NY Observer: 'Beyond the Life of Brian: The Myth of the ‘Lesser’ Beach Boys'

[drbeachboy]

I'd offer the opinion of some fans who thought it was a little odd that when asked directly this spring what Mike thought of Brian's new single The Right Time, he said he hadn't heard it but hoped there wasn't Autotune on it. Knowing Brian his whole life, being a blood relative no less, and also knowing that Brian genuinely cares about reactions to his music and what people think of his songs (and that he likes to make people happy through his music, put smiles on their faces, etc) that Mike could have spared three minutes of his day and listened to the song instead of giving it the brush-off publicly and inserting what some would read as a passive-aggressive dig into the comment on top of that. It was so simple, and basic courtesy between musicians and family: Take a listen to your cousin's new single, if it didn't appeal to him just say "I heard the song and I'm happy to hear my cousin making new music, I wish him the best" or anything along those lines. That's something you might say publicly if you were concerned about not hurting feelings. Instead, we have what looks like Mike not bothering to take 3 minutes to listen to the song but still taking a chance to get in a dig inserted into a public interview.

Or maybe my perspective is just royally f***ed up at this point.  

It's a lose-lose situation. If he said he heard it and then offered some criticism, he would have gotten backslashed just the same. Likewise for the movie; if he said "I saw it, here's my review" he'd get destroyed anyway.

What about the words guitarfool suggested?  "I heard the song and I'm happy to hear my cousin making new music, I wish him the best." He could easily have commented on Love and Mercy without saying anything controversial too had he seen it. He could have said something like "Cusack and Dano were very convincing' or "It brought back some painful memories  but I hope it does well. Some excellent acting.." It's easy to word these things diplomatically if you want to.  He could easily have said "I've only seen it once - I really need to see it again to take it all on board" as well which would have given him a let-out clause if he later decided there was soemthing to which he should have taken exception.

So maybe you should be Mike's spokesperson, putting words in his mouth? Seriously.  Telling him what he should say?  

This film was not easy to watch.  And might be even more so for a family member...and you are going to give him an "escape clause?"  

Why is it not possible for this person to make a statement that is not twisted and modified to align with your position. You don't like him.  Say that.  It is just easier.  

Of course I'm not telling Mike what he should say. I'm suggesting what he could say if he wished to be polite to his cousin. I'm not even suggesting it to him - I'm suggesting it to a group of fans who are trying to defend Mike's reticence about his cousin's recent album and the film Love and Mercy. Mike's words about NPP have been described as mean spirited. I'd go along with that.

Ang, there is nothing to defend one way or the other. Just like you and I, Mike can watch and listen to what he wants, when he wants. He doesn't need to defend his actions/inactions to anyone, including, you, me and Brian.

[HeyJude]

Little review here...there was a huge backlash over the C50 concert Autotune CD, which was widely considered inferior compared to the amateur YouTube videos taken during C50.  And an inference of "backhanded" appears to be more of a projection of those who have no use for the touring band and who continue to dysfunctionally remain stuck in the three year old mire of the expiration of C50. I have never heard a bad word uttered about Brian by Mike since 1967.  Why should he start now? It would be inconsistent. 

Nah, I think Mike’s comment about “The Right Time” was a backhanded compliment because of the content of Mike’s comment. I don’t think anyone has brought Mike’s touring band into that particular discussion. His touring band has nothing to do with his comments about a Brian single.

As for having “never heard a bad word uttered about Brian by Mike since 1967”, I’ll let others if they so choose produce a myriad of quotes that, unless one has a very loose definition of a “bad word”, would indicate that pretty much all of the guys in the band have offered a “bad word” about each other at some point over the years, post-1967 (and does the comment above then suggest Mike *was* offering bad words about Brian pre-1967?). I was just reading a 1979 Bruce interview where he talks about how awful he thinks Mike’s “Brian’s Back” song is. Al has referred to Mike’s band as “imposters.” Dennis has that quote about the MIU Album f***ing up Mike’s karma. Brian has downplayed the original BB band in relation to praising his own band in past years. Mike has made negative references to Brian being “medicated” (in just the last few years). Carl, well, I suppose I’d have to think a while longer on that one. He usually stayed above the fray. Even Dave mentioned in his book with Stebbins that Bruce was kind of weirding him out at various points.

