Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...56789101112131415Next
Current Page: 14 of 15
Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: Lorenz ()
Date: February 15, 2011 15:32

I watched the performance and I have to say, it's absolutely stunning. I had a feeling I didn't have for a logn time - I watched the clip and felt proud. Silly, I know - but I felt proud. That is "my" Mick Jagger out there making the people smile and dance, performing and moving as if he was 20-30 years younger. Awesome.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: ablett ()
Date: February 15, 2011 15:34

and Hugh Hefners jacket.....

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: paulywaul ()
Date: February 15, 2011 15:42

Quote
ablett
and Hugh Hefners jacket.....

cool smiley Indeed ! But not his pyjamas though ......... winking smiley

[ I want to shout, but I can't hardly speak ]

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: Beauforde ()
Date: February 15, 2011 16:07

Quote
Turd On The Run
Kind of a mess. Jagger looks fit, but he's still in that mode from Shine A Light, where he mistakes frantic, kinetic movement for intensity of performance. It is as if proving that he is ageless is the point of his performance...and this has become self-parody.

Quote
bustedtrousers
-5, does that bring us back to even? I saw about thirty seconds of it, which was enough. It was exactly what I thought it would be. Mick's tired histrionics thrown on top of a dull, slick, American Idol-type production. How can you people buy into him still. I just don't get it.

what a thread! just reading through I kinda agree with these very-much-in-the- minority guys in that mick's schtick the last decades has increasingly meant that histrionics and frantic constant movement means 'being mick jagger' and his actual singing takes a very secondary role. the song at the grammys was a no-brainer with 3 lines total. so it allowed him to typically over-emote and flail about and strut his 'mick jagger schtick' without any danger to the song itself, and the bored jaded crowd dug it but I hoped that he would go for something less obvious and do something more challenging and go deeper. did mick want to do homage to burke or to himself doing burke? does mick narcissistically want his audience to constantly marvel at how 'fit' and 'energetic' he is as he runs around maniacally trying to sing and run and cheerlead at the same time, or does he want them to appreciate his growth and depth as an artist and singer and show his appreciation for the great burke by digging deeper? the answer at the grammys was obvious and that means that he is in fantastic shape to tour but if us fans expect anything different at all from the last vegas-style tours we are in for a disappointment.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: ChefGuevara ()
Date: February 15, 2011 16:30

Quote
Posted by: Beauforde ()
Date: February 15, 2011 16:07

Quote
Turd On The Run
Kind of a mess. Jagger looks fit, but he's still in that mode from Shine A Light, where he mistakes frantic, kinetic movement for intensity of performance. It is as if proving that he is ageless is the point of his performance...and this has become self-parody.

Quote
bustedtrousers
-5, does that bring us back to even? I saw about thirty seconds of it, which was enough. It was exactly what I thought it would be. Mick's tired histrionics thrown on top of a dull, slick, American Idol-type production. How can you people buy into him still. I just don't get it.

what a thread! just reading through I kinda agree with these very-much-in-the- minority guys in that mick's schtick the last decades has increasingly meant that histrionics and frantic constant movement means 'being mick jagger' and his actual singing takes a very secondary role. the song at the grammys was a no-brainer with 3 lines total. so it allowed him to typically over-emote and flail about and strut his 'mick jagger schtick' without any danger to the song itself, and the bored jaded crowd dug it but I hoped that he would go for something less obvious and do something more challenging and go deeper. did mick want to do homage to burke or to himself doing burke? does mick narcissistically want his audience to constantly marvel at how 'fit' and 'energetic' he is as he runs around maniacally trying to sing and run and cheerlead at the same time, or does he want them to appreciate his growth and depth as an artist and singer and show his appreciation for the great burke by digging deeper? the answer at the grammys was obvious and that means that he is in fantastic shape to tour but if us fans expect anything different at all from the last vegas-style tours we are in for a disappointment.


Well, After that performance I don't think we'll be hearing the Geritol and Dinosaours jokes for a while.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: schillid ()
Date: February 15, 2011 16:34

Great Band.
And big... looks like around 14 pieces (+ Mick)

1 Keyboard
1 Percussion
3 background vocalists
3 saxes
1 trumpet
2 Rhythm guitars
1 Bass
1 Drums
1 Lead guitar



Sorry... What's the name of the bandleader / guitarist?

