hi
i've been looking through old threads trying to get an answer to this but can't seem to find one i did read someone mention that abcko cut footage out for the dvd release

my reason for wanting to know is the beatles get back if it turns out to be a big success which i assume it will it might prove to the stones and abcko that there's money to made in the idea of watching a band working at length in the studio and if there sitting on tons of footage from 1+1 they could try to edit it into something much more coherent compared to what godard did

so my question is does anyone know if there's any significant amount of unused footage left from the film of the stones

i think some scenes in the docu "crossfire hurricane" are outtakes from one+one,
00:38 and so on, especially from 1:35 on, brian is leaving ...

so there musr be more in the archives

[www.youtube.com]

Quote
thomashanck
i think some scenes in the docu "crossfire hurricane" are outtakes from one+one,
00:38 and so on, especially from 1:35 on, brian is leaving ...

so there musr be more in the archives

[www.youtube.com]

That was fantastic!!!

I'm not an expert on this subject, but here is my 2 cents worth.....

I have seen this film many times over the course of 50 years. The first time was in a movie theater in the early 1970's. At that time, there were 2 'versions' of the film: one, the original Goddard edit, was called "One Plus One". This differs from the currently available version in only one respect...it did not feature the complete LP version of the song playing under the closing credits. A second version, called "Sympathy for the Devil" was also released to capitalize on the song's growing popularity, so the album version of the song was tagged on at the end. The closing credits and footage had to be slowed down to allow for the song to play out. The theater I visited played both versions of the film at alternating times. Why? Who knows....

Remember, the footage was shot almost 6 month's before the album's release. There was no way of knowing how well the song would be received or if it would even be included on the future album.

Goddard did not intend to make a movie about the Rolling Stones. They were merely an aspect of the times, interspersed with quasi-sexual and pseudo-revoltionary imagery that reflected 'radical' societal changes in the late 1960's. I guess he felt that the Stones' music and image were part of those changes. In fact, the idea that Goddard would want to make a mess of a film like this, so different from his previous work, was also a reflection of the times. This was no landmark in the history of cinema. It was a counter-culture experiment. And it is boringly difficult to watch except for the Stones footage. (In retrospect, "Street Fighting Man" might have been a better choice of music, but I digress....)

Goddard did not have a choice in so far as what music his cameras would capture. Movie-making in the late 60's was a costly and involved process, and sometimes the end product was more the result of logistical coincidences than thoughtful pre-planning. Goddard got permission to film the Stones; they had time booked at Olympic Studios on days which were convenient for everyone. The result was the footage in the movie "One Plus One".

Towards the end of the film, the Stones can be seen on the floor, jamming to a riff on Keith's guitar. This goes on for a few minutes. This riff would eventually be incorporated into the chorus of "Stray Cat Blues". This is the only footage of music other than "Sympathy" in the film, and quite possibly the only other rehearsal footage that Goddard captured. His cameras were only in the studio for a few days and the Stones appear intent on developing that one song. And as I mentioned earlier, this was not to be a film about the Rolling Stones.

In an old interview about the film, Jagger said that it was mere luck that Goddard caught them creating "Sympathy for the Devil"....on another night he might have found the Stones just staring at each other.

ABKCO did not finance the making of this film. They bought the rights to it years later. And, as owners of the material, they are free to do with it as they choose. However, I've seen the theatrical release, the laserdisc release in the 1990's and the current DVD. I have not noticed any removal of footage between these formats.

My best bet? There is no extra footage a la "Let It Be/Get Back".

Around 2006 there was a 4 dvd version of the ring available i Remember. Didn't buy It.
But that must've contained a bit more.

Thanks, thkbeercan
Good summary

I think this is another camera angle. At least it's different from what I saw in the movie.
video: [www.youtube.com]

Oh I would love to see any additional footage of The Rolling Stones. It’s Keith at his most beautiful, as well as at the beginning of their peak.

Wasn't looking too good, but I was feeling real well.

Quote
thkbeercan
I'm not an expert on this subject, but here is my 2 cents worth.....

I have seen this film many times over the course of 50 years. The first time was in a movie theater in the early 1970's. At that time, there were 2 'versions' of the film: one, the original Goddard edit, was called "One Plus One". This differs from the currently available version in only one respect...it did not feature the complete LP version of the song playing under the closing credits. A second version, called "Sympathy for the Devil" was also released to capitalize on the song's growing popularity, so the album version of the song was tagged on at the end. The closing credits and footage had to be slowed down to allow for the song to play out. The theater I visited played both versions of the film at alternating times. Why? Who knows....

Remember, the footage was shot almost 6 month's before the album's release. There was no way of knowing how well the song would be received or if it would even be included on the future album.

Goddard did not intend to make a movie about the Rolling Stones. They were merely an aspect of the times, interspersed with quasi-sexual and pseudo-revoltionary imagery that reflected 'radical' societal changes in the late 1960's. I guess he felt that the Stones' music and image were part of those changes. In fact, the idea that Goddard would want to make a mess of a film like this, so different from his previous work, was also a reflection of the times. This was no landmark in the history of cinema. It was a counter-culture experiment. And it is boringly difficult to watch except for the Stones footage. (In retrospect, "Street Fighting Man" might have been a better choice of music, but I digress....)

