The Smiley Smile Message Board

One Beach Boy we didn't hear much from publicly about the end of the c50 tour was David Marks. Here, he discusses his take on it, and also discusses the possibility of another reunion.

http://m.tbrnews.com/lifestyle/always-a-beach-boy-david-marks-an-original-member-of/article_e8928950-4421-11e4-9f7c-4b2c9a19d6c3.html

Interesting, and not surprising. I'm glad Dave pointed out that they don't have a lot of time left to do something else, rather bluntly pointing out that one of them could die.

I don't know how precisely we should parse what he says, but he seems to indicate that "at the beginning" of the C50 tour, Mike said he had already booked his own non-reunion Beach Boys shows. While that still isn't a reason to not do more reunion shows (it's simply a reason why he couldn't do more reunion shows at the same time he was doing his own shows), it is interesting that Dave specifically says Mike had already booked shows, and that they all already knew that's what was going to happen at the end.

This also makes Brian's "no more live dates" statement during the tour rather pointless, and makes Mike citing Brian's "no more live dates"  as a reason to not continue the tour as even more head-scratching.  If he had already booked post-reunion shows, why would Brian's "no more shows" message matter?

Bad management, disorganization, and lack of communication obviously are the main takeaways from the episode.

Interesting.

You see guys? No big deal. There was actually some kind of set end date from the start.

How about this for a timeline ?

Tour booked for 50 dates, ending August 15th, Mike tells them he's booking dates in October.

Tour goes well, extra overseas dates booked, all agree that's it, "no more shows for Wilsons" email.

Added dates go down a storm, Brian & Alan want to carry on despite the previous agreement, Mike declines.

Brian's people then request a press release stating the post September line up won't include him, Alan or David, Mike issues same (granted, timing wasn't the best).

Media jumps to erroneous assumption BA&D have been fired. You know the rest.

Assuming this timeline is correct (I’m not convinced it necessarily is, but let’s go with it), it still renders Brian’s “no more shows” e-mail as entirely superfluous, both in terms of his reasoning for doing it and for Mike caring about it. Mike had already booked his own shows and, if David Marks is to be believed, they all knew it would be going back to the previous “status quo” anyway. So why would the Brian e-mail mean anything to Mike?

More importantly, it ignores the chief criticism that has been made against Mike, which is why he wouldn’t agree to do MORE shows. That will continue to be the burning question until everybody answers *that* question honestly.

The idiotic media falsely reporting a “firing” has been used as a cover for long enough. They were lazy and wrong. But “Mike didn’t fire Brian” can’t be used as an answer to the question “why didn’t you want to do more reunion shows?”

Brian saying no more shows, and then changing his mind, is NEVER going to be something that any reasonable fan will find fault with. The guy that says “no” when Brian Wilson changes his mind and wants to be a Beach Boy and continue a critically-acclaimed world tour is always going to be painted as the bad guy.

Not assuming it's correct either - merely for purposes of discussion.  :)

You would have to ask Brian but apparently it was just for emphasis at the time, just in case someone else was wanting to add even more dates. It wouldn't have to be dates beyond the end date, it could dates in addition to the new dates within the end date. Just a guess, many plausibilities.

I guess Mike doesn't need to justify sticking to an agreement and commitments. Be careful what you wish for I guess is the moral of the story.

To me this is indeed the important and ignored question.  Why couldn't Love do his previously scheduled shows and then the resumption could commence? The M&B "prior commitments" was always a red herring. Go ahead and fulfill the prior commitments, no big deal--if all parties still wanted to be Beach Boys together they would be.  Clearly somebody does not and won't answer why. I don't know, maybe Love deserves credit for not airing out the dirty laundry, but the prior commitments created a pause, not an end...

Nobody has said that wasn't the plan to begin with. Obviously, the situation deteriorated rapidly to the point where that didn't happen...yet.

The somebody is Mike Love, and he's essentially already answered why (or at least a significant part of the "why") in so many words: because he didn't like the "outside forces" (ie. people other than Mike Love) taking away from the writing/collaborating/recording process as he (Mike Love) thinks it should occur, with Mike having a more substantial role, and reclaiming the measure of respect and importance that he thinks he is owed.

That's the only argument/ excuse I've really heard him publicly make that, IMO, is in any way publicly "spinnable" to get Mike some sympathy for his plight. Sure, Mike will talk about the importance of hitting smaller markets, but he hasn't ever come clean about the fact that he simply wants control and to not be bogged down by any sort of group vote that could take away the ease and control he's built up since 1998.  There's no easy way for Mike to outright say that in an honest way in an interview that won't make him come off poorly, so he simply doesn't address the need for control being a factor.

Maybe the "we've been fired"/Facebook petition stuff ticked Mike off, especially since it was agreed that the M&B tour would resume after the C50 (and we all knew about those M&B dates during the early stages of the tour too. That was no surprise to anyone. It was discussed on this board).

As for why Mike & Bruce wanted to go back to their touring band after the C50...they call the shots, they get along better with that crew, they're both in their 70's and don't like to change from a comfortable routine (ask any grandparent about this). There are probably a ton of reasons.  

I had hoped maybe that the surviving Beach Boys would do their individual projects for the remainder of the year and then regroup every summer for a few dates (as Al had suggested at the time) but that's not the way it worked out obviously, but it would have been the best of both worlds. Heck, it could still happen.

Control is part of it, but not the main part, and blaming it entirely on that minimizes the other issues, but the 'outside forces' part of it...would definitely not disagree with that one bit.

Bolded for truth.  See my above post.

And hopefully it does happen again. They do their best work together (although Brian's latest may end up rivaling all but the best BB work..we shall see....)

I don't believe Mike Love ever signed an agreement or committed to never do more reunion shows. ALL of them stuck to the agreement to do the shows they contracted to do. Some of them wanted to do more. Mike didn't. That lack of action is not "sticking to an agreement." The second the tour ended, the agreement was over. Mike not wanting to do more shows was, well, Mike not wanting to do more shows. No contracts were broken. But the guy that wants to end the party at 7:30pm, kick everybody out, and continue the party with only the people he *really* likes, is going to be labeled as the d*ck.

That's not just what Al had suggested at the time... Mike hinted at a future BB universe that would harmoniously have California Saga opening for the BBs "next" summer (2013) in July 2012 at the Grammy Museum.

At least at that point (July 2012) Mike had an inkling that a future (one full year in advance) could exist. In my mind, that means that there was still a level of harmony (no pun intended) that was thought could exist beyond C50. Because I really don't think he was thinking that Cal Saga would tour opening for M&B (I don't see that happening, even though some of the members have individually guested at M&B shows or attended M&B shows).

I just wonder if this hypothetical tour was envisioned as a tour that would happen:

- opening for M&B (doubtful, IMO)
- opening for a continually reunited full band BB lineup
- or perhaps a reunited full band BB lineup that would have occasionally reunited for summer shows, and M&B at all other times.

Someone should really ask Mike or someone in Cal Saga what the plan was, even if it was just talk. I can't imagine Mike would have publicly announced it (even in just an offhand remark) at a live show/interview type event if it wasn't at least talked about between some people a little bit beforehand.

I wish both parties would just admit that they didn't want to continue the tour instead of trying to throw the other camp under the bus in an attempt to save face.

We got a tour that we never thought would happen, and now the members of the band -- save for Al -- get to continue to live their lives as they want.

They did the C50 tour for money, and possibly for the fans. If they cared about being together, they'd still be together.

Some of us have...now whether or not the answer is believable, remains to be seen! And also, things change :/

Yes, I know it was Love and nobody that I have seen has ever pressed him on his answers of why the writing/recording process is not acceptable. The obvious (to me) retort would be that he wrote the lyrics to two of the greatest compositions in popular music history in just the same fashion. If he can dictate the lyrics to the already completed California Girls and Good Vibrations then, why must he insist on writing with Brian in the same room now or its no go?

Can the answer be publicly shared?
Regardless, yeah there is no doubt that things change, and quickly between the BB personalities. Things seemed to go south pretty fast at a certain point.

Dave sounds very much like he hopes to all play together. Now, Al, Dave, and Jeff have all said it.......

The consensus among these three is that being together, playing together, doing anything including an album is their first and best destiny.  Brian likely agrees on many levels. Bruce will always be up for it.  Mike?  He needs something given to him, something acknowledged.  IIT and SV are the most playable songs from TWGMTR along with the 3 great melancholy pieces. SV should have been the single, pushed until it charted.......Oh, says the Professor......

I have nothing but hope, lads.

The Professor

Well put. This is a big part of it, especially in terms of how the debates flow among fans.

It's true that it holds no PR advantage for Mike, but if he was able to offer some detailed explanation that included some things that perhaps reflect a big negatively on him, it would negate much of the criticism, at least from folks here.

I think a lot of the obvious control/money/power/ego issues are what drive a lot of the motivations. All of the external factors (those influences "outside" the core band members) perhaps often serve as things that exacerbate the situation, perhaps sometimes serve as the tipping point.

A lot of those "outside" things Mike has to deal with are probably legit gripes. (Other band members may have similar types of gripes of course). But underlying all of that is the motivation that brings them to the table in the first place. Brian, for a period, seemed to be on the same page as Al in simply acknowledging how the tour was amazing, how the whole was greater than the sum, etc. I think Mike was more guarded and skeptical from the get go, and all of those external factors perhaps were tipping points for Mike while Brian and Al were still good to go to do more gigs. I'm still amazed (and grateful) that he did the tour.

The other question for Mike would be, why would a guy (Mike) who as far as I know has always claimed that jealously was a non-issue regarding the other lyricists in the BB story of the 60s, suddenly take issue with outside lyricists in 2012?

I didn't see Mike saying that the lyrics on TWGMTR were not "relatable" or "commercial", as was his main claim to the problem he had with VDP's lyrics. I'm sure Mike thinks that his lyrics would be "better" and would maybe have made the album go to #1, but I simply don't see how it's a "problem" in and of itself that there are other writers involved; there often have been throughout the BBs story. Just admit that he wants the vision of the BBs to match his vision of the "glory days" where Mike was on top. Admit it's an ego thing, or that it's largely an ego thing.

Or could be the guy writing the lyrics, rather than the lyrics themselves.

Or, possibly, the fact that they were written before the project?

Or, more likely, a combination of both.

He changed his mind.

I suppose I can understand that. But as I was saying, this didn't seem to be such a big problem before. Why wasn't this such a big deal in the BB85 era?

And why (the biggest WTF question of all) was Mike's sole released solo album, by a guy who repeatedly reminds the world of his lyrical talents, have so few Mike-penned lyrics? Even the title track doesn't have lyrics by Mike. It's just baffling.

The only thing that makes sense to me is that Mike only cares deeply to be the lyricist when it means writing with Brian so that if it becomes a hit, it can show how Brian needs Mike. It's some sick psychological game, and I say this because it's just so damn inconsistent coming from Mike, based on the examples I've listed here (and there are many others I'm sure). And yes, I know it's human nature for any person/artist to feel wanted, needed, etc. I think Mike cares so badly especially because he knows what his reputation is and feels immensely slighted, and thought this would be his golden opportunity to somehow correct that.

Well, as 2 bands play Saturday in CA with BB members (Mike and Bruce playing somewhere Sat too?), it's a critical time, as Dave said and as they all know. What should Mike do now?  I fight for gain, Vulcan: what does he gain here if he gets together with Brian, et al, for shows and an album?

ftfy

If it was all about money, it would have happened earlier and lasted longer.

Hasn't Mike complained that people said things were going to be a certain way and then they weren't and things were done by somebody in a less than honorable?

This story today hits the nail on the head I think and the writer won't be falted here...

http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2014/09/25/3263164_beach-boys-brian-wilson-and-al.html?rh=1


For many years, Stebbins said, Love toured as the Beach Boys. But once Brian Wilson decided to tour again, he said, that posed a problem.

“Since Carl died in the late ’90s, Mike has basically been the man,” Stebbins said. “He runs the operations, and he runs the show. And I think for the 50th anniversary tour, he had to step back.”

When the surviving Beach Boys were together, Stebbins said, it was Brian Wilson — the mastermind behind the group — who won the biggest applause.

“Night after night after night after night, Mike is making less money getting reminded that Brian is more popular than him,” Stebbins said. “And he has to answer to people instead of calling all the shots himself.”

Well, yeah, considering the cost of running those shows (bigger venues, bigger band) and more people taking a cut. So, no way that tour was only about making money.

But for Mike I suspect 'being the man' is the main driver.

This summer, more than once, I posited to those who would be involved the notion of a Pet Sounds 50th anniversary celebration  - hereafter referred to as PS50 - which included another full-on reunion tour (I claim no credit, Helen Keller could see that one coming), and the response was negative, and surprisingly heatedly so. My strong impression is that given the current situation (arising from the summer nonsense), no more whole band onstage reunions. Ever.

That said, these are The Beach Boys: never say never, as the usual rules don't apply. We got The Smile Sessions, we got C50.

If that fiasco hadn't happened,  do you think it'd be more likely?

It'd be the epitome of a no-brainer.

Do you think that any of the negativity might also stem from the fact that a "PS50" tour would inevitably result in the press rehashing of the C50 ending and talking about "BRIAN WILSON'S MAGNUM OPUS, PET SOUNDS". In addition to the fact that they'd all be two years older, I gotta imagine that it'd be pretty exhausting dealing with all of that nonsense when doing promotion. If I'm Mike Love, other than cementing the band's artistic legacy, I see very little appealing about a worldwide PS50 tour.

Perhaps instead of a full blown tour they'd be better served doing some short residencies at the appropriate venues in the big markets (LA, NY, London, etc). As a NY'er, I'm envisioning 4 or 5 shows at Carnegie Hall or Radio City with a full orchestra, take a few weeks off and then move to the next market. That'd drop the touring expenses pretty dramatically (local back line would be much cheaper for multiple nights, no need for buses, etc.) and it would also give them the opportunity to build up the prestige for the shows and charge appropriate ticket prices.

That's the way to go. However, we're all certainly jumping the gun a bit as David pointed out....we may not have five living beach boys when this anniversary is celebrated! But then I guess that raises another question: would something like this still be on the table if we lose one of them by then? Not trying to take this down a morbid path or anything, but I couldn't see this having any media hype if Brian OR Mike were no longer with us to make it happen.

If they actually decided to do another reunion tour in any sort of format, I don’t think anybody would worry too much about re-hashing C50. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, when they get back together, that’s the most effective away to deflect or get past questions about past acrimony, lawsuits, etc. No doubt, those questions still come up. But they are neutralized quickly because the questions about acrimony usually heavily involve asking about what’s going on *now*, and if they are in the middle of a reunion tour, it’s very self-evident where the acrimony level is *now*. That’s not to say there isn’t still acrimony during their reunions, but it requires somewhat less BS-ing on the part of the band members to suggest things are “okay” between them now if they are actually really working together.

However, a “Pet Sounds 50” is, I would guess, an even harder sell to make to Mike than C50. Clearly, Mike was at best guardedly optimistic if not almost ambivalent about some aspects of C50, and that was a project that celebrated the whole band and did not celebrate any one member or era excessively more than another. (Yes, there was an obvious “order of billing”, and plenty of compromise, etc., but it allowed the various eras and styles of music relatively equal play. They did “I Just Wasn’t Made for These Times” and “Marcella”, but they also did “It’s OK” and “Kokomo.”) But, as much as Mike will tell anyone who will listen that he likes PS and championed it back in the 60’s (and I’m not even getting into the veracity of such implications), it is a very “Brian-centric” item in many different ways. Brian has the majority of the lead vocals. It’s Brian’s crowning achievement. He has been extra associated with it due to his Pet Sounds tours in the past. It would just be a harder sell ego-wise to Mike than even the C50 tour was.

Now, a good PR person or manager or tour promoter who knows their s**t and knows how to sell band members of different personalities on such things, *could* still convince all of the guys to do such a tour. Let’s keep in mind that they did between 43 or 44 and 61 songs at each show on C50. Even after PS being performed in a set, they would have 30-40 songs to work with. They could try to not over-emphasize the PS aspect while still noting its 50th anniversary. Call it the “From Surfin’ USA to Pet Sounds Tour” or something.

As far as I’m concerned, the C50 tour was so amazing, if they had to make more concessions to Mike to make it happen, I wouldn’t terribly mind. If it even means churning out a somewhat crappier studio album where Brian and Mike co-write everything with nobody else’s help, and even if they have to play “Kokomo” three times and hire an impartial go-between for Mike and Al so they don’t have to actually talk to each other, even then it would be worth the musical benefits of the full reunion band performing live.

I don't buy that Mike backed off a reunion due to merely his own ego issues. He was aware that he'd have to give up some decision-making, knew that BW would get more attention, knew that he would have to accomodate the setlist to please his cousin. Whatever ego issue, it was dealt with previously-- even in the distant past.

As somebody posted, in mid 2012 Mike envisioned a certain role for Cal Saga in the future, and it involved that current BBs lineup for all that could be inferred. My point is that something happened towards Aug 2012-- something that hurt him or made him change his mind. And -let me guess as everybody does- he probably reacted to the "feel like being fired" bullshit. Besides, with the wives being present during the tour, I wouldn't be surprised if bitterness between the ladies was part of the reason for the break up. We know how Mary Ann feels about issues that happened years before the reunion, and probably Jacquie's beautiful shirts were not to everyone's taste. Perhaps Mike felt that he deserved that his "color of the day" dressing code be respected, after agreeing to perform Marcella or getting rid of Stamos.

According to David Marks (and common sense), it appears Mike had already been booking “non-reunion” shows before and/or during the C50 tour. He always planned to move on in the immediate aftermath of the tour.

I think their management (lack thereof) and PR disaster during and after the tour may well have soured some of them (and apparently not Brian or Al) on doing anything together a year or two later. The incorrect “firing” headlines surely didn’t help the prospects or another reunion, but an argument can be made that bad (as in no) management and HORRIBLE PR staff (or again, perhaps none?) is what led to the “firing” headlines in the first place. It kind of seemed to be a bit of unintentional self-fulfilling prophecy if those headlines soured a reunion for Mike even more.

If you believe the account that was published at the time all of it went down, the issue of the confusion regarding "Nutty Jerry's" booking who they thought was the Beach Boys 50th but was actually the pre-50th touring band, then cancelling the show entirely, caused concern enough to ask for a meeting or a clarification session between all the camps to avoid this kind of confusion, or to issue a statement to clarify. And before that meeting, before a group statement could be drafted and released with all in agreement, Mike's PR team released their own statement to the press, unbeknownst to anyone else until it hit the media, and again as there were additional offers to continue the 50th tour and book some high-profile venues on the table.

And in that aftermath, the remark about feeling like we'd been fired got picked up by the press and reported/twisted into actually being fired...spinning in order to create a blaring headline as the press is wont to do. But all that aside, the PR staff working on Mike's behalf did jump the gun, they did put out a statement before the requested meeting which perhaps would have led to a more cohesive group statement or at least a discussion involving all the parties on how to proceed, and I get the feeling even through that one news account that the other parties felt blindsided by both the release and the wording of that statement as it had apparently been news to everyone but Mike's camp when it appeared in the press.

Again, if I'm wrong, correct it, but that's the summary I got from those initial reports and descriptions of what went down.


The million-dollar question is what shows did Mike already have booked the day that press release appeared, around the time of that Grammy Museum ceremony? Simply put, does anyone know how many actual confirmed dates he had in the book when the sh*t hit the fan in the press? I know one was a gig in South America, any others?

They often book shows FAR in advance of when they actually take place. Marks has said Mike was booking shows before or during the tour. Shows are negotiated and booked sometimes well before they are announced or go on sale. In many cases, the venues have a “season” of shows that they announce at a far later date.

Didn’t someone (Bruce?) say years back on the BB Britain board that they sometimes book select shows nearly TWO years in advance?

It’s highly probable that 2013 dates were already being booked by the time C50 was ending, if not earlier.

As for Mike’s statement, it was horribly executed on numerous levels: The timing was horrible. The wording was a totally ham-fisted. They could have ended the tour permanently and still done it far better PR-wise. They should have gotten together and issued a unified group statement, timed appropriately, and worded appropriately. They could have imparted the exact same information far better which, if nothing else, would have at least left their opening for a later reunion to be a cleaner process. That Mike will not even objectively admit that episode was executed poorly (not even a “gosh, yeah, I wish we could have done that announcement better”) is just comical.

Ham-fisted is the word, for sure!  ;D

As a musician always trying to scrape for gigs and money to pay the bills, I've actually gotten into, on a VERY small scale, having to book some local live gigs and private parties, and it's not always an advance thing while other times it is, for special events like weddings, holidays, etc. Just this past year I had two weeks to pull together and rehearse a band for three sets plus, and play a local show. Other times you can pencil in a few months or more in advance, *granted* this is nothing like staging a major band's tour with a traveling crew and accommodations and all related operations details, but it's a smaller version of the same thing and still it sometimes happens really fast and off-the-cuff where a show is offered, added, and planned really fast.

Nutty Jerry's, that booking happened as the C50 tour was underway and the gig was close to overlapping with C50 enough that it caused the confusion...deliberately? Who knows. There was also a show immediately after C50's curtain call in Europe, a charity show at a CA winery which John Stamos participated in, where if I remember there were fans who i think assumed it would be the full band who had been touring as C50 because I believe it happened almost immediately after the C50 bands returned to the States. There were shows afterward where the incorrect promo photos showing or even suggesting C50's lineup were being used to promote them.

Maybe I'm waaaaay off, but i got the feeling that some of the impetus behind the Nutty Jerry's booking was trying to strike while the iron was hot, so to speak, and it got so hot it actually burned those involved.  :)  How's that for being obtuse?  ;)

To further pinpoint my question, what shows were booked for the months immediately after C50? I know of the South America, I know of the charity winery event, I suppose I could look up the others. But the timing of it all does add to all this, especially when they were booked.

My only memory of the timeline was Bruce saying from very early on in the tour that it had to be finished by a certain point. I could be completely wrong but I have vague recollection of him saying August and I presumed it was to leave a gap between the C50 and him and Mike returning to the slimline group to avoid confusion. Then extra gigs were added and so there was no gap at all. Obviously some of those October gigs were certainly announced many months in advance anyway and could have been booked long before that.

He has explained the situation it seems to me: he was lead to believe (by Brian at the very beginning the way I took it) that it would be just he and Brian and without interference or much more just he and Brian with much less interference than actually happened.

I think a lot of Mike`s comments about this situation (both during and since C50) can be taken with a pinch of salt.

Him commenting on stage that he`d like California Saga to support the group the following summer doesn`t mean he was seriously considering it (or that he meant that version of The Beach Boys).

And his comments since are not going to be 100% accurate or inaccurate.

Shades of grey... (the last time I will use that phrase I promise  :) )

Good point.

On another topic,  has anyone considered that it might be as simple as a guy wishing to get back in a way to a place of the best and most productive time of their lives with his cousin?

I don’t think this is accurate. While Mike has said there very early discussions of re-recording some oldies/favorites (it was never clarified whether this was cover versions of other artists or old BB songs), which occurred well before the actual project took place, it was well established at the outset of the recording project that it was largely pre-existing material penned by Brian and Joe Thomas. It is was these recordings that netted the recorded deal with Capitol. Despite that, Mike still got a solo song flown into the album, and also added lyrics to several songs (including at least two tracks written more or less from scratch with Mike). But it had to have been well-known that it was largely the Brian/Joe stuff that would be on the album. In fact, it seems likely that a number of the backing tracks were not only recorded without the other BB’s present, but were in fact cut before they even entered the project. For that matter, Brian and Foskett had already laid vocals down on a bunch of the stuff as well.

I also got the impression that Capitol didn’t want the band d**king around in the studio for a year or two trying to slap together an album, so having it largely written and recorded, with the Beach Boys coming in to basically stick their name on it and add vocals, was also the expedient thing to do to get the album out on time and while the tour was still going. As it was, they oddly didn’t get the album released until nearly a month and a half into the tour.

I don’t think the nature of the composition of the album changed from the time the project began, other than the obvious political concessions made such as adding the Mike track. I think, much like the comments about the C50 tour (too many voices and players; no small markets), Mike probably had a number of standing gripes as the project progressed, as likely most of the guys did (Bruce and Al didn’t get their songs on the album, etc.), but still to his (and the other guys’) credit, pushed through and finished the project. Then, as is human nature, in the aftermath and safety of being back to his own thing, he was able to voice these gripes more bluntly.

Just to recap/revisit the information being discussed, and to add some specific timeline dates to all of this, here is the rundown. (For those interested, of course)

Rewind to the third week in June 2012. The Beach Boys C50 had just played in the Houston area, earlier that June. A promotional release was put out less than two weeks later to the local press announcing that the Beach Boys would be returning to the Houston area in early October. The local music beat writer got this news, fact-checked it with Nutty Jerry's, and they confirmed that it was in fact the band with Wilson-Marks-Jardine who had played Houston a few weeks ago. That writer then published the announcement along with ticket info, this was on or around June 20th.

Several days later, June 25th, the writer published a correction and follow-up, as he had since been informed by Nutty Jerry's that the gig was not in fact the C50 Beach Boys but instead the touring band from before the C50 tour, minus Wilson-Marks-Jardine. That writer published the official statement from Nutty Jerry's which cancelled the show: "Due to a misunderstanding with the Beach Boy's management and a local booking agent, the October 6th Beach Boys concert at Nutty Jerry's has been cancelled. The group that was scheduled to perform at Nutty Jerry's is not the same lineup as the current "Beach Boys 50th Anniversary" tour. As a result Nutty Jerry's did not feel that we could advertise the show as the "original" Beach Boys. Nutty Jerry's regrets the misunderstanding and any inconvenience to our loyal customers.

Rolling Stone picked up the story and printed it the next day, June 26th, along with comments from Brian where he said he wasn't aware of the South America booking slated for October, and also mentioning the possibility of working on a new Beach Boys album and continuing the C50 tour.

That article also mentioned that as of that time, only one confirmed show had been booked, the South America date in October.

Fast forward to Sept 19th 2012, with the LA Times report of the Grammy Museum events. This statement was in that report: The shift in the touring lineup also has caused some confusion outside the group itself. Texas club Nutty Jerry's had booked a Beach Boys show, which has since been canceled. Love's manager Jay Jones said it was Love's decision to halt the show because it was being inaccurately promoted as part of the reunion tour with the original members.


So a few months removed, there is a contradiction. Nutty Jerry's canceled the show within a week via that press release of June 25, and in September via this report, it's told that Mike actually cancelled the show.

Which one is it? Anyway, that's a sidebar.

When this Nutty Jerry's situation broke nationally via Rolling Stone, again June 26th, at that point there had been one booking for October in South America. The Nutty Jerry's October 6th gig was scheduled to happen almost a week after the band was to play the last show in England, that last week of September.

Almost immediately after the C50 tour returned from England, there was the charity gig Sept 30th at the Santaluz Club in California, with John Stamos.

That third week in June 2012 seems to have been the first indication that shows were being booked separate from C50 as C50 was in full force on the road. At that time, the only gigs known to have been booked were the failed Nutty Jerry's show in October, and the South American show in October.


I'm only outlining that to put all the dates and timeline issues into some context with the discussions. What happened in the way of what was or wasn't booked from July 2012 up to the Grammy event just prior to the European trip for C50 is subject to more digging.

I think maybe that’s true. It may also be that Mike is the only person, barring some hopeful fans, that believes the two of them alone can write a full album of quality material. I would question whether even Brian believes that is possible. And, frankly, when one person is largely writing the music and the other is writing mostly lyrics, it’s arguably easier for the lyricist to take for granted what it will take to write good music.

Just as you can’t force Mike into a reunion tour, you can’t force Brian into being a writing team with Mike.  

But the point is, as I understand Mike, it was Brian's idea.

I don’t recall Mike saying in an interview that Brian said or promised the new album that would accompany their 50th anniversary tour would involve the two of them sitting down alone and writing new songs. (Let’s set aside that, despite this, they actually DID write several songs together for the album; but of course not alone).

I know Mike has said he would like to write alone with Brian. He has mentioned discussing with Brian the idea of the group re-recording old favorites (but that wouldn’t have entailed writing new material). I don’t recall, recently, Mike saying Brian said he wanted to write alone with Mike, and I don’t recall Brian saying this in interviews either, at least as it pertains to the album in question.

Getting back to the live shows. For HeyJude and others regarding the booking issues: Help me figure out some of the contradictions in the timeline. There are suggestions that the non-50th BB tour dates were being booked at earlier times throughout the 50th tour.

The 50th tour had been in full force since mid-April 2012. As of June 25th or 26th, when Rolling Stone broke the Texas story of Nutty Jerry's nationally, there were only two confirmed dates, one of which was in South America which according to the reports Brian for one was unaware of, and the other which had been announced and almost immediately cancelled via that venue's press release.

It doesn't add up to suggest that bigger plans for post-C50 shows separate from the C50 lineup were already being put into place when as of the last week in June 2012 only one post-C50 show is known to have been scheduled, and even that one show seemed to have been "news" for other C50 participants.

Or am I missing something? I've been known to do that.  :)

I think they should have made 2012 a year of ONLY the C50 Wilson-Love-Jardine-Johnston-Marks lineup. That's it. Make an announcement before the tour began that to celebrate The Beach Boys 50th, all surviving members would tour together for the year of 2012. The celebration would come to a close with a new year's eve show (MSG for example) and Mike & Bruce would go back to touring under "The Beach Boys" name come 2013. That way there would be no public misunderstandings and there'd still be room within the year 2012 (between Wembley and the new year's eve show) to add any more last minute shows they were offered (if they chose to). To me, that seems like it would have been the easiest way to go about the tour.

I think the general idea is that shows can be pursued, tentatively booked, scheduled, etc. FAR before they are actually announced or publicized. As with a lot of this stuff, we can only guess. But if Mike’s band was already playing shows in September/October 2012, and later into that year, to say nothing of 2013, I don’t believe he hadn’t booked anything but those few shows by the end of C50 at the end of September 2012.

Word got out by June that South American dates for post-C50 were being booked (with the implication that some had “known of” those plans even earlier). Once that was happening, I doubt Mike was booking just a “few” shows with the thought that they might be doing any imminent additional reunion tour dates. Stands to reason that once that was the case, by June/July, they were booking future shows as they normally would. By the end of September, it’s feasible (again, we’re just guessing of course) that they had already begun booking 2013 dates.

I probably won't have time to look it up but as I remember it is from discussions about Brian coming to Mike a year before and discussing what he wanted to do or what they could do.

Exactly.  I truly believe Mike made this happen, beacuse he wanted to work with Brian and he wanted to give the fans something they'd love (see what I did there???).  He probably thought that he could have his cake and eat it too.

in Mike's mind, he does the C50 thing, then does the Mike's Beach Boys thing... then maybe a C51 thing, then a Mike's Beach Boys thing... then maybe a c52 thing, etc.  Once the C50 tour ended and Brian and Al basically acted like little girls about it, Mike just decided he didn't feel charitable anymore and went all 'if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" on us.  So when somebody asks him about it, he just smiles and says it was pleasant blah blah blah and never really mentions that he didn't enjoy becoming part of Brian's entourage.

So now he's in a position where he feels like he gave the fans what they wanted, and he was nice to Brian, and now he's back to touring how he wants and making money how he wants. 

If it was all about money, he would have been bending over backwards to please Brian or get Brian to do anything at all with him.  He booked dates on purpose at the end of the tour, well before the tour, so that he'd have an out in October.  He knew from the beginning he wasn't going to really want to do it like that forever, which proves in my mind at least that Mike did this for Brian, and for the fans.  That's about as charitable as Mike gets, and to be honest, I appreciate that he did it. 

You might truly believe it but that doesn't always make it true.  ;D

Consider a few possibilities, one of which being perhaps Brian, Al, and David didn't wish to become part of Mike's touring entourage either.

And consider there is a possibility that the events of 2012, backed by Capitol Records and surrounding both a new album and a major tour, would not have happened had Brian not been involved as he was. Brian can (and has) gotten major-label deals on his own, under his own name with "Beach Boys" nowhere on those album covers or titles, and he has a new one coming out soon. Mike has not released anything of note, has he? And I'm just guessing he could not get a major release on a label like Capitol on the basis of the Beach Boys' status and legacy without Brian involved.

Just speculation, but perhaps worth considering.

Let me ask this. If keeping the 2012 lineup depended on Brian making more "sacrifices" (the takeaway I am getting from Mike supporters is that MIke gave up more than Brian), would those fans be OK if that sacrifice meant Brian not having his band members at all? i.e. Brian, Al and David simply join the MIke and Bruce show?

The BW Band were the unsung heroes during the 2012 reunion. While the surviving BB together still would have been noteworthy, not utilizing the BW Band would have been a shame.

I sort-of agree with you, but I think the difference in such a situation is far less problematic than it would have been in previous eras. The traveling Beach Boys-branded band is really good. To my mind, the difference between then and Brian's recent bands is less about the musicianship than numbers. Wilson's bands are bigger and use more natural instrumentation, thanks to Paul and Probyn's ability to bring in wind and brass instruments (as well as Darian and Scott playing vibes and such). But as has been much discussed here, the Beach Boys traveling band has really upped its game in the past however-many years.

I think not using the C50 band just using Mike’s band is one of those things that is too difficult to take beyond a theoretical. I think the main magic beyond C50 was those five BB’s on stage. But I don’t delude myself either; they need a robust backing band vocally, and certainly instrumentally.

I don’t think I’d be opposed to the idea of the five BB’s being backed by Mike’s band. But I think what such a concession would mean about the entire project would not make such a project feasible or as enjoyable. That is, that would be so far beyond a reasonable compromise that it would signify giving in to Mike’s theoretical demands for a cheaper operation to the point of significantly hobbling a reunion tour.

A more fair compromise, at least just in terms of the backing band composition, would be to drop a few members and try to get more bang for the buck. Maybe drop a guitarist (Nicky, who missed the last half of the tour on C50), and maybe drop Nelson Bragg and Jeff Foskett (whom I’d be curious to know whether Brian would want back on another reunion tour) and add Matt Jardine who can do some percussion stuff like Bragg and do the falsetto parts like Foskett. That would shave two members off the overheard cost right there. Let me be clear. *I* wouldn’t want that; I think using the huge backing band was one of the main reasons the C50 tour garnered such rave reviews. In some ways they are indeed the unsung heroes of that tour. I don’t think the reviews (or the shows) would have been nearly as amazing with Mike’s leaner backing band behind them.

I think, and I mean this with all due respect, this is a slightly odd hypothetical.

Would anyone have been happy if Mike had been able to dictate exactly who was onstage and Brian had had no say at all seems to be the thrust of the question.

I don`t think even Mike would have considered that possible for a nanosecond.

I don`t think any of the group members did it for the fans or each other. They did it for themselves which is what any of us would have done.

What were Mike`s motivations? That the whole Smile Sessions, C50 tour and new album deal would work as a business package. And he probably hoped that they would have a big hit album and maybe had unrealistic about how many it might sell (the sales figures that people have quoted are good for the present day but significantly worse than those quoted for albums like Still Cruisin` or BW88 so maybe Mike is still stuck in that era).

Watching some of the C50 stuff again, it's obvious that the group never really gelled on a personal level. The QVC special was painful. Near the end, when they ask the group members to say one last thing, Brian says "Well, I just hope they like 'Good Vibrations', because that's our masterpiece." Which he said because they didn't play the song. And then we go in "Wouldn't It Be Nice" and Brian looks lost for half of it, his microphones practically muted. That was his lead!

Then, when I rewatched the Rolling Stone Mag Live rendition of "Surfer Girl", Brian really nails it when they turn up his mic for the lead. Finally. Then Foskett does the falsetto at the end and Brian has this weird look on his face. You get a feeling Brian wished he could sing it.

There's a lot of tension. Brian seemed to visibly resent the way he allowed himself to be pigeonholed in the BBs power structure, while Mike had zero interest in relinquishing any control. It's hard to see how the situation could've went on for years of touring.

I`m really not sure that Brian looking awkward is much of an indicator of anything. I agree that it was never going to go on for years though.

I judge all those analyses as wrong. Brian was trying to recall (and did find) one of the missing harmony parts. Confusion over the set list means nothing. BW does not even sing the lead on WIBN in concert.  QVC was fun but for the artificial tone of the mc, which has nothing to do with the band's dynamic. Mt Cohen, you are way off base sir.

Professor you need to realize these guys mostly did the C50 for the money and fame, not each other. Granted they enjoyed each other's company once they realized how fun touring was again.

So good we have you who can look inside their brains and thus can tell us what we need to realize.

At the end of the day, the obvious remains.  We got an amazing C50 reunion tour and a better than expected reunion album - I think 2012 exceed anyone's expectations by a long shot.  I'm happy to have even gotten the chance to see that tour (3 times) and if that's the end, then it's fine by me.  It would be great for them to keep it going, but that's why we have these threads.

I assumed it would be a mash up of Brian and Mike's band but thought it probably would be the license holding band filled out with some of Brian's band. I do not envy whoever had to tell those in either band that they did not make the cut.

I think the point is they all are responsible for what worked and what didn't and they all sacrificed, some more in one way and others in another. They should call it all good, learn from their mistakes, and do it again but better.