I just opened the online edition of the Billings Gazette (Montana) not far from where I live to find an article about a new film about Robert Frank titled “Every Hundred Miles (Across America with Robert Frank)." It's about a 3 day road trip across America that one of the filmmakers took in 1975 with Robert Frank. It notes that the Stones film made three years earlier was to have been a "big break" for him but because it was never released, that Frank became stuck in a "rut." The other filmmaker is originally from Billings and both filmmakers are supposed to be at the showing of the film and a party afterwards tomorrow (Saturday). I would love to go talk to them but already have more pressing plans tomorrow. I just saw this article now. I have copied and pasted the article below so you don't have to deal with a paywall.

plexi


Billings native returns to MINT Film Festival with intimate documentary about Beat icon

Jake Iverson
America really unfolds from the road. When driving across this country, the landscape becomes dominant. You can’t help but really feel America when you’re on the road. You bend and curve with the country. It’s natural. It’s essential.

That’s the spirit behind “Every Hundred Miles (Across America with Robert Frank),” a new documentary from Kirk LeClaire and Finley Fryer, which will show at the Babcock Theatre as part of the MINT Film Festival on Saturday. LeClaire directed and edited the film. Fryer narrates it, and shot all the footage. The documentary also features music the pair made in the 1980s.

LeClaire has been a painter for most of his life, and Fryer usually works in visual arts, as well. The latter's most high profile work is a piece called "The Plastic Chapel," a giant building built of recycled plastic that he made as part of the Burning Man festival.

But this called for a documentary. "Every Hundred Miles” captures a three-day road trip Fryer went on in 1975 with Robert Frank, a photographer and filmmaker who was one of the core members of the “Beat Generation.” Frank's 1958 photo collection “The Americans" captured the country as it rarely sees itself.

"'The Americans' really showed America what America looked like," said LeClaire. "Prior to that, it was Life Magazine... he showed America what it really was."

By the time 1975 rolled around, Frank was in a rut. Three years earlier he'd filmed what should have been a big break, as he managed to document The Rolling Stones' 1972 tour, their first in the United States since the disaster at Altamont. Frank's resulting film was full of frank depictions of drug use and groupie-involved hedonism. It was too much. The documentary got shelved.

"If it shows in America we'll never be allowed in the country again," Mick Jagger is quoted as saying about the movie. Frank's most high-profile work was shuttered by court orders.

Following the Stones fiasco, Frank lost a daughter in a plane crash. He retreated from public life, and was teaching at UC Davis when Fryer met him in 1975. Fryer was an undergrad at the time, and the pair bonded over experimental documentary films Fryer had been making, most of which had been rejected by his classmates.

"Robert recognized that [Fryer] had something," said LeClaire. "He wasn't just a typical student."

"Robert earned his stars and stripes from being on the road," Fryer says in "Every Hundred Miles."

It makes sense then that Frank and Fryer friendship would coalesce around a road trip.

"Every Hundred Miles" captures a trip the two took across the country, driving from California to New York in three days.

Fryer captured two rolls of film on his Super-8 camera. The footage, LeClaire said, "is akin to if John Steinbeck had somebody filming him when he wrote 'Travels with Charley,' or with Kerouac with 'On the Road.' We can read 'On the Road' but we have to picture it in our minds, because it's fiction. Here we have an actual document from this trip."

That document is a fascinating work. Fryerls camera work is so natural, it feels like you're in the car with them. Frank is loose and weird, driving with his shirt off and laying in the sand next to the truck during their short breaks. It's an American icon totally unguarded. Footage like this rarely even exits, and it's even rarer to get to see it.

Folks in Billings will have a chance to see "Every Hundred Miles" as part of the MINT Film Festival on Saturday. It will show as a part of the Documentary Shorts Block starting at 1 p.m. at the Babcock Theatre. Tickets are $12 for the whole block of movies. LeClaire and Fryer will be on hand for a Q&A after the movie.

That showing will be a big homecoming for LeClaire. A Billings native, LeClaire first started making movies in earnest when he was a student at Senior High in the 1970s. Under the tutelage of art teacher Leo Olson, LeClaire first started exploring his artistic side, alongside his friend and fellow Senior grad John Dahl, a Billings-born director who made "Rounders" and has worked on TV shows like "Hannibal," "Jessica Jones" and "The Walking Dead."

