listening to Green Day until the show. There's a lot of talking but the movie actually doesn't show what was so special about that album - everyone keeps saying how incredible that recording sessions were but we don't get to see it at all. At the end, Billie seems genuinely sad that it's over but the movie itself doesn't really capture the excitement during the recording process so this scene kind of falls flat. It could have been a very emotional moment if the movie was structured differently, had some gradation and actually showed what was behind creating the album (we get to see them playing but we all know how that looks, however, the movie gives us very little insight into what were they thinking at that time).

1 hour ago, Marki. said:

I still haven't watched the whole thing, only saw some snippets. I'm a bad fan  I need to watch it over Christmas, but seems like I'm not missing that much. I need to know what is that thing with naked Mike about though  

It's definitely worth watching - you probably won't learn anything new though. 

Naked Mike is there in all his glory. (And naked Tre too. Billie Joe is surprisingly the only one who stays dressed except for taking his shirt off at one moment.)

[Dakke]

15 minutes ago, Jane Lannister said:

Yes, exactly. Broadway Idiot is much better. I hoped HLAHG would go much more in depth about the writing process, they should have interviewed the band instead of making us listen to songs we've heard a million times. One of the few moments when it looks like they tried to get the band talking is the scene when they have their heads stuck in a piece of black cloth and can't stop laughing about it - this pretty much sums up the problem this movie has.

Also, BI got me excited for the musical, HLAHG was sort of boring and made me consider taking a break from listening to Green Day until the show. There's a lot of talking but the movie actually doesn't show what was so special about that album - everyone keeps saying how incredible that recording sessions were but we don't get to see it at all. At the end, Billie seems genuinely sad that it's over but the movie itself doesn't really capture the excitement during the recording process so this scene kind of falls flat. It could have been a very emotional moment if the movie was structured differently, had some gradation and actually showed what was behind creating the album (we get to see them playing but we all know how that looks, however, the movie gives us very little insight into what were they thinking at that time).

100% agreed. A documentary (or any medium to tell a story) must begin somewhere, chronicle a voyage and describe the end result or lack thereof. There's simply not enough of a voyage in HLAHG and genesis to justify a pass here. Most footage is from live shows after its release. Why is there no interesting video of early recordings, why is the origin and influence of Cigarettes & Valentines and Favorite Son on the creation of American Idiot not documented? How did the writing process proceed, in which way did the story evolve throughout the writing, how did they settle for the specific sound of that song, that composition or sequence of the songs on the final result? All those questions, inherently fundamental to understanding the creation of an album and in general a piece of art, weren't answered, instead leaving us with a superficial behind-the-scenes look at shows and a final recording session which taught us little more than Bullet in a Bible and a generic YouTube interview from 2004 - 2005 can. Roecker not only executed a good idea disastrously cinematographically and editing-wise, he doomed it from the start by neglecting to ask the important questions and showing the answers to the public, which imbues us with disappointment and a feeling of 'That's it?'. He strangled the goose with the golden eggs and squashed the eggs in the process. Cuatro!, which is probably a better comparison to it than Broadway Idiot, at least showed how the Trilogy evolved, how they responded to the audience of the early live shows by improving setlists and stuff etcetera. That's stuff HLAHG neglects to tell, yet it is so paramount to comprehend the creation of AI.

[RougeRogue]

28 minutes ago, Dakke said:

100% agreed. A documentary (or any medium to tell a story) must begin somewhere, chronicle a voyage and describe the end result or lack thereof. There's simply not enough of a voyage in HLAHG and genesis to justify a pass here. Most footage is from live shows after its release. Why is there no interesting video of early recordings, why is the origin and influence of Cigarettes & Valentines and Favorite Son on the creation of American Idiot not documented? How did the writing process proceed, in which way did the story evolve throughout the writing, how did they settle for the specific sound of that song, that composition or sequence of the songs on the final result? All those questions, inherently fundamental to understanding the creation of an album and in general a piece of art, weren't answered, instead leaving us with a superficial behind-the-scenes look at shows and a final recording session which taught us little more than Bullet in a Bible and a generic YouTube interview from 2004 - 2005 can. Roecker not only executed a good idea disastrously cinematographically and editing-wise, he doomed it from the start by neglecting to ask the important questions and showing the answers to the public, which imbues us with disappointment and a feeling of 'That's it?'. He strangled the goose with the golden eggs and squashed the eggs in the process. Cuatro!, which is probably a better comparison to it than Broadway Idiot, at least showed how the Trilogy evolved, how they responded to the audience of the early live shows by improving setlists and stuff etcetera. That's stuff HLAHG neglects to tell, yet it is so paramount to comprehend the creation of AI.

