Quote
arizojp

Mick's new band looks cool. Is it Lech Walesa on drums?

- Doxa

One of those guys is the director of the film, I think.
Thanks for all of the info and photos!

You guys are lucky to be there! This is good:

"We were young, good-looking and stupid," he told the audience after strutting on stage in a grey suit and shiny silver sports shoes for the screening of film-maker Stephen Kijak's documentary "Stones in Exile".
"Now we're just stupid," http://news.yahoo.com/

He's staying on a yacht apparently...

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-05-19 22:40 by Wanton Witch of the Côte.

Strange shoes. Is this supposed to be cool? It doesn`t make it for me.

Thank you all for the pics!

There's a video here, just scroll down:
[lci.tf1.fr]

and also:

Quote
Addicted

Quote
with sssoul

Quote
Addicted
Isn't that Jane Rose in the 5th photo in arizojp's post?

nope, it's Mick's assistant ... as seasoned journalists recognize

A bit heavy on the seasoning, there!
But she does look a bit like Jane Rose - with her new style on the ABB tour.

Its Victoria Pearman.

Quote
copsnrobbers

Hi Copsy!

Miss You

Quote
angee
One of those guys is the director of the film, I think.
Thanks for all of the info and photos!

Stephen Kijak is the young guy on the far left with the beard.

great pics, thanks!

Mick seems in good shape. Years go by and he still has his camera (smaller now) on hands ! open the vaults

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

Quote
noughties
Strange shoes. Is this supposed to be cool? It doesn`t make it for me.

I think I read somewhere (here?) that he always has those trainers on because his ankles are knackered and he can't wear proper shoes - all those year of jumping around on stage I guess...

Great pictures arizojp, thanks for posting

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

I was in Cannes yesterdays, all great!
Mick is ever fantastic
Sici

Quote
Addicted

Quote
guitarbastard
he (my friend ;-) asked me to send him a question.
since they are in cannes i told him to ask about that line in "casino boogie" that causes so many discussions...hehe...keep you updated!

I hope he doesn't ask your questions... It's a press conferance about the film, remember! And geeks who demonstrate their knowledge of the lyrics always annoy the artists when they come up with these kinds of questions. It's totally irrelevant to the rest of the crowd, and it ruins the flow and rhythm in the line of questions.
(Take this from a very experienced reporter/editor in major newspapers and magazines.)

It's a line from a song that's on the album that the film is about that mentions the city the press conference is taking place in.

It's relevant.

Quote
sweetcharmedlife
What's he supposed to ask. When are you going on tour....For the millionth time?

How about asking if the Sharks can beat Chicago?

glad he's still got that diamond in the tooth

[www.thedailybeast.com]

