Official thread for Brian & Al's Official Response to Mike/Bruce Band Tour in the LA Times

[ontor pertawst]

BTW, why did you move all the way across country to be closer to the Beach Boys?  I never moved anywhere to be near them.

Don't be silly. I moved here because of work and since I lived here for a spell in 2001-2 and daydreamed of coming back ever since. Plus, I make films and there's something called the film industry here. That was really sweet of you to say, tho. Thanks!

Also I have a shrine to Al Jardine in my hall closet, so can you imagine my face when I discovered he doesn't actually live here? I am a crap stalker. I'll have to stick to calling him incessantly and hanging up after whispering the words "Loop de loop flip flop."

Wow, page 17. It's about time for a disgruntled band member to gripe to a webzine or something to add more fuel.

[filledeplage]

I don't think most unrepentant Mike supporters WANT the Mike/Bruce show to come to their town! You don't have to hate Mike with a passion in order to scratch your head at his seeming determination to keep the economy class "Beach Boys" rolling......

In fact no one HAS to hate Mike with a passion either..... It's so easy to just love the Beach Boys warts n all.

Erik - "unrepentant" would be me in the late 60's and 70's when they fell out of popular favor. A Beach Boys fan.  

And, I'm greedy; I'll go see them all.  It is not economy class.  Bigger is not necessarily better.  They need to find their formula tha works.  Pun intended.  

Keep finding myself agreeing with your posts - a little cool-headed appreciation of the music in a morass of mud-slinging!

Thanks, and I like your quote about "drifting a bit, before you set your sails." Words of wisdom.

It is so frustrating to finally see all this love and appreciation for this amazing music to become "factionalized" and lose sight of the amazing forest of music we have. 

We sure could have used that kind of support in those lean years. 

Thanks again, for your kind words.   

[Mikie]

Geez. This is heartwarming. Can I have a kiss too?

[Shady]

I'd like one too

[bossaroo]

[filledeplage]

I'd like one too

 

[filledeplage]

Geez. This is heartwarming. Can I have a kiss too?

 

[Shady]

 

[Mikie]

Lay that "3" down sideways and whatia got? 

[Mikie]

Geez. This is heartwarming. Can I have a kiss too?

 

Hey, no kissing on the lips!

Thanks a lot.   Now I don't feel like a third wheel anymore.....  

[HeyJude]

As for if the situation was reversed, I can't speak to anybody else's opinion (or the weird "blue board" straw man that keeps getting brought up), but I would be JUST as bummed if Brian was saying no to more reunion shows in the face of everybody else wanting to do it.

To quote Mr. Zimmerman, "I don't believe you."

Brian's been preventing Beach Boys' reunions for several years now, and all I've ever read was, "You go, guy...." There have been pages and pages and pages of threads explaining why Brian SHOULDN'T get back together with The Beach Boys or any band that includes Mike Love.

But, now people are saying that things have changed, that things are different now. Really? Things are different now? I have read a lot of posts lately that are saying differently, that things in The Beach Boys are still the SAME, same as always, that things WILL NEVER CHANGE. So, what is it? A diiferent Beach Boys or the same old Beach Boys?

Maybe somebody knows more about the real Brian Wilson than we do, but doesn't want to come out and say it. Might be construed as cruel. However, I do think things are different for Melinda now. She's always looking for ways to sustain Brian's "career"; she came out and said as much when she married him. Andy Paley, The Wondermints, Joe Thomas, Pet Sounds, SMiLE, Christmas music, Sweet Insanity, George Gershwin, Walt Disney, and Joe Thomas again. But, now, guess who came along? Who'd of thunk it? Boy, did that get Melinda's attention. And the light bulb goes on again!

Dunno how any of us would know wheter we should believe each other about much of anything here. Again, the scenario with Brian wouldn't have been the same (he would continue solo, not calling his band the BB's), but I most certainly would be bummed about anybody putting the breaks on this reunion. If all of them, or the majority of them, would have all come away saying they were done with it, it still would have been a bummer, but perhaps a bit easier to not get as bummed about.

I for one have never cheered Brian's shunning the other BB's or the idea of reuniting. The thing is, since Brian has been touring at least, these guys were never all on the same page. I used to recall, for instance, that say in something like 2003, Mike would give an interview and still get all romantic about the idea of working with Brian again, at least Mike's idea of what working with Brian again would be. But Mike would barely or never even mention Al. I recall interviews where he would be asked about a reunion, and he would specifically say that he wanted to work with Brian. I don't think Mike was ready for a full-blown reunion ten years ago either. Al was all disgruntled back then too, I don't think he would have gone for it.