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: schillid ()
Date: February 15, 2011 16:47

Quote
ablett
and Hugh Hefners jacket.....

The return of the labia lips!?

[www.iorr.org]

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: sweetcharmedlife ()
Date: February 15, 2011 17:13

Quote
schillid
Great Band.
And big... looks like around 14 pieces (+ Mick)

1 Keyboard
1 Percussion
3 background vocalists
3 saxes
1 trumpet
2 Rhythm guitars
1 Bass
1 Drums
1 Lead guitar



Sorry... What's the name of the bandleader / guitarist?
Raphael Saadiq....and 14 pcs.is about the size of the Stones touring band isn't it?winking smiley

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: schillid ()
Date: February 15, 2011 17:46

Quote
sweetcharmedlife
Quote
schillid
Great Band.
And big... looks like around 14 pieces (+ Mick)

1 Keyboard
1 Percussion
3 background vocalists
3 saxes
1 trumpet
2 Rhythm guitars
1 Bass
1 Drums
1 Lead guitar

....and 14 pcs.is about the size of the Stones touring band isn't it?

Almost. Big budget for the Hollywood crowd though.

With the Stones, Mick economizes...
One backing vocalists plays one of the rhythm guitars, another the percussion,
the horns are limited to around 2.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-15 18:19 by schillid.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: StonesTod ()
Date: February 15, 2011 17:52

Quote
Beauforde
Quote
Turd On The Run
Kind of a mess. Jagger looks fit, but he's still in that mode from Shine A Light, where he mistakes frantic, kinetic movement for intensity of performance. It is as if proving that he is ageless is the point of his performance...and this has become self-parody.

Quote
bustedtrousers
-5, does that bring us back to even? I saw about thirty seconds of it, which was enough. It was exactly what I thought it would be. Mick's tired histrionics thrown on top of a dull, slick, American Idol-type production. How can you people buy into him still. I just don't get it.

what a thread! just reading through I kinda agree with these very-much-in-the- minority guys in that mick's schtick the last decades has increasingly meant that histrionics and frantic constant movement means 'being mick jagger' and his actual singing takes a very secondary role. the song at the grammys was a no-brainer with 3 lines total. so it allowed him to typically over-emote and flail about and strut his 'mick jagger schtick' without any danger to the song itself, and the bored jaded crowd dug it but I hoped that he would go for something less obvious and do something more challenging and go deeper. did mick want to do homage to burke or to himself doing burke? does mick narcissistically want his audience to constantly marvel at how 'fit' and 'energetic' he is as he runs around maniacally trying to sing and run and cheerlead at the same time, or does he want them to appreciate his growth and depth as an artist and singer and show his appreciation for the great burke by digging deeper? the answer at the grammys was obvious and that means that he is in fantastic shape to tour but if us fans expect anything different at all from the last vegas-style tours we are in for a disappointment.

spot-on post. i also thought it wasn't much of a tribute to solomon in that sense. reaaaaaallly was hoping it would be "if you need me," sung with conviction...the way burke himself used to do....

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: ineedadrink ()
Date: February 15, 2011 17:57

if this type of hyper-analyzing is going to occur after each concert of their supposed tour, then man oh man, there will be plenty of threads on this board that i won't be opening.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: StonesTod ()
Date: February 15, 2011 17:59

Quote
ineedadrink
if this type of hyper-analyzing is going to occur after each concert of their supposed tour, then man oh man, there will be plenty of threads on this board that i won't be opening.

not just each concert, but each song.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: February 15, 2011 18:01

Quote
ineedadrink
if this type of hyper-analyzing is going to occur after each concert of their supposed tour, then man oh man, there will be plenty of threads on this board that i won't be opening.

no THAT is a spot on post!

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: donteverstop ()
Date: February 15, 2011 18:23

Word To Your Mother Baby...




Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: mtaylor ()
Date: February 15, 2011 18:28

Quote
schillid
Quote
sweetcharmedlife
Quote
schillid
Great Band.
And big... looks like around 14 pieces (+ Mick)

1 Keyboard
1 Percussion
3 background vocalists
3 saxes
1 trumpet
2 Rhythm guitars
1 Bass
1 Drums
1 Lead guitar

....and 14 pcs.is about the size of the Stones touring band isn't it?

