Quote
iamthedj
Watched the film again last week for the first time since it's initial release and it's a flop. From start to finish a complete mistake. Keith is an embarassment throughout. All that mugging for the camera and dodgy noodling on the guitar. Mick just seems on autopilot and I'm pretty sure he can be seen reading the lyrics from a monitor on several tracks. As for the audience they don't really seem that into it. The girls, I assume were brought in to demonstrate that the Stones main audience are people in the late teens or early twenties but if you watch closely its obvious they're not fans. They don't know the music and aren't overly impressed with the band at all.

Quote
stones78
When Mick stars talking about Champagne & Reefer and how it was done by Muddy, etc. it makes me cringe, those girls in the front rows probably have no idea who's Muddy Waters, who's Buddy Guy, etc.

Quote
DragonSky

Quote
carlostones10

Quote
Vocalion
Champagne was good, the rest was crap.

If you think all Sal crap, sorry. But I am not sure you are a Stones fan.

Then just what is a Stones fan carlostone10? Because you are a blind Stones fan, if blind can be applied to hearing then you're blind at what is in SAL. But if you like it, well then, you like it. Most of us know they are nothing like they used to be - even recently in their history - but it's a real far stretch to say that SAL is the Stones at their best. They played some great songs but they didn't play them great - by any stretch of any imagination.

Although Faraway Eyes is hilarious with Keith being a total idiot and screwing up the words and goofing off to whoever. Can he not read the teleprompter?

Quote
carlostones10

Quote
thewatchman
Just sittin here on a Sunday evening watching my 'Shine A Light' DVD. What an incredible performance and sure glad they didn't put a bunch of homely hardcores (like myself) down front! The Stones and Hot Chicks, doesn't get any better than that!

thewatchman,

I am sure you had a great time. Congratulation. I will do the same very soon. I will drink a good beer and enjoy the most fabulous music in the world: The Rolling Stones.

Have an amazing week.

Regards from Brazil.

Quote
Rolling Hansie

Quote
thewatchman
Just sittin here on a Sunday evening watching my 'Shine A Light' DVD.

Sounds good. Just enjoying the little joys in life.

Quote
24FPS
Martin Scorcese added nothing to their legacy. The Stones produced DVDs of recent vintage are much better. A few rarities were nice, She Was Hot, As Tears Go By. Champagne with Buddy Guy was indeed memorable. Christina Aguilera was great, but Jack White was surprisingly ineffective on Loving Cup, and I like Jack White. All in all a big letdown. The Stones had much better concerts on the Bigger Bang tour, Zilker Park being one.

Quote
thewatchman
I Am So Proud Of My Rolling Stones!

Quote
71Tele
Well, I went to the actual show. Very exciting, but the film was a real dud. To have some conflict in the movie, they had a forced storyline about Scorsese not being able to get the set list until right before the show started. I enjoyed the extras on the DVD far better than the film itself. Oh, and filling the first rows with young "babes" was really, really lame. It was quite odd to sit in the balcony and look at that.

THIS is how far the Stones have slid in relevance: In "Gimme Shelter", the conflict is A GUY GETS KILLED DURING THE SHOW, and for extra drama the boys slip off to record "Brown Sugar" and "Wild Horses" down South. In SAL, the conflict is "Oh gosh, Marty doesn't have the setlist" and the extra drama (I guess) is getting a visit from Hillary Clinton.

Far better they would have allowed Scorsese to do the "No Direction Home" treatment with it possibly culminating in the Beacon concert. Of course, we couldn't have that, so we got another half-baked concert film. Too bad.

Quote
TheDailyBuzzherd

Quote
thewatchman
I Am So Proud Of My Rolling Stones!

Uh-oh Watcher, you just pulled a Jagger. Charlie may bust you one.

Quote
ineedadrink
i've never heard of a person being proud of a band. i understand being proud of your child's first day of school. or your child's graduation from school. but, being proud of a band? that's a little.......weird.

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
ineedadrink
i've never heard of a person being proud of a band. i understand being proud of your child's first day of school. or your child's graduation from school. but, being proud of a band? that's a little.......weird.

You would have to be a fan to understand.

Quote
ineedadrink
i've never heard of a person being proud of a band. i understand being proud of your child's first day of school. or your child's graduation from school. but, being proud of a band? that's a little.......weird.

