The problem for me is Woodman's photography. I just don't get it. In the film it's praised as ahead of its time, revolutionary, revelatory, etc. Sorry but all I see is melodramatic nudes shot in a rundown warehouse. Her work looks like what any self-indulgent young art-school student might submit for a semester's final project. Mildly interesting but far from revolutionary. If someone tried to circulate these photos today I don't think they'd be well received.
Curious to dig deeper, I checked out a few of her books from the library and gave them a good once-over. Meh. I still don't get it. Am I missing something? Any Woodman fans out there? What's the deal with her work? If you think it's good, why?