After getting his undergrad at the University of Montana, LeClaire moved to the Bay Area. When he was a broke college student, filmmaking was too expensive. But with the advent of digital, he's gotten back into it. LeClaire also directed "...so good I can't take it," a documentary about Montana's underground punk music scene in the 1980's. It showed at the MINT Festival in 2019.


Nowadays, he teaches at the California State University, East Bay, in Hayward, California. And he lives in Rodeo, a San Francisco suburb that sometimes reminds him of home.

"It's kind of a dirty little city with refineries," he said, voice tinged by nostalgia.

He's excited to be back in Billings, and to see how the town's film culture has progressed.

"Growing up there, it could be tough," he said, "it was kind of hard to see stuff."

Places like the Babcock, which hosts most of the MINT Festival, have made weirder, more underground movies like the ones that LeClaire makes and watches, easier to find in Billings. Movie-wise, the Billings LeClaire returns to isn't the same as the one he left.

He's especially eager to go to the Saturday after-party at Kirks' Grocery.


Note from plexi: I think you get five free articles from the Gazette before they start charging you, and there are some pics in the article, so if you want to see the article from the site, go to: [billingsgazette.com]

CSBlues is a wierd ugly portrait of the Stones.The fleeting liveperformances of the band show them in great form.But the off the stage and backstage stuff are not so outrageous as they are dreary and depressing



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-17 19:37 by Taylor1.

I would like to see this... if/when etc.

HUGE R. Frank fan here but in 75 the concept of "2 dudes in a car crossing America" was frankly stale.
It was fresh in 55 when Frank did it for "The Americans" but 20 years later...

The idea was brillantly revived by Monte Hellman in his masterpiece titled "Two-Lane Blacktop" in 1971 but that was about it.

Maybe Frank needed a change of scenery after the death of his daughter, which is completely understandable.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-18 21:54 by dcba.

Quote
Taylor1
CSBlues is a wierd ugly portrait of the Stones.The fleeting liveperformances of the band show them in great form.But the off the stage and backstage stuff are not so outrageous as they are dreary and depressing

i agree with your assessment

and short of there concern over the drug use depicted it seems a big reason for mick not wanting it released is he didn't believe it was a accurate document of the tour

it would be really great if they could recut the film with different footage and more performances like they did with charlie is my darling

they could still include frank's original version as a bonus like the producer and director cuts for charlie is my darling

frank must have shot a LOT of footage for the film

has it survived and how much is there?

and do the stones have access to the footage would they have to go thru his estate?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-18 08:13 by ProfessorWolf.

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Taylor1
CSBlues is a wierd ugly portrait of the Stones.The fleeting liveperformances of the band show them in great form.But the off the stage and backstage stuff are not so outrageous as they are dreary and depressing

i agree with your assessment

and short of there concern over the drug use depicted it seems a big reason for mick not wanting it released is he didn't believe it was a accurate document of the tour

it would be really great if they could recut the film with different footage and more performances like they did with charlie is my darling

they could still include frank's original version as a bonus like the producer and director cuts for charlie is my darling

frank must have shot a LOT of footage for the film

has it survived and how much is there?

and do the stones have access to the footage would they have to go thru his estate?

Yeah, I would like to know the same thing. I wonder if the band has some kind of copyright control over the raw footage. I suspect that they would never want to touch it though just cuz of the reputation of the film. Could be a dynamite vault release though.


plexi

If there is available additional unreleased concert and rehearsal footage that would be great to see

Quote
timbernardis

Quote
ProfessorWolf

Quote
Taylor1
CSBlues is a wierd ugly portrait of the Stones.The fleeting liveperformances of the band show them in great form.But the off the stage and backstage stuff are not so outrageous as they are dreary and depressing

i agree with your assessment

and short of there concern over the drug use depicted it seems a big reason for mick not wanting it released is he didn't believe it was a accurate document of the tour

it would be really great if they could recut the film with different footage and more performances like they did with charlie is my darling

they could still include frank's original version as a bonus like the producer and director cuts for charlie is my darling

frank must have shot a LOT of footage for the film

has it survived and how much is there?

and do the stones have access to the footage would they have to go thru his estate?

Yeah, I would like to know the same thing. I wonder if the band has some kind of copyright control over the raw footage. I suspect that they would never want to touch it though just cuz of the reputation of the film. Could be a dynamite vault release though.


plexi

yeah but i think the broader world is ready to learn that the stones and there entourage used drugs in the 70's

i say release the film no matter what it does to there squeaky clean image



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-18 21:47 by ProfessorWolf.

