Is this another Stones-bashing thread? I don't know. It is what it is. That's all I can say before I begin this rant. It almost seems like a prequisite to posting a discussion like this is for us to "prove" how much we love the Stones so the bashing is almost justified. Well, if that's the case...I've loved the Stones religiously all the way into the Vegas-era. So, I'm no way prejudice to the later half of their career. So with that said...


So I popped in "Shine A Light" and watched it over 2 nights. I only watched a portion of the show...only selecting a few songs here and there. That right there, sums up my feelings. I feel only about 40% of the concert is of real value. Issues:

1. Keith. He is unprepared, careless and frankly, performing so irresponsibly throughout the concert. I wish I was cruel enough to count how many times I heard that "3-note" solo he loves to noodle on but I couldn't bare to count. The combination of medication and booze is showing its ugly head in this film. Screwing up lyrics, not even bothering to MEMORIZE lyrics and such a disrespect to the songs. "Little T&A" and "Connection" are frightful. If someone were to ask Keith what KEY these songs were...would he know? Could he tell us 3 chords in these songs?? Dear God. LAZY. How dissaponting is that? It's come to a point where Keith doesn't mind that he doesn't know the chords to the song he sings when he's at center stage? It's this "ah, well. It's just one song. Just get through it and move on" mentality that has plagued Keith in the last 3 tours that has gradually gotten worse and worse. It's a disease that is killing the motivation to actually PERFORM on stage. What a dissapointing version of Keith to capture in such a prominent document of their career.

2. Mick. The guy is a bag of nerves. And is over-performing like the world is ending tomorrow. To me, he is trying too much to remind the audience that he's Mick F'ing Jagger. Move around, jump around, swivel his hips, blah blah. Sure this is what he does at every show (which I believe he should cut down--but that's a whole other discussion)--but what we see in SAL is Mick off the charts...playing it up for Scorcese. People in the audience are laughing...too far Mick. Calm the F down. But Mick has done his homework--he's learned the new songs very well...alhtough he spends too much time eyes glued on Chuck, Lisa and Bernard for changes. Mick should have taken this opportunity to focus more on vocals and put the PHYSICAL aspect of Mick Jagger to the side. He normally pulls off the moves pretty good...but to me, he overdoes it here and it's hard to focus on the MUSIC. Doesn't help that the camera is very generous towards Mick.

3. Fake Audience. I can't even look at that crowd. It's pathetic how it's jampacked with models and stand-ins. Hugely dissapointing and franky, uncomfortable to witness. How does that effect the show? Well not so much, accept it is a huge distraction.

4. The Sound. Guitars are pumped way up when Keith or Ronnie are shown on the screen and then completely dropped out when the shot moves on. You get small doses of Keith's strong chords *(mainly in Brown Sugar) or Ronnie's solos. No consistency. They should have mixed the guitars equally at the same volume throughout the entire film. In fact, I've NEVER been satisfied with guitar mixes in DVD.


In the end, the movie sure does LOOK great. The first 4 songs of the show are unstoppable but it only goes down for me. I think Scorcese took on this project about 5 years too late. Had he caught them during B2B or Licks (at the latest) we would have had a different show on MANY levels. But how was he to know?

Okay now I gotta wrap up with the usual sentiments: "The Stones will always rock--no matter what!" "Nobody's perfect!" "Let's see how well you play when you're 65!"

Whatever. I'm commenting on the band that I love very deeply. And I will see them again if they tour. Watching the concert already made me miss going to their shows. I'll go to hear the songs I love. I'll go to see my old pals up there on stage--in person. But I also have to be aware of the realitic ability of this current band.

That's all I got.

Some good points, and I agree with many of them. I think Mick is in top form, though I do agree he is OVER-performing a bit. He does seem a little nervous. I also hate the fake audience and the "turn the guitar up close-up" shots are a little goofy as well (Live at the Max also does this as I recall). and then there's Keith ... boy oh boy. Probably his worst playing ever on a officially documented video. He's sloppy, lazy, clearly trying to show off for the cameras (even though he claims he didn't even know they were there, blah blah) and has little to offer outside of image (though his guitar at least SOUNDS good here). Though I actually kind of like the version of 'Little T&A' - I am probably alone on that one. It is sort of awful, but it grooves along nicely and I kind of like it's looseness.