Almost. Big budget for the Hollywood crowd though.

With the Stones, Mick economizes...
One backing vocalists plays one of the rhythm guitars, another the percussion,
the horns are limited to around 2.
4 on horns, where one of them plays a bit on keyboard. 13 total inclusive Mick.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: carlitosbaez ()
Date: February 15, 2011 18:45

Yes!!!!
Saw her two years ago over here at the Canarias Jazz Festival and was the best one at that edition, congratulations!!!

carlitos
tenerife

Quote
stateofshock
Quote
CrissCrossMind
Quote
The Sicilian
BTW I never heard of Esperanza Spalding

You and another 6.5 BILLION world citizens....

Um, I've heard of her. She's immensely talented.



Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: gmanp ()
Date: February 15, 2011 18:48

Thank you to ineedadrink and StonesTod

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: sweetcharmedlife ()
Date: February 15, 2011 18:54

Quote
ineedadrink
if this type of hyper-analyzing is going to occur after each concert of their supposed tour, then man oh man, there will be plenty of threads on this board that i won't be opening.
You haven't lived until you setlist watch and people anaylyze a show simply from what's been played without hearing it.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: stupidguy2 ()
Date: February 15, 2011 20:22

Quote
Beauforde
what a thread! just reading through I kinda agree with these very-much-in-the- minority guys in that mick's schtick the last decades has increasingly meant that histrionics and frantic constant movement means 'being mick jagger' and his actual singing takes a very secondary role. the song at the grammys was a no-brainer with 3 lines total. so it allowed him to typically over-emote and flail about and strut his 'mick jagger schtick' without any danger to the song itself, and the bored jaded crowd dug it but I hoped that he would go for something less obvious and do something more challenging and go deeper. did mick want to do homage to burke or to himself doing burke? does mick narcissistically want his audience to constantly marvel at how 'fit' and 'energetic' he is as he runs around maniacally trying to sing and run and cheerlead at the same time, or does he want them to appreciate his growth and depth as an artist and singer and show his appreciation for the great burke by digging deeper? the answer at the grammys was obvious and that means that he is in fantastic shape to tour but if us fans expect anything different at all from the last vegas-style tours we are in for a disappointment.

Excellent! My initial reaction was satisfaction that he got the crowd going and seemed to be having fun...but this is too easy for him, shaking his ass, pointing his finger, running up and down, playing with the guitarist etc...
I was also hoping he would just tear up a ballad.....
I want Jagger to dig deeper as well, Maybe that's too much to ask for a Grammy show, I get that - but I want more Plundered My Souls.....
That was more exciting to me than SUnday's performance.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: duke richardson ()
Date: February 15, 2011 20:28

Quote
donteverstop
Word To Your Mother Baby...


spinning smiley sticking its tongue out

thats funny

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: Kurt ()
Date: February 15, 2011 20:29

I just watched it.
It was @#$%& brilliant.

I assume I am just another post in a long line of posts that loved it.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: Sleepy City ()
Date: February 15, 2011 20:41

Quote
StonesTod
Quote
Beauforde
Quote
Turd On The Run
Kind of a mess. Jagger looks fit, but he's still in that mode from Shine A Light, where he mistakes frantic, kinetic movement for intensity of performance. It is as if proving that he is ageless is the point of his performance...and this has become self-parody.

Quote
bustedtrousers
-5, does that bring us back to even? I saw about thirty seconds of it, which was enough. It was exactly what I thought it would be. Mick's tired histrionics thrown on top of a dull, slick, American Idol-type production. How can you people buy into him still. I just don't get it.

what a thread! just reading through I kinda agree with these very-much-in-the- minority guys in that mick's schtick the last decades has increasingly meant that histrionics and frantic constant movement means 'being mick jagger' and his actual singing takes a very secondary role. the song at the grammys was a no-brainer with 3 lines total. so it allowed him to typically over-emote and flail about and strut his 'mick jagger schtick' without any danger to the song itself, and the bored jaded crowd dug it but I hoped that he would go for something less obvious and do something more challenging and go deeper. did mick want to do homage to burke or to himself doing burke? does mick narcissistically want his audience to constantly marvel at how 'fit' and 'energetic' he is as he runs around maniacally trying to sing and run and cheerlead at the same time, or does he want them to appreciate his growth and depth as an artist and singer and show his appreciation for the great burke by digging deeper? the answer at the grammys was obvious and that means that he is in fantastic shape to tour but if us fans expect anything different at all from the last vegas-style tours we are in for a disappointment.

spot-on post. i also thought it wasn't much of a tribute to solomon in that sense. reaaaaaallly was hoping it would be "if you need me," sung with conviction...the way burke himself used to do....