The whole idea of these guys all being on the exact same page is pretty new, so it's that aspect of it that makes Mike the apparent bigger bad guy in this scenario. Brian being sour on the BB's in 1999 or something wasn't the one thing keeping an otherwise ready-to-go reunited BB's from going back out on the road. What Mike is doing now is much closer to that.

As far what has "changed", that is simple. We now KNOW that a reunited BB's can be awesome. We didn't have confirmation of that until April 2012. That's what changed.

[HeyJude]

Isn't there footage of Al in one of the Do It Again little vids saying "We've reunited for this one last time"?

Damn these guys are confusing.

Very true, it is confusing. That statement from Al is somewhat ambiguous. I am truly not trying to stretch the comments too much, but I think the idea was that this was the final time they would put it back together, but the length of the reunion was up in the air.

[HeyJude]

I don't understand why people keep overlooking the fact that Brian voted for Mike to get the naming rights in the first place.  He also gave public statements in support of Mike against Al when the lawsuits were going.  If Brian hadn't have done that, none of this would be happening now.  I don't blame Mike for wanting to keep touring with his own outfit, since Brian gave him permission to years ago.  If Brian had any thought of wanting to reunite, he either shouldn't have voted for Mike or at least he should have put an expiration date on that license so they could revisit the issue every few years.

I think this is really stretching it. How would Brian, in 1998 or 1999, know that in 2011 he would finally feel like reuniting?

That being said, yes, Brian definitely has to live with his decision to vote for Mike to have the license. I think Brian's reasoning for allowing Mike to have the license are pretty passive; he never wanted to use the name, so it was probably an easy decision for him to make.

Now, assuming Mike didn't somehow wrestle a unrevokable license, we will indeed find out if they want to examine Mike's license again and make any alternate decisions. I highly doubt it, again because especially once the reunion is clearly not salvageable, they will all go back to being relatively passive about it; resigned to it.

[HeyJude]

I think you guys are just plain giving Andrew too much credit. He is only arguing in defense of the Love/Johnston scheme because he's buddies with Bruce. There really isn't any rationale beyond that. Just like during a divorce, usually the husbands' friends agree with the husband, and the wives friends agree with the wife. That's why Andrew is so behind ending this thing. It's obvious.

Aside from insulting all those who agree with me off their own bat - which is all of them - if you truly believe what you've written then you're an even bigger fool than I've always assumed you are.  

BTW, I'm in complete agreement with the view that The Beach Boys (2012) are something better than Mike's, Brian's or Alan's bands. I just can't see a hypothetical BB (2013) sustaining, or even approaching, such heights.

I think some are feeling that, A) It's not out of the question that they could sustain such heights, and more importantly, B) Why does it have to reach or surprass 2012 to still be really good?

I also fail to see how Mike and Bruce going out under the same name is okay if the idea here is to go out on a high note. That can't happen when a 2/5 Beach Boys lineup resumes touring under the same name 48 hours after your ideal "high note" of the end of the tour.

[Nicko1234]

The whole idea of these guys all being on the exact same page is pretty new, so it's that aspect of it that makes Mike the apparent bigger bad guy in this scenario.

Sorry but if Mike doesn`t want to tour with the other guys then that in itself doesn`t make him a bad guy at all. Disappointing maybe but he has a right to not do things that he doesn`t want to do. For example, all of the Monty Python guys at one point agreed to a reunion but Michael Palin was the one who refused. That didn`t and doesn`t make him a bad guy.

Now because Mike wants to continue going out as `The Beach Boys` that does complicate the issue. But for you to suggest that the last 14 years is irrelevant is lunacy. It`s evident that all of the band members knew the score from the start. They would go out for one final time to celebrate the 50th anniversary (Al`s comment cannot seriously be interpreted in any other way) and then things would revert to normal. Everybody, and certainly the members of BRI, knew about the M&B gigs from the beginning. Now if Mike had thought that the reunion would put an end to his other touring forever then I don`t think there is any way he would have agreed to it and certainly not in the way that it was done. Compromise was made by both Brian`s and Mike`s people for this tour but 90% of it was by Mike`s. That was doubtless because it was seen as a one time only thing.

I think the biggest issue with the reunited BBs was always going to be personal stuff between the band members or their management. We now know that there are still issues there and we were lucky that they got through the tour without it becoming detrimental. If it were to end now then it wouldn`t be the worst thing.

[Nicko1234]

I also fail to see how Mike and Bruce going out under the same name is okay if the idea here is to go out on a high note. That can't happen when a 2/5 Beach Boys lineup resumes touring under the same name 48 hours after your ideal "high note" of the end of the tour.

I think because they go out under the radar it is a very different thing. Same name but different expectations.