Charlie of course is thoroughly top notch through out the whole thing, and Ronnie is surprisingly solid when he chimes in. I also think Marty did a great job of filming it (with the exception of too many Mick close-ups), and I love the intimacy and sound mix (again excluding those guitar flourishes I mentioned earlier).

what really annoys me is that part where someone in the audience raises their arm to take a photo and there's an obvious and super cheesy overdub of a camera clicking sound.

Some good points. I just get carried away by the superb film production. It's a good snapshot of the stones in 2006.

It's more of a fictionlized account of a stones show rather than documentry, that's how i c it

"Well my heavy throbbers itchin' just to lay a solid rhythm down"

I've watched this concert "movie" just a couple of times. The Stones far, far from what we know they can be. The audio "zooming" is horrible. In addition to your statements, Justin, I have to say that even Charlie is under par on this one, unfortunatly.
I really wonder how the Stones themselves found this good enough and also promoted it to hell and back compared to the other official dvd releases.
If I want to convince someone that th Stones are the worlds greatest Rock 'n' Roll band, I surely don't play this to them.

[www.reverbnation.com]

1.) Keith shoud never again be allowed to sing two songs every show. especially now
that the shows are so short. The really bad thing is that Keith is actually
quite good here compared to 2007.

2.) This is how beautiful being artificial is.

3.) I like that. Good idea.

4.) I like that. Good idea.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-01-29 23:05 by stoneswashed77.

Quote
Marhsall
It's more of a fictionlized account of a stones show rather than documentry, that's how i c it

Marhshall, what do you mean by this? Outside of the model types up front and the presence of the cameras influence Mick and Keith at times, I see it more as a real show. I was there, btw.

Hasn't caught the camera sound. When I get around to actually giving a shit to watch it again, I'll watch it and look/listen for the camera sound. Other than that, eh, about 5 songs of the entire lot are good and the rest stinks.

I mean that i.m.h.o. it doesn't capture them as the stones's but the stones' playing the stones' for the camera

"Well my heavy throbbers itchin' just to lay a solid rhythm down"

I'm a pretty big Scorsese fan but I've always held the view that he 'lent' his name to this project. I also can't stand the way he acts all stressed out over not knowing the opening number. As if!

You can't burn Mick Jagger.

I barely even commented on Ronnie and Charlie because I felt they were the most consistent and focused of the group. At times, they were the best part of the performances. I constantly look for Charlie to do wrong...but darn it...he proves me wrong every time. The zoom-audio even applies to Charlie. Check how unbelievably great he comes through during the first few seconds of "Undercover of the Night" then the volume dips again as the shot changes. Frustrating.

I would've appreciated more of a documentary with interviews than a concert. I think the music would've stood out more if there were less performances. Or if the warhorses were all eliminated.

<< 3. Fake Audience. I can't even look at that crowd. It's pathetic how it's jampacked with models and stand-ins. Hugely dissapointing and franky, uncomfortable to witness. How does that effect the show? Well not so much, accept it is a huge distraction. >>

The real people were up in the balconies where I was. We couldn't figure out who all the beautiful people were down by the stage, but it was very odd.

Quote
71Tele
<< 3. Fake Audience. I can't even look at that crowd. It's pathetic how it's jampacked with models and stand-ins. Hugely dissapointing and franky, uncomfortable to witness. How does that effect the show? Well not so much, accept it is a huge distraction. >>

The real people were up in the balconies where I was. We couldn't figure out who all the beautiful people were down by the stage, but it was very odd.

which show were you at up there, tele? i was at the first...left side of balcony (as you face stage)....

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
71Tele
<< 3. Fake Audience. I can't even look at that crowd. It's pathetic how it's jampacked with models and stand-ins. Hugely dissapointing and franky, uncomfortable to witness. How does that effect the show? Well not so much, accept it is a huge distraction. >>

The real people were up in the balconies where I was. We couldn't figure out who all the beautiful people were down by the stage, but it was very odd.

which show were you at up there, tele? i was at the first...left side of balcony (as you face stage)....

StonesTod: Me too! First show, left side of balcony. Fun night, eh?

Quote
Justin

I think Scorcese took on this project about 5 years too late. Had he caught them during B2B or Licks (at the latest) we would have had a different show on MANY levels.

