i must admit,when i read an article like patrick o doyles in rs magazine last week,i really wonder if these fools even watch the things they talk about.in this instance the comment he makes about many fans thought keiths playing was inaudible on the shine a light concert dvd.maybe thats what he,or some deaf fans think,i once again watched this evening,in 5.1 tru surround sound,(which is how scorcese,had it recorded for)and keiths playing,is loud,thunderous,and down right mean and nasty.so's ronnies.this is the stones at there absolute peak,micks performance is over the top,his vocals are soaring,charlie and the rest are near perfect.i have listened to every other stone dvd recently,all the dvd'ss on 40 licks,and bigger bang,concert fro st louis in 97,miami 94,steel wheels 89 etc.the playing and the recording of this kills them all,am i the only one that hears this.

Quote
backstreetboy1
i must admit,when i read an article like patrick o doyles in rs magazine last week,i really wonder if these fools even watch the things they talk about.in this instance the comment he makes about many fans thought keiths playing was inaudible on the shine a light concert dvd.maybe thats what he,or some deaf fans think,i once again watched this evening,in 5.1 tru surround sound,(which is how scorcese,had it recorded for)and keiths playing,is loud,thunderous,and down right mean and nasty.so's ronnies.this is the stones at there absolute peak,micks performance is over the top,his vocals are soaring,charlie and the rest are near perfect.i have listened to every other stone dvd recently,all the dvd'ss on 40 licks,and bigger bang,concert fro st louis in 97,miami 94,steel wheels 89 etc.the playing and the recording of this kills them all,am i the only one that hears this.

You didn't say what peak. The peak of being a band that ignored anything post-1983 and snoozed through that one as it was? There are a few others peaks out there, none of which have anything to do with what you said. You are correct in one aspect - the mix for Shine A Light is outstanding. Too bad the playing isn't.

You are, seemingly, the only one that hears what you hear.

Quote
backstreetboy1
i must admit,when i read an article like patrick o doyles in rs magazine last week,i really wonder if these fools even watch the things they talk about.in this instance the comment he makes about many fans thought keiths playing was inaudible on the shine a light concert dvd.maybe thats what he,or some deaf fans think,i once again watched this evening,in 5.1 tru surround sound,(which is how scorcese,had it recorded for)and keiths playing,is loud,thunderous,and down right mean and nasty.so's ronnies.this is the stones at there absolute peak,micks performance is over the top,his vocals are soaring,charlie and the rest are near perfect.i have listened to every other stone dvd recently,all the dvd'ss on 40 licks,and bigger bang,concert fro st louis in 97,miami 94,steel wheels 89 etc.the playing and the recording of this kills them all,am i the only one that hears this.

Yes.

maybe your boom box was to loud,when u read my post,obviously i meant there all time peak,i referred to concert dvd's ranging from 1989-2008.let see what others think,and seriously if you didnt like the playing maybe you need to invest in a system.

a focused, specific comment: i was at the show and i think all down the line was the best I have ever heard it live going back to '75

plexiglass

The cinematography is pretty good. Blows away Ladies and Gentlemen.

The special musical GUEST list is better than Let's Spend the Night Together, which had none.

The concert went fairly well. No one got stabbed to death, and the band didn't have to stop playing mid song like we see in the Altamont film.

I could probably go on, but I just don't quite see "Shine a Light" as the zenith of the Stones career. Even the title seems to reference back to another time that just maybe was their heyday.

Quote
backstreetboy1
maybe your boom box was to loud,when u read my post,obviously i meant there all time peak,i referred to concert dvd's ranging from 1989-2008.let see what others think,and seriously if you didnt like the playing maybe you need to invest in a system.

I need to invest in a system so I can...hear how poorly Keith performed even better than I already do? Ho ho ho ho. If you 'obviously meant' it then why didn't you say it? Maybe you were 'just sayin'' instead?

"There all time peak" of...what? All time worst? You won't find a lot of argument against that.

