Skip

Can't get no satis-faction...
November 16, 2006 7:55 PM   Subscribe

"I don't have any more babes." After offering fans $75 each to show up, Martin Scorsese's film crew prettifies the front row [Coral Cache] of NY's Beacon Theatre for the Rolling Stones' 2007 documentary. Are the boys — not to mention their audience [PDF] — getting a little long in the teeth, or can they rock for ages?
posted by cenoxo (71 comments total)

 
Are you kidding? They dig them up each year just before their tours, and bury them again afterwards.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 8:12 PM on November 16, 2006


Actually, Keith digs up himself. The man is truly a phenomenon.
posted by jonmc at 8:24 PM on November 16, 2006


(also, artistic merit of their recent work aside, why is age brought upo whenever discussing the Stones. The R&B and country singers they modeled themselves after were making music well into old age. why should rock and roll be different?)
posted by jonmc at 8:25 PM on November 16, 2006


These guys were just in my town (the only stop on the tour where they did TWO sold out shows, but I digress). In between, Mick had a party and the word was spread that young hot women were invited. (read more here.)
posted by evilcolonel at 8:32 PM on November 16, 2006


One of my friends runs the show for the Stones when they are in town... it's his ONLY FUCKING CONVERSATIONAL SUBJECT. I'd like to kill the guy sometimes.

Never loved Elivs, the Beatles or the Stones, sad to say.
posted by unSane at 8:56 PM on November 16, 2006


Joking aside, from the above links ... what a surreal life they all must lead. To even get to them you have to jump through so many hoops. I can't imagine my life being a string of carefully selected parties where I'm treated as some sort of demi-god. How depressing.
posted by geoff. at 9:02 PM on November 16, 2006


Reading that first link made me want to retch, and wonder how Scorcese could be so ridiculous as to want only plastic bimbos up front for his movie. Ugh.
posted by mediareport at 9:04 PM on November 16, 2006


Mr. Scorcese, I don't think that word "documentary" means what you think it means.
posted by straight at 9:23 PM on November 16, 2006


The typical audience these days is a bunch of doctors, lawyers and executives, as no one else can afford the ticket, or would care to. The boys still rock pretty well, and most of the rock and roll spirit rests in Keith, God bless him.
posted by caddis at 9:24 PM on November 16, 2006


My friend's 14 year old son likes the Stones. But he is not a hot babe.
posted by bobobox at 9:43 PM on November 16, 2006


Fuck the Stones.
posted by trinarian at 10:25 PM on November 16, 2006


It's not the age of the musicians so much as the age of the music. The Rolling Stones made a conscious decision to become a brand, rather than a legitimate band, when I was in diapers, and I have grey hair now. That was their choice to make. I just can't bring myself to feel upset that their first decade of important early work has been overshadowed by thirty years of whoredom.
posted by freshwater_pr0n at 10:29 PM on November 16, 2006 [1 favorite]


BEAVIS: "Martin scores easy? It's hard for me to score!"
posted by drjimmy11 at 10:42 PM on November 16, 2006


Like most "classic rock" bands these days, the Stone have become something closer to a travelling Broadway show. They go out and play the hits they're expected to play every night. Everything is choreographed, right down to the encores that coincidentally end just at the venue's curfew time. It might be entertaining to some extent but there is absolutely no sense of danger or spontaneity, or any of the things that were once great about a rock concert.

Of course, the Stones were a mediocre live act even back in the 60s, when the Who blew them off the stage on their "rock and roll circus" -- to the extent that the Stones wouldn't even allow the film to be released for another 30 years.
posted by drjimmy11 at 10:49 PM on November 16, 2006


And nowe we can come totally full circle (for me, not for anyone else) if that guy will post again that he saw Duck Dunn playing bass for the Stones in his VIP seats.
posted by stevil at 11:07 PM on November 16, 2006


Newsflash: the Stones are getting old. They play rock and roll, and they're getting old. They've been getting old for years now. The Stones are getting old.

