Recent Posts

The Murry stuff was also confused and did nobody any favors. They weirdly conflate the issue of selling the catalog versus Mike not getting credit on some of the songs. Obviously, those things are not wholly unrelated, but they're two different issues. Then, after they've done their hack, surface-level examination and condemnation of Murry, they circle back around to Murry *again* near the end of the doc for no apparent reason.

Yeah, I consider this one of the real "tells" regarding this film (i.e., "tell" in the poker sense of tipping the hand).  It goes a long way in reinforcing Al's contention that this is basically a documentary of BB history as seen by Mike Love. Because otherwise it makes near-zero sense that the intertwined "Sea of Tunes" issues are given so  much weight in this doc when so many other huge topics were ignored.

 I guess everybody is supposed to be shocked and saddened that Mike Love and Brian Wilson (and their various spouses, ex-spouses and dependents) are merely multi-multimillionaires rather than centi-millionaires or someting like that.  I can only speak for myself as a fan, but I have never lost even one minute of sleep worrying that Herb Alpert and Jerry Moss got very rich off the BBs' publishing.  Seriously, who the F cares?!  Frankly, I doubt that even Brian Wilson has cried himself to sleep over this more than once either.  At this point, Sea of Tunes is a snoozer topic...  to really anyone other than Mike Love (and perhaps Marilyn and the various Wilson-Love progeny who stand to inherit mere millions rather than hundreds of millions). Boo freakin hoo.

ON AiR: BRiAN{ö}LoveVol. 381. By C. GUY LA FORTUNE/PapaLaPap (2020/2024)
_________________________________________________________________
         i'M  A "G*i~R*O*D"/ABS: A RAIL OF SALAMi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
    "BURGHS i: "FLESH~GUY, SUBSiST ON PASTRAMi"!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         i'M  "ART", SAP: NOT "SiS"!
-----------------------------------------------
         BUSY! [UGH] "SELFiSH"?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     GRUB?  i'M, ALAS:  "FOLIAR AS BAD ORiGAMi !««««

If they included Kokomo - as mentioned a song with absolutely no historical connection to the timeline nor subject matter covered by the film - but couldn't include 'Til I Die or Surf's Up which are key to the years covered in the film on the soundtrack...there's a major problem here.

I'd also like to hear the backstory of how Kokomo got hammered into the film's content, and which parties may have pushed for it. Any guesses? (sarcasm, there, btw).

Huh?

No historical connection?  As Rocker mentions it's their last number one hit and one of their most recognizable songs like it or not.

The fact that the song was just thrown in during the credits should actually dismantle that this was some scheme by Mike the villan which you're insinuating here.   The song and its story would have been part of the actual documentary---as it should be. 

I said no historical connection to the timeline covered in the film. Was that unclear? If the band and their music is the subject of a documentary whose timeline stops around 1974, why put in a song that wasn't released until 15 years after the documentary ends that focus? Especially when they had many key songs important to *that specific timeline* to use and which got left out, and especially in a case where barely any songs get more than 10 seconds worth of airtime in the film!

It's simple logic, if the focus of this film is the band's history and the band's musical output from 61-74, why jump timelines and include something like Kokomo that charted in 1989, whether it was a hit or not? It doesn't fit the timeline and is an anachronistic way to end the film.

And even more frustrating for me as a fan is how they could have had a perfect, bittersweet ending to the whole thing by ending it with the surviving guys sitting with each other and singing something together for maybe the last time on film and let the whole thing fade into the sunset. But no...we end the film hearing Kokomo instead. Just my opinion, that makes no sense in the timeline or in the art of making a documentary film that draws people in emotionally to the subject matter.

It went into quite a bit of detail about just how much was on Brian's plate and how it was taking a toll on him, and it went into detail about his writing and producing, so I think that's plenty of context regarding why Brian didn't want to tour. It honestly seems like some people are trying to find things to criticize....

I'd say it's more the case that some people are trying to find something, *anything*, to pluck out of this new doc and try to find redeeming.

And, obviously, I'm not saying this documentary is just a front-to-back worthless trainwreck. The story, the music, all of it is too powerful to not elicit some sort of emotional reaction out of the viewer. There are moments during the new doc where it starts to feel like it's gaining some sort of footing, but then it just never gets "there."

I've written more words about this documentary than most (more to come), going into some amount of detail about specific issues with the doc. I've been pretty specific, and at some point I hope to do a more detailed, thorough rundown. But I think I've earned the right to not be labeled as someone "looking for things to criticize." I didn't make this thing, I didn't choose to make it.

Frank Marshall and Disney are the ones that slapped the word "Definitive" on this movie's poster.

I'm not going to give the film much credit for taking two extra minutes to diagram personnel changes on screen.

Some of the stuff the new doc covers is done adequately I suppose. But there's just nothing, zilch, that is remarkable about this film. It never feels like it's even attempting to be great. It's produced like a big, long EPK.  It feels lazy. Even the TITLE of the documentary is lazy.

I've also managed in the last day or so to run through large hunks of the 1998 "Endless Harmony" documentary, and it's immensely more smooth and satisfying. It offers far more pathos, via both the interviews and the editing. The main drawbacks of "Endless Harmony" are mostly just due to its age; it's 4x3, Standard Def, it has some 90s doc trappings (the sort of Dutch angles on some of the interviews, the titles/graphics, etc.).

I just watched this last night. I have many thoughts about it. I'm probably going to watch it a second time and actually take notes to do a full review. My first thoughts are that this is quite a bit better than it's reputation. Lots of details is given to the Al-David-Al again chronology, and the Brian-Al-Brian-Glenn and finally Bruce chronology. I really appreciated the archival interviews with Carl and Brian detailing the Nick Vinet battle with Murry over Brian's role as producer. These are just a few details that actually made portions of this documentary actually better than Endless Harmony for me, personally. I do agree that it kind of really fell apart in the last 15 or so minutes.

I wouldn't say it's "lots of details." They do lay out the chronology, including Brian's first break from the road. But there's not much substance or context given beyond "Brian didn't like the road." That isn't good filmmaking. It's like, "Congrats for getting a fact correct."

The "Endless Harmony" doc had a great interview clip from *Brian himself* discussing this moment. This new doc already cribbed tons of stuff from "Endless Harmony", so why not ahead and do it there too?

And they never addressed Bruce's departure (nor Blondie or Ricky's for that matter).

The new doc spends the first approx. 90 of its 106 minutes (not counting end credits) covering 61 to 67, so sure, they are able to slip a bit more detail on a few pieces of the story, including a brief interlude discussing Venet being tossed as producer.

If you have to wade through this doc to find a story here or there that isn't in "Endless Harmony", that's a pretty bad sign.

I think everybody should try this exercise: Review the new doc without mentioning any other doc. Pretend no other documentary exists on the band. Does this new doc do the job? I don't think so. Not even for the "general public." Is it a block of programming featuring BB images and music that gives them some sort of "exposure"? Sure. But this also could have been accomplished by dropping "Endless Harmony" on Disney+, or "Doin' It Again", etc.

This documentary was lazy. It isn't difficult, with cute visual aids to boot, to explain a series of personnel changes and the order in which they happened. It isn't so easy to explain "Pet Sounds" or "Smile" or Murry, or, if you're inclined to get into the Manson stuff, explain/contextual that correctly.

There are bits and pieces of the *production values* on this doc that are fine, and I suppose if one isn't trying to really pay too close attention, this might provide a bit of a smoke screen for how bad this doc is.

It went into quite a bit of detail about just how much was on Brian's plate and how it was taking a toll on him, and it went into detail about his writing and producing, so I think that's plenty of context regarding why Brian didn't want to tour. It honestly seems like some people are trying to find things to criticize....

I just watched this last night. I have many thoughts about it. I'm probably going to watch it a second time and actually take notes to do a full review. My first thoughts are that this is quite a bit better than it's reputation. Lots of details is given to the Al-David-Al again chronology, and the Brian-Al-Brian-Glenn and finally Bruce chronology. I really appreciated the archival interviews with Carl and Brian detailing the Nick Vinet battle with Murry over Brian's role as producer. These are just a few details that actually made portions of this documentary actually better than Endless Harmony for me, personally. I do agree that it kind of really fell apart in the last 15 or so minutes.

