I just finished reading "This monster lives" which is a book detailing the making of the "some kind of monster" documentary. It was overall a good read, but I'm unsatisfied with the way Kirk is portrayed.
He is written in such a "mystified" way, I derived that from adjectives such as "the ever-gracious", "the ever-patient", "the natural mediator" of the group and also having really wise replies and insights. He's rarely shown as having any real and consistent frustration or vulnerability, at least in comparison to James and Lars (I mean, even Phil, Dave and Jason's affects are more fleshed out than Kirk's ever seemingly were). I think it's quite unfair that his person hood isn't challenged or as profoundly explored as his bandmates (or former, in Jason's case).
I'm not saying that Kirk isn't this kind of person, he certainly is more attuned to his emotions and more mature from this point of view, what I'm trying to say is that I went in expecting some sort of satisfaction that I didn't really receive regarding him in the documentary, that maybe I'd get further insight into what exactly he was going through in that period, and I thought, by also being part of the "core three", he'd also be shown expressing his individuality. Another thing I noticed was when Kirk was mentioned, it was seldom as an individual, it was often "Lars and Kirk", "James and Kirk", "James, Lars and Kirk", which I guess bothered me. I remember he had a whole scene on his ranch, on the beach talking about him kicking his addictions because another wise he couldn't surf and enjoy life, in the car, saying he'd felt the need to shrink his ego and hoped others would lead by example, his displeasure at the band's choice to not add solos etc., I was hoping the book would go more into detail. The author and filmmaker claims that this documentary is about Metallica getting through their hardships and exposing their vulnerabilities and insecurities through therapy and in front of the camera and making a "honest" and "raw" album as a team, but it still feels like the "James and Lars" project, as their focus is on them instead of the entire band.
(also, I'm sorry, I fucking hated when they were referring to the time James was in rehab as the "James-less" era, it was so unnecessary, I understand this was a big thing to happen due to the uncertainty and already low morale, but the others are as much part of Metallica as James is and they shouldn't be pushed to the side in favour of their front man or be seen as an extension of him - it isn't James' fault, obviously)
Overall, it was an insightful read, but not satisfying. I don't know if it's because Kirk was hesitant to lay out his grievances or because he was particularly reserved in showing vulnerability (I doubt it's that, due to them mentioning him being responsive and open to the therapy sessions - he's proved some reservations about the filming process because he is a private person, but gave in for the sake of honesty and sincerity - in comparison to James' reticence and stubbornness) or they simply omitted or cut out these parts in the filming and writing process. Maybe I'm biased, maybe there's actual vulnerability and because of my high expectations, I refused to see and acknowledge it or didn't see it as enough.
