Although Alex Gibney’s new documentary, “Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson,” attempts to capture the spirit of the eccentric journalist, it ultimately turns into a loose collection of political commentaries.

Gibney, an award-winning, anti-Bush director, creates a brilliant opening by using dramatic Sept. 11 videos to foreshadow Thompson’s eventual downfall and suicide.

But as the movie progresses, the film’s political themes supersedes the focus.

During interviews with Thompson’s ex-wife and friends, it is obvious that Gibney asked them how Thompson would have felt about the war in Iraq.

Rather than highlight his accomplishments, a good deal of time is spent on people’s predictions on Thompson’s hypothetical reaction.

Even though politics was an important aspect of Thompson’s personal and journalistic career, an unnecessary 30 percent of the film focuses on the 1972 presidential election.

The concentration on such a short period of Thompson’s life could have been justified if it had centered on McGovern, the candidate Thompson supported and followed as research for his series, “Fear and Loathing on The Campaign Trail.”

Unfortunately, a substantial amount of time revolves around Nixon’s corruption during the Watergate Scandal and Vietnam War.

Gibney edits the film in a way that compares Bush to Nixon and the Vietnam War to the Iraq War.

The Nixon obsession does not stop, even after covering Thompson’s involvement in the election.

A Nixon mask continues to appear randomly throughout the documentary without any logical explanation or purpose.

In fact, the documentary goes on a number of ill-conceived tangents, including superfluous footage of hippies at music festivals.

It is as if Gibney attempted to make the documentary in the “gonzo journalism” style while lacking the heart, energy and illegal substances that fueled Thompson.

Therefore, the film ends up being choppy, illogical and lacking a main focus.

The most enjoyable parts are the excerpts of Thompson’s work read by his friend Johnny Depp.

Their close friendship began when Depp studied Thompson’s personality and mannerisms for three months before filming “Fear And Loathing in Las Vegas.”

Because of this, Depp is able to pick excerpts that tell more about Thompson’s life than everyone’s interviews combined.

He does not pass judgment on Thompson’s drug use or adulterous affairs – unlike some of the people interviewed.

Instead, Depp presents the best of Thompson’s work and honors his legacy as an eccentric man and an inspiring journalist.

If Depp were the director, the documentary would have been a memoir to Thompson and “gonzo journalism.”

However, Depp was not the director. Hell, he wasn’t even interviewed on camera.

Thus, the documentary played out to be a warning against Nixon-esque politicians and prolonged drug use rather

than a tribute to the political atmosphere and lifestyle that allowed Thompson to create.

I would have appreciated a lot less directorial input and a lot more Hunter S. Thompson.

He was too much of a badass to not be the center of attention in a documentary about his life.