I was really enjoying the first 3/4 of this documentary. It was great to see the history of one of my all time favourite shows. One that moulded the kind of adult I became and dictates the types of humour I consumed into my adult life. Then they got to the abuse stuff and it just felt like the depth of the film, up until this point, just dropped off.

The rich detail of the history of John K from a child to Ren & Stimpy becoming one of the biggest, most iconic animated shows in history and his subsequent fall from grace; was turned into this short, shallow afterthought that was glossed over with details heavily edited out. It feels like a documentary dictated by John K or by someone really trying to please him whilst still mentioning some things that can't be ignored.

I understand that this is, ultimately, a documentary about Ren & Stimpy and not about the life of John K but when the creator of something so iconic is such a controversial figure, these things can't be ignored. I feel like I was let down by the last 1/4 of this documentary. It's well worth a watch if you're looking for the story of one of the best shows ever put onto TV but if you want more depth in regards to its creators life, outside of his childhood, don't waste your time.

It was really entertaining. I was a kid when the show came out and watched it religiously. It was cool getting the inside perspective on the show. Unfortunately it was new to me hearing about the abuse by John. It does take away from the nostalgia of the show for me because what he did was disturbing. Hearing him acknowledge what he did only made it worse.

I think everyone can contend that John K. is 'old school'. He loves his old cartoons, movies, music, fashion, etc. Struggling through the 80's, John did manage to become allied with the infamously controversial Ralph Bakshi. In and around this time, John K. also gets commissioned by The Rolling Stones to make a video for their song 'Harlem Shuffle'. A handsomely geeky Canadian that seems to be the modern day Robert Crumb that everyone wants a piece of. And through the myriad of odd, sexual, stereotypical, and subversive characters John could conjure up - a funny little cat and dog was noticed. Can it be capitalized upon? Can it be cross marketed for kids and adults? Can animation resort to the 'old ways', and can John K. be trusted to steer the ship and avoid icebergs...? Could Jimmy Page produce a record for Mr. Rogers? Could Gore Vidal write a children book? Technically 'yes' Professionally... Why would anyone dare entertain the notion? So whether you knew of John K. before, or newly experience his history with this movie, it's plain to see John K. was a 'bull in a china shop' from the get go. A fierce and visionary talent demanding control of his own style and substance. And Nickelodeon wisely and/or foolishly took a chance on him and his crew. And much to everyone's surprise, Ren & Stimpy became a overnight success! But what was failed to see by all involved is this seemingly simple product of cartoon cat and dog could not be easily delivered overnight. Uniqueness, boundaries, fame, and ego's were all soon to clash. And regrettably, Ren & Stimpy got fused into a rope for a game of 'Tug O' War' that pitted creation against product, control over freedom, and integrity over merit. Personally, I don't think anyone was to blame. Nickelodeon exec's may have been short sighted, but John K. certainly didn't get easier to work with. And thus Ren & Stimpy became a headless chicken to go on living for the sake of entertainment - which didn't last long. Amazingly, nearly ten years later - Spike TV had the audacity to let the now even bigger and angrier bull loose in the china shop! New station, new millennium, new and more open minded audience. Take it away John.... And he took it to where they could've never imagined - or wanted to. So again, whose to blame? Over exigent on both parties, but that's the world of art and profit. Now where the movie fell for me is painting John K. as this evolving tyrannical predator that literally painted himself into a corner he couldn't get out of. Although aging and bitter by this point, John K. is still an attractive and fit man. And young girls saw him as an idol still. Really young! And John K. took a liking to them - liking them a little too much. BUT - he can't be fully blamed or ostracized, as these girls literally gave themselves to him. For years! And to now say what a monster he was and how he damaged them I just don't buy! Where was their sense? Where was their parents sense? Where was anyone's sense when this was going down? John K. was merely riding out the fantasy he was Robert Plant or Hugh Hefner that liked the comfort and carefree nature of young girls. We ALL do - to certain extents! And it's truly sad to see John's sudden trajectory, misunderstandings, lack of discipline (or maybe too much of from his father and others...?) Now whittled down to this perverse failure that doomed everyone. Meanwhile Robert Crumb gets more admiration and sympathy for his art and eccentricities with supposed understanding. I don't fully defend John K. But regardless of this movie - I think I fully understand him to this day!