Did I mention that they're getting old?
posted by flapjax at midnite at 11:08 PM on November 16, 2006


jonmc said: ...why is age brought up...?

I don't know about every Stones discussion, but in this instance it's the idea that young women are being paid to worship at the feet of old rockers — literally old enough to be their fathers (by a couple of decades) — for the sake of an alleged documentary film by a famous director. Altamont it ain't.

True, there's nothing new here: it's bald-faced Hollywood myth-marketing, and the Stones (and their recording company) are laughing all the way to the bank. The film is meant to promote the Stones' image, probably in anticipation of their 2010, 2020, 2030, or whenever, World Tour. If this keeps up, eventually they'll have to roll out on stage strapped into remotely-controlled Segways.

Roz Chast's Madonna and Child, 2008 cartoon comes to mind.
posted by cenoxo at 11:27 PM on November 16, 2006


jonmc: "(also, artistic merit of their recent work aside, why is age brought upo whenever discussing the Stones. The R&B and country singers they modeled themselves after were making music well into old age. why should rock and roll be different?)"

For the same reason that Mick, when throwing a party, wants the place filled with hot young girls, or Scorcese, when making a movie about rock, wants the seats filled with hot young girls.

It's because rock and roll is *all* about youth -- in a way that other popular musical forms -- the blues, jazz, country, etc. -- just aren't.

Look at the breakthrough defining moments -- Elvis, The Beatles & The Stones, The Sex Pistols, etc. The power has nothing to do with musical ability, and everything to do with youth, passion, the desire to do it differently, etc. And what was punk about if NOT about that eradicating the sickness that is boring old farts going through the motions and calling it rock and roll?

There are unquestionably older artists who have something of value to say, and who are worth listening to. And there's always a role for granddad's top band from his youth, playing his old favorites.

Neither has anything to do with rock and roll though.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 12:17 AM on November 17, 2006


I still love pulling out "Dead Flowers" on one my encores though.
posted by sourwookie at 12:30 AM on November 17, 2006


Elvis, The Beatles & The Stones, The Sex Pistols, etc. The power has nothing to do with musical ability

OK, the Sex Pistols, yeah, and the early Stones, alright... but Elvis and the Beatles had musical ability aplenty. Do you mean lack of a musical education, perhaps?
posted by flapjax at midnite at 12:34 AM on November 17, 2006


No, I'm not saying anything about their musical ability. What I'm saying is that the thing that changed the world had more to do with the boundless energy and optimism of their youth than it does their musical ability.

Loads of people have mountains of musical ability. By and large, that's not what defines cultures and changes the world.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 1:23 AM on November 17, 2006


If they have to pay to get hot girls in the front row, they are no longer a living rock and roll band, they are a museum piece.

Why aren't they following Prince to sunny old-man-friendly Las Vegas? They could spend their free time gambling and drinking and indulging in activities dependent on Viagra and defibrillators, and play a couple of shows a week at some casino. Is there a rock and roll Branson? Or is Vegas becoming that?

Or maybe there should be a Stones theme park like Dollywood? They could have special deals every "Ruby" Tuesday at the Tumbling Dice Casino, Beast of Burden Ranch, Sticky Fingers Confectionary, Gimme Shelter Hotel, Hot Rocks Steam Baths, Some Girls Dance Revue, Tattoo You Body Art, etc.
posted by pracowity at 1:30 AM on November 17, 2006 [2 favorites]


I suspect the reason that age gets brought up with the stones is that they made a point of bringing it up when they were young. Turnabout and all that.
posted by srboisvert at 2:29 AM on November 17, 2006


I saw the Stones on their 'Bridges to Babylon' tour mainly because I wanted to be able to say I had seen them live before they start dying off.

It's been over 8 years since and the fuckers are still touring...