I wouldn't say it's "lots of details." They do lay out the chronology, including Brian's first break from the road. But there's not much substance or context given beyond "Brian didn't like the road." That isn't good filmmaking. It's like, "Congrats for getting a fact correct."

The "Endless Harmony" doc had a great interview clip from *Brian himself* discussing this moment. This new doc already cribbed tons of stuff from "Endless Harmony", so why not ahead and do it there too?

And they never addressed Bruce's departure (nor Blondie or Ricky's for that matter).

The new doc spends the first approx. 90 of its 106 minutes (not counting end credits) covering 61 to 67, so sure, they are able to slip a bit more detail on a few pieces of the story, including a brief interlude discussing Venet being tossed as producer.

If you have to wade through this doc to find a story here or there that isn't in "Endless Harmony", that's a pretty bad sign.

I think everybody should try this exercise: Review the new doc without mentioning any other doc. Pretend no other documentary exists on the band. Does this new doc do the job? I don't think so. Not even for the "general public." Is it a block of programming featuring BB images and music that gives them some sort of "exposure"? Sure. But this also could have been accomplished by dropping "Endless Harmony" on Disney+, or "Doin' It Again", etc.

This documentary was lazy. It isn't difficult, with cute visual aids to boot, to explain a series of personnel changes and the order in which they happened. It isn't so easy to explain "Pet Sounds" or "Smile" or Murry, or, if you're inclined to get into the Manson stuff, explain/contextual that correctly.

There are bits and pieces of the *production values* on this doc that are fine, and I suppose if one isn't trying to really pay too close attention, this might provide a bit of a smoke screen for how bad this doc is.

The one sound bite from Paul McCartney talking about Pet Sounds (the quote was from David Leaf’s interview with McCartney for the first Pet Sounds CD) sounded particularly egregious in the AI department.

That McCartney clip sounds so bizarre.  It might be AI, but if it is, then whoever coded that AI algorithm should be fired.  It sounds almost nothing like Macca.  Dana Carvey does a better impression of Paul than that.   Does anyone remember the circumstances of Leaf's interview with Paul? Could it be a situation like Leaf recording an audio interview on some cheapo tape recorder not for broadcast but just for his own notes?  And then said lo-fi recording is later run through some digital filters to enhance it with said "enhancement" utterly massacring it?

There's a lot of talk in the reddit bb thread that it's generated ai voices, but it's clearly not that simple. 

Imo they've used a blanket setting on an ai audio 'cleanup' tool like Adobe podcast, but barely tinkered with the settings, even on the modern interviews.

I've used Adobe podcast a lot in the last year for archiving old domestic 1/4 inch tape voice recordings, and it does a pretty good job in removing hiss and hum etc, but does produce artifacts that sound like what can be heard in ai covers,
especially if the audio is poor quality.
It sounds like they've not bothered to fine tune anything though.

Maybe we’ll get the proper documentary for their 70th. 😅

 I just watched this last night. I have many thoughts about it. I'm probably going to watch it a second time and actually take notes to do a full review. My first thoughts are that this is quite a bit better than it's reputation. Lots of details is given to the Al-David-Al again chronology, and the Brian-Al-Brian-Glenn and finally Bruce chronology. I really appreciated the archival interviews with Carl and Brian detailing the Nick Vinet battle with Murry over Brian's role as producer. These are just a few details that actually made portions of this documentary actually better than Endless Harmony for me, personally. I do agree that it kind of really fell apart in the last 15 or so minutes.

Also, again unimportant in the grand scheme, here's a cap from the DC '80 show from YouTube, but taken from the Japanese DVD of the show. The actual DVD still looks much better than this, but even this compressed YouTube clip looks better than what they put in the Disney doc:



The clips from the Japanese DVD also sounds *much* better:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lt2tvNzt1CU