Uncut’s “Ask Mike Love”
Pretty Funky:
Quote from: HeyJude on March 20, 2017, 07:20:24 AM
Quote from: Pablo. on March 18, 2017, 01:29:37 PM
Have you read Brian’s book?
Peter Sharply, Leeds
No, I haven’t. Do I intend to? I don’t think
so. I’d rather just sit and have a chat with
Brian and hang out, like we did in the old
days when we were writing together. I
haven’t seenLove&Mercy, either, but the
one thing I do know is that my character
in that film was portrayed as objecting to
some element of an instrument on “Good
Vibrations” – which is made up. I was 100
per cent positive about “Good Vibrations”.
I came up with the chorus and wrote all the
words. I was mischaracterised.
"I haven't seen the movie, but here's something I'm going to complain about anyway...."
If Mike had seen the movie, he'd know that in the film he doesn't complain about an "element of an instrument", he's complains rather about Brian's perfectionist nature in recording the instrument. Not only has Mike by his own words professed to find the studio a tedious enterprise, but also that moment in the film actually humanizes him more and it's a moment that the audience can identify with.
Mike should talk to a certain 'fact checker' on this one. ;)
CenturyDeprived:
Quote from: Peadar 'Big Dinner' O'Driscoll link=topic=24884.msg606497#msg606497
I bet he has watched it a few times. Would be shocked if he hadn't.
The reason why I agree with this statement is this: wouldn't Mike want to know if there's reason for him to sue for defamation of character in a major motion picture? I feel like he'd want to review the film just to make sure there's not some characterization in the film that he could somehow sue for. After all, weren't there all sorts of lawsuits/threats of lawsuits for portrayals in Brian's 1991 autobiography?
I can't imagine that Mike would just not even bother watching it out of curiosity to know if there's some sort of offensive characterization he could complain about, particularly given what happened years earlier. Or at minimum, perhaps he had his wife or lawyer watch it for him and report back to him.
The idea that someone (Mike) who is portrayed on film (in a project from the Brian "side", a side that apparently in the past caused legal action due to what was viewed as unfair/slanderous previous portrayals) would just "sit it out" and not even want to bother knowing - in full detail, which is only possible by planting his butt in a seat and watching - doesn't seem quite plausible to me. Maybe it's just me thinking that, though.
Dove Nested Towers:
Quote from: HeyJude on March 20, 2017, 07:15:05 AM
Quote from: Pablo. on March 18, 2017, 10:53:50 AM
Although my question about "Columnated ruins domino" wasn't included on "An audience with..." (I managed to ask a question to Ringo a couple of years back) the article is way much, much more interesting than your typical Mike Love interview.
Sample:
Few artists have been
bootlegged like The Beach
Boys. Are there plans to put out
any of theSunflower sessions,
or theLandlockedor the
Adult/Childrecordings?
ZoranTuckar,Zagreb,Croatia
I have fond memories of the things
we did onSunflower. But the company
that owns our masters, they’re always
looking for ways to put out editions, so
who knows? Sure, any well-known group
had a core of people absorbed in knowing
everything about everything. The people
into the archival things, they know which
songs were recorded by the guys in the
band and which ones were recorded by the
Wrecking Crew, and so on. There’s a lot of
lore and history and technicality involved
edit: of course, he must know that all these recordings he's asked for are property of BRI, not Capitol.....
Mike has, by his own words, never been terribly interested in the intricacies of reissues and archival releases. You can go all the way back to his feisty 1992 Goldmine interview where he professes ignorance as to what's going on with the BBs back catalog releases, and the interview laughs and Mike seems kind of annoyed that the interview is amused that Mike doesn't know this stuff.
All we can hope for is that better management at BRI get some good archival projects going, and hopefully they can just put the thing under Mike's nose and get him to sign off on it and then Mike doesn't have to be involved any further.
From what I understand, he was actually wuite involved in song selection for MIC, and even went to great lengths to ensure the inclusion of as much of Dennis' work as possible. Perhaps he feels guilty about his treatment of and statements about that "no-talent parasite."
HeyJude:
Quote from: CenturyDeprived on March 20, 2017, 03:30:56 PM
Quote from: Peadar 'Big Dinner' O'Driscoll link=topic=24884.msg606497#msg606497
I bet he has watched it a few times. Would be shocked if he hadn't.
The reason why I agree with this statement is this: wouldn't Mike want to know if there's reason for him to sue for defamation of character in a major motion picture? I feel like he'd want to review the film just to make sure there's not some characterization in the film that he could somehow sue for. After all, weren't there all sorts of lawsuits/threats of lawsuits for portrayals in Brian's 1991 autobiography?
I can't imagine that Mike would just not even bother watching it out of curiosity to know if there's some sort of offensive characterization he could complain about, particularly given what happened years earlier. Or at minimum, perhaps he had his wife or lawyer watch it for him and report back to him.
The idea that someone (Mike) who is portrayed on film (in a project from the Brian "side", a side that apparently in the past caused legal action due to what was viewed as unfair/slanderous previous portrayals) would just "sit it out" and not even want to bother knowing - in full detail, which is only possible by planting his butt in a seat and watching - doesn't seem quite plausible to me. Maybe it's just me thinking that, though.
It's hard to say. Mike back in the early 90s seemed to almost relish talking about how he sued over the '91 book without having read it. I believe he said in some interviews that he at some point had to at least read portions of it.
I'm guessing what happens with things like this were litigation is at least a possibility is that some third party watches it (either "for Mike", or just someone who has seen or heard or read the thing in question fills Mike in), and I think at the point at which some sort of litigation would happen, Mike would *have* to at least watch or read some of the thing in question. Which seems to be what he did in 1991/92.
Then again, he claimed not to listen to the 2004 "Smile" yet there was a lawsuit about that as I recall.
With the L&M film, there's nothing to sue over, so he doesn't need to watch it. It would be easy enough for him to watch like 30 seconds worth of the scene he keeps talking about in ignorance because he hasn't bothered to watch it. He would know then that he doesn't object to the music of "Good Vibrations" in the film.
As for the broader question of whether Mike really doesn't watch/read/listen to stuff he claims not to (L&M film, 2004 "Smile", etc.), I could easily picture either scenario. I could totally buy that he really is avoiding the stuff for a myriad of reasons, from having plausible deniability when asked (though he seems happy to comment on the stuff even when he says he hasn't seen it), some sort of fear that he'll hear something good, and so on. I could also buy that, as a rather sharkish business guy as well as someone who plays the political/personal game within BRI and the BB sphere, there's no way he isn't intimately familiar with everything the other guys are doing. I could buy that he listens to every album, from Brian's solo sets to Al's live album and everything in between, and keeps close tabs on the other guys behind the scenes.
Never underestimate how sharkish these people can be behind the scenes in business meetings and whatnot. There's that boardroom tape of McCartney from the 80s where, despite his public persona that veers a little bit purposely dense and simple, he's on top of everything and you don't doubt for a second he knows *exactly* what's going on in his business/political/financial world.
Rick5150:
Bruce still surfs?!? Good for him.
People complain that Mike keeps giving us the same responses. I prefer that over a different response each time. The key may be if you want a different answer, ask different questions?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page