Quote
Justin

Quote
backstreetboy1
i must admit,when i read an article like patrick o doyles in rs magazine last week,i really wonder if these fools even watch the things they talk about.in this instance the comment he makes about many fans thought keiths playing was inaudible on the shine a light concert dvd.maybe thats what he,or some deaf fans think,i once again watched this evening,in 5.1 tru surround sound,(which is how scorcese,had it recorded for)and keiths playing,is loud,thunderous,and down right mean and nasty.so's ronnies.this is the stones at there absolute peak,micks performance is over the top,his vocals are soaring,charlie and the rest are near perfect.i have listened to every other stone dvd recently,all the dvd'ss on 40 licks,and bigger bang,concert fro st louis in 97,miami 94,steel wheels 89 etc.the playing and the recording of this kills them all,am i the only one that hears this.

Yes.

Yes, you are the only one!

Worst musical effort by the Stones in their 50 tears existance. Keith literally struggles to recognize the songs they are playing, and the full band is acting they are a world famous Rock act -and they are bad actors at that. It's not entirely their fault though. The contracts where signed before Richards had his anneurysms.

Mathijs

Quote
backstreetboy1
i must admit,when i read an article like patrick o doyles in rs magazine last week,i really wonder if these fools even watch the things they talk about.in this instance the comment he makes about many fans thought keiths playing was inaudible on the shine a light concert dvd.maybe thats what he,or some deaf fans think,i once again watched this evening,in 5.1 tru surround sound,(which is how scorcese,had it recorded for)and keiths playing,is loud,thunderous,and down right mean and nasty.so's ronnies.this is the stones at there absolute peak,micks performance is over the top,his vocals are soaring,charlie and the rest are near perfect.i have listened to every other stone dvd recently,all the dvd'ss on 40 licks,and bigger bang,concert fro st louis in 97,miami 94,steel wheels 89 etc.the playing and the recording of this kills them all,am i the only one that hears this.

No, you're not the only one. I love the performance in SAL and think Keith is in fine form there, as is the whole band. I don't get this crap about Keith "struggling to even recognize what songs are being played." What BS. He's spot on throughout the whole show.

Keith and Ronnie do a fine job and have their moments of greatness. Charlie is brilliant as always.

However, the set list is horrible and Mick's vocal and overall performance make the DVD unwatchable and painful to hear. I have tried to find some way to get through the whole thing more than once but I can't.

It strikes me as a corporate style show for the Clinton's and they got a great director to film it to add something to the overall hype.

You can believe what you want but they are not at the peak of their careers on this film.

While certainly not a career highlight, I have always really enjoyed 'Shine A Light' and actualyl find the guitars very raw and Stonesy - prime examples maybe 'She Was Hot' - it sounded brilliant, never thought it would be added to the set-list and it really was one of the highlights for the crowd in the theatre I saw it in. 'Brown Sugar' cooks, just love the sound, the energy and the jamming on the fade-out - even Mick's OTT posturing just seems to make sense during this one

'Champagne and Reefer' is magnificent. 'You Got the Silver' another highlight; Ronnie shines, and Keef really sings it well and I love the way he moves during Ronnie's slide solo.

I do agree the performance, especially Mick's, can be OTT in places; especially during JJF, Mick's weord voval intonations during that song kill it; but overall I have always enjoyed this movie and find the gems in it.

The cd is a better listen, but it has to be said that Keith is very off, considering how he plays the songs. In general, there is very little consistance in his rhythm guitar playing, and the solos are repetitive no matter if his playing a ballad, a soul number or a stones/berry-ish number.

It's the Stones playing music. I simply love the Stones playing music. That's what being in
a Rock 'n Roll band is all about. To play music and to give people a chance to listen to it.

Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away

The very worst thing about this film, for what it says about The Stones and indeed us, is the hired beautiful people at the front of the stage. Yes Mick, hot girls still want you..if they're being paid that is.
Are they ashamed of us? Dont like to see themselves reflected in the demographic of their own loyal audience perhaps? Truly sad and a great example of their own delusions.