Good gig though.
posted by slimepuppy at 2:51 AM on November 17, 2006


The last "new" Stones song I liked was "Under Cover of the Night," and that's going on 25 years ago...? Sheesh.

"But when she was asked how she enjoyed the show, her eyes sparkled. “Did you see Keith give me the pelvic thrust?"

Sex over 60? Just pull over to the side of the road to finish.
posted by pax digita at 3:00 AM on November 17, 2006


I'll make the argument that the Stones are the worst rock band ever. The antithesis of Rock.

The Blues swept in to Britain, so they did the Blues. British Invasion takes over the world, they do Pop. They followed James Brown's live breakdown/robe/revival act by doing the exact same thing minutes later. With Psychedelia, they followed 'Sgt. Pepper's...' and 'Magical Mystery Tour' with 'Their Satanic Majesty's Request.' They miscalculated on Woodstock, so they hastily assembled a Golden Gate Park festival. Upon its last-minute rejection, they moved it to Altamont, hiring the Hell's Angels for security (the exact same chapter that famously beat down Berkeley's Telegraph Ave Vietnam War protesters only months before) with tragic consequences, 'finishing' the 60s.

'Brown Sugar' is hot slave rape. 'Some Girls:' 'Black girls just wanna get fucked all night.' Mick dates bovine Jerry Hall. Disco comes in, they do 'Undercover of the Night.' Mick records wimp-ass solo albums, Keith rightly nails him with 'You Don't Move Me.' They go back on tour and become the first Big Rock Band to get a corporate sponsor (Jovan, thanks alot). The first Gulf War breaks out, they respond with 'Highwire:' 'We sell 'em missiles, we sell 'em tanks...' Ed Bradley interviews Mick for '60 Minutes' and remarks how Mick often plays fey for the audience, causing him to protest. He puts on a leather skirt and hits the stage.

They're greed and P.R. driven, they're parasites, they refuse to take risks, have an appalling lack of political conscience given the past 40 years of world history,.....I could go on and on.

Their lasting gift to us: the primer for Madonna.
posted by toma at 3:43 AM on November 17, 2006 [5 favorites]


I hate when people say "Stones" instead of "The Rolling Stones."
posted by ColdChef at 4:14 AM on November 17, 2006


Yeah, it's kind of like saying "MeFi" all the time...what a bunch of posers.
posted by pax digita at 4:20 AM on November 17, 2006


I hate when people say "Stones" instead of "The Rolling Stones."

My god, man, the practice is so ubiquitous that you must be a raging inferno of endless hate!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 4:22 AM on November 17, 2006


I'll make the argument that the Stones are the worst rock band ever. The antithesis of Rock.

Still waiting for you to make that argument.
posted by bunglin jones at 4:27 AM on November 17, 2006


They're greed and P.R. driven, they're parasites, they refuse to take risks, have an appalling lack of political conscience given the past 40 years of world history....

I thought it was obvious. That's the opposite of Rock.
posted by toma at 4:34 AM on November 17, 2006


I hate it when people capitalize the word "rock" ;)
posted by flapjax at midnite at 4:37 AM on November 17, 2006


Is this something I'd need an LP record player to know about?
posted by bashos_frog at 4:47 AM on November 17, 2006


They're greed and P.R. driven, they're parasites, they refuse to take risks, have an appalling lack of political conscience given the past 40 years of world history....

I thought it was obvious. That's the opposite of Rock.


I don't think it's obvious. While I don't disagree with many of the points you've made about the band, I don' think "that" adds up to the opposite or rock (or Rock), and I've heard many, many, many rock bands that are a LOT worse than the Rolling Stones (and guilty of the same things you list), but I don't see any point in venturing into a "your favourite band doesn't rock (or Rock)" discussion.
posted by bunglin jones at 4:51 AM on November 17, 2006


bunglin, gotcha. But I am not making the 'your band doesn't rock' argument. I would prefer listening to them than many, and there are a couple of songs I like: 'Bitch,' and Richards' 'Before They Make Me Run.'

