Quote
TheGreek

Quote
mtaylor
Jagger did not like Some Girls at all ....

no, i think maybe he was feeling a little under the weather ?

Nope....just wasted.

Licking Ronnie may not be a shock in 2016 but it was not common place on television in 1978. JAgger did not come off as hip in 1978. He came across as queer and queer in 1978 was not good. Today people would not be fazed but they were in 1978. My high school pals were ruthless about the tongue and ruthless about his voice. " that Jagger guy is queer and old". Remember the media in 1978 including Rolling Stone were not kind to the stones tour. They were already considered old.

I think there is a cultural aspect to this. Maybe this was a bigger deal in the US? No one in Europe cared. And Jagger played with the androgynous look quite heavily in the 70s.
Bowie was openly bisexual. In Europe that wasn't a big deal.

Quote
Stoneage
I think there is a cultural aspect to this. Maybe this was a bigger deal in the US? No one in Europe cared. And Jagger played with the androgynous look quite heavily in the 70s.
Bowie was openly bisexual. In Europe that wasn't a big deal.

I don't remember anyone making a big deal out of it at the time. If someone couldn't tell it was just a stunt then I wouldn't know what to tell them.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-07-14 21:57 by stanlove.

Quote
Bashlets
Licking Ronnie may not be a shock in 2016 but it was not common place on television in 1978. JAgger did not come off as hip in 1978. He came across as queer and queer in 1978 was not good. Today people would not be fazed but they were in 1978. My high school pals were ruthless about the tongue and ruthless about his voice. " that Jagger guy is queer and old". Remember the media in 1978 including Rolling Stone were not kind to the stones tour. They were already considered old.

Who did your friends like again? I don't think you had anything to worry about. And jagger did come off as hip in 1978.

Quote
Bashlets
Licking Ronnie may not be a shock in 2016 but it was not common place on television in 1978. JAgger did not come off as hip in 1978. He came across as queer and queer in 1978 was not good. Today people would not be fazed but they were in 1978. My high school pals were ruthless about the tongue and ruthless about his voice. " that Jagger guy is queer and old". Remember the media in 1978 including Rolling Stone were not kind to the stones tour. They were already considered old.

I was 16 at the time and my high school friends had the same reaction. The licking was just ... weird.
And for high school kids of that time, the Stones were yesterday's news. I think kids have always been more interested in what is new, what is current, what is right now and the Stones were a '60s act to most of us (me excepted!). My friends like Southern rock and Zeppelin and the girls liked Journey and REO Speedwagon.
At the time, I thought Jagger was camp and I didn't like camp. Still don't.

What Bashlets said was true back in 1978. The SNL performance was simply awful and Jagger came off as an embarrassment. It was especially painful for a big Stones fan because Some Girls was so exceptional and Miss You was the song of the summer to a large extent. But the 1978 tour was very strange and not just because they skipped NYC (forget Capital and Palladium surprise shows). The famous shoe incident was not a positive response. The fans thru the shoes because they were not happy. The reviews were largely not positive and Rolling Stone magazine (always a huge Stones supporter) got thrown off the tour due to bad reviews. Chet Flippo wrote a book about it (On The Road With The Rolling Stones). Now in retrospect, the 1978 tour comes off better, but it was largely poorly received at the time. The big positive were the live King Biscuit Shows which sounded strong and nice to hear live Stones on the radio, which I think were influenced by what Springsteen was doing on his 1978 Darkness tour which had incredible live radio shows and are now considered amongst his best shows ever. The Stones 1978 setlist was incredibly ballsy though being 90 minute shows and mostly consisting of Some Girls live. Very cool and showed a vital revitalized band focusing on new vital material.

Quote
Mr.D
The show and the band were both relevant in '78, neither one of them are anymore!

Then WHY are you on this site. Go over to the bon joke site

I was also embarrassed at the time it aired. I was a college freshman and was thrilled at the prospect of introducing my newly-met roommates to the Stones. They were not fans like me. When the Stones came on, I found myself in the awkward position of trying to explain that the Stones were actually much better than that. It was rather uncomfortable...

"Gonna find my way to heaven ..."

I have to think collectively about what was going on: 1978 and it was the Stones, Some Girls just came out, the press said they are back, remember SNL still had most of the original cast and writers, Studio 54, all the partying, I took the licking in stride, and thought "this was new". A creative peak for every single one of em - Stones and the cast and writers of SNL.

We're in Stones -world; and I have never understood this huge deal over Jagger licking Ronnie.