At the Stones in Exile premiere, the rock legend turned on the late-career charm—much more Sir Mick than His Satanic Majesty. But Richard Porton says the documentary leaves many questions unanswered about the band’s sojourn in France.
The tabloids, as well as the broadsheets and a battalion of photographers, were out in force at Cannes on Wednesday as the Directors’ Fortnight premiered Stephen Kijak’s Stones in Exile, a documentary on the Rolling Stones’ legendary 1972 album Exile on Main Street. Founded in 1969 as a forum for independent cinema, the festival sidebar usually screens art films more likely to be discussed in specialized film magazines than in tabloids. Mick Jagger’s appearance doubtless prompted this unusual attention to what is normally a low-key celebration of auteur cinema. It appears that even the sedate Fortnight has a soft spot for star-f------.
As I proceeded to wait an hour and 45 minutes to gain entrance to the screening, I pondered—when I wasn’t feeling slightly foolish for waiting there in the first place—why, more than any other rock band, the Stones have inspired such an array of provocative, and frequently scandalous, documentaries. The group’s—and especially Jagger’s—chameleon-like nature have proved irresistible for filmmakers, I concluded. In addition, chronicling the Rolling Stones has allowed directors to find an audience-friendly entry point for commenting on the turbulent historical currents of the ’60s and ’70s.
Kijak’s film is not in a league with other classic Stones documentaries. It gives the impression of being a promotional film, which is precisely what it happens to be.
To cite a somewhat obscure example, the great British director Peter Whitehead’s Charlie Is My Darling, unavailable to the public at present because of legal wrangling, depicts the musicians at a point in 1966 when they were just becoming famous and hadn’t yet coalesced into notorious bad boys. Jagger in particular is clearly quite insecure, despite some superficially hip banter, and very much resembles the middle-class former London School of Economics student he wanted the world to forget. Albert and David Maysles’ much more famous Gimme Shelter, the seminal movie about the 1969 debacle at the Altamont Free Concert near San Francisco, displays the gap between Jagger’s cocky on-stage demeanor and his shocked but naïve response to the murder of an audience member. Finally, Robert Frank’s @#$%& Blues—which, because of a court order precipitated by the Stones themselves, who were displeased with the film’s content, is available for viewing only on inferior bootlegs and at clandestine screenings—offers an unsparingly intimate view of the North American tour that followed the release of Stones. It became notorious for its frank glimpses of the group’s heroin use, as well as a scene of Jagger masturbating for the camera. Some critics have concluded that Jagger & Co. were less concerned about these salacious details than the fact that they would come off as decidedly unappealing and narcissistic.
Kijak’s film is not in a league with these classics—not to mention other Stones documentaries such as Jean-Luc Godard’s One Plus One or Martin Scorsese’s Shine a Light. It gives the impression of being a promotional film, which, having been executive- produced by Jagger, Keith Richards, and Charlie Watts, and designed for inclusion in a new “Super Deluxe” edition of Main Street, is precisely what it happens to be. Given the limitations of this genre, it’s a reasonably well-paced and informative, if workmanlike, effort. The story of the band’s decision to take up residence in the south of France as a result of punitive income taxes imposed by the British Labour government is competently sketched. The alluring decadence of a period that made possible what the Daily Mail, in an entertainingly gossipy article, labels “the most debauched album ever made,”is conveyed with a fair amount of candor; Richards discusses his fondness for hard drugs with surprising philosophical detachment. Ex-model, actress, and former Richards girlfriend Anita Pallenberg is even roped in to provide her jaundiced recollections of the Stones’ French sojourn.
Despite filling us in on some colorful factoids concerning the ambience at the Villa Nellcôte in Villefranche-sur-Mer, where the album was recorded, Stones fails to address some of the most intriguing questions surrounding this pivotal moment in rock history. For one thing, Main Street is a fascinating case study in the critical reception of popular culture. While the film acknowledges that many critics were lukewarm about the record when it was released and subsequently hailed it as a masterpiece, it could certainly have explored the issue with more rigor. Why did even such an astute critic as the late Lester Bangs finally embrace it as a masterpiece after initially dismissing it with a sneer? When discussing Main Street’s “greatness,” all that commentators such as Sheryl Crow, Benicio del Toro, recording engineer Andy Johns, and Scorsese can do is throw around clichés about the music’s “rawness” and its ineffable “coolness.”
At the Fortnight festivities, Jagger himself seemed as clueless about these topics as anyone else and fell back on his late-career charm—much more Sir Mick than His Satanic Majesty. He introduced the film by jocularly proclaiming that “we were good-looking and stupid. Nixon was in the White House, there was a war in Vietnam. Now we’re just stupid.” In a post-screening press conference, where the journalists lobbed softball questions about whether he felt “nostalgic” for the ’70s, Jagger exhibited his trademark gift for repartee by flitting from topic to topic, at one point chuckling over a New York Times article that compiles delectable recipes using marijuana and, in a response to a question about Godard’s One Plus One (which oscillates between a recording session of the song “Sympathy for the Devil” and sequences featuring the Black Panthers) quipped that, although many acknowledge the director’s talent, few seemed to know “what that film is about.” No one asked why Stones employs extensive outtakes from @#$%& Blues while Jagger and his band mates are still, at least as far as I know, preventing Frank’s film from being publicly screened in its entirety. (I tried, but couldn’t get the attention of the fawning moderator.) In any case, questions of that kind would have ruined the Mick Jagger love-in.
Plus: Check out more of the latest entertainment, fashion, and culture coverage on Sexy Beast—photos, videos, features, and Tweets.
Richard Porton is one of the editors of Cineaste magazine in New York and has written on film for Cinema Scope, In These Times, and Moving Image Source. His anthology, On Film Festivals (Wallflower Press), was published in 2009.
Get a head start with the Morning Scoop email. It's your Cheat Sheet with must reads from across the Web. Get it. For more entertainment and fashion coverage follow Sexy Beast on Twitter.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.

