ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
A Bigger Bang Tour 2006

Radio City Music Hall, New York City, March 14, 2006
© Throbby... thanks!
[ ROCKSOFF.ORG ] [ IORR NEWS ] [ SETLISTS 1962-2006 ] [ FORO EN ESPAÑOL ] [ BIT TORRENT TRACKER ] [ BIT TORRENT HELP ] [ BIRTHDAY'S LIST ] [ MICK JAGGER ] [ KEITHFUCIUS ] [ CHARLIE WATTS ] [ RONNIE WOOD ] [ BRIAN JONES ] [ MICK TAYLOR ] [ BILL WYMAN ] [ IAN "STU" STEWART ] [ NICKY HOPKINS ] [ MERRY CLAYTON ] [ IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN ] [ LINKS ] [ PHOTOS ] [ JIMI HENDRIX ] [ TEMPLE ] [ GUESTBOOK ] [ ADMIN ]
CHAT ROOM aka The Fun HOUSE Rest rooms last days
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: Old Gods Almost Dead Return to archive Page: 1 2
13th March 2006 12:49 PM
keeefff what did you think of this book?

seem to paint mick in the worst way - saying stuff like mick was afraid to use drugs because it would effect his looks and use to say mean things to brain

i'm only about half done, but i love it

13th March 2006 12:51 PM
Break The Spell It does paint many of the band members in a negative light, especially Mick, but I went into the book expecting that. I found it quite informative as far as dates and events goes, it gives you a good chronological view of the band if nothing else. I also like that there is comments on every song on every album through bridges (the book came out in 2001) and gives info on various out takes from each album.
13th March 2006 01:07 PM
Gazza
quote:
keeefff wrote:
what did you think of this book?

seem to paint mick in the worst way - saying stuff like mick was afraid to use drugs because it would effect his looks and use to say mean things to brain

i'm only about half done, but i love it





Its a pile of utter shite and the level of research is appalling

Might be an 'entertaining' read but the factual errors make it worthless and make you sceptical of the autheticity of almost anything that Davis says
13th March 2006 01:12 PM
pdog Crap...
Makes Tony Sanchez into a Pulitzer prize winner..
13th March 2006 01:13 PM
ListenToTheLion
quote:
keeefff wrote:


seem to paint mick in the worst way - saying stuff like mick was afraid to use drugs because it would effect his looks and use to say mean things to brain




What do you mean? The example you give paints mick in a sensible way.
13th March 2006 01:14 PM
Break The Spell I believe it was the same guy that wrote "Hammer of the Gods" on zep and an Aerosmith book as well. Hey Gazza, what were some of the big errors in the book?? Forgive me but its been 4 years since I read it so if there's errors their not fresh in my head.
13th March 2006 01:20 PM
Madafaka Talks about drugs too much IMO. That is not the best part of Stones trajectory.
[Edited by Madafaka]
13th March 2006 01:25 PM
Joey
quote:
keeefff wrote:
what did you think of this book?

seem to paint mick in the worst way - saying stuff like mick was afraid to use drugs because it would effect his looks and use to say mean things to brain

i'm only about half done, but i love it






An Outstanding Book !!!!!

" Old Gods Almost Dead " spent forty two weeks at the Number # 1 Position on the New York Times Best Seller List and has sold two hundred and fifty million copies ( Hard Back ) to date ........ Marriott , Inc. keeps a paperback copy in every hotel room . Word .



JACKY !


................................................
[ Edited by Bill Wyman ]
[Edited by Joey]
13th March 2006 06:03 PM
tumbling dice I like this book.Tony sanches Up and Down is very good too.
13th March 2006 06:10 PM
HardKnoxDurtySox Davis clearly hates the Stones as he spends 2/3 of the book arguing that Aerosmith and Led Zeppelin are superior bands. In an act of shear lunacy previously unheard of in the entire history of writing, Davis claims that "Pump" is the last great rock album. Avoid at all costs!
13th March 2006 06:11 PM
Gimme Shelter I read it too when it first came out. What I remember is that it really critizied the Steel Wheels tour.
13th March 2006 06:45 PM
corgi37 Havent read this book. Seems like the usual stitch up job Jagger gets. Oh my, boo-hoo, he was mean to Brian. Brian wasnt exactly a nice person. Just ask his bastard kids, or the women he beat up.

