He wasn't just there for his book. He also promoted his upcoming appearance in Pirates 4, which might be written into his contract that he had to do some promotion. He seemed bit frail. It's hard to imagine him slinging on his axe and treading the boards for two hours a night for a year or two across the globe. And his fingers looked suspect. I think he's got a persona for the public and he wore it last night. Not much was learned except time is passing quickly.

The course of this thread is sickening. Keith made it clear that efforts are in the works for a new tour. Vagueness was in order as plans are preliminary at best. Rest assured, it will happen. Commentary of who is a better choice of a late night host is pointless. Keith was sharp and nothing but pride was received!!!

What about journalistic ethics: How can it be acceptable that celebs visits shows just to sell stuff? If that happened here in Sweden people would complain about it. It's basically corruption. A bit like the old Payola system.

Quote
Stoneage
What about journalistic ethics: How can it be acceptable that celebs visits shows just to sell stuff? If that happened here in Sweden people would complain about it. It's basically corruption. A bit like the old Payola system.

I do not give a shit about "selling points' Don't we all try to make a living everyday??? Keith kicked ass.

So you think corrupt journalism is okey because people are making a living of it?

I wasn't talking about politics Chris (although I'm with you on some of your statements), I was talking about talkshows working as vehicles for selling books and other commodities and whether that is acceptable from a moral standpoint.

Whatever else Keith did or didn't do, he succeeded in making some believe that a tour is ON and others that it's never going to happen. Clever, that - and par for the course. Rehearsed or not, it was good to hear his humour. For all his years in the US, it's still quintessentially British.

To console you on this Chris: Moral leadership seems to be a commodity in short supply all around the world, not just in the USA. Europe is basically governed by clowns these days... .

>What about journalistic ethics: How can it be acceptable that celebs visits shows just to sell stuff?

It's not journalism and it's nothing new -- you think the Stones didn't appear on Ed Sullivan with the intention of selling records?

My uncle interviewing the voice of reason for ending USA Involvement

[www.youtube.com]

At least they were performing. And Ed wasn't showing their new LP to the TV-audience saying how brilliant it was and persuading them to buy it. I'm sure he didn't hand out copies to the audience either.

Quote
carlostones10
Interview on youtube:



Thanks, Roger from Mexico.

awww....thanks for sharing. That was fun to watch. Hope you can nail them down, Keith! Glad you don't want to crucify them. Could it be a reference to not wanting to harm Mick? I think so.

I didn't like that he said he didn't have enough time (a year) for that jarred lemon thing. I hope he doesn't have any health issues.

Loved it.

Quote
Chris Fountain
The course of this thread is sickening. Keith made it clear that efforts are in the works for a new tour. Vagueness was in order as plans are preliminary at best. Rest assured, it will happen. Commentary of who is a better choice of a late night host is pointless. Keith was sharp and nothing but pride was received!!!

WTF??
CLEAR efforts are in the work for a new tour??
Where the hell did you get that idea?
Sounded more like he deflected. He sounded more positive about a tour a year ago.
Don't think things look very good at all for a tour.

first of all i dont think he could finish a two hour set much less a two year world tour, and second there is absolutely nothing in the works, and trust me i truly hope iam wrong



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-13 05:19 by melillo.

Quote
24FPS
He wasn't just there for his book. He also promoted his upcoming appearance in Pirates 4, which might be written into his contract that he had to do some promotion. He seemed bit frail. It's hard to imagine him slinging on his axe and treading the boards for two hours a night for a year or two across the globe. And his fingers looked suspect. I think he's got a persona for the public and he wore it last night. Not much was learned except time is passing quickly.

He's only in the movie for 2 minutes. Hard to believe he's required to do that much promotion.

I agree with SCL; it was only an interview. For God's sake , they will tour again...stop the fricking paranoia. jeeeze it was only a damn interview.....


Do we need to start screening iorr members? LOL

I looks like Mick and Keith are finally separated in a public, too. Perhaps the popularity of LIFE and his involvement in Depp's Walt Disney movies - and Depp's public adoring of him - has given Keith finally an independency as a celebrity that does need any longer the Stones/Jagger connection (another solo/Winos album would fit the picture now as well). Like noticed here Keith didn't mention Mick or the Stones at all - I would't be surprised if Fallon (an irrating jerk, by the way) had been told that this subject will not be discussed any further.

Maybe it is calm before the storm but there have never been so quiet for years as far as Mick and Keith's co-working goes. The two seem to ignore even the existence of the other. If anyone sees anything indicating in that "interview" to a new Stones project is really a magician or a true believer.

