Interesting approach with lots of footage, but I wish they talked more about the music than the personalities.

Incredible documentary. Really gives you an insight into the band

The best band ever.

VELVET UNDERGROUND effectively invokes the experimental nature of the band in relating their story and enduring legacy, creating an interesting portrait of both the band and the era that informs and entertains, whether you're a fan or not.

A confession first, I'm a huge fan of The Velvet Underground. This movie really focuses closely on the influences, relationships, and musical processes, The Velvet Underground developed in their short and influencial reign. Some great archival footage, and most of the talking heads are amazing, and give us a real feel of the 1960's - 70's NYC art scene. One of 2021's best movies.

Todd Haynes deft directorial touch, great raw footage, storytelling and the sublime talent of the Velvet Underground and Andy Warhol make for a crowning achievement. The meteoric rise and fall of this pioneering underground band is very interesting and speaks to the torturous genius of Lou Reed. The great candid interviews with stakeholders rounds out film.

Well-made VU appreciation documentary. I'm not a big fan of them, but could see til the end because editing is good. Music is great of course, and visually inspiring.

Very good archival digging but borders on being a hagiography. There was a lot of resistance to the the VU during their career from critics thinking of them as "Warhol's pet band" to labelmate Zappa's dig at them on some issues of "We're Only In It for the Money". You wouldn't know any of that from this doc that presents them as a progressive rock band too hip for the public.

This is an overall impressive doc on a band whose history is pretty well known to its ardent fans. Similar works on the band, Reed, Warhol and his scene, Nico, have covered most all of this history, this material before. But there is certainly quite a bit of video I haven't seen before, or at least do not recall. There's also audio speech from their time from members and Factory figures as well. One call always wish for more, like more concentration on the albums themselves; specific songs that are especially transcendent or indicative of a band's/act's recordings or significance. But this is fairly thorough and hits the main lines well enough. I found Jonathan Richman annoying, though, but I often do. 3.7 stars

I love box office man

The definitive doc that in years to come will be inseparable from the bands legacy. Captures the essence and spirit of the band.

Excellent documentary for Velvet Underground fans. It discusses the band members fairly equally with a focus on what their motivations were, how they worked together, inspirations and their backgrounds. Includes a good deal about Nico as well. Great clips of Warhol and some of his art films, too. It will re-spark interest in their music if you hadn’t heard them in awhile. It almost “takes you there” to the time period and captures it’s energy.

A pretty good documentary about one of my favorite bands and a favorite artist.

Better than expected - it has a narrative but a little overlong, especially at the beginning. Lots about Lou as you might expect but little from him. He was difficult to interview l guess. Glad Mo Tucker got a shout out for After Hours. That deserved to be a big record, best flat singing ever (eat your heart out Morrissey). John Cale looks miles better now than in the day when he would walked it into Slytherin. Not sure how a non fan would like this. Nor am l really sure what the legacy is. Definitely Bowie. Moontans, skinny tight everything black and shades?

Highly recommended for anyone interested in the Velvets or the 1960s avant garde art/music scene, but might be a bit boring for others. Interesting/artsy use of video clips. Lots of old video/audio clips that have probably never been seen/heard by most viewers.

The director of this documentary is obviously a huge fan of the late 60s avant garde movement in New York. While it was interesting to see what brought the band together, a little more time could have been spent on their later work. Most of the movie seemed more centred on Andy Warhol and his ilk, instead of the genius that Lou Reed and company brought to the table. Most of the focus is on the first two albums, then it seems like " Oh then they made a couple of more successful albums and Lou Reed walked away. The end."

It gives a new whole perspective about the importance of The Velvet Underground. In addition to incredible unpublished footage, the film contextualizes the band's emergence within an effervescent avant-garde scene of the 50s and 60s in music (John Cale disciple of John Cage and La Monte Young), literature (Lou Reed linked to Allen Ginsberg and Delmore Schwartz ), visual arts (Warhol, etc.) and cinema (Jonas Mekas).

The Velvet Underground is a pretty unique documentary. I didn’t know anything about the band going into this. The main reason I watched this is because I’m a big fan of Todd Haynes as a director. I was very curious to see what he’d bring to the documentary genre. I learned that the titular band was very experimental, and Haynes’ approach to the material fits that description. I loved the use of split screen, and the editing of the images worked very well. The film was at its best when it wasn’t afraid to diverge from what you typically see in a music documentary. Unfortunately, there were times where the film leaned into those cliches, with the typical talking heads structure and moving from album to album. I feel like this could’ve been amazing if it stuck to the weird montage style the entire time. Still, it’s a pretty interesting watch. Overall, I liked this. It packs a lot of information in 2 hours, and it’s definitely not a fast paced watch. But Haynes’ direction and the band themselves make it a worthwhile watch. If you love the band you’re probably watching regardless of what I say. But if you’re on the fence I say give it a watch if you like things that are more on the experimental side.