Goddard did not have a choice in so far as what music his cameras would capture. Movie-making in the late 60's was a costly and involved process, and sometimes the end product was more the result of logistical coincidences than thoughtful pre-planning. Goddard got permission to film the Stones; they had time booked at Olympic Studios on days which were convenient for everyone. The result was the footage in the movie "One Plus One".

Towards the end of the film, the Stones can be seen on the floor, jamming to a riff on Keith's guitar. This goes on for a few minutes. This riff would eventually be incorporated into the chorus of "Stray Cat Blues". This is the only footage of music other than "Sympathy" in the film, and quite possibly the only other rehearsal footage that Goddard captured. His cameras were only in the studio for a few days and the Stones appear intent on developing that one song. And as I mentioned earlier, this was not to be a film about the Rolling Stones.

In an old interview about the film, Jagger said that it was mere luck that Goddard caught them creating "Sympathy for the Devil"....on another night he might have found the Stones just staring at each other.

ABKCO did not finance the making of this film. They bought the rights to it years later. And, as owners of the material, they are free to do with it as they choose. However, I've seen the theatrical release, the laserdisc release in the 1990's and the current DVD. I have not noticed any removal of footage between these formats.

My best bet? There is no extra footage a la "Let It Be/Get Back".

thank you that was informative but still i'm sure there has to be at least enough footage left to properly piece together the recording of sftd without goddard's bizzare pseudo political crap that makes the film so unapproachable to the general public and many fans and still end up with at least and hour of footage of the stones maybe 1 1/2 hours if they fill in the gaps with interviews with the stones about the recording process and you have something worth releasing

There must be more out there......................come on editors...............put theme together

__________________________

Quote
thomashanck
i think some scenes in the docu "crossfire hurricane" are outtakes from one+one,
00:38 and so on, especially from 1:35 on, brian is leaving ...

so there musr be more in the archives

[www.youtube.com]

It's not outtake, it's from the movie

Quote
thomashanck
i think some scenes in the docu "crossfire hurricane" are outtakes from one+one,
00:38 and so on, especially from 1:35 on, brian is leaving ...

so there musr be more in the archives

[www.youtube.com]

No, they have used some Peter Whitehead footage from 1967 in amongst the One Plus One footage.

Brian with tambura, Brian with Suki and Andrew wearing hat talking to him etc is from 1967.

If Godard had spare footage from the few days of the Stones he shot, would he even have considered it worth keeping, given that the Stones weren't the main subject of his film, and he wasn't particularly a fan? My guess is that it got swept up from the cutting room floor and dumped.

We don't know exactly what ABKCO bought the rights to - maybe just the released films?

We don't have evidence that any outtake footage still exists, or where it is, or who has the rights to it, if it does.

Some bonus footage was included in the DVD... the ceiling catching fire.

I bet there is more. There usually is, but interest from those that have or may have it, incentive and viability of restoring film etc etc is the catch.

I don’t have any footage but there’s a vinyl bootleg “The Devil is my name”, that has 45 minutes various “Sympathy For The Devil”, tracks.

Quote
runaway
I don’t have any footage but there’s a vinyl bootleg “The Devil is my name”, that has 45 minutes various “Sympathy For The Devil”, tracks.

can anyone elaborate on this record is it just a straight recording of the movie soundtrack or is it something different

I don't think the One plus one footage is very useful for a Get Back-like documentary, but maybe there is more in the vaults. Like the footage shot in the Muscle Shoals studio's or from Altamont or the Hyde Park show.

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
runaway
I don’t have any footage but there’s a vinyl bootleg “The Devil is my name”, that has 45 minutes various “Sympathy For The Devil”, tracks.

can anyone elaborate on this record is it just a straight recording of the movie soundtrack or is it something different

The vinyl: recorded at Olympic Studios London. May 1968
Executive Producer: Jimmy Miller For “One & One
Vocal: Mick Jagger
Acoustic Guitar: Brian Jones
Mick Jagger (first rehearsal)
Guitar: Keith Richards
Bass: Keith Richards
Marimbas: Bill Wyman
Drums: Charlie Watts
Percussion: Mick Jagger
Piano: Nicky Hopkins

Quote
runaway

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
runaway
I don’t have any footage but there’s a vinyl bootleg “The Devil is my name”, that has 45 minutes various “Sympathy For The Devil”, tracks.

can anyone elaborate on this record is it just a straight recording of the movie soundtrack or is it something different

The vinyl: recorded at Olympic Studios London. May 1968
Executive Producer: Jimmy Miller For “One & One
Vocal: Mick Jagger
Acoustic Guitar: Brian Jones
Mick Jagger (first rehearsal)
Guitar: Keith Richards
Bass: Keith Richards
Marimbas: Bill Wyman
Drums: Charlie Watts
Percussion: Mick Jagger
Piano: Nicky Hopkins

thanks but is it just a recording of the soundtrack or something different like an early version/mix, different takes then the ones used in the film

are the performances clear of narrators talking over them

Quote
ProfessorWolf


are the performances clear of narrators talking over them

As part of their 1968 copyright protection uploads, ABKCO included a complete earlier take of Sympathy For The Devil (which is in the film with voice over) without the voice over.