Anyway, I found the interview dull but I never been any fan of these so called celebrity host shows (so that is just me). The paperback version of Keith's book was promoted and the Pirate movie as well. Keith told the old "we made sure that the singles never crash with the Beatles" story (that I think holds true only to one way), and gave some one-liners of nothing especially (yeah, the famous wit still exists). I'm glad the Pirate clip was shown so I don't need to see the whole awful movie just to see Keith's contribution.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-13 06:34 by Doxa.

Am I to take it that Swedish celebrities show up on TV shows out of the goodness of their hearts to talk about their dogs, daughters and such?

This is just my speculation but to my ears is starts to sound that Keith's crucifying of Mick, and with it their relationship, in LIFE was a process which Keith needed to do in order to let his mind free. That was his terapia (the same might go to the 70's drug scene as well, and his life over-all) for to get the independency and autonomy. Mick seemingly has done it already in the late 70's or so, but for Keith the relationship and the mutual dependency stands in much stronger footing. Call it "the Rolling Stones". Perhaps LIFE actually was Keith's way to set him free of the whole circus. (A bit like Bill's STONE ALONE). Of the Twins, I have the impression that more sensitive Keith has never been able to be so pragmatic as Mick is toward The Stones: that the Stones is a vehicle to fame to make a horrible amount of money, and nothing really more than that. For Keith - as for Brian - it is "their baby".

I can see happy retirement days for 'uncle' Keith now. He might play with 'pirate' character that gives him the claim for celebrity, but I guess there is a relaxed, balanced man and a family patriarcha behind the curtain and image who enjoys his long private hours in his library, etc. He might even visit the recording studio (liek he has now done) if he feels like doing something - a touch of sudden muse - but there is need to do that or relaese anything to satisfy some contract or to "show to breathe" or "being still in business" or anything like that. The freedom of a pensioner just to do anything you want...

But this was just a thought - one way to look at it.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-13 07:10 by Doxa.

Doxa- the "Walt Disney Movies" should be taken in context presented.There is no such thing thing as a "perfect movie" It's all subjective!!! I like the comic aspects of the carribb. movies, which prove enjoyable. For example, one could say that "Bonnie and Clyde was overrated.

Funny thing; Robert Redford was on CNN not too long ago and mentioned that he saw "The Sting" for the first time three years ago!!! You know what he said????

That is a great movie!!!


I guess we all sometimes under appreciate our good deeds!!!!


By the way, you're a great writer; I like learning from your skills!!

Quote
Doxa
This is just my speculation but to my ears is starts to sound that Keith's crucifying of Mick, and with it their relationship, in LIFE was a process which Keith needed to do in order to let his mind free. That was his terapia (the same might go to the 70's drug scene as well, and his life over-all) for to get the independency and autonomy. Mick seemingly has done it already in the late 70's or so, but for Keith the relationship and the mutual dependency stands in much stronger footing. Call it "the Rolling Stones". Perhaps LIFE actually was Keith's way to set him free of the whole circus. (A bit like Bill's STONE ALONE). Of the Twins, I have the impression that more sensitive Keith has never been able to be so pragmatic as Mick is toward The Stones: that the Stones is a vehicle to fame to make a horrible amount of money, and nothing really more than that. For Keith - as for Brian - it is "their baby".

I can see happy retirement days for 'uncle' Keith now. He might play with 'pirate' character that gives him the claim for celebrity, but I guess there is a relaxed, balanced man and a family patriarcha behind the curtain and image who enjoys his long private hours in his library, etc.

But this was just a thought - one way to look at it.

- Doxa

no offense, but you think way too much just sit back and enjoy keith while we still have him. don't get too deep and psychological over a human that you don't know personally.

Chris, nothing wrong with the Walt Disney movies per se! I admit I used the term intentionally with a bit nasty manner, but a great film is a great film no matter its genre or source. Besides, those classical long Walt Disney cartoon movies (The White Snow; Cindarella, etc.) are one of the best films ever done. Still love to watch those with my five-years-old kid; in fact, having a kid is a good excuse to watch those films again!

Thanks, by the way, for your compliment.

- Doxa

Quote
ineedadrink

Quote
Doxa
This is just my speculation but to my ears is starts to sound that Keith's crucifying of Mick, and with it their relationship, in LIFE was a process which Keith needed to do in order to let his mind free. That was his terapia (the same might go to the 70's drug scene as well, and his life over-all) for to get the independency and autonomy. Mick seemingly has done it already in the late 70's or so, but for Keith the relationship and the mutual dependency stands in much stronger footing. Call it "the Rolling Stones". Perhaps LIFE actually was Keith's way to set him free of the whole circus. (A bit like Bill's STONE ALONE). Of the Twins, I have the impression that more sensitive Keith has never been able to be so pragmatic as Mick is toward The Stones: that the Stones is a vehicle to fame to make a horrible amount of money, and nothing really more than that. For Keith - as for Brian - it is "their baby".