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
71Tele
Well, I went to the actual show. Very exciting, but the film was a real dud. To have some conflict in the movie, they had a forced storyline about Scorsese not being able to get the set list until right before the show started. I enjoyed the extras on the DVD far better than the film itself. Oh, and filling the first rows with young "babes" was really, really lame. It was quite odd to sit in the balcony and look at that.

THIS is how far the Stones have slid in relevance: In "Gimme Shelter", the conflict is A GUY GETS KILLED DURING THE SHOW, and for extra drama the boys slip off to record "Brown Sugar" and "Wild Horses" down South. In SAL, the conflict is "Oh gosh, Marty doesn't have the setlist" and the extra drama (I guess) is getting a visit from Hillary Clinton.

Far better they would have allowed Scorsese to do the "No Direction Home" treatment with it possibly culminating in the Beacon concert. Of course, we couldn't have that, so we got another half-baked concert film. Too bad.

You lucky guy! You were actually there and thought the show was great! Let's not forget, this was Scorcese's movie. Mick wanted him to come to Rio. Maybe Eastwood would have done a better job?

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
ineedadrink
i've never heard of a person being proud of a band. i understand being proud of your child's first day of school. or your child's graduation from school. but, being proud of a band? that's a little.......weird.

You remind me of that stalker in the movie Tightrope. Talk about a weirdo.

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
stones78
When Mick stars talking about Champagne & Reefer and how it was done by Muddy, etc. it makes me cringe, those girls in the front rows probably have no idea who's Muddy Waters, who's Buddy Guy, etc.

Who cares if they know who Muddy Waters or Buddy Guy are? I mean, do the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders need to know the history of the Dallas Cowboys and who Tom Landry was? Hell, no! They are nothing more than eye candy for those viewing the movie.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
71Tele
Well, I went to the actual show. Very exciting, but the film was a real dud. To have some conflict in the movie, they had a forced storyline about Scorsese not being able to get the set list until right before the show started. I enjoyed the extras on the DVD far better than the film itself. Oh, and filling the first rows with young "babes" was really, really lame. It was quite odd to sit in the balcony and look at that.

THIS is how far the Stones have slid in relevance: In "Gimme Shelter", the conflict is A GUY GETS KILLED DURING THE SHOW, and for extra drama the boys slip off to record "Brown Sugar" and "Wild Horses" down South. In SAL, the conflict is "Oh gosh, Marty doesn't have the setlist" and the extra drama (I guess) is getting a visit from Hillary Clinton.

Far better they would have allowed Scorsese to do the "No Direction Home" treatment with it possibly culminating in the Beacon concert. Of course, we couldn't have that, so we got another half-baked concert film. Too bad.

You lucky guy! You were actually there and thought the show was great! Let's not forget, this was Scorcese's movie. Mick wanted him to come to Rio. Maybe Eastwood would have done a better job?

I think it was really Jagger's movie and Scorsese had handcuffs on, figuratively speaking. I think a documentary - which would have examined the band and its personalities using from a broader perspective using Scorsese's unique skills - would have been a much more intriguing project. Have you seen "No Direction Home"?

Quote
ineedadrink

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
ineedadrink
i've never heard of a person being proud of a band. i understand being proud of your child's first day of school. or your child's graduation from school. but, being proud of a band? that's a little.......weird.

You remind me of that stalker in the movie Tightrope. Talk about a weirdo.

stalking takes more than 5 seconds, unlike responding to a message on a message board on the internet. try harder with your insults.

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
ineedadrink

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
ineedadrink
i've never heard of a person being proud of a band. i understand being proud of your child's first day of school. or your child's graduation from school. but, being proud of a band? that's a little.......weird.

You remind me of that stalker in the movie Tightrope. Talk about a weirdo.

stalking takes more than 5 seconds, unlike responding to a message on a message board on the internet. try harder with your insults.

Nice to know that this is a public forum and everything said is documented. You my (possibly former) friend are the master at hurling insults, always have been. You have a very short attention span.

Quote
Send It To me
Keith's arthritis has diminished his technical skills a bit, but his experience compensates for it. The arrangements are getting better. It was always about FEEL anyway.

