I just recently saw Performance and although I'm not quite sure what to make of the movie, I still enjoyed Jagger's acting(and perfromance) in the film.
I want to watch the rest of the films in his filmography and I was interested in hearing what you have to say about his acting career.

So what do you guys think of Mick Jagger as an actor. I'm especially interested about thoughts on Performance, Ned Kelly, Freejack, Bent and The Man from Elysian Fields.

Also, did you spot his uncredited cameo appearance in The Bank Job

cheers
Hannes

I've only seen Performance -- loooooong time ago, Freejack and Bent.

I loved Bent. It's the best of the three by far.

T@3

Freejack is probably one of the worst movies of all time.

Ne supra crepidam sutor iudicaret (Pliny the Elder) -
A shoemaker should not judge above the sandal.

He was good in Performance because he played himself .
He was pretty bad in Ned Kelly and unfortunately, I didn't see "The man from the Elysian Fields .

Some videos & comments here :

[www.iorr.org]



I am a Frenchie ,as Mick affectionately called them in the Old Grey Whistle Test in 1977 .

Yeah I haven't seen Freejack, but I saw the trailer and it looked it pretty awful. I think most of Jaggers movies have gotten pretty bad reviews apart from Bent...but a movie which protagonist is a homosexual jew in the second world war is bound to get a good review no matter what

Quote
msw2525
Freejack is probably one of the worst movies of all time.

Nah there have been zillions worse than that.

Mick getting gunned down on the tracks with his little armored suit is classic.

Quote
No Expectations

Quote
msw2525
Freejack is probably one of the worst movies of all time.

Nah there have been zillions worse than that.

don't think so !

5 to 10 come out every week

The worst thing I ever saw Mick in was that Fairie Tale Theater thing in the early 80's. The Nightingale. That was awful.

Bent is by far his best acting performance.

Quote
msw2525
Freejack is probably one of the worst movies of all time.

But doesn't Mick look cool



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

But let's not forget his looks in Performance eh



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

That is one good looking man

Quote
msw2525
Freejack is probably one of the worst movies of all time.

'Ned Kelly' is worse...

No-one's mentioned the 1983 TV movie 'The Nightingale' which I quite like (it'a available as an official region 1 DVD), & I think he was very good in 'The Man From Elysian Fields'.

'Performance' remains probably my favourite movie of all time (along with the Slade movie 'Flame').

Mick's over-enunciated phrasing only works well in Performance; he uses the same voice in his other films (though not in real life) and it just sounds irritating and affected.

How I wish he hadn't gotten cold feet after the initial poor reception of Performance and the justifiably poor reception of Ned Kelly. Mick was incredibly beautiful at that time and it would have been great to see more of him on film.

He was very good in 'The Man from Elysian Fields.'

I like Ned Kelly, heck, the "Wild Colonial Boy" segment alone is worth the price of admission...

Quote
dewlover
I like Ned Kelly, heck, the "Wild Colonial Boy" segment alone is worth the price of admission...

Yes, that bit's good (& great to see Mick performing it live in the Australia 1988 TV broadcast).

He was great in Performance. I had the worst exspectations before I watched Ned Kelly, but didn't think it was a disaster at all and he did okay I think. But Freejack was very bad indeed. The Man In the Elysian Fields was not as astonishing a film as Performance, but Jagger did well.
Bent and The Nightingale I will look forward to see. I didn't notice him in the Bank Job.

Quote
SwayStones
He was good in Performance because he played himself .

Nah there were cameras and other people present during filming thus we do not see the real Michael Philip Jagger.

Quote
GetYerAngie
He was great in Performance. I had the worst exspectations before I watched Ned Kelly, but didn't think it was a disaster at all and he did okay I think. But Freejack was very bad indeed. The Man In the Elysian Fields was not as astonishing a film as Performance, but Jagger did well.
Bent and The Nightingale I will look forward to see. I didn't notice him in the Bank Job.

Wasn't he also in 'Enigma'? I Haven't seen that yet.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
SwayStones
He was good in Performance because he played himself .

Nah there were cameras and other people present during filming thus we do not see the real Michael Philip Jagger.

