Tour '81 is probably low point in Stones bio. Look only Jaggers wardobe, for example. So LSTNT film is not better. Even HaL Ashby cut JJF.






But on HTW I have seen something astonishing. (Some probably know it already).
In stupid part with HTW with girls in front of Charlie was his wife (Shirley). It was kind of joke, but with Stones kids on last tour, or B2B, is much suitable.


Jerry Hall spiced too.




But who was little girl? Probably Seraphina Watts?







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-22 13:46 by JJackFl.

They played too fast.

Quote
JJackFl
Tour '81 is probably low point in Stones bio.

Dumbest thing I have read here all week,
please STFU!

Low point cause of Jagger`s wardrobe and the cuts in the Rock`s Off movie , which at the time should be a 90 minutes film to be played at the cinemas? I think you didn`t saw any concerts of the 81/82 tour, right?

Quote
electricmud
Low point cause of Jagger`s wardrobe and the cuts in the Rock`s Off movie , which at the time should be a 90 minutes film to be played at the cinemas? I think you didn`t saw any concerts of the 81/82 tour, right?

No. Except Tourin (Italy) 1982.
Even KR said that's it was LOW POINT. I'm sure he know.
Yes wardrobe was horrible and they play faster then ever.
And if you read about Stones you have to know that this tour was intro in 1983 - 1989 pause, Charlies heroin addiction...
I don't want to talk about stage (worst ever) or set list (same). If this wasnt low pont, when was?

Quote
electricmud
I think you didn`t saw any concerts of the 81/82 tour, right?

I saw five stops on that tour, and I thught it was kick ass "rawer" rock and roll. They were still.... ummmmm?.... waht is the best way to say it.... they were still kind of a dirty rock and roll band, they still did not have a lot of back up people reinforcing the sound. Keith still played the heck out of that guitar and the weaving with Ronnie was awesome. I am not saying later tours were not great, I just like this era quite a bit, and it certainly is NOT a low point...... and as far as judging fashion, I leave that to women and gays, I dont even notice the clothes, it is about the music, and I dont nitpick at the music, after all its only rock and roll.

I dont bash on any era of the Stones. I would never say sommthing so stupid as "LOW POINT" as long as they were/are on tour making music.... the only low points (IF THEY CAN BE CALLED THAT) was maybe the lull in the mid 80s when we wondered what was going on...... or maybe when, for a couple of seconds, it looked like Keith might be in real trouble in Canada... but those are not really low points, they are just part of the story....... a looooooong 50 year story...... imuho it is all high points, one long high point.

Of course there are pleanty of fkn cluckers on this board who feel they are superior to any man who ever walked, and they feel they are superior to Mick and Keith, and they feel they are worthy to judge the greatest rock and roll band EVER, and they love to post snide remarks by the bucket load at every opportunity.... but in reality these fkn cluckers are not even worthy to judge a county chicken clucking contest. I usually ignore thses stuipd cluckers, but sometimes it get to be too much and the trolls catch me. oh well.... just waiting for F1 to start.... what else to do besides cluck back ; )

Quote
Max'sKansasCity
.... just waiting for F1 to start....

Hey, thanks for the tip!

Fell asleep just after NASCAR last night, and waking up to F1 this morning.
Best racing weekend next to next weekend!

BTW, no low points in the Stones' career. Peaks & valleys maybe, but no low points.

Quote
Edith Grove

Quote
Max'sKansasCity
.... just waiting for F1 to start....

Hey, thanks for the tip!

Fell asleep just after NASCAR last night, and waking up to F1 this morning.
Best racing weekend next to next weekend!

BTW, no low points in the Stones' career. Peaks & valleys maybe, but no low points.

My pleasure have fun, cuz fun is a good thing to have.
GREAT race today so far... GREAT F1 SEASON TOO... The race in China was awesome.
and ..yes you are correct about next weekend... I ALWAYS love to watch Monaco GP



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-22 15:11 by Max'sKansasCity.

Nah, the 81/82 tour was not a low point...the guys played well and the image was new and fresh, I quite liked the whole sports look from Jagger. The stage set, if I remember correctly was Charlie's influence and it looked great - don't forget this was a time before the huge stage builds which followed. I saw them 4 times on that tour and whilst I don't think the set list was the best, they were on top form. Even the IMAX Hal Ashby film is very watchable in my opinion. The HTW thing with the girlfriends wives and models was ok, something different nd very Jagger. But, to call it a low point is way off the mark, it was a change of direction and as someone above pointed out, it was still a relatively stripped down band and it sounded like the stones!

It certainly wasn't a low point for me. I sang along so loud for the entire show (12/9/81) that I nearly fainted at the end. Didn't sit down for a second. I was in high school.

What would make anyone think Mick was snortinga lil coke on this tour? naw.... who spreads these rumors?


edit; picture re-posted to tinypic .com for stability.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-23 06:03 by Max'sKansasCity.

Max, the photo doesn't prove Jagger was doing coke (I'm sure he was though!) that is a high adrenaline photo taken in a split second of time and Jagger has a very expressive face. There are many photos like that from the last tour when he certainly didn't have a head full of snow!