[HeyJude]

The whole idea of these guys all being on the exact same page is pretty new, so it's that aspect of it that makes Mike the apparent bigger bad guy in this scenario.

Sorry but if Mike doesn`t want to tour with the other guys then that in itself doesn`t make him a bad guy at all. Disappointing maybe but he has a right to not do things that he doesn`t want to do. For example, all of the Monty Python guys at one point agreed to a reunion but Michael Palin was the one who refused. That didn`t and doesn`t make him a bad guy.

Now because Mike wants to continue going out as `The Beach Boys` that does complicate the issue. But for you to suggest that the last 14 years is irrelevant is lunacy. It`s evident that all of the band members knew the score from the start. They would go out for one final time to celebrate the 50th anniversary (Al`s comment cannot seriously be interpreted in any other way) and then things would revert to normal. Everybody, and certainly the members of BRI, knew about the M&B gigs from the beginning. Now if Mike had thought that the reunion would put an end to his other touring forever then I don`t think there is any way he would have agreed to it and certainly not in the way that it was done. Compromise was made by both Brian`s and Mike`s people for this tour but 90% of it was by Mike`s. That was doubtless because it was seen as a one time only thing.

I think the biggest issue with the reunited BBs was always going to be personal stuff between the band members or their management. We now know that there are still issues there and we were lucky that they got through the tour without it becoming detrimental. If it were to end now then it wouldn`t be the worst thing.

I guess we can just really parse things here. I mentioned the "apparent bad guy", because I know some people don't mind that he's stopping more reunion activities. If one is bummed about that, Mike is the "bad guy" in the most generic sense of the term, meaning he's the cause of what some people are unhappy about.

I also disagree about the band "knowing the score" from the outset. It seems pretty obvious that they didn't, at least not all of them. Why that is and how ridiculous that may be is a seperate discussion. But the fact that they added shows does indicate that the default plan for after the booked reunion shows was able to be changed.

The few semi-"insider" comments we've heard from Howie Edelson and Jon Stebbins suggest that they did not all "know the score." Can I go so far as to say that Brian and/or Al were being too optimistic about more reunion stuff, and Mike kind of stayed silent or vague about his plans even though he knew they would want to continue and he didn't? We don't have enough even circumstantial evidence to assert that theory I suppose, but clearly they were not all on the same page. For that, they are probably all to blame.

[HeyJude]

I also fail to see how Mike and Bruce going out under the same name is okay if the idea here is to go out on a high note. That can't happen when a 2/5 Beach Boys lineup resumes touring under the same name 48 hours after your ideal "high note" of the end of the tour.

I think because they go out under the radar it is a very different thing. Same name but different expectations.

This is definitely where it does indeed quickly devolve into the same debates fans had circa 1998/99. How much is using the BB name about the principle of it, how much is about the spirit of the music/group, and how much is about the functionality of it? Fans clearly differ on these and other similar points.

Going out with a different reunion lineup and calling it "The Beach Boys" clearly caused Mike a few hiccups in going back to using the name. That tells me the problem isn't just "perception" from fans or observers, but also a flaw in the logic that tells him using the same name isn't inherently just kind of odd.

But if we're trying to get this rosey end of the BB's story, stopping the reunion but continuing the Mike/Bruce show doesn't make sense to me. If some BB scholar writes a detailed book on the group 25 years from now, a rosey end for their story is not that they went out on a high note with the reunion band, but then Mike continued to use the name for x additional number of years with his "different" lineup that had "different" expectations. The hardcore fans know the deal with the various lineups, but most don't, and that usually is to Mike's benefit. Unfortunately, in light of the high successful reunion, that lack of knowledge is working against him just a bit a present. I doubt he's very concerned, though.

[musicismylife101]

The thing is, if you had a fuller band -- but operating at half the intensity of this summer's shows -- it would (to me) be twice as preferable as going back to the status quo.

You know, this will be quickly ridiculed in some quarters I know, but should M&B visit the Pacific NW I'm really considering picketing the show. I picketed a Browns game during the '87 NFL strike (in support of the striking players) and while I got lots of abuse from arriving fans I also received a lot of support from the NBC network union members.

A simple sign - "Tonight's show is bullsh*t. This is not the Beach Boys"

It appeals to my inner martyr. Might just do it.

I was wondering who would be the first to suggest that. If you could get sizable groups doing the picketing, think of the news stories!

Well, actions speak louder than words. I think if done right it might sway something, you never know...

[Aegir]

that'd be stupid. you're just ruining everyone else's good time. only a very small amount of people care who's on the stage.