May 20, 2010 | 12:07am | | |


Mick masturbates in C-S Blues??

Sure there's a self-love element in there, but I don't recall anything so specific...

Quote
sweetcharmedlife
What's he supposed to ask. When are you going on tour....For the millionth time?

Nononono... "Will it be your last one?!"... thát's what I'd like to know.

Questions about the movie, containing material from "CS Blues" would be even more relevant. There's plenty. For those familiar with the movie, the controversial scenes, the ban, and some content that's got to be quite embarrassing for a 67 year old grandfather to watch...
Mick seemed to be in a good, honest mood, full of self irony, and willing to answer even the not so panegyric questions. It's a pity to miss out on that opportunity and rather ask a typical "geek"-question that has no relevance to people who didn't major in EOMS. Asking "internal humour" questions at a press conference is considered unprofessional, but if you had Mick in an exclusive face to face situation, you could round up the interview with a question like that. But not untill the very end, because it would ruin the dramaturgy of the session and you'd be in danger of losing the track and direction.
If one of my reporters had asked that kind of question in the middle of a Jagger interview, I would have wondered if her of his training had been taken properly care of. (If you work for a fanzine, however... you can be as unprofessional and panegyric as you like. Risking loss of honour, self respect etc.)

Quote
Doxa

Quote
arizojp

Mick's new band looks cool. Is it Lech Walesa on drums?

- Doxa

lol

Quote
arizojp

What is that ring Mick`s wearing on the last picture?

Ray
15 and counting. No stopping. Stockholm next.

Yeah, what's that ring ???

Quote
bernardanderson
mick, seriously, those shoes, not cool. you look like marty mcfly.

Thats the quote of the day.

sums it up brilliantly.

Quote
Filip020169

Quote
sweetcharmedlife
What's he supposed to ask. When are you going on tour....For the millionth time?

Nononono... "Will it be your last one?!"... thát's what I'd like to know.

Yeah they never get asked that.

"It's just some friends of mine and they're busting down the door"

Quote
Infamy

Quote
arizojp

What is that ring Mick`s wearing on the last picture?

knighthood ring?

Ray
15 and counting. No stopping. Stockholm next.

ya hear of..A List Celebrities..well theyve got nothing on Mick Jagger hes a triple AAA List Celebrity and right out there on his own..the public..the Journalist..the Photographers just cant get enough of Mick Jagger. (Its a fact)

Quote
Addicted
It's about the movie, for Christ's sake!
Parts of the movie is "C***sucker Blues" - and I can imagine some people would like to know a lot about the trouble the film's caused them. And the sex assaults, committed by roadies... Not very good scenes. Were they at some point embarrassed? Did they think of trying to stop the bastards who assaulted the girl?
These questions sure won't make Mick happy, but they're at least interresting in relation to the film...
Then your friend has demonstrated he's not sucking up to Mick, and that he knows the content of the film. And it's very relevant - and perhaps Mick will say something he's refused to comment on earlier?

my friend asked the question about "kissing @#$%& in cannes" and mick liked it. he thought it was a good question and gave a detailed answer (unlike other questions that he just answered very shortly)....sorry to say addict, even a oh so highly decorated journalist (as you claim to be) can be wrong....

Quote
guitarbastard

Quote
Addicted
It's about the movie, for Christ's sake!
Parts of the movie is "C***sucker Blues" - and I can imagine some people would like to know a lot about the trouble the film's caused them. And the sex assaults, committed by roadies... Not very good scenes. Were they at some point embarrassed? Did they think of trying to stop the bastards who assaulted the girl?
These questions sure won't make Mick happy, but they're at least interresting in relation to the film...
Then your friend has demonstrated he's not sucking up to Mick, and that he knows the content of the film. And it's very relevant - and perhaps Mick will say something he's refused to comment on earlier?

my friend asked the question about "kissing @#$%& in cannes" and mick liked it. he thought it was a good question and gave a detailed answer (unlike other questions that he just answered very shortly)....sorry to say addict, even a oh so highly decorated journalist (as you claim to be) can be wrong....

So,what was the detailed answer?

Terrible watch and terrible shoes. My god, where is his style sense gone?