Did anyone see this last night, it was on channel 5 at 11:00 pm ? I thought it was pretty good, but the one revelation was what came up at the end, and that was that apparently Brian's builder Frank Thorogood confessed on his deathbed - I think it said he died in 1993 - to having murdered/drowned Brian in the swimming pool. I never knew this. I'd heard or read somewhere or other that Brian's death at the hands of this guy was one of many theories swirling around, but I wasn't aware that there'd ever been a "deathbed confession" ??

Anyway, it made for great viewing, I enjoyed it.

[news.bbc.co.uk]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-04 13:38 by paulywaul.

I just pulled this off of WIKIPEDIA-

Anna Wohlin claimed in 1999 that he had been murdered by a builder who had been staying with them renovating the house the couple shared. The builder, Frank Thorogood, allegedly confessed to the murder on his deathbed to the Rolling Stones' driver, Tom Keylock; however, it should be noted that there were no other witnesses to this confession. In her book ("The Murder Of Brian Jones") she alleges that Frank Thorogood behaved suspiciously and showed little sympathy when Jones was discovered in the pool (he was also the last one to see Brian alive), but she admits that she was not actually present at the time of Jones's death.

Anna Wohlin.....Frank Thorogood arriving at Jones inquest East Grinstead...Daily Mirror



ROCKMAN

I saw this at the Curzon cinema when it came out last year and I enjoyed it as a film but there will be endless debates as to it's accuracy and in particular Thorogood's 'confession'. I seem to remember the scenes in Morocco were an interesting interpretation of the chaotic, hedonistic events of the time.

I also saw it when it came out and it was/has been much discussed on this board. I thought that as a film it was rubbish!

ROLLING STONED Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just pulled this off of WIKIPEDIA-
>
> Anna Wohlin claimed in 1999 that he had been
> murdered by a builder who had been staying with
> them renovating the house the couple shared. The
> builder, Frank Thorogood, allegedly confessed to
> the murder on his deathbed to the Rolling Stones'
> driver, Tom Keylock; however, it should be noted
> that there were no other witnesses to this
> confession. In her book ("The Murder Of Brian
> Jones") she alleges that Frank Thorogood behaved
> suspiciously and showed little sympathy when Jones
> was discovered in the pool (he was also the last
> one to see Brian alive), but she admits that she
> was not actually present at the time of Jones's
> death.

Really interesting. Anyway, certainly the way the "possible" events that occurred in that pool involving Brian and Frank Thorogood were depicted in the film were credible I suppose, in as much as (a) given the state Brian was supposedly in at the time, and (b) the falling out over monies due they'd recently had - it not beyond the realms of possibility that tempers frayed and one ended up drowning the other.

Is the case of Brian's death actually a closed one at this moment in time, or still open ?

far as i know: closed, despite assorted efforts to get it reopened.
there was a long long thread about it here, although i don't blame anyone for not being up to following it -
if you do an "all posts" search for Keylock or Thorogood or Wohlin you'll probably unearth it

I watched it last night for the first time. My god what a terrible film! I'm so glad I didn't give in to curiosity before and buy the DVD!

Anyway, an over weight asmatic, with heart and liver issues, swimming under the influence of some drink and sleeping tablets during a cloudy humid night in a hot swimming pool is a recipe for disaster.

Whether it was even remotely factual or not, and I have doubts about some of it, alright... most of it but the there are some facts about the movie that can't be avoided... it was a badly scripted, badly made, badly acted... a totally crap movie that doesn't merit a discusion. Apart from how crap it was.

Total crap.

A really poor film, by any standards. Although I thought the guy playing Brian was really good.

I saw it last night too and actually thought it was quite a good film.

OK so the main characters can never look and sound exactly like our heros, but it seemed to get the atmosphere right. The Keith character was particulraly bad acted (only recognisable as Keith by the hair cut) but I didn't think any of the other characters were bad.

Also, remember that people really did talk differently in the 60s. I think that the film reflected this well.

And what was bad about the script? I thought it was well scripted.

Perhaps if the film was remade using american actors and more action in it then people would prefer it.

remember reading about a death bed confession years ago.

still, there were no other witnesses.

i think brians death was recorded as open so the case could probably be reinvestigated, although who knows what the outcome would be.

Come on guys, you know what really happened, Thorogood was paid by record company execs to knock off Jones because when he was kicked out of the stones a few days earlier, his lawyers threatened the rest of the band that Jones owned the name and a major lawsuite would follow if the Stones didn't change their name.....Now I do not know if this is really true, but a friend of mine who is into conspiracy theories has been saying this for years. Then again, he contends that LBJ was behind the shooting of JFK.

Rubbish. Everyone knows that Elvis killed JFK.

the film was shit, the theory was shit. He got @#$%& up and drowned - come on guys it was too long ago to still care that much!

OLDKR

The film was dumb, but I liked looking at the cool outfits the Anita chick got to wear. Like the boots with the long vest and pretty much nothing else. Anita does mod-nude like no-one else.

I got Stoned but stopped watching after about 30 minutes. Incredibly dull.

oldkr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the film was shit, the theory was shit. He got
> @#$%& up and drowned - come on guys it was too
> long ago to still care that much!
>
> OLDKR

The film wasn't shit, the film put forward a perfectly valid theory - albeit one that has never been proven and in all likelihood can never be. No question he was f***ed up, no question he drowned, but as to the question of whether he drowned partly at the hands of another ... that in itself is perfectly feasible and that is the very subject matter that the film explores. What's shit about that ?

I downloaded this film and watched it twice. I liked it, but there were too many things that were inaccurate about the film. I'm no great Stones historian, but I could tell there was a lot of artisitic licence being used here.

I think the main problem is that the actors who played Mick and Keith for example, hardly looked like either Mick or Keith. Ok, the guy who played Brian looked alright, but the rest of the 'Stones' just didn't cut it.

This makes the viewer less inclined to get into the story IMHO.

If you haven't seen this film I suggest you go watch it - but remember that a lot of it is inaccurate, or speculation. That doesn't make it a bad film though....

Rolling Stones Tribute

Play Rolling Stones



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-04-30 20:05 by Stikkyfinger.

I rented out on DVD last year, and watched it once, I enjoyed it, but it is not the kind of film i would need to see again. I am quite suprised how quickly it has go onto terrestrial t.v, i mean it has not been 2 years since it came out at the cinema, and as far as i know, it never got a u.k sattelite screening either...

Watched it last week. Not bad, but the Mick and Keith characters weren't particularly good imo. It was funny listening to the attempts of making the stones' songs like the originals. Must have been hard work. The singer did a good job imo.

Quote
His Majesty
I watched it last night for the first time. My god what a terrible film! I'm so glad I didn't give in to curiosity before and buy the DVD!

Anyway, an over weight asmatic, with heart and liver issues, swimming under the influence of some drink and sleeping tablets during a cloudy humid night in a hot swimming pool is a recipe for disaster.

Whilst the afore-mentioned health conditions wouldn't help, there must be literaly thousands of people who go out swimming - particularly abroad - who don't suffer the same consequences.And people considerably older than Brian.

The level of drink and the actual amount of drugs found in his body were not I recall excessive - certainly not with Brian's history of substance abuse.

It was quite interesting watching the Michael Barrymore documentary on Monday evening. The same unquestioned answers. One obvious similarity - the police investigation (at the scene) and the subsequent interviews with key witnesses and then the post-mortem seemed to have been less than perfectly carried out.

There will probably never be a final verdict (beyond allreasonable doubt) which is of course unsatisfactory - mostly for the family (as one could see quite plainly with the deceased's father) rather than fans who can just move on. They can call clousure,with family and friends its not so simple.

On a final note, what was the motive behind Tom Keylock saying there had been a "deathbed confession" and then retracting it. Was it financially motivated? Presumably he was paid for his role as Consultant in the film - but how could the Director/Producers accept that what he had to contribute had any degree of legitamcy. But then again, in the film world this isn't always the point I guess.