BECAUSE LEGALITY. BECAUSE SCOPE.

John didn't enter the picture until Billie called him when they were beginning to record AI in Los Angeles. (Because that's where JR is) He's not going to have any content earlier than that. You have to understand how informal it was. It was very little more than a friend recording his friends. Warner has ZERO obligation to allow John to show anything like that without shelling out some big bucks.

I'll say it again...when this was made, it was little more than a guy filming his friends. It was not formal, it was not planned, and you have to stop comparing it to docs that were and treating it like it was supposed to be something other than that.

[Chin for a Day]

40 minutes ago, RougeRogue said:

BECAUSE LEGALITY. BECAUSE SCOPE.

John didn't enter the picture until Billie called him when they were beginning to record AI in Los Angeles. (Because that's where JR is) He's not going to have any content earlier than that. You have to understand how informal it was. It was very little more than a friend recording his friends. Warner has ZERO obligation to allow John to show anything like that without shelling out some big bucks.

I'll say it again...when this was made, it was little more than a guy filming his friends. It was not formal, it was not planned, and you have to stop comparing it to docs that were and treating it like it was supposed to be something other than that.

That may all be true, but it doesn't take away from the fact that it was a poorly put together film.  Just because it was friends filming friends does not mean it could not have have had more substance.  As a matter of fact, I would think that a friend on friend film would have more because the subjects would feel more comfortable.  He would start down a path, asking certain questions and then replace it with live footage or footage that has no bearing on the film at all.  It was a poorly constructed home video that any HS student could have done better.  

[RougeRogue]

Just now, Scattered Wreck said:

That may all be true, but it doesn't take away from the fact that it was a poorly put together film.  Just because it was friends filming friends does not mean it could not have have had more substance.  As a matter of fact, I would think that a friend on friend film would have more because the subjects would feel more comfortable.  He would start down a path, asking certain questions and then replace it with live footage or footage that has no bearing on the film at all.  It was a poorly constructed home video that any HS student could have done better.  

But my argument against that is still- It is John Roecker. How could anyone actually expect anything better than that?

[Chin for a Day]

Just now, RougeRogue said:

But my argument against that is still- It is John Roecker. How could anyone actually expect anything better than that?

Well considering he is pretty darn close to the worst film maker on the planet than yes, I see your point

[Dakke]

1 hour ago, RougeRogue said:

BECAUSE LEGALITY. BECAUSE SCOPE.

John didn't enter the picture until Billie called him when they were beginning to record AI in Los Angeles. (Because that's where JR is) He's not going to have any content earlier than that. You have to understand how informal it was. It was very little more than a friend recording his friends. Warner has ZERO obligation to allow John to show anything like that without shelling out some big bucks.

I'll say it again...when this was made, it was little more than a guy filming his friends. It was not formal, it was not planned, and you have to stop comparing it to docs that were and treating it like it was supposed to be something other than that.

You misunderstood the word documented. I wondered why Roecker didn't ask any questions about the lost album, Favorite Son and the influence of them on the creation and evolution of American Idiot. I don't ask for rough demos, merely for clarity. As a guy filming his friends, it was more of a poorly constructed fan-made tribute than a personal, intimate look into the process. Cuatro! is a lot more personal than this rockumentary is.

17 minutes ago, RougeRogue said:

But my argument against that is still- It is John Roecker. How could anyone actually expect anything better than that?

Maybe the answer is no, but given the intimate access and ample time at his disposal, he could have done much more with this unique opportunity.