Point is, it’s beyond hyperbolic to suggest Mike has never said a bad word about Brian. And that’s okay, as a general rule that is. Nobody is not allowed to have a bad word about someone at some point. Sometimes it’s deserved, and/or constructive. And sometimes not deserved, or justified.

Hyperbole is not necessary. Having seen them well over 100 times, in whatever lineup, since 1967, that is my experience. I'm speaking about the public forum of a concert.  I don't mean interviews, or other "armchair" analysis.

I think that’s the problem. Nobody here has been talking about solely (or at all for that matter) Mike’s commentary about Brian *during* a concert. This has been, for pages now, a discussion about interviews.

In my opinion, pointing out that Mike doesn’t say negative things about Brian only during his concerts is kind of setting a weird, low, arbitrary bar. And, again, it has nothing to do with the conversation at hand. It’s not much more germane to the topic at hand (which is what Mike says *in interviews*) than pointing out that Mike loves kittens.  

[filledeplage]

I'd offer the opinion of some fans who thought it was a little odd that when asked directly this spring what Mike thought of Brian's new single The Right Time, he said he hadn't heard it but hoped there wasn't Autotune on it. Knowing Brian his whole life, being a blood relative no less, and also knowing that Brian genuinely cares about reactions to his music and what people think of his songs (and that he likes to make people happy through his music, put smiles on their faces, etc) that Mike could have spared three minutes of his day and listened to the song instead of giving it the brush-off publicly and inserting what some would read as a passive-aggressive dig into the comment on top of that. It was so simple, and basic courtesy between musicians and family: Take a listen to your cousin's new single, if it didn't appeal to him just say "I heard the song and I'm happy to hear my cousin making new music, I wish him the best" or anything along those lines. That's something you might say publicly if you were concerned about not hurting feelings. Instead, we have what looks like Mike not bothering to take 3 minutes to listen to the song but still taking a chance to get in a dig inserted into a public interview.

Or maybe my perspective is just royally f***ed up at this point.  

It's a lose-lose situation. If he said he heard it and then offered some criticism, he would have gotten backslashed just the same. Likewise for the movie; if he said "I saw it, here's my review" he'd get destroyed anyway.

What about the words guitarfool suggested?  "I heard the song and I'm happy to hear my cousin making new music, I wish him the best." He could easily have commented on Love and Mercy without saying anything controversial too had he seen it. He could have said something like "Cusack and Dano were very convincing' or "It brought back some painful memories  but I hope it does well. Some excellent acting.." It's easy to word these things diplomatically if you want to.  He could easily have said "I've only seen it once - I really need to see it again to take it all on board" as well which would have given him a let-out clause if he later decided there was soemthing to which he should have taken exception.

So maybe you should be Mike's spokesperson, putting words in his mouth? Seriously.  Telling him what he should say?  

This film was not easy to watch.  And might be even more so for a family member...and you are going to give him an "escape clause?"  

Why is it not possible for this person to make a statement that is not twisted and modified to align with your position. You don't like him.  Say that.  It is just easier. 

Of course I'm not telling Mike what he should say. I'm suggesting what he could say if he wished to be polite to his cousin. I'm not even suggesting it to him - I'm suggesting it to a group of fans who are trying to defend Mike's reticence about his cousin's recent album and the film Love and Mercy. Mike's words about NPP have been described as mean spirited. I'd go along with that.

Can you imagine a family member's pain finding out that a court-entrusted "professional" has violated a code of ethics? Or, even if he wasn't a family member, but a band member, finding out that a person has been held against his will, notwithstanding the court order in effect at the time?  

It is no less outrageous that  the pedophile scandal in the churches, etc. with a trusted professional who exploits those entrusted to them.  Or being banned from seeing Brian without being on the "approved list?" I saw a Brian on a "Landy cameo." That was the first time ever.  

This film is a lot to digest.  Why isn't he permitted to do that privately?

Does it occur to you that there are some who would like to see every one treated on his own merits, and not within some band-centered position? And refuse to be assigned a team?

[SMiLE Brian]

The refusal to see or hear any of BW's new projects could have an insidious factor as well. Mike thinks he is BW's equal and therefore makes their projects "great". However without Mike on board, he thinks these projects suck and are not worth his time.


Examples: Pet sounds, SMiLE, all BW solo albums, and movie.