I'm just quickly depressed by their essential nature, their attitude. It's calculated, I can't take it. My favorite bands are different.


flapjax--ever seen the New York Times do an interview with Meatloaf? They refer to him as "Mr. Loaf."
posted by toma at 5:04 AM on November 17, 2006


flapjax--ever seen the New York Times do an interview with Meatloaf? They refer to him as "Mr. Loaf."

heh heh, yeah, that whole "Mr." thing the Times has to do, it's pretty funny.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 5:25 AM on November 17, 2006


Are any of their songs any good? Like as good as Bowie or anything?
posted by snoktruix at 5:29 AM on November 17, 2006


Yes, some are good, maybe not good (smart, inventive) like Bowie's, but good rock. "Gimme Shelter," for one. If you don't like any Rolling Stones songs, you probably aren't very keen on rock and roll.
posted by pracowity at 6:42 AM on November 17, 2006


flapjax--ever seen the New York Times do an interview with Meatloaf? They refer to him as "Mr. Loaf."

That's probably because his name is Meat Loaf, not Meatloaf (except on the 1971 album Stoney & Meatloaf, on which many of Mr. Loaf's vocals were re-recorded by Edwin Starr, fact fans).
posted by jack_mo at 6:49 AM on November 17, 2006


on the 1971 album Stoney & Meatloaf, on which many of Mr. Loaf's vocals were re-recorded by Edwin Starr

No kidding? Crazy! I love Edwin Starr, RIP.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:54 AM on November 17, 2006


Yeah, funny thing about "gimmie shelter". Scorcese put it in three of this movies, Goodfellas, Casino, and The Departed.

They're greed and P.R. driven, they're parasites, they refuse to take risks, have an appalling lack of political conscience given the past 40 years of world history....

Random related anecdote: I once went to a restaurant owned by Dick Clark, and the walls were covered in rock memorabilia. One wall in particular featured old US work visas from the late 60's for british bands like the who, stones, etc.

On each of the 1969 visas for the Stones, they had to identify their jobs. Keith and the other members of the band identified themselves as "Musician". Mick identified himself as "Entertainer".

I think that pretty much sums it up.
posted by Pastabagel at 7:08 AM on November 17, 2006




It's funny how time and music play games with your head as you get older. I was never a fan of the Stones, but I am fond of a few of their songs. Even so, the band itself becomes a fetish of my own youth. Their sound echoes down the years and resonates here and there.

There is something different about music like this which was always on the radio, but one didn't buy it. Truth is, plenty of songs from the artists of my youth, that I disliked, now sound special, so long as they were heard a lot. I suppose it's just a nostalgia thing. But don't misunderestimate the allure of nostalgia.
posted by Goofyy at 7:41 AM on November 17, 2006


You know it doesnt surprise me that the Stones would work to get young people up front, but it does surprise me that Scorcese did it.
posted by poppo at 8:00 AM on November 17, 2006


If you don't like any Rolling Stones songs, you probably aren't very keen on rock and roll.

This I agree with 100%


Yeah, funny thing about "gimmie shelter". Scorcese put it in three of this movies, Goodfellas, Casino, and The Departed.


Well, firstly it's a great song, in my personal top 200 for sure. And it's highly appropriate to the themes (entropy, fear, paranoia, chaos) that Scorsese likes to explore.

On each of the 1969 visas for the Stones, they had to identify their jobs. Keith and the other members of the band identified themselves as "Musician". Mick identified himself as "Entertainer".

I think that pretty much sums it up.