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
We're in Stones -world; and I have never understood this huge deal over Jagger licking Ronnie.

How about Ronnie's reaction? Which was definitely I DON'T WANT TO BE LICKED!

Just gotta say to those calling the current SNL terrible and such -- they've been saying that since the originals left, Franky, if you watch the early shows now they're largely embarrassing. Underwritten, underrehearsed, cast members on drugs or coming off them. Certainly a lot of talent but IMO the show didn't hit it's stride until the "Phil Hartman Era" (Late 80s - mid 90s) and has remained pretty consistent since. There have been many high caliber performers and writers and that continues now. And yeah, there are a few clinkers -- it's a live weekly show. I was in college when it first came on btw and have watched since those early days so my argument isn't a generational one, just sayin'.

And yeah I remember the '78 show -- indeed band was great, Jagger awful. Reportedly, Belushi took him out on the town and ran him in the ground. We cringed then laughed at "the lick." Clearly he was just trying to be outrageous, which many of us remember is what the Stones were.

And I agree he came back with Tosh to redeem himself, which he did.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-07-17 00:53 by Wry Cooter.

wtf is SNL.

Saturday Night Live



ROCKMAN

Here, Mick is with Charlie....



Mick licking Ronnie (can be seen in the Some Girls 1978 movie as well), touching himself etc. was somehow a beginning / inspiration for what Madonna and other ones did later on. And at that time Mick was also quite much in to men.....

[www.feelnumb.com]

I guess Mick was "wild and sexy" in his stage performance, specially from 1972-1978. Who can't remember Billy and Mick during 1975/1976

Mick thought they sounded good in their SNL appearance.


About 4:40


[www.youtube.com]

Quote
24FPS

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
We're in Stones -world; and I have never understood this huge deal over Jagger licking Ronnie.

How about Ronnie's reaction? Which was definitely I DON'T WANT TO BE LICKED!

I don't agree with you are all and I am surprised that you could even see it that way. It looked staged and if you look at it Wood moved his face closer to Jagger's tounge before it happened. And I don't know exactly where Wood looked like he was put off by being licked. Plus I don't think its a coincidence that Wood just happened to close his eyes even before the lick.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-07-17 20:03 by stanlove.

Quote
stanlove
Mick thought they sounded good in their SNL appearance.


About 4:40


[www.youtube.com]

talk about "coked out" lol maybe he was still so high he couldn't remember how bad it was

if Jagger's licking RW lips "weirded" you out it said more about you than it did about him...and if it wasn't for his voice being shot the performance was otherwise great....maybe they'll do it again..only this time maybe Jagger will make out with RW instead?

Quote
Rip This
if Jagger's licking RW lips "weirded" you out it said more about you than it did about him...and if it wasn't for his voice being shot the performance was otherwise great....maybe they'll do it again..only this time maybe Jagger will make out with RW instead?

Two old people making out...ewwww....

Quote
Rip This
if it wasn't for his voice being shot the performance was otherwise great....

That's a big "if" when it's the voice... of the vocalist.



Plus his face looked puffy and his clothes were awful.

Quote
loog droog

Quote
Rip This
if it wasn't for his voice being shot the performance was otherwise great....

That's a big "if" when it's the voice... of the vocalist.



Plus his face looked puffy and his clothes were awful.

Lets hope you are not one of those who defends Dylan's live shows.

I din't think Jagger's voice was as bad as some are saying. I will take his voice on that night over his voice over the past 25 years or so. And i for one always liked his 1978 outfit.

Quote
stanlove

Quote
loog droog

Quote
Rip This
if it wasn't for his voice being shot the performance was otherwise great....

That's a big "if" when it's the voice... of the vocalist.



Plus his face looked puffy and his clothes were awful.

Lets hope you are not one of those who defends Dylan's live shows.

I din't think Jagger's voice was as bad as some are saying. I will take his voice on that night over his voice over the past 25 years or so. And i for one always liked his 1978 outfit.

Ohmygod it was beyond awful -- egregiously so.

I can tell you this -- i was in a band, we were all huge Stones fans. Covered a lot of their songs including a few off "Some Girls." We made a party out of staying in to watch the show. Enjoyed that Charlie and Ronnie were in the "Cheeburger Cheeburger: bit. And then...we were underwhelmed, embarrassed. His voice was that bad. We were waiting for them to be great.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-07-18 06:11 by Wry Cooter.

Quote
Wry Cooter

Quote
stanlove

Quote
loog droog

Quote
Rip This
if it wasn't for his voice being shot the performance was otherwise great....