There might be a semblance of truth in Jagger not wanting to do drugs because it would affect his looks. But, i would say it was more about affecting his performance with the LAY-DEE's! hahaha. And, he still had a pretty go of the party powders and natural herbs from mid 60s to mid 70s. And, being a good boy, i think old Basil might have had a father/son chat with his boy. Health and fitness were drummed into Jagger from an early age.

Its why we can enjoy the wrinkled old fucker running around for 2 hours, sending crowds wild - while fans of Brian (to 99% of the world - who?), Keith Moon, Jim Morrison, Hendrix, Joplin, Cobain etc), can just sit around and remember the "good old days".

Has there ever been a balanced book on the STones? Its either gushing crap, or a vitriolic character assassination, saying how shit they are and they'll never as good as the Beatles. I find it funny some one writes a book about a band, yet compares that band to others. Led Zep's book is full of comparisons to (guess who!!) the Stones. Hendrixes book the same. Even No one here gets out alive. They all want a piece of the kings of the jungle.

Trouble is, there is still some roar in these old lions yet.
13th March 2006 07:36 PM
sirmoonie That book barely avoids copyright infringement of, among others, Bockris book on Keith. Plus, its disjointed, jumps around - a clear cut and paste job written by a computer.
13th March 2006 08:09 PM
Riffhard It's a shit book! As many here have already alluded to. The problem is that it is written by the Kitty Kelly of rock bios. It's a hatchet job plain and simple. Plus there are so many factual errors that any true fan can only shake their heads in disbelief.


I have,on this very forum,stated many many times that the best book ever written about the Stones was Stanley Booth's The True Adventures of the Rolling Stones. He was there. He saw it. Hell,he even lived with Keith for a couple of years at Nellcott. It's also the only book ever written about the band that is forwarded by a letter of agreement signed by all of the Stones themselves. There is no bullshit,or speculation about motives here. Just the straight scoop from a guy that could genuinly call the Stones friends. Even after the book came out! Which is more than Davis,or Spanish Tony could say.

Get it. Buy it. Read it. Learn it. Thank me later.



Riffy
13th March 2006 08:17 PM
Sir Stonesalot You would think that people writing these types of books would come to places like this to get fact checkers.

Old Gods is a funny comedy of farce. 87.6% fact free!
13th March 2006 08:49 PM
gotdablouse It was the first book to shed some led in writing about the B2B sessions though and how they ended with Mick walking out. I don't think I'd ever read that before.
13th March 2006 09:22 PM
WhenTheWhipComesDown What would be the best book on the Rolling Stones starting with the Sixties?
I want to know which one could be the most accurate during the above period.
Thanks.
13th March 2006 09:31 PM
Riffhard
quote:
WhenTheWhipComesDown wrote:
What would be the best book on the Rolling Stones starting with the Sixties?
I want to know which one could be the most accurate during the above period.
Thanks.



Uhhh,I have just told you three posts ago! The best book by an incredibly large magin is Stanley Booth's-The True Adventures of The Rolling Stones.

It's not even close. That ain't opinion either! That's a fact!


Riffhard
13th March 2006 09:38 PM
Egbert
quote:
WhenTheWhipComesDown wrote:
What would be the best book on the Rolling Stones starting with the Sixties?
I want to know which one could be the most accurate during the above period.
Thanks.



Booth's "True Adventures of...", Greenfield's "S.T.P.", and Bockris' "Keith Richards" are all good reads and highly recommended.
13th March 2006 09:56 PM
gorda I think that Keith Richards and Mick Jagger need to get together and write a book to set the record straight!

I would like to hear it from their point-of-view.

That big red book, According to the Stones, is too choppy, just bits and pieces of information.

It would be a cool to read a book that started from the beginning as they remembered things.