[filledeplage]

I don't understand why people keep overlooking the fact that Brian voted for Mike to get the naming rights in the first place.  He also gave public statements in support of Mike against Al when the lawsuits were going.  If Brian hadn't have done that, none of this would be happening now.  I don't blame Mike for wanting to keep touring with his own outfit, since Brian gave him permission to years ago.  If Brian had any thought of wanting to reunite, he either shouldn't have voted for Mike or at least he should have put an expiration date on that license so they could revisit the issue every few years.

I think this is really stretching it. How would Brian, in 1998 or 1999, know that in 2011 he would finally feel like reuniting?

That being said, yes, Brian definitely has to live with his decision to vote for Mike to have the license. I think Brian's reasoning for allowing Mike to have the license are pretty passive; he never wanted to use the name, so it was probably an easy decision for him to make.

Now, assuming Mike didn't somehow wrestle a unrevokable license, we will indeed find out if they want to examine Mike's license again and make any alternate decisions. I highly doubt it, again because especially once the reunion is clearly not salvageable, they will all go back to being relatively passive about it; resigned to it.

You are on to something.  The issue of  "foreseeability."  To turn back the clock ten years or so, Brian had opportunities which were amazing, exciting and a new band to mold and mentor.  It was that proverbial fork in the road, we all face.  Maybe at this point, there is a sense of fulfillment with individual projects.  No one could foresee that he would outlive his siblings or that the demand for his touch on composition of a giant like Gershwin would fall his way. 

Fast forward...the Touring Band was still doing work in the prescribed "Beach Boys style."  Who could foresee the prospects of this C50?  It was luck or maybe destiny.  If I had a crystal ball, I might have laughed at my own future.  Strange things happen, as in that song.

If someone discussed a reunion in 1999 or so, there would likely have been laughs all around. No one can predict the future.  So, now, when the unlikely has happened. Everyone said, "Yes."  But, the whole concept, after each band took a different road for over a decade was not "foreseeable." 

First, the name wasn't coveted as much as now.  Not unlike Diana Ross, leaving The Supremes.  Did she go back? No.  She remained an individual artist. And, second, there was no "foreseeable" anticipation for a reunion where there is a "group" doing individual leads, and no theoretical "star" (nothwithstanding Brian's presence) - each gave one another a chance to shine.  The dynamic was different.  But, what became clear to the audiences was that Brian's heart never left home, and maybe he realized it too, at the Grammy show.  And, maybe Brian's journey was leading him back home, on some level, all this time, while he was working as a solo artist.  Brian defied those odds of going back to a group dynamic.  Unforeseeable.

The home where Mike kept the fires burning.  And Mike is the messenger here, being shot. 

There is a bridge here in all this fog, that they will likely find.  And cross.     

[Nicko1234]

But if we're trying to get this rosey end of the BB's story, stopping the reunion but continuing the Mike/Bruce show doesn't make sense to me. If some BB scholar writes a detailed book on the group 25 years from now, a rosey end for their story is not that they went out on a high note with the reunion band, but then Mike continued to use the name for x additional number of years with his "different" lineup that had "different" expectations. The hardcore fans know the deal with the various lineups, but most don't, and that usually is to Mike's benefit. Unfortunately, in light of the high successful reunion, that lack of knowledge is working against him just a bit a present. I doubt he's very concerned, though.

The truth is though that if a BB scholar writes a book about the band in 25 years time then all of M&B`s touring will be seen as largely unimportant. Just a footnote.

The only thing that could really damage the impact this reunion tour made would either be to do less successful work together in the future or if arguments between the band members were to overshadow it (which is what makes recent headlines so sad).

[Wirestone]

that'd be stupid. you're just ruining everyone else's good time. only a very small amount of people care who's on the stage.

If that's true, why was this summer's tour such a big deal?

Because of the people on the stage.

[Shady]

that'd be stupid. you're just ruining everyone else's good time. only a very small amount of people care who's on the stage.

That is the biggest myth when it comes to the beach boys.

People actually do care who's on stage.

[Awesoman]

I think you guys are just plain giving Andrew too much credit. He is only arguing in defense of the Love/Johnston scheme because he's buddies with Bruce. There really isn't any rationale beyond that. Just like during a divorce, usually the husbands' friends agree with the husband, and the wives friends agree with the wife. That's why Andrew is so behind ending this thing. It's obvious.

Aside from insulting all those who agree with me off their own bat - which is all of them - if you truly believe what you've written then you're an even bigger fool than I've always assumed you are.  

BTW, I'm in complete agreement with the view that The Beach Boys (2012) are something better than Mike's, Brian's or Alan's bands. I just can't see a hypothetical BB (2013) sustaining, or even approaching, such heights.

I agree that if the group gets back together next year that they won't receive nearly the amount of attention they did this year, but is that really a problem?  If the fans prefer the group stay together, and they can continue to perform well enough, that isn't a bad thing now is it?