[Ang Jones]

If Mike is concerned about seeing Love and Mercy because of how upsetting it might be to him, surely he could say so to any interviewers asking the question. He doesn't even need to go into detail, just make it clear that he feels it is a private matter on which he doesn't wish to comment.

But I repeat, if Mike is so sensitive on his cousin's behalf, why doesn't he show this level of sensitivity in his interviews?

[filledeplage]

Little review here...there was a huge backlash over the C50 concert Autotune CD, which was widely considered inferior compared to the amateur YouTube videos taken during C50.  And an inference of "backhanded" appears to be more of a projection of those who have no use for the touring band and who continue to dysfunctionally remain stuck in the three year old mire of the expiration of C50. I have never heard a bad word uttered about Brian by Mike since 1967.  Why should he start now? It would be inconsistent. 

Nah, I think Mike’s comment about “The Right Time” was a backhanded compliment because of the content of Mike’s comment. I don’t think anyone has brought Mike’s touring band into that particular discussion. His touring band has nothing to do with his comments about a Brian single.

As for having “never heard a bad word uttered about Brian by Mike since 1967”, I’ll let others if they so choose produce a myriad of quotes that, unless one has a very loose definition of a “bad word”, would indicate that pretty much all of the guys in the band have offered a “bad word” about each other at some point over the years, post-1967 (and does the comment above then suggest Mike *was* offering bad words about Brian pre-1967?). I was just reading a 1979 Bruce interview where he talks about how awful he thinks Mike’s “Brian’s Back” song is. Al has referred to Mike’s band as “imposters.” Dennis has that quote about the MIU Album f***ing up Mike’s karma. Brian has downplayed the original BB band in relation to praising his own band in past years. Mike has made negative references to Brian being “medicated” (in just the last few years). Carl, well, I suppose I’d have to think a while longer on that one. He usually stayed above the fray. Even Dave mentioned in his book with Stebbins that Bruce was kind of weirding him out at various points.

Point is, it’s beyond hyperbolic to suggest Mike has never said a bad word about Brian. And that’s okay, as a general rule that is. Nobody is not allowed to have a bad word about someone at some point. Sometimes it’s deserved, and/or constructive. And sometimes not deserved, or justified.

Hyperbole is not necessary. Having seen them well over 100 times, in whatever lineup, since 1967, that is my experience. I'm speaking about the public forum of a concert.  I don't mean interviews, or other "armchair" analysis.

I think that’s the problem. Nobody here has been talking about solely (or at all for that matter) Mike’s commentary about Brian *during* a concert. This has been, for pages now, a discussion about interviews.

In my opinion, pointing out that Mike doesn’t say negative things about Brian only during his concerts is kind of setting a weird, low, arbitrary bar. And, again, it has nothing to do with the conversation at hand. It’s not much more germane to the topic at hand (which is what Mike says *in interviews*) than pointing out that Mike loves kittens.  

And I'm thinking the problem could be such that, absent seeing The Touring Band and what is said publicly, that Mike's sincerity is being challenged.  

Mike had the crappy job in 1997, of telling the audience that Carl had cancer, standing feet from him, with a voice that cracked.  Did anyone else do that job?  So do I find him credible? Ya.  I've watched the journey, as a lowly fan.  

But not unlike every group dynamic, there are bound to be disagreements. Especially in a family context.  Or a close business relationship when you're confined for extended amounts of time.

But, I don't doubt for a second that there isn't a close bond between and among them, which should be respected by outsiders, such as fans, and not held up to such scrutiny and judgment.

[filledeplage]

The refusal to see or hear any of BW's new projects could have an insidious factor as well. Mike thinks he is BW's equal and therefore makes their projects "great". However without Mike on board, he thinks these projects suck and are not worth his time.


Examples: Pet sounds, SMiLE, all BW solo albums, and movie.

How do you know what anyone thinks? We can only know what we think as individuals.

[filledeplage]

If Mike is concerned about seeing Love and Mercy because of how upsetting it might be to him, surely he could say so to any interviewers asking the question. He doesn't even need to go into detail, just make it clear that he feels it is a private matter on which he doesn't wish to comment.

But I repeat, if Mike is so sensitive on his cousin's behalf, why doesn't he show this level of sensitivity in his interviews?

Why do you think anyone is owed an explanation?

[sea of tunes]

I'm not sure if it has been mentioned...and I'm not ripping Mike or Bruce or anything but I'm certain that BD or DVD screeners do get sent to critics.  And surely if Mike or Bruce, or an assistant, asked for a screener of L&M they would be sent one.