You're not wrong there. A Scorsese document of Stones circa '98 would have been far more exciting.

'twas indeed. hadn't been to NYC in 25 years before that, either...fun weekend all around....

I was at the second Beacon show
one of the real fans up in the balcony!!

I don't mind Keith's performance. His mistakes are part of the charm. Off Keith is better than no Keith. I'd love to see him get more songs in the shows.

The audience bums me.

I also like the guitar zooming when watching on a surround sound system. Makes me feel like I'm in the mix. Could just be me.

The parts that I hate are the fake "setlist?!" part at the beginning and the fake limo shot at the end.

Other than that I love this movie and this band.

<The combination of medication and booze is showing its ugly head in this film. >

What medication? This was way before the coconut incident, wasn´t it??

No, it was after the accident. In 2007 the Stones played much worse than on SAL though.

In all honestly I think it's quite a good gig, and Scorcese has made it into a film very well. The prominence in the mix of the instruments as they appear on camera is an interesting touch.

What lets it down (as with many other ABB gigs) is, mainly, Keith's shit guitar playing. His solo on Sympathy For The Devil is so shit I had to go back and listen to it, I didn't believe my ears. In the title track, when he tries to do a solo over the last couple of choruses it sounds pathetic. His voice isn't up to much either; Connection is awful and Little T & A isn't exactly amazing. Awesome verson of You Got The Silver, admittedly.

Ronnie's on form thankfully. He's not exactly Taylor at Brussels but he's pretty good, and certainly isn't making dreadful mistakes all over the place like his partner in crime. He plays nice steel guitar on Faraway Eyes, great slide work all over the gig. On Sympathy you can hear him playing some solid soloing under Keith's atrocity of a solo. Charlie's as good as ever, and the band are still infuriatingly tight.

The main upside of the gig is the setlist. It's great to have some more good quality versions of Loving Cup (with Jack White!), Faraway Eyes, You Got The Silver, Connection, Some Girls, She Was Hot, As Tears Go By, Champagne And Reefer, Shattered, Shine A Light, Live With Me, Just My Imagination and I'm Free. It definitely shows The Stones' setlists to be more interesting than they actually are, but I'm not complaining, even if some of the peformances are below par.

it is a crap movie. I was hoping & expecting some interviews and/or some backstage footage and all I get is a "live" show of the band which I have seen countless times on bootlegs & the like.
Don't even ask me about the stand-in audience...

I wrote once that SAL is just as good as Ya Ya's, and I still believe it.

Justin: give it another listen!

As for your points.

1. Keith. I found he played great. OK, a couple of bum notes here and there, but overall, great.

2. Mick. Micks Mick. Can't change him. I bet that he acts crazy even if he has to sing "happy birthday to you". He is a shoman in the DNA.

3. Fake Audience. The babes were only the first two rows. All the rest were "live". Every time the camera opens up on the crowd, they all look as animated as fish in a bowl. Better a fake audience of good looking girls, than a dead audience as was in the background.

4. The Sound. Justin: it was MEANT to be this way!!!. If you buy the CD, its mixed in the tarditional way. I don't know what sound system you were using, but on a decent one, it worked great!

C

the only highpoint in SAL is the bonus where they sit down and play some blues, and played it well!
They should have done that..

....the way in which it was filmed is pretty...there are a couple of nice moments/tunes on there that were OK....but if you want a great latter day Stones effort on film you can't beat Four Flicks...

Face it
SFTD on SAL is just horrible
The song should be retired, if they ever happen to tour again
but they they will always have to play SFTD
its a warhorse!!

Quote
Ferret
The main upside of the gig is the setlist. It's great to have some more good quality versions of Loving Cup (with Jack White!), Faraway Eyes, You Got The Silver, Connection, Some Girls, She Was Hot, As Tears Go By, Champagne And Reefer, Shattered, Shine A Light, Live With Me, Just My Imagination and I'm Free. It definitely shows The Stones' setlists to be more interesting than they actually are, but I'm not complaining, even if some of the peformances are below par.

Eh, what? You think Loving Cup is good? And She Was Hot? Champagne And Reefer?

Wow.

The problem with SAL is that it does nothing that Four Flicks did not do a hundred times better!!!!

Drew

Hey liddas, you're HILARIOUS! As good as Ya-Ya's? DUUUUUUDE! What ARE you smoking!!??