Oh, pheh. The whole 'Keith=authentic badass and Mick=big phony poseur' is possibly one of the tiredest cliches in rock criticism history. They were one of the greatest partnerships in popular music history, mainly because of the tension and sparks created when their very different instincts collided.
posted by jonmc at 8:09 AM on November 17, 2006


For what it's worth, U2 did something similar on the last tour during one of the stops where they were filming the show for release as a DVD. The crew went down the line of fans waiting outside, selecting the young and the pretty women to fill the front row, while those who had been fans for decades-- some of whom had been travelling to follow the tour, ran fansites, and so on-- were left to fill the rest of the hall.
posted by jokeefe at 8:14 AM on November 17, 2006


The crew went down the line of fans waiting outside, selecting the young and the pretty women to fill the front row

jokeefe, this may sound horrible, but let's face it: pretty women worshiping you is part of the rock and roll dream or at the very least one of the fringe benefits, so it isn't such a bad thing that the DVD would reflect that. Somebody's gotta live the dream, so to speak.
posted by jonmc at 8:21 AM on November 17, 2006


It's about time that pretty women got a break.
posted by found missing at 8:21 AM on November 17, 2006


Somebody's gotta live the dream, so to speak.

Somebody?
posted by cenoxo at 8:39 AM on November 17, 2006


That's pretty much SOP for most concert movies/videos, isn't it?

When they made the video for Run-DMC's cover of Walk This Way, the producers infamously filled the front row with white people, because they didn't think they'd get on MTV if the audience looked "too black", if memory serves.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:48 AM on November 17, 2006


I hate it when people always bring up an audience member stabbing another audience member to death as evidence that the band playing onstage at that time is/was dangerous.
posted by stinkycheese at 8:49 AM on November 17, 2006


When they made the video for Run-DMC's cover of Walk This Way, the producers infamously filled the front row with white people, because they didn't think they'd get on MTV if the audience looked "too black", if memory serves.

Well, IIRC, the whole theme of premise of the video was that Perry & Tyler and Run-DMC were in adjoining rehearsal halls, then on the chorus, Tyler busts his head through the wall and they start performing together dragging their respective audiences with them, so there's a positive racial subtext to the video.

That seems to be a recurring theme with Run-DMC. I remember 'Rock Box' showing a pint-sized white kid sneaking out to hear them at a show. The fact that they also included loud guitars in their songs seems to back up the idea that they were explicitly in the cultural miscegenation tradition by declaring to be rock and roll and inviting it's audience along for the ride. I remeber wishing I was that little white kid.
posted by jonmc at 9:00 AM on November 17, 2006


They're greed and P.R. driven, they're parasites, they refuse to take risks, have an appalling lack of political conscience given the past 40 years of world history,.....I could go on and on.

Oh yeah, the Stones are pure, incandescent evil, whereas all of those other principled and integrity-laden risk-taking rock bands are .....

Wait a minute, what principled and integrity-laden risk-taking rock bands?

I could go on and on.
posted by blucevalo at 9:05 AM on November 17, 2006


I think the pretty girls got fed up with the 'worship the rock gods' roll and just started their own bands.

Like many, I'm ambivalent - they had some great songs way back when but are now an amusement park version of themselves. That rider for the audience was hilarious and pathetic at the same time ("you're not attending a show, you're working"; "they need your energy to play a really amazing show"). Sad that their DVD would be recording this for prosperity, but maybe Marty's unconsciously doing them a service showing them for what they've turned into, for prosperity. (props to Tomas for a great analysis up there).

It's not about age - hell, I'm completely stoked the Meat Puppets are reforming, and the brothers Kirkwood are getting up there age wise. Doesn't matter - it's about being an authentic artist and performer. When you're playing a rock star instead of being one - need I finish the sentence?
posted by rmm at 9:06 AM on November 17, 2006


I read where the Stones are pleased to have been invited to the White House on the tour. It will be there first visit there since the Truman administration.
posted by wsg at 9:17 AM on November 17, 2006


...their first visit...
posted by wsg at 9:18 AM on November 17, 2006


(props to Tomas for a great analysis up there).

Eh. The Stones never claimed to be pillars of virtue. And musically they're still light-years ahead of most bands trotted out as examples of 'integrity.'