[RougeRogue]

5 minutes ago, Dakke said:

You misunderstood the word documented. I wondered why Roecker didn't ask any questions about the lost album, Favorite Son and the influence of them on the creation and evolution of American Idiot. I don't ask for rough demos, merely for clarity. As a guy filming his friends, it was more of a poorly constructed fan-made tribute than a personal, intimate look into the process. Cuatro! is a lot more personal than this rockumentary is.

Well, 1, he may not have known anything about a lost album. Not many people did. 2, it was never supposed to be a personal, intimate look into the process. And I stand by my statement it's stupid to think it ever was going to be.

Personally, the most important thing I got out of it was finally seeing the pool party scene featuring the rhythm section wangs. The gay ass fanboy in me has been waiting for that for years.

[Wretched & Divine]

As someone who watches more documentaries than any other style of visual media, I didn't expect a lot from HLAHG. As a result, I adore it. Approaching it the same way as you'd approach something aired on Nat Geo is ridiculous, since I don't even know if the intent from the beginning was to make and release a documentary or if it was only supposed to be documented for personal/private use. Those are two very different things and you have entirely opposite ways of going about it. I appreciate it for the insights it offers, but I don't fault it for the insights it lacks as that would be a massive mistake.

[RougeRogue]

6 minutes ago, Wretched & Divine said:

As someone who watches more documentaries than any other style of visual media, I didn't expect a lot from HLAHG. As a result, I adore it. Approaching it the same way as you'd approach something aired on Nat Geo is ridiculous, since I don't even know if the intent from the beginning was to make and release a documentary or if it was only supposed to be documented for personal/private use. Those are two very different things and you have entirely opposite ways of going about it. I appreciate it for the insights it offers, but I don't fault it for the insights it lacks as that would be a massive mistake.

Thanks for the insight.

My own views come from having worked on documentaries and enjoying working on them. I just got off of a year long documentary project and you would not believe the kind of corporate road blocks that get in your way. People were harsh on MTV: The Ride in the same way and it drove me fucking nuts. You have no idea how hard this shit is particularly having to deal with higher ups that don't want to allow you to do anything that you actually might want to do.

That there is a whole other part of this movie's possible flaws. And definitely in the time it took.

[Billie Hoe]

To this day I will not understand why the fuck this weird scene of these random ass dancers was included for several minutes. Wasn't it like the entirety of Jesus of Suburbia? I don't know if that was some kind of reference I didn't understand or... well. 

[RougeRogue]

16 hours ago, Billie Hoe said:

To this day I will not understand why the fuck this weird scene of these random ass dancers was included for several minutes. Wasn't it like the entirety of Jesus of Suburbia? I don't know if that was some kind of reference I didn't understand or... well. 

Because John Roecker. If you were trying to classify him with any genre, you might stray towards avant garde. And that style definitely bled into HLAHG.

[Beerjeezus]

16 hours ago, Billie Hoe said:

To this day I will not understand why the fuck this weird scene of these random ass dancers was included for several minutes. Wasn't it like the entirety of Jesus of Suburbia? I don't know if that was some kind of reference I didn't understand or... well. 

You know that feeling when you're watching something and listening to unrelated music at the same time and it somehow goes together? That's probably what he meant. 

[Billie Hoe]

27 minutes ago, Jane Lannister said:

You know that feeling when you're watching something and listening to unrelated music at the same time and it somehow goes together? That's probably what he meant. 

.....but why 

[Beerjeezus]

19 hours ago, Billie Hoe said:

.....but why 

Because Roecker thinks it's artsy as fuck, that's why 

[unextraordinarygirl]

I didn't understand the dancing during JOS either. It just looks stupid to me even if it's supposed to mean something/or not. I skip that part every time I watch it because of that. 

[MaraGreenDay]

I've watched this just one time, I was so excited when I watched it, but then I tried to watch it again and I couldn't, it's boring and annoying, and for some reason I just don't like John Roecker at all lol and I don't know why. 

A few weeks ago I saw that video where Billie's crying at the end of Whatsername and I didn't even remember that from the first time I saw it, probably the only nice moment from it. 

And I haven't bought this, I just don't see the point in having this, specially cause it doesn't have spanish subtitles here