The film sucks but the concert clips are great.Frank must shave shot a lot more concert footage and rehearsals than wound up in the film.I hope it still exists.A petition should be started to that film

Sounds interesting. I have encouraged any number of people to drive across the United States/America to get a feel for the country and its people. I've done it twice. It's a big country filled with much new, but for me, much older. Rather than the interstates I looked for the old highways that took me through places mostly forgotten yet fascinating in how people still there made their lives as best they could, the stories they had to tell. This is all still out there, little town America, they are still out there, "The Americans", as Robert Frank titled his photo book. They have stories to tell, memories to share, that go far beyond the bullsh*t fed out every day by the powers that be or want to be, the history they don't think of. Stopping and talking with these small town, off the beaten path Americans, sharing a laugh or two with them, a head nod of agreement regarding which y'all have in common, is something to experience. Not to say you won't find folks like those who dealt with Wyatt, Billy and George in "Easy Rider", they're everywhere just not in the United States, but for the most part, my experience is that "If you smile at me, I will understand, 'cause that is something everybody does in the same language". If you want to experience my country, please drive its length and breadth at least once. It's the same I would do in yours given the chance to know it. And Robert Frank's spirit will be smiling upon you.

Quote
ProfessorWolf

frank must have shot a LOT of footage for the film

has it survived and how much is there?

and do the stones have access to the footage would they have to go thru his estate?

The band's vault holds every reel of 16mm film Frank shot. They do not need to ask Frank's estate about using it because they own the material. I guess Frank was hired to film the 72 tour so he has no artistic right over the material. He was just a contractor.

Imo Frank didn't play fait game with the band : in 72 he was broke so he gladly accepted the gig and the money that went with it.
But during or after the tour things went sour, which resulted in Frank delivering the film with a 3-year delay. Plus it included stuff Jagger certainly didn't want to be seen (like the drug use).

And Frank made extravagant claims about the stones like he had to teach them where to score drugs in every town they visited (yeah sure!).

Jagger - ever the Cerberus protecting the band - made sure he got the raw material for CsBlues. But - ever the gentleman - he allowed Frank to show the movie under certain conditions.

Quote
dcba

Quote
ProfessorWolf

frank must have shot a LOT of footage for the film

has it survived and how much is there?

and do the stones have access to the footage would they have to go thru his estate?

The band's vault holds every reel of 16mm film Frank shot. They do not need to ask Frank's estate about using it because they own the material. I guess Frank was hired to film the 72 tour so he has no artistic right over the material. He was just a contractor.

Imo Frank didn't play fait game with the band : in 72 he was broke so he gladly accepted the gig and the money that went with it.
But during or after the tour things went sour, which resulted in Frank delivering the film with a 3-year delay. Plus it included stuff Jagger certainly didn't want to be seen (like the drug use).

And Frank made extravagant claims about the stones like he had to teach them where to score drugs in every town they visited (yeah sure!).

Jagger - ever the Cerberus protecting the band - made sure he got the raw material for CsBlues. But - ever the gentleman - he allowed Frank to show the movie under certain conditions.

well if they have everything and little if any obstacles in there way to using the footage in any way they see fit

it does beg the question why they haven't attempted to release the film as is or remake it in a way that better represents there experience of the tour

especially as the video and film in there vaults from the golden 70's that's interesting enough to be released is quickly running out (though definitely not the audio recordings) it would seem a slam dunk idea to release it in some way

perhaps there planning to save it for one last big video release from the 70's

but i can't imagine that mick hates it so much that he can't even think about making use of it in any fashion short of clips in other documentaries

he must recognize the potential in the film

right?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-19 11:16 by ProfessorWolf.

Prof Wolf, you say:

"but i can't imagine that mick hates it so much that he can't even think about making use of it in any fashion short of clips in other documentaries

he must recognize the potential in the film

right?"

No, not if he does hate it that much, which I can imagine.

~"Love is Strong"~

He should just release all the live performances and rehearsals and throw out the rest

....................................... Photo Jim Marshall 1972



ROCKMAN

Quote
ProfessorWolf


yeah but i think the broader world is ready to learn that the stones and there entourage used drugs in the 70's

Probably, but I am afraid that we have already passed the moment of 'the broader world being ready'. Probably that had been around the time of EXILE deluxe edition, if not even earlier. Since then the world has changed.