Quote
ab

Quote
Send It To me
Keith's arthritis has diminished his technical skills a bit, but his experience compensates for it. The arrangements are getting better. It was always about FEEL anyway.

Yeah, it was all about the feel, but Keef doesn't even play in time through much of Shine a Light. Keef used to be the groove master behind nearly every song onstage. Any recent rearrangements are to cover up for his inability. Compare She's So Cold from 1981 and 2005. Or worse still, that godawful version of Sympathy on SaL.

BTW, I've never felt any sense of ownership toward the Rolling Stones. That mentality is reserved for the Mark Chapmans of the world and the twits who think that performers owe them anything.

And, yes, I'd rather watch LStNT than SaL. Even with the bad edits and sped-up tapes, it's a bona fide rock 'n' roll band and not some overblown Vegas act.

It took SaL to finally convince me that the Stones are done. Jagger isn't saying as much, but his unwillingness to participate in any Stones activity in the last four years would seem to indicate that he agrees. And unless and until Micky's down with it, the Stones ain't happening.

Quote
ineedadrink

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
ineedadrink

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
ineedadrink
i've never heard of a person being proud of a band. i understand being proud of your child's first day of school. or your child's graduation from school. but, being proud of a band? that's a little.......weird.

You remind me of that stalker in the movie Tightrope. Talk about a weirdo.

stalking takes more than 5 seconds, unlike responding to a message on a message board on the internet. try harder with your insults.

Nice to know that this is a public forum and everything said is documented. You my (possibly former) friend are the master at hurling insults, always have been. You have a very short attention span.

there are millions and millions and millions of people using the internet this very second. why you would think that i'm someone you know is beyond me. ain't paranoia grand?

Quote
ab

Quote
Send It To me
Keith's arthritis has diminished his technical skills a bit, but his experience compensates for it. The arrangements are getting better. It was always about FEEL anyway.

Yeah, it was all about the feel, but Keef doesn't even play in time through much of Shine a Light. Keef used to be the groove master behind nearly every song onstage. Any recent rearrangements are to cover up for his inability. Compare She's So Cold from 1981 and 2005. Or worse still, that godawful version of Sympathy on SaL.

BTW, I've never felt any sense of ownership toward the Rolling Stones. That mentality is reserved for the Mark Chapmans of the world and the twits who think that performers owe them anything.

And, yes, I'd rather watch LStNT than SaL. Even with the bad edits and sped-up tapes, it's a bona fide rock 'n' roll band and not some overblown Vegas act.

It took SaL to finally convince me that the Stones are done. Jagger isn't saying as much, but his unwillingness to participate in any Stones activity in the last four years would seem to indicate that he agrees. And unless and until Micky's down with it, the Stones ain't happening.

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
71Tele

Quote
thewatchman

Quote
71Tele
Well, I went to the actual show. Very exciting, but the film was a real dud. To have some conflict in the movie, they had a forced storyline about Scorsese not being able to get the set list until right before the show started. I enjoyed the extras on the DVD far better than the film itself. Oh, and filling the first rows with young "babes" was really, really lame. It was quite odd to sit in the balcony and look at that.

THIS is how far the Stones have slid in relevance: In "Gimme Shelter", the conflict is A GUY GETS KILLED DURING THE SHOW, and for extra drama the boys slip off to record "Brown Sugar" and "Wild Horses" down South. In SAL, the conflict is "Oh gosh, Marty doesn't have the setlist" and the extra drama (I guess) is getting a visit from Hillary Clinton.

Far better they would have allowed Scorsese to do the "No Direction Home" treatment with it possibly culminating in the Beacon concert. Of course, we couldn't have that, so we got another half-baked concert film. Too bad.

You lucky guy! You were actually there and thought the show was great! Let's not forget, this was Scorcese's movie. Mick wanted him to come to Rio. Maybe Eastwood would have done a better job?

I think it was really Jagger's movie and Scorsese had handcuffs on, figuratively speaking. I think a documentary - which would have examined the band and its personalities using from a broader perspective using Scorsese's unique skills - would have been a much more intriguing project. Have you seen "No Direction Home"?

I am not so sure Scorcese would have allowed Mick to "rule the roost" over a movie with his signature on it. Yes, of course I have seen "No Direction Home", and yes I would have loved to see what you have suggested here. Maybe they are saving that for further down the line?