(as an addendum to my geeky Run-DMC digression above: Run-DMC was in exactly the right position to make the bridge between rap and hard rock explicit. They (along with Run's brother Russell Simmons) were from Hollis, a fairly quiet middle-class black neighborhood in outer Queens, so they're lives weren't that divorced from those of the metal kids they were extending an invitation to.)

/end music geek digression
posted by jonmc at 9:22 AM on November 17, 2006


Hey! You! Get off of my lawn!
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 9:26 AM on November 17, 2006


When I was a teen backpacking around Europe, I'd stopped in Amsterdam. (Well, duh.) Before I'd even looked up my family there, I headed to a coffee shop because I was bound and determined to try hash.

So, in this dark and smoky place, I ordered a coffee and a cube of hash. Then I stared at the hash...because I had absolutely no idea what I was supposed to do next. I stared at it, it stared at me, and various people around me no doubt giggled at the silly American.

A growling voice came from down the bar and said "Do you have a cigarette?" And I said yes, and handed one down. The guy moved over a seat, and proceeded to show me how to roll a hash and tobacco joint. I passed him my lighter, and as he lit up, I got a good look at him and realized it was Keith Richards.

We sat there and smoked my hash and talked and had coffee with strange yellow cream in. It wasn't until I was leaving that I did the fan girl thing and asked him to sign the hash menu for me. He laughed and gave me backstage passes to a show.

And that's how I got stoned with a Stone.
posted by dejah420 at 9:47 AM on November 17, 2006 [2 favorites]


Keith Richards gives up drugs? But I thought their cumulative effect was the only thing keeping him alive...
posted by cenoxo at 10:24 AM on November 17, 2006


YES dejah420,

See. That's what I wanna hear. I go to great pains to give you guys good stories. And what do I get back? Nothing!
Dejah delivered!

So this is for Dejah:

I was never a huge Rolling Stones fan. I recognized why they were important to rock and had the obligatory first five albums. I like where the Stones "lead" me. To punk.

When I was going to high school in the seventies there were four main distinct camps. Beatles fans - pop groups. Zeppelin fans - hard rockers. Eagles fans - American "country" and straight rock. Bee Gees fans - disco.

I hung with the Zeppelin fans as they had the best dope. But I did sports with the Eagles fans. However. If one wanted to get laid one had to hang out with the Beatles fans as they were all the cute girls. This, of course, was a ruse . The Beatles' chicks were unattainable. They were the chicks who went to bible camp. BUT you attracted the attention of the Disco fans... and those chicks put out. But as a Zeplin fan-in-good-standing one had to be careful being seen trying to hump a Disco fan. So you used Beatles fans as camouflage since there was overlap.

There was this one fringe group. The most mysterious. And where the Stones fit in. The Rebel Brains. They did Drama club and shit like that. They listened to the Stones. Since they listened to the Stones they also listened to Roxy Music, New York Dolls, Velvet Underground, Iggy, all that Proto-Punk stuff. I secretly was a member of this group. Pretty much everybody hated this group except begrudging respect from the Zeppelin fans. For some reason they embraced being outsiders when everybody else wanted to "belong." This intrigued me. So after hours this is where I hung out.

I dated a gril from the Rebel Brain clique. A girl who dressed like Mick Jagger - with the shaggy Jagger hair haircut and all. She was WAAAY into the Stones. And she did things sexually that no other girl had ever done. I associate this with influence from the Stones. And to this day I thank Mick Jagger for the skills imparted to me through her.

So. She gave me a mix cassette tape once. It , of course, was Rolling Stones but also a bunch of Punk... like Black Flag, Ramones, Stooges, etc on it. I was drunk at a party thrown by the wrestling team. I commandeered the stereo and put this Stones mix tape in. After a few songs all hell broke loose. One of the jocks came up to me called me a faggot and told me to turn that shit off and play REO Speedwaggon. I told him to fuck off. We got in a fight. I lost.