That's a big "if" when it's the voice... of the vocalist.



Plus his face looked puffy and his clothes were awful.

Lets hope you are not one of those who defends Dylan's live shows.

I din't think Jagger's voice was as bad as some are saying. I will take his voice on that night over his voice over the past 25 years or so. And i for one always liked his 1978 outfit.

Ohmygod it was beyond awful -- egregiously so.

I can tell you this -- i was in a band, we were all huge Stones fans. Covered a lot of their songs including a few off "Some Girls." We made a party out of staying in to watch the show. Enjoyed that Charlie and Ronnie were in the "Cheeburger Cheeburger: bit. And then...we were underwhelmed, embarrassed. His voice was that bad. We were waiting for them to be great.

I don't get when people keep saying it was embarrassing that his voice was shot. I don't think that the correct word. I don't deny that they did not sound good that night and I agree I was underwhelmed, but it had more to do with just Jagger's voice. They just didn't sound good at all.

I saw Paul Shaffer comment on it years ago. He said during rehearsals the Stones were smoking ( not the rehearsals I have seen ) and people were worried that they were going to overwhelm the rest of the show and make everything else look small. He said they peaked too soon and rehearsed too much and blew up.

Quote
Rip This
if Jagger's licking RW lips "weirded" you out it said more about you than it did about him...and if it wasn't for his voice being shot the performance was otherwise great....maybe they'll do it again..only this time maybe Jagger will make out with RW instead?

Oh, please, whatever kind of anti-gay crap you're trying to say. It looked like Ronnie was being taken advantage of and that Ronnie felt he couldn't do anything because he was still the junior member at that point. If it was so wonderful, and so natural, why did Jagger stop doing it to Ronnie? And why didn't Mick go up and lick Charlie during a performance?

The Stones have been there and done that (SNL) What do they have to prove or promote ? The upcomong follow up to ABB ?

Quote
24FPS

Quote
Rip This
if Jagger's licking RW lips "weirded" you out it said more about you than it did about him...and if it wasn't for his voice being shot the performance was otherwise great....maybe they'll do it again..only this time maybe Jagger will make out with RW instead?

Oh, please, whatever kind of anti-gay crap you're trying to say. It looked like Ronnie was being taken advantage of and that Ronnie felt he couldn't do anything because he was still the junior member at that point. If it was so wonderful, and so natural, why did Jagger stop doing it to Ronnie? And why didn't Mick go up and lick Charlie during a performance?

projecting sexual harassment....interesting....but doubt it. it wasn't a big deal and it still isnt...they are buds. Kiss me 24FPS.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-07-19 21:36 by Rip This.

Quote
24FPS

Quote
Rip This
if Jagger's licking RW lips "weirded" you out it said more about you than it did about him...and if it wasn't for his voice being shot the performance was otherwise great....maybe they'll do it again..only this time maybe Jagger will make out with RW instead?

Oh, please, whatever kind of anti-gay crap you're trying to say. It looked like Ronnie was being taken advantage of and that Ronnie felt he couldn't do anything because he was still the junior member at that point. If it was so wonderful, and so natural, why did Jagger stop doing it to Ronnie? And why didn't Mick go up and lick Charlie during a performance?

Cause Charlie would have popped him with the sticks ... and still kept the beat.
Agree that Ronnie was being messed with because he was the new kid without much standing. Not cool.

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
24FPS

Quote
Rip This
if Jagger's licking RW lips "weirded" you out it said more about you than it did about him...and if it wasn't for his voice being shot the performance was otherwise great....maybe they'll do it again..only this time maybe Jagger will make out with RW instead?

Oh, please, whatever kind of anti-gay crap you're trying to say. It looked like Ronnie was being taken advantage of and that Ronnie felt he couldn't do anything because he was still the junior member at that point. If it was so wonderful, and so natural, why did Jagger stop doing it to Ronnie? And why didn't Mick go up and lick Charlie during a performance?

Cause Charlie would have popped him with the sticks ... and still kept the beat.
Agree that Ronnie was being messed with because he was the new kid without much standing. Not cool.

OK..Now for the third time. If you look at the video its clear that it was staged beforehand. You can see Wood close his eyes and bring his face closer to Jagger's lips. Wood knew what was going to happen and i am sure was ok with it. It was a stunt. The Stones were always big on stunts.


Now lets wait for the next person to ignore that and again act like Jagger just decided to do it without Wood knowing about it beforehand and agreeing to it.