[SMiLE Brian]

But they won't and that is the problem in a nutshell.

[Ang Jones]

If Mike is concerned about seeing Love and Mercy because of how upsetting it might be to him, surely he could say so to any interviewers asking the question. He doesn't even need to go into detail, just make it clear that he feels it is a private matter on which he doesn't wish to comment.

But I repeat, if Mike is so sensitive on his cousin's behalf, why doesn't he show this level of sensitivity in his interviews?

Why do you think anyone is owed an explanation?

Telling people it is a private matter on which he doesn't wish to comment is hardly an explanation.

The second part of my message doesn't require an explanation either but without one we can all draw our own conclusions about Mike's level of sensitivity on the subject of his cousin.

[SMiLE Brian]

If he is willing to spill so much bile to interviewers, imagine what he says in private.

[sea of tunes]

But they won't and that is the problem in a nutshell.

I hear you, I guess I just don't care about this as much as others do, apparently.  Whatever animus exists, if any, is between those guys.

That's not to say that I'm not above chuckling at Mike-isms.  He does come across as a domineering a-hole, but, conversely,  I also don't think it's okay to infantilize Brian, as some do. 

At the end of the day, I'm a Brian Wilson guy through and through, but I try not to like "care" about the inner politics.  I'm amused by it and think it can be very comical at times, but never entirely in a "tragic" sense.  Not anymore.  In 1966-1967, yes, "tragic".  In 2015, just amusing.

[Mike's Beard]

Maybe Mike has heard NPP and seen L&M and just thought they sucked and is avoiding hurting Brian's feelings by pretending he hasn't?

[sea of tunes]

Maybe Mike has heard NPP and seen L&M and just thought they sucked and is avoiding hurting Brian's feelings by pretending he hasn't?

That's very possible.  If you can't say anything nice...don't say anything at all right?

[SMiLE Brian]

Yeah, but would Mike want the world to know it sucked. This is a guy that told the world in the 1992 issue of goldmine that BW88 wasn't good in harsh words ? 

[SenorPotatoHead]

Why doesn't Mike just make his own movie?  
He could call it Love and Mersey - and use his time in India with the Beatles as the touchstone point for
flashbacks and flash forwards to tell his own version of things......ya, that'd be great.    

[filledeplage]

If Mike is concerned about seeing Love and Mercy because of how upsetting it might be to him, surely he could say so to any interviewers asking the question. He doesn't even need to go into detail, just make it clear that he feels it is a private matter on which he doesn't wish to comment.

But I repeat, if Mike is so sensitive on his cousin's behalf, why doesn't he show this level of sensitivity in his interviews?

Why do you think anyone is owed an explanation?

Telling people it is a private matter on which he doesn't wish to comment is hardly an explanation.

The second part of my message doesn't require an explanation either but without one we can all draw our own conclusions about Mike's level of sensitivity on the subject of his cousin.

First - they are family. Family in business. They share a parent who is a sibling to one another. Family bonds confer privacy.


Second - it isn't "sensitivity" as much as "sincerity" which is ascribing a connotation of falsehood.  So even if Mike wishes Brian well, you are calling him a liar.  I guess that is the problem.  You are questioning his motivation, as insincere rather than "sensitivity" which is an "awareness of the feeling of others."

[filledeplage]

Yeah, but would Mike want the world to know it sucked. This is a guy that told the world in the 1992 issue of goldmine that BW88 wasn't good in harsh words ?  

Smile Brian - I just happened to buy that CD last week. On sale, of course. $3.99.  Guess who is the fellow partner? The bad guy in the movie.  And it wasn't that long after I saw Brian for the first time, in the Landy cameo.  Seven of eleven were Landy credits.

And whatever copy I bought has "Dr. Eugene Landy as Executive Producer." Stamped in large print on the bottom of the CD. Letters and font larger than Brian Wilson.

And, I have no doubt the comments were written under duress..."Dr. Eugene Landy for saving my life and inspiring, overseeing and fighting for me and this entire album." Copyrighted 1988 Sire Records.  

So Mike's wrong? After seeing Love and Mercy?

[Andrew G. Doe]

I'm not sure if it has been mentioned...and I'm not ripping Mike or Bruce or anything but I'm certain that BD or DVD screeners do get sent to critics.  And surely if Mike or Bruce, or an assistant, asked for a screener of L&M they would be sent one.

