I think the best way to start to dismantle and diagnose the issues with this doc is *not* to pick one particular story/fact/piece of information that was excluded and cry foul. This film has more fundamental, ground-level problems than that.

That's kind of like saying if I order a California cheeseburger with fries, and it comes out missing the cheese, lettuce, and tomato, and with potato chips instead of fries, there are more fundamental problems than those. No, the missing elements are fundamental problems too! And there is every right to cry foul if they're missing.

I've just been given this link to a UK Telegraph article which is about the documentary but covers a lot more than just that. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/news/the-beach-boys-brian-wilson-mental-health-drugs/  Some of the information comes from Nick Kent. I've read The Dark Stuff ages ago but I'm a bit distrustful of how much can be taken as the truth.

'If you happen to be one of the people keenly anticipating the arrival of the documentary film The Beach Boys, available now on Disney+, please be advised that this remarkable account fails to occupy a single moment of its near two-hour running time. Never mind that in marrying wild acclaim – from Leonard Bernstein, of all people, not some stoned hack from Creem or Hit Parader – with crushing insecurity, the story handily typifies the triumphs and terrors running wild behind the group’s sun-kissed exterior. For the life of me, I cannot account for such an obvious omission. ...While it wouldn’t be quite fair to accuse Beach Boys of entirely overlooking definitive and sometimes grisly details, it is right to accuse the film of seeking to place a positive spin on even the ugliest moments. Worse still, it seeks to imply that talent of the group’s members was, to some degree at least, evenly spread. But it really wasn’t.'

I could carry on quoting but I wouldn't know where to stop. Well worth a read.

Unfortunately the article is behind a paid subscription firewall at that link, is there another link?

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.

 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).

Al Jardine spills the beans again:

“There is some really wonderful footage of our performing,” Jardine said. “But unfortunately, Carl and Dennis are gone, so you don’t have their point of view. You have the narrative, according to Mike Love, and you have me in there somewhere in between, going, uh-hmm, sure. The truth is, we didn’t have enough content the way I would have liked to have done it. The producer did what he could, with what he had.”

https://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2024/05/beach-boys-cofounder-reflects-on-career-future/

Just go back to this quote from Al and the direction of this film makes perfect sense. It's the narrative according to Mike Love. If the Smile chapter plays out the way it does, again that makes perfect sense because efforts have been underway for several decades to minimalize the Smile saga and its influence, discredit firsthand eyewitnesses to what was happening, repeat ad nauseum either a whitewashed or false narrative about the how's and why's of what happened, and ultimately dismiss what has been reported and published about it since 1967 by trying to replace it with a narrative which was cartoonishly portrayed on ABC in 2000 via the John Stamos produced biopic...again, the narrative according to Mike. Broadcast twice now by networks owned by Disney.

It's really not hard to suss out why the documentary reads this way and why the narrative is what it is. It's just a shame to see over the past few decades such blatant efforts by some factions to diminish and discredit the individuals who had firsthand, even eyewitness information that would counter the narratives which included Brian being so geeked up on drugs and held back by various leeches and hangers-on that he couldn't do the work and decided to one day wave his hand in the air and scrap everything in his fits of drug-fueled paranoia. It's so laughable, yet if that crap continues to be repeated there are people who will believe it.

And if these narratives go beyond message boards and people with agendas sending false information around the fanbase, and gets broadcast widely to "new" fans on projects like the ABC miniseries and the Disney doc, those new fans will hear it and believe it. Sad.

I am just amazed and disappointed that one of the landmark songs of the Beach Boys' career - if not the 70's overall - was not included on this soundtrack. And that's "Til I Die". Maybe Brian himself vetoed it as he did "Let Him Run Wild" on the '93 box set, but I'm absolutely shocked Til I Die isn't on the soundtrack, especially if the point is to 1. sell Beach Boys music to new generations and fans and 2. introduce new generations and fans to their music. It's one of the most unique and compelling recordings I've ever heard, and it should be on there for a wider audience to hear and experience.

