For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
mickschix
Ok, I'll give you that one, Treacle...just a tad too old for LAD! Mick NEVER sucks!
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
mickschix
Ok, I'll give you that one, Treacle...just a tad too old for LAD! Mick NEVER sucks!
only 'in the 70's!
Quote
mickschix
Well, if he reads all of these critiques, it will be interesting to see what he does in terms of movements next year....if there IS a 5oth Tour. If you go back to '72, he was not using " jabbing" moves as much as punches straight out and in '75 these moves smoothed out a bit into more fluid movements, like karate moves. In '78 he was defiant, so the movements appeared angry to me. A lot of you really hated the '81 tour and the constant running and the cherry picker...I liked it more than the '78 attitude. Steel Wheels was just a huge production all around with a very short hair cut and less jabbing movements. The 90's I loved, especially No Security. The " exaggerated " moves described by Edward became a bit more pronounced after 2002-03. I think Edward is exaggerating quite a bit but everyone's perceptions are different. I still find 95% of Mick's movements quite natural...hey, "he moves like Jagger", what else can you say??
Quote
treaclefingers
mick in all his 'unnaturalness' is still a far better watch than any other entertainer.
Quote
harlem shuffle
I think some people on this board overanalysing Jagger.
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
I O R R
Its Overanalyzing Rockn Roll
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
I O R R
Its Overanalyzing Rockn Roll
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
I O R R
Its Overanalyzing Rockn Roll
Quote
Edward TwiningQuote
treaclefingers
mick in all his 'unnaturalness' is still a far better watch than any other entertainer.
Mick at his peak was very much unique, treaclefingers, i'll give you that, and pretty charming too, back in the very early days, when his movements had a freshness, and a naivety about them too. The word natural, i feel really is the key, to understanding what made Mick so truly great back in the sixties and seventies. Mick truly had a wonderfully suited physique for dancing, and also a physical eloquence in the way he actually moved, when he danced. Mick was perfectly in sinc with music back then, and very much complimenting in a physical way, very much what was aurally/musically being heard by the audience. I think Jagger did lose a little of the naivety from the 64-65 period as he entered the latter half of the sixties, and more of a blatant sexual quality came into his movements/dancing style, yet spontaneity always seemed pretty much his forte, and pretty much whatever i have seen him try, from that period, seemed to work brilliantly. The first time i really noticed him really working outside of the context of the music, in terms of him merely for creating a spectacle for himself, was certain moments on the 78 tour. That's when i feel a degree of excess was creeping into his movements, and very much outside the context of what the group were playing. However, it is really in the more recent years where his movements have been becoming ever more forced, that a real issue with Mick's dancing has come into play. Mick seems like he's completely abandoned the style of his own moves from earlier years. It is true, his visual physique hasn't really changed at all over the years, in terms of his weight, and from a distance he does seem pretty ageless. However, i believe the illusion is pretty much diminished when it comes to actually watching Mick attempt to dance. His movements, tend to lack any degree of sincerity, and really don't compliment the music too well, either. My feelings in part are one of two things : When Jagger began to lose his natural ability, it was replaced by a more contrived professional approach (by acquiring dance teachers etc). However, from another perspective, perhaps having dance lessons, may actually have quashed any of the existing natural tendences out of his dancing, too. Jagger just doesn't seem to move with any degree of grace or eloquence these days. Subtelty seems so very much missing, and Jagger just doesn't seem very flexible in a physical sense these days, either. He's just putting on a spectacle, but it's all pretty meaningless, ultimately. Mick would have been far more amiable, if he wasn't so vain. Another reason, namely - Michael Jackson - may also have had a bearing on this change of emphasis from Mick. In the eighties Mick saw Michael as competition, and he desperately wanted to emulate Michael's commercial success, and maybe he felt the slickness of Michael's visual performance was the way to go. However, in reality he and Michael's approaches to dancing were from two very different perspectives. Michael was always pure showbiz, whereas Mick was always so much more earthy, and as i have said previously - spontaneous.
Quote
BroomWagon
This kind of touches on the discussion here.
I think once and in the last 15 years, Jagger was asked how he stayed skinny and he said he ran 5 or 8 miles a day .... (ref. [ultimateclassicrock.com] ), I wonder if he still does that, anyone at any age would have to be in rather ace condition to do that, even the minimum of 5 if it was even 6 days a week. I have always wondered about his diet, he could eat about anything, for the record, Indian food Saag which is spinach, I love that stuff.
Quote
treaclefingers
It would be impossible, at that age, (certainly any age after 40), to have a physique like that without a strict exercise regime. Whether he's running or not, he is doing aerobic exercise and weight training.
Quote
shortfatfannyQuote
Max'sKansasCity
I O R R
Its Overanalyzing Rockn Roll
uuuuummmmmmmm..... Valerie BertinelliQuote
BroomWagon
I think it's up to the individual.
Quote
BroomWagonQuote
treaclefingers
It would be impossible, at that age, (certainly any age after 40), to have a physique like that without a strict exercise regime. Whether he's running or not, he is doing aerobic exercise and weight training.
Obviously from obesity rates, all ages are affected, the average person is 20 lbs. heavier than 20 years ago, I think it's up to the individual.
Quote
harlem shuffle
I think some people on this board overanalysing Jagger.
He is 68 years now,do you really think he can sing and act like the old days?
What about some overanalysing for Keith.
I could be dreadful
Quote
treaclefingers
[He would look like a complete idiot if he danced the way he did in 1965...times changed, he changed and he's still the best. Any further dissection of his dancing IMHO is ridiculous because he's almost 70!
Quote
Edward TwiningQuote
treaclefingers
[He would look like a complete idiot if he danced the way he did in 1965...times changed, he changed and he's still the best. Any further dissection of his dancing IMHO is ridiculous because he's almost 70!
Really????!!!!!
Jagger never danced in 65, the way he dances now, treaclefingers. It was much more in context with the music as a whole, and the spectacle was actually that much smaller. matsumoto33 is spot on in his analysis. I don't know why Jagger can't let his vanity rest for a while, and that would perhaps give him an opportunity to truly concentrate on the music. Yes, he can perhaps shake a leg here, or turn his head there, or use his hands as a form of expressing the music through his being, but the circus act is something that's unbecoming for a man approaching seventy. Musical sincerity would be that much more amiable in my opinion.