Quote
71Tele

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.

Just for clarification purposes....I was offering the sarcastic alternative.

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.

Well, however we look at it, I am sure we can all agree in the end, what a terribly lost opportunity this was to introduce The Sons of The Beatles into the film. Putting The Sons of The Beatles into the first row would've kicked open the door to their involvement with the Stones'50th Anniversary that will now take place sometime in 2013!

Quote
treaclefingers
Just for clarification purposes....I was offering the sarcastic alternative.

You? sarcasm?! NO WAY! I didnt think ANYONE around here used sarcasm, irony maybe, but NEVER sarcasm.

Very enjoyable in IMAX theatre, rubbish at home.

Quote
SweetThing

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.

Well, however we look at it, I am sure we can all agree in the end, what a terribly lost opportunity this was to introduce The Sons of The Beatles into the film. Putting The Sons of The Beatles into the first row would've kicked open the door to their involvement with the Stones'50th Anniversary that will now take place sometime in 2013!

Damn, you're right. Where's the Watchman?

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
treaclefingers
Just for clarification purposes....I was offering the sarcastic alternative.

You? sarcasm?! NO WAY! I didnt think ANYONE around here used sarcasm, irony maybe, but NEVER sarcasm.

Now that is both ironic and sarcastic.

Shine a Light is by far the worst of the post 1989 live Stones, it sounds so sloppy that hurts the ears, Mick's vocals are terrible, Keith's playing is one of the worst things available on CD or DVD coming from a professional musician, his solo on SFTD is so amateurish, unbelievable, it sounds like a 5-year old boy playing guitar by first time and the worst thing of all: this was on 2006, I can't imagine the Stones' sounding better than this in 2013, 7 years later!!

The film was ok I guess. I don't think the band played very well and alot of if seemed rather contrived. I don't care so much for Jagger's intrance on "Sympathy" but whatever.

I haven't heard it in surround sound or the theater or anything else but I can't imagine that the difference would cover up all those bum notes. I mean, Keith's solo in "Sympathy For The Devil"? Do I really need to say anymore?

Those people calling this the Stones absolute zenith....I couldn't disagree more. But hey, if you like it then good for you. I, like alot of others, felt it was a missed opportunity.

I don't have a 5.1 stereo system (and I don't think I want one either) yet, SAL still gets heavy rotation in my house. I can't get enough of it. It is not one of the best performances of the tour, fair enough. But it is a wonderful recording that fully captures that very particular vibe that the band had that time around. It has depth and balls. It swings. It is plain great.

The film. Unfortunately, Scorsese is Scorsese (I am not a great fan). But visually it is a dream. The light! Certain ideas were great: the point of view, the rough realism. Unfortunately the inclusion of President Clinton, Aguilera and White made it a work of its time, and nothing immortal.

C

their crowning achievement was "a spike right through my head".

Awful...thoroughly awful. THis was an opportunity missed and missed by someone who ought to have done better - namely Scorsese.

From the hired 'babes; in the first few rows, to the poor guitar work from Keith and lack of real backstage footage, this film is poor and a massive let down. The whole thing feels fake and staged.

Quote
treaclefingers
their crowning achievement was "a spike right through my head".

Exactly.

This film really should have been titled something else... Maybe "Ain't no use in Crying" or "Down in the Hole".

Quote
backstreetboy1
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 agree on this. This is the Stones at their best. I mean they want to show their best on these 2 nights concerts. Like if they were aware this may be the last time. Lots of great renditions of classics Stones songs too. Love Sympathy for the Devil version on the Shine A Light CD. Tight and straight to the point. Also Some Girls, Faraway Eyes, She Was Hot ... Really great record.

Maybe it's an age thing. My guess is that backstreetboy and kowalski aren't stricken in years like most of us. I don't want to be a killjoy. If you really like SAL - feel free to enjoy it!
Don't worry about the old men bellyaching around here!

Quote
Stoneage
Maybe it's an age thing. My guess is that backstreetboy and kowalski aren't stricken in years like most of us. I don't want to be a killjoy. If you really like SAL - feel free to enjoy it!
Don't worry about the old men bellyaching around here!

Submitted for consideration "IORR Post of the year".

Quote
backstreetboy1
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?

They sound just as bad in stereo. Why don't you go listen to Exile or Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out?

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues

Quote
backstreetboy1
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?

They sound just as bad in stereo. Why don't you go listen to Exile or Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out?

Because they don't play She Was Hot or Some Girls on those records.

Quote
kowalski

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues

Quote
backstreetboy1
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?

They sound just as bad in stereo. Why don't you go listen to Exile or Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out?

Because they don't play She Was Hot or Some Girls on those records.

Thats a good point Killer Kowalski

I very much liked the last 30/40 seconds or so of She Was Hot very much in that film. Keith's playing was sort of distracting in the earlier part though I thought.

Keith's impersonation of Stevie Nicks, during 'You Got The Silver' was a far-king joke! Great vocal though!

connection was killer as well.love when keith says,i know the truth neither one of us are that good,but together were better than 10.so true.

It had it´s moments..I was bit suprised by the mix, I didnt like the way it was mixed, on the other hand - I saw it in a theatre - and I dont know if a movie theatre is a best place to hear this kind of music. If you have sound system for special effects and explosions for action movies, - it might not work with rock n roll.

Shine Lights´worst moment was Micks nasal voice in "As Tears Go By" - the best moment was the song they did with Buddy Guy and Keith´s "You Got The Silver" - not bad, - it killed most of the eighties concert footage that I have seen.