Quote
Mathijs
Worst musical effort by the Stones in their 50 tears existance. Keith literally struggles to recognize the songs they are playing, and the full band is acting they are a world famous Rock act -and they are bad actors at that. It's not entirely their fault though. The contracts where signed before Richards had his anneurysms.

Mathijs

This has nothing to do with his brain injury. There were alot of shows before the fall where he stunk up the place. Also I saw two shows after where he was spot on.

I think that Jagger's husky voice is the main spoilsport on SAL. Keith's limitations were expected and could have been edited (heavily...) on the DVD. But if you put Jagger's cold voice on top of that it's beyond editing. It's a shame though since SAL was an excellent opportunity to make something extraordinary. But it wasn't to be...

thank god stones dans ears are working,and jaggers voice is awesome,seriously how many of you negative posters have watched this in theatre,or 5.1 surround?

Watched it in a theatre, bb 1. The profit for me in that film were the in between clips, the concert itself was so bad that I considered leaving the theatre. By the way, we were five in the audience...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-20 16:52 by Stoneage.

Perhaps the only DVD I have where the bonus footage is far better than the main event.

I thought the girls in the first few rows were the hottest I've ever seen.

Let's start with the positives.

Quote
treaclefingers
I thought the girls in the first few rows were the hottest I've ever seen.

Let's start with the positives.

I was there and it was just plain weird to see all of these girls in the front looking like they had been bused in from somewhere.

Quote
treaclefingers
I thought the girls in the first few rows were the hottest I've ever seen.

Let's start with the positives.

"hottest" "girls" = always a good thing

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
treaclefingers
I thought the girls in the first few rows were the hottest I've ever seen.

Let's start with the positives.

"hottest" "girls" = always a good thing

I would normally heartily agree, but in the context of the Beacon shows it was contrived and somewhat bizarre. These seats could have been used by actual Rolling Stones fans instead of movie extras.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
treaclefingers
I thought the girls in the first few rows were the hottest I've ever seen.

Let's start with the positives.

"hottest" "girls" = always a good thing

I would normally heartily agree, but in the context of the Beacon shows it was contrived and somewhat bizarre. These seats could have been used by actual Rolling Stones fans instead of movie extras.

A common, and cliche, comment on this board... but facts be known if I was them, I would probably fill the entire pit with hotties too, versus ugly fkrs like me, no one cares if I am the best fan of all time.... beauty trumps fanship everytime.... I understand that.


To quote Rod "Gimme a blonde that's six feet two... and that ain't all"





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-20 17:33 by Max'sKansasCity.

can we get back to the show,you horn dogs,lol

how many posts does it take to change the topic? usually 3

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
treaclefingers
I thought the girls in the first few rows were the hottest I've ever seen.

Let's start with the positives.

"hottest" "girls" = always a good thing

I would normally heartily agree, but in the context of the Beacon shows it was contrived and somewhat bizarre. These seats could have been used by actual Rolling Stones fans instead of movie extras.

A common, and cliche, comment on this board... but facts be known if I was them, I would probably fill the entire pit with hotties too, versus ugly fkrs like me, no one cares if I am the best fan of all time.... beauty trumps fanship everytime.... I understand that.


To quote Rod "Gimme a blonde that's six feet two... and that ain't all"

Well, sorry you think it's a cliche. But I was there and that was my impression at the show, long before I was aware of this site's existence. I don't think the Stones need to "stack" the audience with ringers. It comes off as a bit desperate. But if you differ, that's perfectly fine.

What do the critics see in Shine A Light? It get's 3 1/2 stars (out of 4) where every other Stones movie gets 2 to 2 1/2 stars or 3 at the most.

Quote
BluzDude
What do the critics see in Shine A Light? It get's 3 1/2 stars (out of 4) where every other Stones movie gets 2 to 2 1/2 stars or 3 at the most.

Well, its certainly a nice film to look at. Fairly easy on the eyes.

But primarily, the critics see Martin Scorsese's name I believe and don't want to misstep by rating the film less than what an MS might normally receive. Plus many, most or all of these critics are not Music Critics and they don't want to be perceived as out of their depth in rating the Stones' performance as we might do so here.