Just for arguments sake, suppose such a request was made, and met with no response ? What then ?

[sea of tunes]

I'm not sure if it has been mentioned...and I'm not ripping Mike or Bruce or anything but I'm certain that BD or DVD screeners do get sent to critics.  And surely if Mike or Bruce, or an assistant, asked for a screener of L&M they would be sent one.

Just for arguments sake, suppose such a request was made, and met with no response ? What then ?

Only guessing, perhaps not wanting to throw a whole media relations division (of Lionsgate/Roadside Attractions) under the bus, they (M&B) would probably say nothing; or something like what they have already said. 

[Jim V.]

Yeah, but would Mike want the world to know it sucked. This is a guy that told the world in the 1992 issue of goldmine that BW88 wasn't good in harsh words ?  

Smile Brian - I just happened to buy that CD last week. On sale, of course. $3.99.  Guess who is the fellow partner? The bad guy in the movie.  And it wasn't that long after I saw Brian for the first time, in the Landy cameo.  Seven of eleven were Landy credits.

And whatever copy I bought has "Dr. Eugene Landy as Executive Producer." Stamped in large print on the bottom of the CD. Letters and font larger than Brian Wilson.

And, I have no doubt the comments were written under duress..."Dr. Eugene Landy for saving my life and inspiring, overseeing and fighting for me and this entire album." Copyrighted 1988 Sire Records.  

So Mike's wrong? After seeing Love and Mercy?

Ah right. So the song "Love And Mercy" is worthless and horrible too, because Gene Landy was around when it was done. I see that it's okay to trash that album to you.

So "Let It Shine", "Meet Me In My Dreams Tonight", "Rio Grande", all trash to you.

[drbeachboy]

Yeah, but would Mike want the world to know it sucked. This is a guy that told the world in the 1992 issue of goldmine that BW88 wasn't good in harsh words ? 

Smile Brian - I just happened to buy that CD last week. On sale, of course. $3.99.  Guess who is the fellow partner? The bad guy in the movie.  And it wasn't that long after I saw Brian for the first time, in the Landy cameo.  Seven of eleven were Landy credits.

And whatever copy I bought has "Dr. Eugene Landy as Executive Producer." Stamped in large print on the bottom of the CD. Letters and font larger than Brian Wilson.

And, I have no doubt the comments were written under duress..."Dr. Eugene Landy for saving my life and inspiring, overseeing and fighting for me and this entire album." Copyrighted 1988 Sire Records. 

So Mike's wrong? After seeing Love and Mercy?

Ah right. So the song "Love And Mercy" is worthless and horrible too, because Gene Landy was around when it was done. I see that it's okay to trash that album to you.

So "Let It Shine", "Meet Me In My Dreams Tonight", "Rio Grande", all trash to you.

I don't know about that. The songs themselves are pretty damn good. The production and Brian's lead vocals on most of the tracks are what kill it for me. I found his voice a bit grating from BW through Orange Crate Art. Then begins the big difference starting with Imagination.

[filledeplage]

Yeah, but would Mike want the world to know it sucked. This is a guy that told the world in the 1992 issue of goldmine that BW88 wasn't good in harsh words ?  

Smile Brian - I just happened to buy that CD last week. On sale, of course. $3.99.  Guess who is the fellow partner? The bad guy in the movie.  And it wasn't that long after I saw Brian for the first time, in the Landy cameo.  Seven of eleven were Landy credits.

And whatever copy I bought has "Dr. Eugene Landy as Executive Producer." Stamped in large print on the bottom of the CD. Letters and font larger than Brian Wilson.

And, I have no doubt the comments were written under duress..."Dr. Eugene Landy for saving my life and inspiring, overseeing and fighting for me and this entire album." Copyrighted 1988 Sire Records.  

So Mike's wrong? After seeing Love and Mercy?

Ah right. So the song "Love And Mercy" is worthless and horrible too, because Gene Landy was around when it was done. I see that it's okay to trash that album to you.

So "Let It Shine", "Meet Me In My Dreams Tonight", "Rio Grande", all trash to you.

Of course it isn't about the music!

Why would I buy it?

It is about the EXECUTIVE PRODUCER!

And I've always felt that L & M would be a great show closer for a potential reunion. 

[filledeplage]

 

Double post! Mea culpa...