I'd like to know what decision-making process was behind that song's exclusion. If it was Brian's call, it's disappointing but I can live with that. If including it would be too much of a "downer", if you know what I mean, I'd be righteously pissed off.

Tedesco's got his name on his guitar - what a hombre 

That's Tommy's famous Telecaster which he literally threw up in the air during a session for Mike Nesmith's Wichita Train Whistle Sings sessions after Nesmith asked him to play something crazy, you can barely hear it crash down on the track. I know the answer is out there but I can't recall if Tommy got it fixed after that episode.

It's great to see these guys in action at Western, especially #3. Also consider there wasn't much footage shot because, until Nesmith blew the lid off the whole session player scene in a magazine interview, they didn't want it publicized in the biz that kids' favorite bands weren't playing their tracks on their albums.

If we could nail down the date of this Mamas & Papas session at Western #3, it would be neat to fit it into the Smile timeline because Brian was cutting Smile tracks there at exactly the same time.

[omission of any sort of discussion of the deaths of Dennis and Carl]

I guess the thing that bothered me most was omission of any sort of discussion of the deaths of Dennis and Carl.  

Really?!  

Yes, really.    

One could argue that the makers of this film tip their hand with respect to their values by omitting the tragedies of Dennis' and Carl's deaths while simultaneously devoting so much time to a different "tragedy"... i.e., Murry's ownership and sale of Sea of Tunes and the related aspect of Sea of Tunes' mistreatment of Mike Love.  Is that story really so terribly interesting and important to the legacy?  All parties concerned here are multi, multimillionaires, right?  Is it really so tragic that they're not even richer? The filmmakers think so, apparently, and that's perhaps the Rosetta Stone of understanding this film.

As I mentioned above, this isn't truly a documentary.  It's a promotional film posing as a documentary.  What's it promoting?  A brand called "The Beach Boys" which boils down to a collection of timeless songs created 1962-67 along with a "California dream" of sunny beaches, beautiful girls and fast cars.   I think it's pretty obvious what happened  here.  A couple years ago, Irving Azoff's Iconic bought a majority stake in BRI/The Beach Boys.  Azoff is an executive produer of this film.  He commissioned this film as re-introduction of a newly acquired asset.  This is business, not art.  

Nailed it. Al also answered the reason why they devoted that much to the Sea Of Tunes topic: It's the narrative according to Mike. Simple as that.

not sure if this is the Dionne Warwick footage you mentioned but it's great: https://youtu.be/iBUDjZxC4co

That's it! Thank you! Yes, that's the Bacharach-David-Warwick segment from "The Songmakers". I hope someday we can see the full show as it aired on ABC in early '67. I think I have seen the Mike Bloomfield footage online as well from the same show.

Well, even if the documentary doesn't cut it for some of us, we can be entertained by a moderately surly Al Jardine during the Q&A:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7SZc7BApKI&t=2s

Al did seem a little passive aggressive in that first question, did I hear it right that he got in a dig about them playing instruments related to the topic mentioned here earlier?

Just a nit-pick, Mike tells the story about the car sounds on 409 as Dennis revving up his 409 and driving down their street while Brian recorded it on his reel to reel...I thought that was Gary Usher revving up and driving his Chevy with a 348 engine, because the 409 had just come onto the market and they wanted one but couldn't afford it yet. Just a nit-pick there, but I don't think it was Dennis or his car, and it wasn't a 409 Chevy on that tape.

If you read that interview Al gave a few weeks ago where he didn't seem too hot on the documentary, and then see his surliness here, I think a potential idea of Al's opinion of this documentary project may become a bit clearer.

It was a rhetorical question, Al's opinion is pretty clear! Yes I was referring specifically to the interview in that Maui news article where Al also said the line about the project being the narrative according to Mike, so yes he doesn't seem as keen about this film as the producers and backers probably hoped he would be. I will say there is a difference between saying something in a print interview and saying something when the guy who made the editing decisions is right there in front of you, so kudos to Al for speaking up "live" as he did.