Me too, but then I suspect we'd be reading criticism (particularly from the press) that Jagger can't run around like he used to...

[peterchecksfield.com]

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: bustedtrousers ()
Date: February 15, 2011 20:56

Quote
paulywaul
Quote
bustedtrousers
Quote
CrissCrossMind
Quote
Beast
Quote
paulywaul
The performance is pure Jagger, he's pretty much doing what he's always done. I thought it was great, it was him being the Mick Jagger the world has always known, and doing what Mick Jagger does best. I imagine the good reverend would be looking down fondly and nodding his head with 100 percent approval. Ten out of ten Sir Mick.

+1 thumbs up

I Agree Beast +1 from you, +1 from Paul, +1 from me...., so so far we have +5 !!! (so let's round up even more !!! ALRIGHT, ALRIGHT !!) ") (the Math Genius)

-5, does that bring us back to even? I saw about thirty seconds of it, which was enough. It was exactly what I thought it would be. Mick's tired histrionics thrown on top of a dull, slick, American Idol-type production.

How can you people buy into him still. I just don't get it.

How can you people buy into him still. I just don't get it

Because he still delivers. Don't worry about not getting it, just leave it to those of us that do. It would seem there's still a few of us lurking here n' thar !!

Loadsa thangs I 'don't get' ... jazz, jazz fusion, rap, the Sex Pistols, how the f**k Queen Elton and Lady Furnish have ended up with a baby ... ?? Each to theirs I guess ??

Fair enough, pauly. But what frustrates me is that I use to get him. I use to think Mick was great, and still had something relevant to say in his performances. That he, and the Stones, were still the standard-bearers. Now I don't. And when I read all these raves, after seeing what I saw as nothing better than what you see on American Idol, I have to say something.

I watched the Dylan clip, and that I did get. I've never been a huge Dylan fan, but I enjoyed what he did way more than Jagger. No awards show performance is ever really that great. They can't be, it's a few minutes thrown in with a bunch of other stuff, all of which have little to do with each other. But I got Dylan, because he came out and just did his song. Without having to resort to running around like a retard, in a way that's no longer suits him.

The sloppy transition from the Avett Brothers, to Dylan just standing there, barely able to even sing, with all those musician's behind him, was ten times more exciting to me, than Jagger's slick, soulless, spastic attempt to try and be what he still thinks "Mick Jagger" should be.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: schillid ()
Date: February 15, 2011 20:57

flip-cam in the dressing room ... practicing the cloak manoeuvre...




Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: cc ()
Date: February 15, 2011 21:39

Quote
schillid
flip-cam in the dressing room ... practicing the cloak manoeuvre...



I like how he practiced this, but not too much. There's a fine balance with the Stones between showmanship and professionalism (discussed on another thread here) and [email protected]#$%& amateurism. mick at his best has raw movements but still a studied sense of theater.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: The Sicilian ()
Date: February 16, 2011 05:47

Quote
ineedadrink
if this type of hyper-analyzing is going to occur after each concert of their supposed tour, then man oh man, there will be plenty of threads on this board that i won't be opening.

Then be prepared to take a long break, because this is nothing compared to a Stones tour.

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: skipstone ()
Date: February 16, 2011 05:50


Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: Brue ()
Date: February 16, 2011 05:52

I think everybody just got poster-ized


Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: gypsy18 ()
Date: February 16, 2011 09:40

Quote
ChefGuevara
Well, After that performance I don't think we'll be hearing the Geritol and Dinosaours jokes for a while.

Amen to that!

Re: Jagger at Grammy awards
Posted by: riccardo99 ()
Date: February 16, 2011 11:43

Broadcasted tonight at 10 pm UK time on ITV2

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...56789101112131415Next
Current Page: 14 of 15


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 206
Record Number of Users: 184 on May 17, 2018 22:46
Record Number of Guests: 3948 on December 7, 2015 15:07

Previous page Next page First page IORR home