It is not my intention to project “shouldas” or “couldas” onto the filmmakers, and it was certainly not within the scope or purpose of the film to explore in depth The Byrds critical and cultural impact. However, with the title Under Review, one would hope that the film would have more perspective to offer in the way that only the benefit of time can provide.
The film is somehow both and neither an outsider history and a critical response to their music because both perspectives are employed but neither feels fully developed.
Unfortunately the end result is that the film is just a biography, in lieu of other compelling and provocative possibilities. This combined with low production value and a dearth of extras, (though I do admit that Gene Parsons’ demonstration of the “string-bender’ he invented for guitarist Clarence White is pretty fascinating) combine to make The Byrds Under Review a noble but flawed effort at an analysis of a great band by informed filmmakers.
Overall:, The Byrds Under Review is a marginal documentary inhabited by mostly peripheral characters made without much concern for production value or particularly insightful perspective. There are some notable moments, but people familiar with The Byrds’ story will likely find most of the material therein redundant. Even Byrd maniacs may deem The Byrds Under Review a little disappointing. In the end it’s not really clear at whom this documentary was aimed. Consequently, The Byrds Under Review can be added to the mounting pile of unremarkable Byrds' biographies.
Article comments
1 - JC Mosquito
The Byrds should occupy the same pedestal as that other quintessential mid 60's American rock and roll act, the Beach Boys. At the risk of opening up another can o' worms, as a very loose analogy, in some ways the Byrds were to John as the Beach Boys were to Paul. I haven't figured out who was George and Ringo yet.