This is the live in the studio audio as captured by Jean-Luc Godard's film crew during the filming of One Plus One aka Sympathy For The Devil. 3 mics in total were used by the film crew, 1 mic for Mick's vocal and 2 portable over head mic's on booms which were moved around the room during filming and takes. This explains why the levels and presence of the instrumentation on this recording changes during the song.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
ProfessorWolf


are the performances clear of narrators talking over them

As part of their 1968 copyright protection uploads, ABKCO included a complete earlier take of Sympathy For The Devil (which is in the film with voice over) without the voice over.


This is the live in the studio audio as captured by Jean-Luc Godard's film crew during the filming of One Plus One aka Sympathy For The Devil. 3 mics in total were used by the film crew, 1 mic for Mick's vocal and 2 portable over head mic's on booms which were moved around the room during filming and takes. This explains why the levels and presence of the instrumentation on this recording changes during the song.

thanks i have that one but your elaboration on it helps me appreciate it in a new way

Quote
ribbelchips
I don't think the One plus one footage is very useful for a Get Back-like documentary, but maybe there is more in the vaults. Like the footage shot in the Muscle Shoals studio's or from Altamont or the Hyde Park show.

i hadn't thought of that perhaps they could combine whitehead's, goddard's and the maysle's footage in to a some kind of documentary about how they worked in the studio in those times

but to be honest i'm unsure what the purpose of peter whitehead filming them in the studio was can someone elaborate on why he was there and how much he filmed

also how much of the muscle shoals sessions where filmed and what are the chances of that footage having survived
i thought a lot of the footage from gimme shelter has been lost

video: [youtu.be]

Some more footage

Quote
ProfessorWolf

... i'm unsure what the purpose of peter whitehead filming them in the studio was can someone elaborate on why he was there and how much he filmed

It was for promo vids mostly.

After Charlie Is My Darling, it seems Peter filmed them in New York in 1966 during the Have You Seen Your Mother drag photo session < not positive about this one... But definitely at the Albert Hall in September 1966, Olympic in November 1966, Olympic and in spring/summer 1967. He also filmed Mick, Keith & Marianne at an old church etc for the We love You/Dandelion promos.

His footage was used for promos for Have You Seen Your Mother, Let's Send The Night Together, Ruby Tuesday and the already mentioned We Love You and Dandelion promos.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-11-30 18:32 by His Majesty.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
ProfessorWolf

... i'm unsure what the purpose of peter whitehead filming them in the studio was can someone elaborate on why he was there and how much he filmed

It was for promo vids mostly.

After Charlie Is My Darling, it seems Peter filmed them in New York in 1966 during the Have You Seen Your Mother drag photo session < not positive about this one... But definitely at the Albert Hall in September 1966, Olympic in November 1966, Olympic and in spring/summer 1967. He also filmed Mick, Keith & Marianne at an old church etc for the We love You/Dandelion promos.

His footage was used for promos for Have You Seen Your Mother, Let's Send The Night Together, Ruby Tuesday and the already mentioned We Love You and Dandelion promos.

ok thanks i should have known that

When they re-released "Charlie Is My Darling" a few years back they re-cut the part where Brian talks about wanting to make a movie that is surrealistic, and the interviewer then asks him, "What is surrealism?" and there is this long pause which seems like forever in which he is speechless because he doesn't know the answer.

One of the most devastating moments I've ever seen in a film. You really feel for the guy. He's been found out, using fancy words he doesn't even know the meaning of.

My best friend and I saw Charlie Is My Darling at a rare screening in a tiny art house in 1976, Since then it's been a running point of reference for us where we will just look at each other whenever the word "surrealism" pops up. (or one of us will say to the other, "What is surrealism?" whenever we see someone who clearly doesn't know what they are talking about)


On the new version I can't recall if they cut the question or just trimmed that long, long pause from the re-release. I was disappointed to see that they tampered with it, because like I said, it's an unforgettable moment of hell for Brian. But at the same time, it was kind of interesting that it was done, perhaps as a kind gesture to Brian, to spare his memory that embarrassing moment from more than 50 years ago.


Re: Godard. I recall reading that he originally wanted to film the Beatles (who supposedly were recording "Revolution") but couldn't get them and ended up with the Stones. Whatever, having the creation (and evolution) of such a key track documented on film was a lucky break for all concerned.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2021-12-01 01:03 by loog droog.

An odd moment indeed. The pause is the same in both. It's not that long, but he is obviously caught out... he does give an answer, which is given with other footage shown which sort of obscures it. Something like - 'a sort of abstract realism'.

The way it is done is quite surrealistic/dreamlike.

This was discussed years ago in a forum, I had to look up the actual meaning of surreal myself back then. Hah.

here is the interview, at the end of it the question about "surrealism"

[www.youtube.com]

Quote
thomashanck
here is the interview, at the end of it the question about "surrealism"

[www.youtube.com]

Minus his answer.