Well, even if the documentary doesn't cut it for some of us, we can be entertained by a moderately surly Al Jardine during the Q&A:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7SZc7BApKI&t=2s

Al did seem a little passive aggressive in that first question, did I hear it right that he got in a dig about them playing instruments related to the topic mentioned here earlier?

Just a nit-pick, Mike tells the story about the car sounds on 409 as Dennis revving up his 409 and driving down their street while Brian recorded it on his reel to reel...I thought that was Gary Usher revving up and driving his Chevy with a 348 engine, because the 409 had just come onto the market and they wanted one but couldn't afford it yet. Just a nit-pick there, but I don't think it was Dennis or his car, and it wasn't a 409 Chevy on that tape.

Not specifically a Beach Boys film, but...Thanks to the licensing company "Reeling In The Years Productions", footage from an ABC program that aired in February 1967 called "The Songmakers" has been released to YouTube, FINALLY! I've been writing about this and waiting for it for years.

This shows a Mamas And Papas session in Western #3 (Brian's favorite room) that was held in either late 66 or early 67, and features the Wrecking Crew cutting tracks. What is amazing is to consider we can see the same room with several of the same musicians in action during a session at the same time Brian was in there cutting tracks for Smile. So we get to see the exact same equipment and how things were set up and run inside Western #3 at the same time Brian was there. And it also shows...which I didn't realize until the clip was released...the band writing the song at John and Michelle's house with producer Lew Adler. This is the SAME house and likely the same room just a few months removed from when Brian and Paul McCartney hung out there for a jam session in April '67. And it's also where Brian spent time there too, hanging out and doing whatever else.

It's rare to see these things in live action, full color film/video, so this is short and apparently less content (I think?)  than what was originally aired but still a treat to watch. And there is more of the show (including a Bacharach-David-Warwick session) which hopefully the company will preview on their channel as well. The only other clip is Simon & Garfunkel from the same "Songmakers" program. More, please!

Here it is in glorious color, with audio:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mspTGpiPzU

Here are some of my previous posts and research about that Songmakers program, which at the time was not available for public viewing and which had only trickled out in brief clips on an old M&P documentary (scroll down for more info and vintage press clippings) :

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,27354.msg666314.html#msg666314

The song being worked up became "Boys & Girls Together" on the "Deliver" album, released February 1967.

Shown in the video are the following musicians and staff, besides the M&P:
Hal Blaine drums, Tommy Tedesco guitar (with the Telecaster he smashed at a Mike Nesmith session later that year), Joe Osborn bass, "Doctor" Eric Hord banjo (the Doc was the M&P touring guitarist), Larry Knechtel on piano, Gary Coleman mallets/percussion, Bones Howe lead engineer, Bowen David assistant engineer, Lew Adler producer...and if anyone can spot any others in the film please add to the list! (Interestingly, Tommy is clearly shown playing guitar but is not credited on the album)

Enjoy!

Agreed, all good thoughts, HeyJude.

I posted this in another thread, but here's the Joe Thomas interview where he talks about how he and Brian developed ideas for the TWGMTR album:

https://notes.andrewromano.net/joethomasbeachboys

The process with Joe Thomas and Brian here sounds very much like what you describe... Joe kind of rolling with an open-ended, abstract, at times even slightly absurd process, helping to tease out Brian's ideas that might take weeks or months or years to fully develop. Kind of catching these little drops of magic where he can, and going wherever Brian's creative process goes, whatever that ends up looking like.

Mike is -- to put it mildly! -- not known for this kind of empathy and flexibility. And a process that sounds to Brian like "you and Mike are going to work together on Day X when he's not touring, and you'll go into a room at X time and come out with X number of songs" is certainly going to feel high-pressure, unnatural, and about a million miles removed from what Brian's comfortable with.

If it didn't happen organically or to Mike's satisfaction during the 2012 tour, it seems very, *very* unlikely to happen now.