Quote
crumbling_mice
Max, the photo doesn't prove Jagger was doing coke (I'm sure he was though!) that is a high adrenaline photo taken in a split second of time and Jagger has a very expressive face. There are many photos like that from the last tour when he certainly didn't have a head full of snow!

huh?

The tours from 89-99 were much better than 81 indeed!

'81 was amazing.

The Stones performances had nothing to do with how the film was edited. Ashby friggin' idolized the band. His comments concerning the film are fairly easy to find using, you know, a search engine.

But, why let comments from the director of the LSTNT inform you? You have an opinion, and that is all that matters. Apparently.

I have seen numerous shows on every tour since Some Girls and 1981 was the best.

Haven't been able to find any quotes about Keith saying that '81 was a low point, musically speaking. I mean, if you consider '81 a low point, more power to ya. But, no need to bolster your opinion with b.s.. I swear, your opinion matter on it's own. It really, really does. What you say matters because YOU believe it.

For instance, Hampton '81 is my favorite bootleg. There's no need for me to back it up by saying that "Charlie said he loved '81 more than any other tour", because A) He didn't say that and It wouldn't matter if he did.

Opinions are not facts (especially on boards like this one). So, there is a great freedom inherent in having opinions; you don't have to prove them because you simply cannot. So, stop trying, please. Be comfortable with what you believe and that should be more than enough "proof" for you.

To JJackFl: The little girl has to be Leah Wood - none of the other Stones had a daughter who would have been that small in '81 (Seraphina Watts was born in '68 or thereabouts).

"Look only Jaggers wardobe"

So you assess a tour (and the music that came with it) by its visual aspects?

So I guess 78 was crap because the visual aspects were almost non-existant and 89 was their best tour ever...? (ha the inflatable dolls during HTW!!!)

Remeber what Keith said once : "the eyes are the whores of the senses".

Quote
JuanTCB
To JJackFl: The little girl has to be Leah Wood

Thanks! I forget about Serafina.
You only go to the point. Tastes are different, my aim didn't to talk about this tour or Jaggers wardrobe. And I'm lazy to serch article where Keith said how this were low point tour or MJ wardrobe.
BTW this stage was pure kich, even for that time perspective.

81-82 tour was excellent those daylight stadium shows rocked with a festival atmosphere and the boys were in top playing form IMO

I thought 1975 - 1976 was their lowpoint as a live band (particularly Mick's horrible growled / slurred vocals), though I doubt if many here agree...

Give me Hampton '81 over any videos / audios I've seen / heard from the mid 70s.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-22 20:50 by Sleepy City.

the 81/82 tours were way hot!

yeah, Keith has dissed the gimmicks - not just the 81/82 gimmicks! -
but what does that (or anyone's wardrobe) have to do with what's important about a tour?
the Rolling Stones sounded great in 81/82 - especially those gloriously raunchy backing vocals :E


i love the Rolling Stones



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-23 10:36 by with sssoul.

Let's Spend The Night Together was dreadful and the only Stones DVD concert performance I refuse to watch. Mind you I love all the rest and couldn't live without them. Watched Rio (from The Biggest Bang) the other night and actually got into Rain Fall Down, believe it or not, maybe ABB is going to grow on me yet?

Quote
Sleepy City
I thought 1975 - 1976 was their lowpoint as a live band (particularly Mick's horrible growled / slurred vocals), though I doubt if many here agree...

Give me Hampton '81 over any videos / audios I've seen / heard from the mid 70s.

...I agree.

Lowpoint of their career though, is 1986, and yes, I know they weren't touring.

Quote
JJackFl

Quote
electricmud
Low point cause of Jagger`s wardrobe and the cuts in the Rock`s Off movie , which at the time should be a 90 minutes film to be played at the cinemas? I think you didn`t saw any concerts of the 81/82 tour, right?

No. Except Tourin (Italy) 1982.
Even KR said that's it was LOW POINT. I'm sure he know.
Yes wardrobe was horrible and they play faster then ever.
And if you read about Stones you have to know that this tour was intro in 1983 - 1989 pause, Charlies heroin addiction...
I don't want to talk about stage (worst ever) or set list (same). If this wasnt low pont, when was?

I don't know but your focusing on Jagger's clothes? Time to take a look at yourself there, I think you may have just entered your own personal low point.

the shoot 'em dead, brainbell jangler!

Quote
rattler2004
I don't know but your focusing on Jagger's clothes? Time to take a look at yourself there, I think you may have just entered your own personal low point.

Yes, but I'm not Mick Jagger.

Well I have said many times before on this forum. For me, the US leg of the US tour, Mick ruins it. Bad coughing vocals with a hint of a permanent nose candy cold. And the stage, and costumes, garish pastels where the Stones should be dark and ominous. The European leg he sounds and looked much better.

81/82 it's on the same level as any tours made after Altamont...



2 1 2 0



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-23 09:31 by Come On.

I would prefer the Munich 1982 concert anytime above the Munich 1990 concert.In 1982 they were on their peak as a live band. In 1990 it was a theater show with perfect light & sound but from then on it was artificial and sterile.
In 1982 they highlighted the show with Let it bleed and Time is on my side but htere were indeed many highlights.
The clothes were in fashion back then. It is entirely wrong to compare them with the fashion of today.