|
headshrinker |
Is it n e good? |
|
dealer squealing |
Itīs great. Tecnically itīs not well edited and shot but seing the Stones in top form and great set itīs a must! |
|
Jumacfly |
I ve heard the songs are cut before the end, is it true???
Anyway the HTW intro is...mmhhh.. |
|
Mr Jimmy |
I personally love Let's Spend The Night Together. I think 'the shooting' and directing by Hal Ashby was great because it was shot to be seen on the BIG screen and not shot like videos/dvds of today with the intentional tighter framing that looks better on your home tv. When I watch LSTNT at home it seems like a completely different film then when I saw it for the first time when it was released in the theatre. You really need to experience it in the theatre where you feel the full impact of a shot where Mick fills the the foreground, Keith is in the middle plane, and that composition is juxtaposed aginst a backdrop of several thousand fans. That kind of composition is very powerful in a theatre but comes across as a little 'busy' on a tv. Either way, the music is fantastic! |
|
Jumping Jack |
Look for "Rocks Off" the euro version that also has Whip. |
|
padre |
What annoys me most on LSTNT is that the intros are cut from some songs (JJF misses the whole 1st verse!) and the songs run in the wrong speed. They're way too fast. If you get your hands on Hampton -81, get that. It's much better. |
|
cwatts0462 |
GREAT TO SEE MICK GET PISSED AT WOODY BACK STAGE AND AT KEITH ONSTAGE |
|
exilestones@netscape |
The movie sucks because it is chopped to death missing too many parts. |
|
F505 |
that movie sucks indeed: songs are cut short and Mick wears the most riduculous outfit you ever saw. |
|
jb |
I agree..awful movie, weak performances...I remember going to see it in college on the big screen...people in the audience said the "Who" were much better as they had recently played the Tangerine Bowl...In all candor, 81 was the beginning of the decline.... |
|
F505 |
The tour itself wasn't that bad I guess. It's the last tour Ron Wood was in shape. Unfortunately the movie and the Still Life album didn't do justice to the 1981 tour. But I agree with JB: from this point on the decline was starting.... |
|
jb |
Agreed....the concert itself was the last real "Stones" compared to the polished Vegas acr from 89 forward...but Woody was already on the decline, Jagger never sounded like the Jagger from 69-78(his voice got much deeper), and the band just never was quite the same... |
|
padre |
But Keef in -81 looked cooler than ever before or after that! I just can't get enough of YCAGWYW on LSTNT. And the intro of THW...YEAH, BABY! |
|
jb |
quote: padre wrote:
But Keef in -81 looked cooler than ever before or after that! I just can't get enough of YCAGWYW on LSTNT. And the intro of THW...YEAH, BABY!
Keith did look glorious....also I liked the way he kinda glided along stage in his suede boots b/t riffs on Under My Thumb.. |
|
Mikey |
best thing about that movie, IMO, is Beast of Burden, YCAGWYW and one of the best, if not the best, versions of Let it Bleed live. Keith hits a chord after shaking his cigarette that reminds us all how dirty and sleazy that song can be. |
|
jb |
quote: Mikey wrote:
best thing about that movie, IMO, is Beast of Burden, YCAGWYW and one of the best, if not the best, versions of Let it Bleed live. Keith hits a chord after shaking his cigarette that reminds us all how dirty and sleazy that song can be.
|
|
Some Guy |
I like it, I finally found the dvd. I must of saw that 15 times at the theater. I was obsessed with that blue jacket Mick was wearing. |
|
jb |
quote: Some Guy wrote:
I like it, I finally found the dvd. I must of saw that 15 times at the theater. I was obsessed with that blue jacket Mick was wearing.
Mick's face in the promo poster looks like he is on prednisone or some other inflamation causing drug... |
|
padre |
quote: padre wrote:
intro of THW...YEAH, BABY!
THW? Tonky Honk Women? |
|
Gimme Shelter |
I have always loved that movie, and also Still Life was the second Stones album I ever got, and I won it off the radio. |
|
DG81 |
Love it and hate it in equal measures. Love it for Jagger's jacket and chewing gum, Keith's coolness / raggedness, Ronnie's youthfulness / Charlie's utter brilliance as always (although, he's not shown nearly enough for my liking) and Bill..I think he played brilliantly on the US and Euro tours of 81 and 82, after listening to boots of the period. Poor OLD bastard, no one ever seems to give him any credit.
Same old gripes though - merciless 'editing' of songs, and why does the audio track make the Stones sound like the Chipmunks on speed?? |
|
sammy davis jr. |
I think it's more like "The Stones on cocaine" is why everything is so fast. I like the movie ok......at least nobody gets killed in it. |
|
glencar |
Love the photography of this flick. The sun going down at Sun Devil was sweet. They did some nice set lists that tour. |
|
Sir Stonesalot |
Hal Ashby was a hamfisted fuckwit.
Who the fuck inserts atrocity footage in the middle of Time Is On Our Side? I don't need to see execution footage and heads on sticks during a Stones film.
Fuckin' awful editing.
What's with the time continuity? Why do they show the guys walking around backstage before the gig in the middle of the show?
The only saving grace is the Stones themselves. The movie sucks. |
|
T&A |
movie isn't as bad as the Still Life. As for the TIOMS video - well, Hal isnt' to be blamed entirely - the Stones did show that footage during the song throughout the tour. |
|
cwatts0462 |
i like the film alot
and i watch it alot
if your not into the editing thing
then watch hampton or seattle,[problem solved |
|
padre |
But where has Charlie's bold spot disappeared since LSTNT? It's very evident in the movie, but I don't see it anymore. Chief Wiggum? |
|
jb |
quote: T&A wrote:
movie isn't as bad as the Still Life. As for the TIOMS video - well, Hal isnt' to be blamed entirely - the Stones did show that footage during the song throughout the tour.
No video in 81...it was either 89 or 94... |