P.S. Keith and Mick are not angels. But, they are under a lot of pressure! Being in the public eye all the time must be nerve-racking, they have to have some outlet, some release!
13th March 2006 10:33 PM
Soldatti It's good at times, but with loads of mistakes. The chart positions for the albums and singles is a mess.
13th March 2006 10:35 PM
stonedinaustralia
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
Hell,he even lived with Keith for a couple of years at Nellcott.



not quite Riffy.. i believe it was Redlands and I don't think it streched into years (months maybe)

i don't even think keith lived at Nellcote for a couple of years - around late '72 early '73 (i think) french authorities put out warrant for his arrest while he was away and he never went back
13th March 2006 10:52 PM
Riffhard
quote:
stonedinaustralia wrote:


not quite Riffy.. i believe it was Redlands and I don't think it streched into years (months maybe)

i don't even think keith lived at Nellcote for a couple of years - around late '72 early '73 (i think) french authorities put out warrant for his arrest while he was away and he never went back



Yeah you're right SIA. I was mistaken about the location. It was indeed Redlands. However,he did live there for the better part of a couple of years in an on again off again arrangment. He says in the book that he relized that he had to move to out shortly before the '72 tour because,in his words,"Somebody was gonna end up dead,and I didn't think it was gonna be Keith!"

Apparently he got addicted to smack as badly as Keith had. He ended his "experiment" well before Keith did though. However,I do think that we are both right in one respect. Booth claims only to lived there full-time for around five or six months,but later he stresses that he used Keith's house as a crash pad(read-smack shack)for at least two years after the '69 tour.

I stand by my claim the his book is the definitive Stones book available. He was writing from a perspective that no other biographer was ever privy to,and that counts for alot in my mind. His story about the riot in Blackpool is one of the funniest things that I have ever read about the band!



Riffy


14th March 2006 06:58 AM
chevysales
quote:
pdog wrote:
Crap...
Makes Tony Sanchez into a Pulitzer prize winner..




too funny
14th March 2006 07:04 AM
corgi37 Keith and/or Mick will NEVER write a bio.

Neither will Charlie.

Of course, there's always Bill's books. How many chicks he fucked. How much a train ticket was. Mick and Keith wont let him submit songs. It's all so unfair. I never get air time. I wrote this. I wrote that.
14th March 2006 07:06 AM
Break The Spell
quote:
HardKnoxDurtySox wrote:
Davis clearly hates the Stones as he spends 2/3 of the book arguing that Aerosmith and Led Zeppelin are superior bands. In an act of shear lunacy previously unheard of in the entire history of writing, Davis claims that "Pump" is the last great rock album. Avoid at all costs!



I remember that part, it was around when Bill was leaving, how he was noticing that the "rock boom had ended" and then Davis stated that "Achtung Baby" and "Pump" were the last truly great rock albums. So he has a U2 comparison to go with all the Zep and Aerosmith ones as well!!
14th March 2006 07:16 AM
FotiniD "Old Gods Almost Dead" is one of those books that I tend to look at it sitting on my bookcase shelf and wondering what the heck possessed me and made me get it. I'd have thrown it away years ago if I could actually come to throw away any book.

Read half of it it over a 15-hour travel by ship and the rest of it when I got back from the holidays. What still puzzles me is why would anyone bother to write a book on a subject he obviously seems to hate - oh, yes, $$$... True enough.

I agree with Riffy, stick with Stanley Booth's book and it won't let you down. Not only is it straightforward, fun to read, illuminating at many points and manages to transfer all the vibe of what it was like to be next to the Stones at that time but the guy can write! Very beautiful book.
14th March 2006 08:05 AM
gypsy I agree w/ Riffy's book choices as well.

Yeah, the chances of Mick and Keith writing a tell-all are slim to none.
Anita won't even write one, and she even expressed disappointment in Marianne for telling all in her bio in 1994.
14th March 2006 09:08 AM
Break The Spell Charlie will surprise us all one day and give us a tell all book with all the dirt.
14th March 2006 03:55 PM
Voodoo Scrounge I have read it. It was the very first BOOK i read about the stones and being young and dumb and naive, I took it all as gospel.

However, as I have grown and matured I have also found much better researched and more well written material about the stones.
Page: 1 2
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
The Rolling Stones World Tour 2005 Rolling Stones Bigger Bang Tour 2005 2006 Rolling Stones Forum - Rolling Stones Message Board - Mick Jagger - Keith Richards - Brian Jones - Charlie Watts - Ian Stewart - Stu - Bill Wyman - Mick Taylor - Ronnie Wood - Ron Wood - Rolling Stones 2005 Tour - Farewell Tour - Rolling Stones: Onstage World Tour A Bigger Bang US Tour

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED)