Mike and Bruce Superbowl 1998
Carrie Marks:
deleted
Sheriff John Stone:
Quote from: Carrie Marks on April 29, 2009, 11:21:43 AM
Quote from: Andrew G. Doe on April 29, 2009, 11:04:49 AM
Slight correction, Carrie - the band that played the 1998 Super Bowl were billed as follows -
"A Tribute To The Beach Boys Featuring Mike Love, Bruce Johnston, David Marks, Glen Campbell, Dean Torrance, and John Stamos". Snappy, huh ?
America's Band happened in in June - all the May gigs were private, therefore could be billed as The Beach Boys - and of the eight gigs booked under that name, four were cancelled.
Correction appreciated, thank you Andrew. My point remains, though....regardless of the actual billing, the band that played at the Super Bowl was clearly NOT billed as the Beach Boys, and therefore, Brian, Carl and Al could not 'vote away' the performance.
Slight correction? How about a major correction? Which makes most of your theories about Mike Love's "plans", Carrie, a mute point. It's obvious by the billing that it was a one-off, intended for that specific Super Bowl appearance, and had little if anything to do with a "plan in motion" or the "license".
But, it also doesn't disprove my opinion. Actually, it adds more creedence to my position. If that Super Bowl group - and it doesn't matter what they were called - used pre-recorded Beach Boys' tracks, they had to get permission, the group would've known about it, and they probably got compensated for it. Would it be legal for any group to perform at a Super Bowl and on National TV, and play, for example, tracks from Live At Knebworth, and not get permission and/or compensate the Beach Boys for it?
And, I'll state again, I don't know the specifics about the songs that WERE played, which could change things significantly.
EDIT: Carrie, I didn't want to ignore your question to me as to what "proof" I had that the Beach Boys were the original target of the Super Bowl entertainment commitee. I have no proof. In my original post, I wrote "I think". That would make it my opinion. Very, very few people who post on message boards have proof.
In my opinion, I would think a Super Bowl entertainment commitee would want the Beach Boys before a "Tribute To The Beach Boys", and it wouldn't take much to explore that possibility. I do have a few opinions why the Beach Boys, at that specific time, would decline to appear, but I'm not going to go there. I can understand why you don't agree with my opinion. You can dismiss it, which you obviously already did. :police:
KokoMoses:
Please be nice to The Sherrif!
I rather like the image of Brian and Carl laughing while watching that performance!
Carrie Marks:
deleted
Sheriff John Stone:
Quote from: Carrie Marks on April 29, 2009, 01:26:09 PM
Now, if you want to argue about what may or may not have been an ethical violation of using "Beach Boys" recordings versus Mike Love solo band recordings, then you aren't going to get a fight from me...
Um, yes, that has been my point, which I obviously haven't been making well enough. And, to clarify, I never claimed it to be "an ethical violation". Actually, I've been saying just the opposite.
Again, I felt that Mike had to get permission to perform the Beach Boys' recorded songs (if they were Beach Boys' recorded songs), got the permission, thus the group had to know about it, and probably, the Beach Boys got some compensation - unless they were just being nice guys and didn't request any. That's all I was trying to say.
As far as whether the Beach Boys were the first choice for the Super Bowl, yeah, I believe that, and I have no proof. Pure 100% speculation! Actually, I didn't think that was such "a broad statement"; I just thought it was logical. I don't think that's an outlandish thought or opinion at all.
And, no, I had no idea that Mike "had his soldiers in line long before Feb 1998". You stated, "If you can't accept that, that's your right....but it's not a realistic point of view". Truthfully, Carrie, it's not a matter of me accepting it, or having a realistic point of view. Actually, I don't have much of a point of view in regard to what went down with the Beach Boys with Al, or after Carl's death, or the license, or whatever. And here's where we will agree. I haven't read/seen/heard much information about the whole reorganization, and I don't want to opine on "what went down". I feel it was all about the money, and the whole thing gives me a sour taste. Uh oh, did I just state another opinion?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page