I think the performance was good - I´ve seen better but it was much better than say..Steel Wheels era, when everything was so clean, nice and sterile and polished with no energy or balls - in other words - the Steel Wheels era Stones was too "pop" for my taste and I happen to love real kick ass dirty rock n roll. Shine A Light was more in that direction.

right on brother

Yeah, SAL isn't that bad. Some great moments in fact! Especially She Was Hot, Shattered, and Some Girls. Beautiful cinematography, and the sound is stellar as well. Some clinkers, but all in all not that bad.

Quote
kowalski

Quote
backstreetboy1
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 agree on this. This is the Stones at their best. I mean they want to show their best on these 2 nights concerts. Like if they were aware this may be the last time. Lots of great renditions of classics Stones songs too. Love Sympathy for the Devil version on the Shine A Light CD. Tight and straight to the point. Also Some Girls, Faraway Eyes, She Was Hot ... Really great record.

Ok, while I think some of the enthusiasm for this record and movie are a bit over the top, I can generally respect people's personal tastes. Each to their own, and all that. IMO it's a seriously flawed movie and CD. but it does have it's moments.

However, I cant for the life of me grasp how anyone who has ever heard the Rolling Stones before could seriously consider that version of 'Far Away Eyes' to be 'the Stones at their best'. Clearly, the effects of that charming (if obviously staged) little moment when Mick and Keith are arm in arm around the same mike for the first time since 1792 or whatever must be clouding people's judgement. It's one of the worst vocal performances of Mick's entire performing career - he delivers the 'recitation' with all the sincerity of someone reading out a hotel breakfast menu in a language that isn't their own.

It's unquestionably the most dreadful thing in the entire movie along with the awful sight of occasionally having to try to look in between the blonde bubbleheads' cellphones in order to see the band.

Quote
Gazza
However, I cant for the life of me grasp how anyone who has ever heard the Rolling Stones before could seriously consider that version of 'Far Away Eyes' to be 'the Stones at their best'. Clearly, the effects of that charming (if obviously staged) little moment when Mick and Keith are arm in arm around the same mike for the first time since 1792 or whatever must be clouding people's judgement. It's one of the worst vocal performances of Mick's entire performing career - he delivers the 'recitation' with all the sincerity of someone reading out a hotel breakfast menu in a language that isn't their own.

I like this version of the song. Mick is trying something different, more melodious I'd say. Also what makes the Shine A Light version quite enjoyable is Charlie's drums work and Ronnie's slide guitar. They're both giving a nice musical background to Mick's vocal rendition. And actually that's what I like about Shine A Light : the band plays really well throughout the whole album.

I'll give it another go, mate and try and get past the lead vocal - which I've been unable to do so far!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-03-21 04:32 by Gazza.

Quote
Gazza
However, I cant for the life of me grasp how anyone who has ever heard the Rolling Stones before could seriously consider that version of 'Far Away Eyes' to be 'the Stones at their best'. Clearly, the effects of that charming (if obviously staged) little moment when Mick and Keith are arm in arm around the same mike for the first time since 1792 or whatever must be clouding people's judgement. It's one of the worst vocal performances of Mick's entire performing career - he delivers the 'recitation' with all the sincerity of someone reading out a hotel breakfast menu in a language that isn't their own.

That was my thought when I first saw the movie (and still is). and the response I got was that they (the posters here) didn't understand what I was talking about, because they thought Mick did an excellent job, but Gazza, you discribed it perfectly!

I don't think it's fair to rate Keith's playing on Shine A Light by the measure of his playing on "Sympathy". I have never heard Keith play a good solo on it since they started playing it again in 1989, and come to think of it not before either (69-75 - was he the one playing it then?) - it's always the moment where he doesn't sound good. It's not his type of thing, and it only sounds good (amazing, actually) on the studio version.

I find his guitar playing, solo-wise, went downhill from what it had been during the tour gap between '82 and '89 - watch him solo on "Black Limousine" during LSTNT, that's just sweet, fairly fast, fluid and beautiful. (And if you happen to catch him on the 1983 Jerry Lee Lewis TV concert, he still sounds incredibly sharp there.)

I happened to watch the first part of Shine a Light again this weekend and found his playing, including solos and fills (e.g. She Was Hot), very respectable considering the 1989-2007 time frame. No signs of brain aneurysms or finger-crippling arthritis there.

I saw Hyde Park Concert Blu-ray edition yesterday.
It was funny that some audiences were sitting in deckchair and were relaxing when Mick was reading Shelley' poem.

Were they hired babe?

Quote
kowalski

Quote
Gazza
However, I cant for the life of me grasp how anyone who has ever heard the Rolling Stones before could seriously consider that version of 'Far Away Eyes' to be 'the Stones at their best'. Clearly, the effects of that charming (if obviously staged) little moment when Mick and Keith are arm in arm around the same mike for the first time since 1792 or whatever must be clouding people's judgement. It's one of the worst vocal performances of Mick's entire performing career - he delivers the 'recitation' with all the sincerity of someone reading out a hotel breakfast menu in a language that isn't their own.

I like this version of the song. Mick is trying something different, more melodious I'd say. Also what makes the Shine A Light version quite enjoyable is Charlie's drums work and Ronnie's slide guitar. They're both giving a nice musical background to Mick's vocal rendition. And actually that's what I like about Shine A Light : the band plays really well throughout the whole album.

I think Gazza agrees, it was in fact a melodious performance. Oh wait, I think he means it was malodorous - nevermind.