What makes it controversial (or more like dated in a difficult way) nowadays I don't think is just the explicit drug use, but all over the way it portrays the rock star world of the seventies (that probably was once thought to be cool). For example, the (staged) aeroplane scene with the nude groupie is not probably something to shout out loud proudly these days. The (also staged) tv set throwing out of the balcony is just embarrassing in its absurdity. The title of the movie alone is problematic in many ways these days (and not just being a dirty expression to provoke).

It could be if The Stones would be all history, like The Beatles, none of this would matter: it would be just documents of the past, no matter how ridiculous, politically incorrect or anything it is. But as far as The Stones still are some how pushing forward they still have concerns of their image, including their history. They are not in the position yet to distinguished themselves from their past and just look back and laugh their asses off.

This partly is the cost for us fans having the beloved band still going on: they cannot yet view their past as a pure history. This means that they are pretty careful how to reveal their vaults. They carry their past still with them (and as long as the most effective way to milk out the past is to play the songs from those times live, and giving the impression of still being the same band, I don't think this attitude will change).

That said, CS Blues is a dirty masterpiece as a document of those days, me thinks. It tells much more than it says. Frank probably was not that impressed of what he saw and witnessed.

- Doxa



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-21 13:31 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
ProfessorWolf


yeah but i think the broader world is ready to learn that the stones and there entourage used drugs in the 70's

Probably, but I am afraid that we have already passed the moment of 'the broader world being ready'. Probably that had been around the time of EXILE deluxe edition, if not even earlier. Since then the world has changed.

What makes it controversial (or more like dated in a difficult way) nowadays I don't think is just the explicit drug use, but all over the way it portrays the rock star world of the seventies (that probably was once thought to be cool). For example, the (staged) aeroplane scene with the nude groupie is not probably something to shout out loud proudly these days. The (also staged) tv set throwing out of the balcony is just embarrassing in its absurdity. The title of the movie alone is problematic in many ways these days (and not just being a dirty expression to provoke).

It could be if The Stones would be all history, like The Beatles, none of this would matter: it would be just documents of the past, no matter how ridiculous, politically incorrect or anything it is. But as far as The Stones still are some how pushing forward they still have concerns of their image, including their history. They are not in the position yet to distinguished themselves from their past and just look back and laugh their asses off.

This partly is the cost for us fans having the beloved band still going on: they cannot yet view their past as a pure history. This means that they are pretty careful how to reveal their vaults. They carry their past still with them (and as long as the most effective way to milk out the past is to play the songs from those times live, and giving the impression of still being the same band, I don't think this attitude will change).

That said, CS Blues is a dirty masterpiece as a document of those days, me thinks. It tells much more than it says. Frank probably was not that impressed of what he saw and witnessed.

- Doxa

I would only want to see any additional live performances or rehearsals.Frank must have shot more of the live shows.Too bad this can’t be confirmed

Doxa, "For example, the (staged) aeroplane scene with the nude groupie is not probably something to shout out loud proudly these days." Duh. Understatement.

Great post, encapsulating the issues, thank you.

~"Love is Strong"~

Thanks, angee. And yeah, it was an understatement...

- Doxa

Doxa:

~"Love is Strong"~

Quote
Doxa

Quote
ProfessorWolf


yeah but i think the broader world is ready to learn that the stones and there entourage used drugs in the 70's

Probably, but I am afraid that we have already passed the moment of 'the broader world being ready'. Probably that had been around the time of EXILE deluxe edition, if not even earlier. Since then the world has changed.

What makes it controversial (or more like dated in a difficult way) nowadays I don't think is just the explicit drug use, but all over the way it portrays the rock star world of the seventies (that probably was once thought to be cool). For example, the (staged) aeroplane scene with the nude groupie is not probably something to shout out loud proudly these days. The (also staged) tv set throwing out of the balcony is just embarrassing in its absurdity. The title of the movie alone is problematic in many ways these days (and not just being a dirty expression to provoke).

It could be if The Stones would be all history, like The Beatles, none of this would matter: it would be just documents of the past, no matter how ridiculous, politically incorrect or anything it is. But as far as The Stones still are some how pushing forward they still have concerns of their image, including their history. They are not in the position yet to distinguished themselves from their past and just look back and laugh their asses off.

This partly is the cost for us fans having the beloved band still going on: they cannot yet view their past as a pure history. This means that they are pretty careful how to reveal their vaults. They carry their past still with them (and as long as the most effective way to milk out the past is to play the songs from those times live, and giving the impression of still being the same band, I don't think this attitude will change).

That said, CS Blues is a dirty masterpiece as a document of those days, me thinks. It tells much more than it says. Frank probably was not that impressed of what he saw and witnessed.

- Doxa

perhaps but as long as the women in the plane are of age, consented to what they did and to being filmed doing it there isn't really much of problem as far as i can see

not everyone would be happy but i think if the above are met it wouldn't be a huge problem

as for the tv tossing scene i love it even if it is staged its still hilarious

maybe i do feel bad for the hotel owners who had to replace it though

moreover if they have problems with these scenes the band could simply edited them out or better yet remake the film with (as taylor1 would like) more performance footage

With all due respect, Professor Wolf, I think you're missing Doxa's points.
Legalities are not the only issues. Have you heard of bad taste, or unsavory behaviors?
Just because people are paid for something doesn't make it right.

The Rolling Stones/Mick won't let it out, imo, for reasons explained above by Doxa.
Of course, that makes the film all the more attractive to the curious. Haven't
most of those seen it by now, or some version of it?

~"Love is Strong"~

Quote
angee
With all due respect, Professor Wolf, I think you're missing Doxa's points.
Legalities are not the only issues. Have you heard of bad taste, or unsavory behaviors?
Just because people are paid for something doesn't make it right.

The Rolling Stones/Mick won't let it out, imo, for reasons explained above by Doxa.
Of course, that makes the film all the more attractive to the curious. Haven't
most of those seen it by now, or some version of it?

oh i understand his point and agree that a lot of the stuff in cb has aged very poorly or shines a bright light on aspects of the times and culture the stones were part of that shouldn't be celebrated or admired anymore and rightfully so

but they own the footage and can do whatever they want with it

surely frank shot more then just plane orgies and naked people shooting up herion in hotels

it very much seems like he went out of his way to include as much nasty dark crap in it as he could get away with

that seems to have been his goal

and i'm sure he left out a ton of great behind the scenes footage and footage of performances and rehearsals

my proposal is that they remake the film with the footage they have into something that better reflects the tour they remember and not the dark boring creature that robert frank created

Okay. You want an entirely new film.

That's an interesting idea, but I think that ship has sailed, so to speak.

~"Love is Strong"~

Quote
angee
Okay. You want an entirely new film.

That's an interesting idea, but I think that ship has sailed, so to speak.

yes that's what i want

and i don't think as they quickly run out of releasable footage from the 70's that they can continue to ignore that mountain of footage that frank shot

just get peter jackson or someone in there and put something new together

after get back i'm sure mick has had some thoughts about what they could do like that with all the footage in there vaults

one+plus one seemingly doesn't have enough leftover footage to create anything interesting out of

but frank's footage is a largely untapped source that should have at least enough potential in it to create a good new film

dcba says above that the band owns all the film footage...hmm...
I wonder how much concert film is really in there, or rehearsals.

~"Love is Strong"~



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2022-09-23 01:57 by angee.

Quote
angee
dcba says above that the band owns all the film footage...hmm...
I wonder how much concert film is really in there, or rehearsals.

hmm...indeed

as to whats left form the footage he shot i have no idea

but this appeared just last year form the dallas rehearsals so who knows

Quote
ProfessorWolf
as to whats left form the footage he shot i have no idea

but this appeared just last year form the dallas rehearsals so who knows

Thanks! I haven't seen that one before. Great stuff! I guess there also are some then-unseen-before Frank's footage in the video of "Plundered My Soul" and STONES IN EXILE (and there also is the clip of the dudes walking on Main Street circulating). All this suggests that they probably have more of it in their vaults, like said here.

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

That said, CS Blues is a dirty masterpiece as a document of those days, me thinks. It tells much more than it says. Frank probably was not that impressed of what he saw and witnessed.

- Doxa

I agree, it's a fantastic movie if you consider it by itself, that is NOT as a companion to L&G.
It is by far Frank's best film, the rest of his filmography is tedious boring arthouse "avant-garde" crap.

I have a personal theory that says the Stones not only had tons of talent, but by some capillary action they also gave lots of talent to people who worked with them.
Take solo albums by Nicky Hopkins or Bobby Keys : rather bland works. Yet what they did on Stones albums was glorious.

The same thing happened to Frank imo : CSB is a fascinating movie. Frank transceneded himself on that one, he was almost as good there as he was in 55-57 travelling thru America with a Leica.


"Frank probably was not that impressed of what he saw and witnessed"
Certainly. Frank was a visual beat poet, and he probably despised the rock scene, which was (to him) a lesser musical genre than jazz.