I can see happy retirement days for 'uncle' Keith now. He might play with 'pirate' character that gives him the claim for celebrity, but I guess there is a relaxed, balanced man and a family patriarcha behind the curtain and image who enjoys his long private hours in his library, etc.

But this was just a thought - one way to look at it.

- Doxa

no offense, but you think way too much just sit back and enjoy keith while we still have him. don't get too deep and psychological over a human that you don't know personally.

No offense taken no, but I don't know what else I already do if not "sitting back and enjoying Keith". That I made some behavioristic observations - that I called "speculative" in my first sentence - of the theatre I've been 'following' in some sense of the term now some 30 yaers - and I have a habit of thinking aloud (articulating those very thoughts) - I find it strange what is "think too much". I can't help it, sorry.

Afterthought: Now after re-reading my post I admit I used a bit too heavy psychological vocabulary to express my point, but despite that I hope that the point - that is not such a "deep-going" issue at all - can be seen.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-05-13 07:37 by Doxa.

Quote
Stoneage
What about journalistic ethics: How can it be acceptable that celebs visits shows just to sell stuff? If that happened here in Sweden people would complain about it. It's basically corruption. A bit like the old Payola system.

Journalistic ethics? This is a talk show, not journalism. People have been appearing on talk shows to pitch their latest film/book/project since the days of Steve Allen and Jack Paar.

very nice interview. fallon and keith hit it off. keith may be the new pitchman for minutemaid lemonade!

This was a really nice interview and a great showing by Keith. I like this version of Keith. And Jimmy Fallon recognizes the contributions the Stones have made to rock in a way many people on TV simply don't, so I give him props for being a guy who actually probably has a ton of old bootlegs and honestly loves the Stones in a way that many on this board do. I'll excuse his blatant ass-kissing for making an attempt to educate his audience that, hey, there's more to music than...justin bieber or whatever.

I'll take this version of Keith to the ridiculous pseudo-badass Keith from, say, that silly fake interview from '78 where he replies to the question "What was the inspiration for Let it Bleed?" with "I'll tell you what it would've been now...it would've been your face." That was so fake. And this is so real, in a humble and endearing sort of way.

(And this from a guy who done his share of modern-era Keith slagging on this board...)


[Apologies for the cross-post...this seems to be the appropriate thread to comment on Keith on Fallon.]

V. Bockris in his Keith book (in the edition of 2004) says that Keith should begin to work solo, 'couse everybody hate Jagger, because all the criticism the Stones gets was directed at Jagger and everything good is always associated with Keith.
Therefore, go to hell Jagger - he just just annoys people people who "used to love him long time ago but not anymore( Richards' words in one of his interview)
I think there are many people around Richards who are pushing him for this direction. Of course, at this stage of their career - this is the end for the Stones. Keith's fans are happy, I'm being a fan of the Stones not happy.
Funny, that in the end it is Richards - who more than anyone else shouted of devotion to the Stones - who destroyed them.
I think for Richards Stones always were he himself and nobody else. like Napaleon told - what's good for me, good for France.

that silly fake interview from '78

Hey that's the one with Norman Gunston ain't it ?....

Like Gunstan use ta stick cig-papers on his dial ta make it
look like he'd sliced himself up while shavin' so Keef was only
givin' him back some stick with the Let It Bleed comment....

Those old Gunston interviews were classics and many of those people just
didn't get him esp the Americans....He was like an Aussie Ali G but like 30 years ahead ......

If ya sniff around Youtube you'll find a few of Gunston's interviews with different celebrities....
The one with Colonel Tom Parker was classic ...... It's a wonder Gunston didn't get wacked after it







ROCKMAN

Quote
Rockman
that silly fake interview from '78

Hey that's the one with Norman Gunston ain't it ?....

Like Gunstan use ta stick cig-papers on his dial ta make it
look like he'd sliced himself up while shavin' so Keef was only
givin' him back some stick with the Let It Bleed comment....

Those old Gunston interviews were classics and many of those people just
didn't get him esp the Americans....He was like an Aussie Ali G but like 30 years ahead ......

If ya sniff around Youtube you'll find a few of Gunston's interviews with different celebrities....
The one with Colonel Tom Parker was classic ...... It's a wonder Gunston didn't get wacked after it

"You don't share a bed with Mr. Keith Richards, do you?

"Well, I think that's a very personal question."

ROCKMAN