The part of this which is hard to figure out in terms of Mike writing with Brian is that when reading through the Joe Thomas interview, Brian and Mike DID write together, and as others have said, in a way that's more in line with their previous successful collaborations like California Girls and Good Vibrations than Mike's ideal "room with a piano" scenario, or starting something from scratch. I don't know if Mike is/was looking for something to gripe about, or just bitching for the sake of it, but the Thomas interview clearly states that Mike and Brian co-wrote those songs mentioned, in the way they had done before. It goes against some of Mike's claims in subsequent years that he wasn't allowed to write with Brian, or whatever his claims were.

And I've also found through the years that those people writing here and elsewhere on the topic of songwriting and collaboration seem to have no direct experience either collaborating on an original song, working up a song and recording it in the studio, or other hands-on elements of creating original music. It's something Nik Venet even touched on during his testimony in court for the song credits legal case in the early 90's, and how the nature of making songs and making records is a unique process that involves ideas being thrown around sometimes randomly and haphazardly in order to create a finished song. If people have not experienced that process, and only take certain comments from books or interviews at face value thereby idealizing or simplifying the whole process, they miss most of the point.

If what Joe described isn't Brian and Mike working on songs together, i.e. "collaborating" to create finished songs, then someone needs to explain that one to me.

As a tie-in with the documentary, Sweetwater is offering new guitar and bass effects as well as an amp, designed to capture the signature sounds of the Beach Boys' records from the 60's. These were created by some of the best effects creators, and are supposed to give players access to the classic tones heard on BB's productions without having to go broke buying vintage gear. The question of how do I replicate that guitar or bass tone from a given song has been asked often before, and in these products they offer a solution that won't break the bank...and which also has the Beach Boys branding on it too.

I really like the "Punchline" Bass Station "all in one" pedal, as it offers the key components in the old signal chain in one device that you can use direct into the board as an amp simulator...perfect for that Ray or Carole tone providing you use a pick on a Fender bass! The other ones look cool too, that 12-string simulator would be handy to avoid carting a separate 12-string to gigs or sessions.

Check them out, and there's video of the guys recording a Beach Boys inspired original song using this gear on this link as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hlQuawC6SE

https://www.sweetwater.com/insync/the-beach-boys-studio-effects-collection/

Visual teaser showing the Punchline and the brand logo:

The question is where did these opinions originate about BWPS not being the definitive Smile, or whatever variations of that have been spoken. And one source and mindset is pretty obvious, and has been in the public record for nearly 20 years.

That would be the lawsuit Mike filed against Brian, Melinda, his manager Jean, David Leaf, The Mail On Sunday publication, and related interests surrounding a free CD giveaway.

It's a long read, so this is only the first part which describes the basis and background for Mike's case.

Decide for yourself, after reading this, how relative the language in the lawsuit is to those opinions of BWPS, Smile, etc. and what is the "real" Smile and whatever else surrounds that mindset.

And consider that one way to make Brian and Van Dyke's completed Smile less legitimate (or to refute it entirely) would be to claim it is not the real Smile, and that the real Smile was in effect stolen from The Beach Boys, who own the intellectual property as claimed in the lawsuit. Mike's suit made the same claims about "Pet Sounds" and Brian's live performances of that album too. Part of this, if not the crux of these claims, is that Brian performing and releasing his versions of his own compositions was hurting Mike and "The Beach Boys" financially, and causing "confusion" in the fan marketplace.

The language in this suit explains a lot.


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MIKE LOVE, Plaintiff,vs.THE MAIL ON SUNDAY; ASSOCIATED NEWSPAPERS LTD.; SANCTUARY RECORDS GROUP, LTD., SANCTUARY RECORDS GROUP NY; SANCTUARY MUSIC MANAGEMENT, INC.; SANCTUARY MUSIC PRODUCTIONS, INC.; BIGTIME.TV; BRIAN WILSON; JEAN SIEVERS; THE LIPPIN GROUP, INC; SOOP LLC; DAVID LEAF; and DOES 1 through 100. Defendants Case No. COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR THE FOLLOWING CAUSES OF ACTION:Violation of Statutory and Common Law Rights of Publicity; Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; Action for Indemnity Under Written Indemnity Agreement; Declaratory Relief; Breach of Fiduciary Duty; Copyright Infringement for Unlawful Reproduction, Unlawful Preparation of Derivative Work, and Unlawful Distribution; Federal Trademark Infringement; Federal Unfair Competition – False Representation; Federal Trademark Dilution; State of California Unlawful Business Practices; Interference with Contractual Relations; Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage; Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantages; and Civil ConspiracyJURY TRIAL DEMANDED


NATURE AND BASIS OF ACTION
1. This action arises out of an international advertising and marketing scheme organized and orchestrated by Brian Wilson and his agents to promote the release of The Beach Boys’ long-awaited Smile album, at the expense of fellow Beach Boy Mike Love and The Beach Boys corporate entity, Brother Records, Inc. (“BRI”). This multimedia promotion shamelessly misappropriated Mike Love’s songs, likeness, and The Beach Boys trademark, as well as the Smile album itself, which has been identified with The Beach Boys for over thirty-seven years. The primary means used to implement the scheme was the use of “The Beach Boys” registered trademark, the misappropriation of images of Mike Love and the band, coupled with the “give- away” of over 2.6 million music CDs entitled “Good Vibrations.” This CD included a number of Beach Boys hit songs composed by Mike Love and Brian Wilson. The free Good Vibrations CD increased the sale of defendant Brian Wilson’s Smile CD, and defendant The Mail on Sunday’s newspapers, but it has had an adverse effect on the sales and value of the many Beach Boys CDs available for sale in the marketplace. Incredibly, the emails and correspondence by and between the defendants three weeks before the “give-away” on September 24, 2004 admit that they had to use The Beach Boys name and images to “engage” the audience. This suit seeks damages including the disgorgement of millions of dollars of illicit profits, and the protection of The Beach Boys trademark and the name and likeness of Mike Love and The Beach Boys
2. Mike Love, Brian Wilson, Carl Wilson, Dennis Wilson and Alan Jardine were the original members of the world famous Beach Boys band. From November 1961, when The Beach Boys released their first hit record Surfin, until the present, Mike Love, as the lead singer on most of their songs, has been the only member of the band to consistently perform live concerts. Brian Wilson essentially stopped touring in 1964, to be eventually replaced by current Beach Boy Bruce Johnston. Dennis Wilson passed away in 1983, Carl Wilson died in 1998, and Alan Jardine was not a member of the touring band from 1962 until 1965, and again from 1998 until the present. The current directors and equal shareholders of BRI are Mike Love, Brian Wilson, Carl Wilson’s estate, and Alan Jardine. Alan Jardine became a shareholder in 1973.
3. Contrary to the myth that Brian Wilson was the sole musical genius behind The Beach Boys songs, Mike Love and Brian Wilson are credited as co-authors of nearly all of The Beach Boys’ hits; and Mike Love and Carl Wilson carried the performing band for forty years. Many of Mike Love’s early compositional and lyrical contributions to The Beach Boys songs were concealed for many years by Brian Wilson’s father, Murray Wilson, who was the first manager of The Beach Boys, and then later by Brian Wilson, in order to direct the valuable songwriting royalties for The Beach Boys hits to Murray and Brian Wilson. However, this injustice was corrected after a four-month federal court jury trial and ensuing verdict and judgment in 1994 (hereinafter “the Love partnership action”) crediting Mike Love as the co-author of thirty-five of The Beach Boys’ songs, including such hits as California Girls, Wouldn’t It Be Nice, Help Me Rhonda, 409, and Be True To Your School. This judgment legally established Mike Love and Brian Wilson as partners in these songs and that Brian Wilson owed fiduciary duties to Mike Love in connection with their songs. Before the trial court decided on the amount of damages, Mike Love and Brian Wilson entered into a settlement agreement, i.e., a contract, wherein the settlement agreement was incorporated into the judgment.
4. In addition to his songwriting contributions to The Beach Boys, as the longtime front man for the band, Mike Love has been historically recognized as the primary voice and image of The Beach Boys; and Carl Wilson was historically recognized as the musical leader. After Carl’s death in 1998, Alan Jardine announced in the entertainment media that he no longer wished to tour with The Beach Boys; and Mike Love announced privately within BRI that he would no longer tour with Alan Jardine because of Jardine’s long and well documented history of mental and emotional problems, failure to perform, and abusiveness toward other band members. BRI then granted an exclusive license to Mike Love to perform at live concerts using The Beach Boys registered trademark. Since 1998, Mike Love has scrupulously fulfilled his license obligations, using the trademark to perform as The Beach Boys in approximately 150 live concerts per year all over the world. He has paid over eleven million dollars to BRI as royalties on this license.
5. In the same time frame following Carl Wilson’s death, Alan Jardine misappropriated the trademark, bastardized The Beach Boys name, altered the traditional Beach Boys harmonies, line-up and music, defamed Mike Love and The Beach Boys in the media, and then overtly infringed upon the trademark by using it to perform live concerts while duping ticket-buyers into believing it was the BRI-licensed Beach Boys. Jardine wreaked havoc in the marketplace causing BRI to sue for a permanent injunction which was granted and then upheld by the Ninth Circuit in Brother Records, Inc. v Jardine, 318 F.3d 900 (9th Cir. 2003). Although Jardine is still a 25% shareholder and a Director of BRI (receiving 25% of the license revenues), he is an adjudicated infringer who has breached his fiduciary duties to BRI.
6. Like Jardine, Brian Wilson has now with the “give-away” scheme, pursued a path to promote himself, destroy The Beach Boys trademark, and breach his fiduciary duties to BRI and to Mike Love. Historically, these breaches are the continuation of over thirty-five years of conduct by Brian Wilson to damage The Beach Boys and BRI. Between 1961 and 1966 Mike Love and Brian Wilson successfully collaborated with Carl and Dennis Wilson in the creation of hit after hit and album after album in the rapidly growing world of rock and roll music. Mike and Brian are recognized as prodigious song-writing pioneers in the early development of this musical genre. But beginning in 1965, drugs began to destroy Brian Wilson. By 1967, Brian lived either in his bed or in his sand-box in his Beverly Hills mansion. While Mike Love and The Beach Boys were touring without him, Brian was surrounded by drug addicts, drug dealers, parasites, and plagiarizers. In 1967, while Brian was living in an environment of drugs and physical and mental illness, Brian and The Beach Boys created the “Smile” album pursuant to their contract with Capitol Records, and paid for by Capitol. Brian also consulted some of the hangers-on that surrounded him at the time.
7. Between 1967 and 2002, Brian was essentially too ill to do anything but collect his royalties, including revenues from BRI and his 25% share of Mike Love’s license royalties. Between 1991 and 2002, Brian was under a court-ordered conservatorship, first with a court appointed lawyer until 1995, and then with his just married wife. In 2002, Brian began to resurrect his career by touring with his own band. However his “performance” has been, for the most part, limited by his past mental and emotional problems. In order to promote himself, Brian began to misappropriate BRI property. In 2003, he misappropriated “Pet Sounds,” a Beach Boys album, all while serving as a fiduciary to BRI. In September, 2004, Brian Wilson, without permission or a license from BRI, the owner of Smile, orchestrated the scheme to release a Smile CD. Up until then, Smile had been called the most recognized unreleased album in the history of rock ‘n’ roll. Smile has obtained “secondary meaning” as a Beach Boys property, and historically has been identified with The Beach Boys trademark. The defendants here exploited Mike Love and The Beach Boys’ tie-ins with Brian Wilson and Smile to promote the sale of the Smile CD, The Mail on Sunday newspaper, and the services of BigTime.TV.
8. The acts and omissions perpetrated by defendants to misappropriate the songs, the copyrights, publicity rights, the names and likenesses, and The Beach Boys trademark are summarized as follows:
· The Mail on Sunday’s unauthorized use of Mike Love’s songs, name, and images in its September 24, 2004 edition to promote the giveaway of 2.6 million copies of the Good Vibrations CD and the associated sale of 2.6 million copies of its newspaper;
· The Mail on Sunday’s unauthorized use of The Beach Boys trademark to promote the giveaway of 2.6 million copies of the Good Vibrations CD and the associated sale of 2.6 million copies of its newspaper;
· The Sanctuary defendants’ unauthorized use of Mike Love’s musical compositions California Girls, Good Vibrations, Wouldn’t It Be Nice, Darlin and Help Me Rhonda, which were included on the Good Vibrations CD;
· The Sanctuary defendants’ unauthorized use of Mike Love’s name and images on the cover of the Good Vibrations CD;
· The Sanctuary defendants’ unauthorized use of The Beach Boys trademark on the cover of the Good Vibrations CD;
· BigTime.TV’s unauthorized use of Mike Love’s songs, name, and images and the unauthorized use of The Beach Boys trademark to promote the Good Vibrations CD on television and the Internet, and to promote its own services;
· Brian Wilson’s breach of his partnership agreement with Mike Love by exploiting their co-authored songs for Brian Wilson’s benefit and to Mike Love’s detriment;
· Brian Wilson’s breach of his fiduciary duty to Mike Love by replacing the lyrics Mike Love wrote for their co-authored Good Vibrations song with those written by Van Dyke Parks for the version of Good Vibrations that appears on the Smile CD;
· Brian Wilson’s breach of his fiduciary duty to Mike Love by not informing Mike Love of the inclusion of their co-authored songs on the Good Vibrations CD used to promote the sales of Brian Wilson’s Smile CD;
· Brian Wilson’s breach of his fiduciary duty to Mike Love by participating in the scheme to give away the Good Vibrations CD, which included many Beach Boy hits, thereby devaluing other Beach Boys albums being sold by BRI and causing less of these other Beach Boys albums to be sold;
· Defendants David Leaf, Jean Sievers, SOOP LLC, The Lippin Group, and others tied in the giveaway of the Good Vibrations CD with a worldwide promotion of Smile by, inter alia, producing a television “documentary” using copyrighted Beach Boys materials and The Beach Boys trademark in such a way as to represent to the world that Smile was a BRI product, and that Smile was the property of Brian Wilson and that Brian Wilson and his new band was, in fact, the real Beach Boys.