As I was on the porch staunching the blood from my nose two big wrestlers came out. Uh oh.

"Hey man. What was that shit?"

Oh, no, I thought. "The Stones?"

"No the other shit. It was fucking AWESOME!" They said all happy AND mock-angry and amped up like only wrestlers and 10 year old boys are.

And so the infection of punk began.
posted by tkchrist at 10:44 AM on November 17, 2006 [2 favorites]


They're greed and P.R. driven, they're parasites, they refuse to take risks, have an appalling lack of political conscience given the past 40 years of world history,.....I could go on and on.

Everything you say is absolutely true, but it ignores this fact:

In Let it Bleed, Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main Street, you have three of the most perfect examples of the genre. None of it was particularly original or world shattering -- it was just better than everything else around at that time that was passing for rock and roll.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 11:02 AM on November 17, 2006


Of course, the Stones were a mediocre live act even back in the 60s, when the Who blew them off the stage on their "rock and roll circus"

Not true, I'm afraid.

I saw them both, in 1971 within a couple of weeks of each other. The Who at Liverpool University's Students Union -- a venue that held around 1000, and the Stones at the Liverpool Empire -- a venue that held around 1500.

Until that point, I'd always preferred The Who. Preferred their songs, preferred their records. Didn't really get the Stones at all.

And then I saw them live.

Between 1970 and 1980, I saw pretty well everyone -- and saw them all in relatively small halls. Saw the Velvets (albeit the Doug Yule line up). Saw Zeppelin twice, again, at Liverpool University, and at the Liverpool Stadium. Saw the Clash and the Sex Pistols, both at Erics on their first tours.

But of *everyone* I ever saw, nobody rocked like the Stones did that night at Liverpool Empire.

Nobody even came close.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 11:12 AM on November 17, 2006



They could have special deals every "Ruby" Tuesday at the Tumbling Dice Casino, Beast of Burden Ranch, Sticky Fingers Confectionary, Gimme Shelter Hotel, Hot Rocks Steam Baths, Some Girls Dance Revue, Tattoo You Body Art, etc.

-Pacowity

Awesome.
posted by mmrtnt at 3:51 PM on November 17, 2006


what principled and integrity-laden risk-taking rock bands

The Minutemen and Unwound to start.
posted by freshwater_pr0n at 8:38 PM on November 17, 2006


How about good ol' Elvis Costello?
posted by toma at 9:08 PM on November 17, 2006


I like all three of those bands, but get over the naive adolescent idea that 'integrity'=musical quality. None of them are even in the same solar system as the stones and they'd be the first to admit it.
posted by jonmc at 9:37 PM on November 17, 2006


NTM, are we talking about the Elvis Costello who referred to Ray Charles as a 'blind, ignorant nigger'? Yeah, he just reeks of integrity...

(I still love his first three albums, but you see where I'm going here, mr. righteousness...)
posted by jonmc at 9:43 PM on November 17, 2006


Please, jonmc. Yes, Elvis was way out of line when he said that about Ray. The link you provided also says that Ray himself forgave Costello when he said: "Drunken talk isn't meant to be printed in the paper." It was a drunken scene that spiralled out of control. If I'm not mistaken Bonnie Bramlett gave Elvis a black eye that night, and rightfully so. Must Elvis be the Jane Fonda of the music world because of an unfortunate and regrettable episode that all concerned parties have moved beyond?
posted by wsg at 11:57 PM on November 17, 2006


Agreed. But my point is he's kind of an odd choice for 'Integrity Man.'
posted by jonmc at 6:22 AM on November 18, 2006


Elvis Costello is now a fat, aging narcissist who's lost his youthful fire. Wasn't he in a Spice Girls movie a few years ago? Right before he left his wife for Diana Krall?
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:55 PM on November 18, 2006


« Older Butt Out   |   Want another ID? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post