It's been suggested that he actually played Brian Jones in the movie...

Quote
Sleepy City

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
SwayStones
He was good in Performance because he played himself .

Nah there were cameras and other people present during filming thus we do not see the real Michael Philip Jagger.

It's been suggested that he actually played Brian Jones in the movie...

He says it himself, something along lines of ''there's a bit of Brian Jones in there, but not really''.

Quote
GetYerAngie
The Nightingale I will look forward to see.

If anyone's interested I'm currently selling a brand new (sealed) official Region 1 DVD of this on ebay:

[cgi.ebay.co.uk]

Quote
Sleepy City
Wasn't he also in 'Enigma'? I Haven't seen that yet.

There is a nightclub scene and he sits in the back on a table talking to (I think) two women. The DVD also contains a longer outtake of the scene above and Mick visiting the set.

This is the review of the Performance by great ROGER EBERT


"Performance" is a bizarre, disconnected attempt to link the inhabitants of two kinds of London underworlds: pop stars and gangsters. It isn't altogether successful, largely because it tries too hard and doesn't pace itself to let its effects sink in.
But it does have a kind of frantic energy, and it introduced Mick Jagger in a role that reinforced his stage image without copying it. The movie is really about images anyway. On its most fundamental plot level, it's about a gangster (James Fox) who is trying to disguise himself so that he can slip out of England on a forged passport. He meets the Jagger character by accident when he takes a basement room in a boarding house.
Jagger is introduced as a top star of two or three years ago who has "retired" and hidden away to work on his memoirs or something. Mostly he seems to have submerged himself in a hedonistic existence with two girls, a variety of drugs, and a cloying assortment of Eastern artifacts. Almost every shot in his apartment is aimed past candles, incense, wall hangings, tapestries, and all that, and half the time we're even getting the Turkish rug reflected in the mirror.
This is not exactly the environment your everyday white-collar gangster feels at home in, but Fox plays a strange character who never feels at home anywhere. His workaday style is to beat and threaten potential "protection" customers. But despite his enthusiasm, he isn't really accepted even by the boss (every gangster has a boss) and his associates. So Jagger's little corner of London seems much like any other to him, affording a hideout until he can get the passport and fly to New York.
Alas, Jagger doesn't see it that way, and over the course of a day or two, the gangster is sucked down into a psychedelic whirlpool with Jagger and the two girls. One of them feeds him a hallucinogenic mushroom, after which the other dresses him in the unisex clothes they all wear, and then we get a lot of obligatory psychedelic photography showing the poor guy losing his identity, or his values, or in any event his inclination to escape.
The movie is so nervously edited that it doesn't stay around to develop the effects it introduces. That was a tendency with many semi-experimental British films of the early seventies; they were so concerned with reminding us they're movies that they don't do the work movies should. The first half of the movie is especially distracting. But after the gangster and the pop star meet, the editing and the story settle into a kind of consistency.
The surprise of the movie, and the reason to see it, is Mick Jagger's performance. It isn't simply good; it's a comment on his life and style. The ads emphasized his unisex appearance, and the role does so even more. When he slicks back his hair during a psychedelic fantasy, and seems to adopt the gangster's lifestyle, we're looking at acting insights of a very complex psychological order. Other than that, the movie is neither very good nor very bad. Interesting.

The man from the Elysian Fields was my favorite from this list. However my overall favorite is Running Out Of Luck. Again, because he played himself.

Quote
frankotero
However my overall favorite is Running Out Of Luck. Again, because he played himself.

I watched this again (twice) very recently for the first time in nearly 25 years, & I found it great fun! Worst thing about it is the music, though even that isn't as bad as I remembered...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-17 21:10 by Sleepy City.

Quote
JJHMick

Quote
Sleepy City
Wasn't he also in 'Enigma'? I Haven't seen that yet.

There is a nightclub scene and he sits in the back on a table talking to (I think) two women. The DVD also contains a longer outtake of the scene above and Mick visiting the set.

There's a brief clip of him being filmed for this movie in the 'Being Mick' documentary (available as an official DVD with bonus footage & highly recommended!).