Criticism of this film has focused on its refusal to be as political or revolutionary as Lennon himself - I don't think it's such a bad thing. Of course, not all films turn into Michael Moore-style propaganda pieces the minute they endorse a political viewpoint, but there are certain inevitable compromises that must be made (just as we see in Lennon's life, in fact - though here Lennon states that he considers himself an artist first and a politician second, the mere fact that it was necessary to make the distinction points to tension).
In the end, The U.S. vs. John Lennon does what it needs to do. It sets out to tell the story of Lennon's post-Beatles activist life, and does it well enough. Yoko Ono's presence in the film could (and should) have been examined more critically, but this is a cursory complaint.
Sharp, seamless editing of the mainly archival footage - interspersed with contemporary footage of interviews with some of Lennon's friends, acquaintances and (not enough) enemies helps propel the not particularly complicated narrative forward, but it's not dull.
It's a pretty simple formula here: if you like Lennon or The Beatles, you'll probably like this. But you won't write home about it.
In the end, The U.S. vs. John Lennon does what it needs to do. It sets out to tell the story of Lennon's post-Beatles activist life, and does it well enough. Yoko Ono's presence in the film could (and should) have been examined more critically, but this is a cursory complaint.
Sharp, seamless editing of the mainly archival footage - interspersed with contemporary footage of interviews with some of Lennon's friends, acquaintances and (not enough) enemies helps propel the not particularly complicated narrative forward, but it's not dull.
It's a pretty simple formula here: if you like Lennon or The Beatles, you'll probably like this. But you won't write home about it.