I know there's some hard core Doors fans here. What do you think about this?

[news.bbc.co.uk]

I am a fan of The Cult and was a bit surprised when Ian Astbury took on the role of singing for...those two guys. All the grief about the comparisons etc...but he took it on for the songs, for the songs to be sung one more time etc...so I thought it would be cool. Which, in a way, it was. But it's one of those things someone can never live up to or live down.

But to my surprise he didn't get as much flack as I thought he would. In fact, he actually earned a lot of new fans.

However, that's the only positive (with maybe the exception to the songs from LA Woman actually getting played live - depending on your point of view, of course). So, yeah, those dudes messed with a legacy that really should have been left untouched. And now they're paying for it. Hey - to make up for the money they need to dish out, they can just release another Doors Best Of with the songs in a different order...like ABKCO does...

It just bugs me that Jim's parents (I can't believe they're still alive. Shit, they must be in their NINETIES now!) are getting money from Jim's partners when they never approved of his career choice in the first place. And what have PAM'S PARENTS done to deserve a paycheck? Their daughter may have inspired some of the songs? You get paid for that?

Ha ha. See how that works? Money is great innit?

And of course, Densmore gets paid for sitting on his ass while Ray and Robbie do all the work!

Well, he always did just sit on his ass anyway! Only this time he wasn't actually sitting THERE hardly doing anything, he was sitting over THEEERRRRRRE doing NOTHING!

<<what have PAM'S PARENTS done to deserve a paycheck?>>

Jim left his entire estate to Pamela, and when she died in 1974 without leaving a will, the entire estate of Jim Morrison was passed to her parents.

Jim's parents later sued the Coursons for a share.

Not so sure what I think.
But its feels peculiar that both Jim's parents are still alive.
Cant think of many more interestin' folks to interview.

Sir.. Admiral.. Morrison... Did you and your son have a close relationship?

My 75c... Next weekend maybe to do a live heavy hardcore poetry readin' of Jimbo's stuff.

Yet, the three of them were able to colaborate on a book together a couple years ago and all 3 showed up together to do a book signing.

Densmore goes on about not doing the band without Jim, how it would destroy the memory of the band etc etc. Yet, he had no problem with the three of them releasing two albums and touring as "The Doors" in the immediate aftermath of Morrison's last bath.

I think what happened is that he thought the other two wouldn't dare tour without him and his ego (and wallet) took a hit when they carried on without him. So suddenly, he's concerned about Morrison's memory and the band's lasting image.

He always came across as a douchebag anyways.

Shows what I know-I thought the drummer was dead! I do like how the Doors will look for and are willing to buy fan recordings of the band that are worthy enough to be released.

Quote
batcave
Densmore goes on about not doing the band without Jim, how it would destroy the memory of the band etc etc. Yet, he had no problem with the three of them releasing two albums and touring as "The Doors" in the immediate aftermath of Morrison's last bath.

I think what happened is that he thought the other two wouldn't dare tour without him and his ego (and wallet) took a hit when they carried on without him. So suddenly, he's concerned about Morrison's memory and the band's lasting image.

I tend to agree with that. But still, Manzarek and Krieger should have been smart enough to know that Densmore would win that suit, they all signed a legal document saying all decisions of that nature had to be unanimous. So Manzarek and Krieger never should have called it The Doors in the first place (for legal and artistic reasons).

$5 million, though, that's what the entire tour Manzarek and Krieger did made. I can see Densmore and Morrison's heirs being awarded half of the profits, but the whole thing? Ouch. Seems a little excessive.

Presumably Brian Jones' parents (his Estate) have received income from record sales etc .
That is, once his debts had been paid off.
And presumably, not a penny for his 5+ kiddies.

Well since Mick actively works to pay child support and Brian doesn't...it makes sense that the Stones don't pay for Brian's children.

I saw the Doors of the 21'st Century and it was an awesome event, I wasn't expecting to see the original 4-member band or equivalent. Besides they didn't call themselves "The Doors". What's the difference in that and "Creedence Clearwater Revisited", guess it depends on the judge.

I saw D21C with Ian Astbury twice - Wembley 2003 and 2004. They were indeed brilliant. To see those songs being performed by Manzarek and Krieger was worth the ticket price. It's their legacy and they should be allowed to exploit it as they please. They are as entitled to exploit their work as the Stones or any other act are entitled to do with theirs.

Having said that I don't feel the need to see them again.

>> they should be allowed to exploit it as they please <<

sure, if they hadn't all signed a legally binding agreement not to use the name
without the unanimous consent of all three. which they didn't have in this case.

Quote
Sir Craven of Cottage
I saw D21C with Ian Astbury twice - Wembley 2003 and 2004. They were indeed brilliant. To see those songs being performed by Manzarek and Krieger was worth the ticket price. It's their legacy and they should be allowed to exploit it as they please. They are as entitled to exploit their work as the Stones or any other act are entitled to do with theirs.

Having said that I don't feel the need to see them again.

Shouldnt spit on Jim Morrison's grave, mate!

Quote
Baboon Bro

Quote
Sir Craven of Cottage
I saw D21C with Ian Astbury twice - Wembley 2003 and 2004. They were indeed brilliant. To see those songs being performed by Manzarek and Krieger was worth the ticket price. It's their legacy and they should be allowed to exploit it as they please. They are as entitled to exploit their work as the Stones or any other act are entitled to do with theirs.

Having said that I don't feel the need to see them again.

Shouldnt spit on Jim Morrison's grave, mate!

That's an extreme reaction. Did you go and see them? Are you qualified to comment on the issue? They performed the songs in the 60s - they should be entitled to do so now - just like any other act from that period.

Yeah, I doubt Morrison would have really cared if members of his old band played Doors songs as long as they didn't call it The Doors.

At least they did change it - eventually, to Riders On The Storm.

And at least Ian did quit and go back to doing what he does best - The Cult.

I saw performances only on TV and on youtube from various shows and from what I saw and heard, it was pretty good. Ian did an excellent job. He naturally sounds simialr to Morrison so it made sense - he still sang his (Ian's) way but it was the essence of Morrison that carried it. He didn't go nuts and off the path - he stayed true to the tunes.

How that is equivalent to spitting on the grave of Morrison I'll never know - he's the fat idiot that bailed.

I really don't see what was wrong with calling themselves The Doors of The 21st Century. It is clearly distinct from The Doors - whilst acknowledging their history (they were one half of the Doors).

Strong reaction from a devoted Morrison-follower.

I interpreted his works back in the 80s; I have been tourin'
as a stage poet with his stuff and will most probably interpret
into my language the Lost Paris Tapes this upcomin' winter.

Sir Craven said this: "They are as entitled to exploit their work as the Stones or any other act are entitled to do with theirs."

One could object, that Jim Morrison was a little more crucial for
the Doors than Brian Jones was for the Stones...

Quote
Baboon Bro
Strong reaction from a devoted Morrison-follower.

I interpreted his works back in the 80s; I have been tourin'
as a stage poet with his stuff and will most probably interpret
into my language the Lost Paris Tapes this upcomin' winter.

Sir Craven said this: "They are as entitled to exploit their work as the Stones or any other act are entitled to do with theirs."

One could object, that Jim Morrison was a little more crucial for
the Doors than Brian Jones was for the Stones...

Look at it this way - if you can have a Doors tribute band (The Australian Doors) why can't two original band members sing the songs and exploit their own heritage for their own financial gain. The memory of Morrison is not so sacred that they are excluded from doing so - good luck to them.