I am reading the book What Would Keith Richards Do? and on page 128 I came across this quote:

"Because it's in black-and-white and because the camera wobbles, everybody thinks, Wow, this is for real, man, and all the time it was obviously set up .... It's so far removed from what actually goes on."

The quote is followed by this blurb: "- on the supposed documentary film C--sucker Blues".

I know that a few scenes in the film are staged, such as the throwing-the-TV-out-of-a-hotel-window scene. However, I also believe that many (most) scenes are not staged. From what I understand, the band did not allow the film to be released because of the potential backlash. Why would the band intentionally stage the more controversial scenes in the film if doing so would prevent the film from being released?

To everyone who has seen C--sucker Blues, do you believe the film is (for the most part) staged? Or is Keith just blowing smoke?





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-03-05 09:52 by bv.

FAKE

Quote
Cafaro
FAKE

The nodding-off scene looked genuine.

Don't take that quote too seriously. I think you're right when you say some scenes were staged (most famously the airplane orgy and the tv tossing) but most of it weren't.

But there is a big grey area between "accurate documentary" and "total fake". In between you have something like people-know-the-camera-is-on-and-act-accordingly-even-if-it's-unconsciously.

On the other hand, if you read Keith's Life or any other Stones biography you'll notice they actually did snort loads of blow, shoot heroin and bang hundreds of chicks (even if only a fraction is true). So if you let the camera roll during the Stones Touring Party of 1972 it should come as no surprise when some raunchyness ends up on film.

In any case, the band themselves didn't really stage anything, it came mostly from the director Robert Frank. When the Stones saw the movie, they chickened out and took it to court.

Quote
MILKYWAY
From what I understand, the band did not allow the film to be released because of the potential backlash. Why would the band intentionally stage the more controversial scenes in the film if doing so would prevent the film from being released?

because they seemed like a good idea at the time - but somewhat less so in the cold light of day when sobriety kicks in!

I think Tony Sanchez's comment was that when they went to the advance screening of it, while all around them were excited about what a cool movie it was, Jagger's succinct comment was 'we'd be busted from here to Timbuktu if that ever got out'



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-03-05 03:26 by Gazza.

The sex in the plane was staged, though the girl may have not been pleased about it afterwards. The drug stuff with Keith, much of which was cut, was not staged.

Quote
MILKYWAY

Quote
Cafaro
FAKE

The nodding-off scene looked genuine.

That was the only one, other than the live playing.

Most of those stages were staged...but the stage didn't know it...

Maybe I'm just simple, but what exactly do you mean about the plane orgy being staged? Do you mean that they decided that would be a funny thing to film and that typically happen on their flights, or that there wasn't an actual orgy and they just made it look like one was? If its the latter, it still seems like they're all having sex on there, so whether its staged or not its probably not far from the truth and it did really happen.

that's what staged means . . . they made it look like something was hapening but it was just staged for the cameras. obviously it was not something that actually happened on their flights. Yes, it really did happen that it was staged.

There's a difference between "acted" and "staged." For example, when they threw the TV out of the window, they actually did it--but it wasn't spontaneous, it was done deliberately for the cameras. Same with the "orgy"--it actually happened, and people actually did have sex, but they did it specifically because the cameras were rolling. (Think of it as an early reality show!) And it was certainly the sort of thing that genuinely happened on a lot of bands' flights--whether that applies to the Stones or not, I couldn't say.

It's real alright. The TV-scene is probably "staged" or directed and the "boys" listening to Happy is marketing. The Stones are staged and an act.

Staged, all the way - it's a film.

Does Mick use the blade regularly when snorting coke? If, so, maybe that scene was real

Frank's purpose was to provide a point of view that would balance the flashy "superstar" public image of the Stones. To do so he chose the form of documentary, but the film is not at all an "objective" account of the STP. Keith's comment on the use of black and white is spot on: B&W does add drama.

C



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-03-05 14:17 by liddas.

Put it this way--if it were merely a documentary, would they have had to block its release?

Some of it is staged, some not. who cares. You know one of the most famoous and best pics in rock/pop/entertinament history was staged, Keith's Patience please a drug free America comes first. 1000% ataged as admnitted by Ethan Russel himself.

On 25x5, there are some comments from a bearded bloke who says that CS Blues was "very much performance". To me, he's saying it was put on for the cameras. Robert Frank, unfortunately, did not have the foresight to do a Big Brother and use hidden cameras!

Quite simply when you have a camera following you around 24/7 you have the natural tendency to play it up for the camera which the band and Frank freely admitted they did. It is only where they were not aware the camera was on them (on stage, immediately post show, etc) where the film is more documentary than reality TV. I have seen it and quite honestly it is not that great although the live stuff (which is on Ladies and gentlemen) rocks. I just wish they would release the live double album with Stevie Wonder. And the book by Greenfield on the tour is one of my favourite rock books of all time.

Staged and some real footage, in my opinion.

Just a thought here,

What if they were already going to throw the tv and since the camera was there, they filmed it.

Would that still be considered staged? I'm understanding staged as something contrived to reach a particular impression.

Quote
liddas
Frank's purpose was to provide a point of view that would balance the flashy "superstar" public image of the Stones. To do so he chose the form of documentary, but the film is not at all an "objective" account of the STP. Keith's comment on the use of black and white is spot on: B&W does add drama.

C

Peter Rudge commented in the Bob Spitz book about Mick that 1972 was the first viral campaign and that the Stones totally got the idea of making something and then saying you can't see it. Helped build the mystique. Bob Dylan got this as well. Along with his manager Albert Grossman in the 60s, they pioneered the "we don't want to talk to anyone" stance which helped build the Dylan mystique. He still uses that philosophy.

Just by the way: A Robert Frank exhibition starts March 7 at the Photographic Museum i Stockholm.

Anybody seen it anywhere else?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-03-05 16:50 by Thommie.

Quote
LieB

On the other hand, if you read Keith's Life or any other Stones biography you'll notice they actually did snort loads of blow, shoot heroin and bang hundreds of chicks (even if only a fraction is true).

Any of these chicks here on the board? Wanna tell how it was back in those days?

I don't believe Keith was faking when he was wanting those blueberries.

That girl rubbing herself on the bed didnt appear to be faking anything....

I found this movie to be rather boring. So many of the scenes appeared to be staged, yes like the orgy on the plane and the tv out the window scenes. I'm sure when the band was in flight, it was the only time they had to themselves and to relax. And tv tossing was pretty much standard behavior for travelling bands. There's supposed to be an un-edited version out there..this one showing a nude, full frontal of Jagger. Wow! But, their tours were crazy, lots of groupies, lots of drugs...this film didn't come close to showing how it really was behind the scenes IMO.