RIP
…But any chance of a re-do of the C50 Live album without autotune now? 😁

While there are cost issues involved in clearing a ton of songs for a Blu-ray of the full show (though that should happen too, just charge more!), there's no reason to not release the 61-song Royal Albert Hall gig from the reunion tour.

There should have been a bunch of consolation releases in the aftermath of the reunion stalling out prematurely.

Unfortunately, Mike still seems kind of irked about some aspects of the reunion, so I'm not sure how likely it is for them to do what at this point would essentially be "archival" releases from the 50th anniversary.

Not to be morbid, but we've just recently been talking about Mike developed some pretty intense animus towards Joe Thomas by the end of the reunion project, so I don't know if working with the reunion material in any form might be easier in the future now?

It could also depend on who owns the rights to the footage, along with the other moving parts involving rights, clearances, etc. The question is whether the footage is owned or in any way controlled by the Wilson-Love-Thomas LLC "50 Big Ones", or whether everything went to Capitol, Brother, etc. Was "50 Big Ones LLC" dissolved after the tour and subsequent media releases from that tour, or is it still in effect and could have a stake in that footage and control over what gets done with it in the future?

I agree, that Royal Albert Hall gig and the other final shows from the tour in the UK deserve a standalone release. No post-production "fixing" either!

Just a little bit of history too, that same night "The Big 610" was hosting The Beach Boys package show, Frank Zappa and The Mothers played a gig at the Fillmore with Lenny Bruce! 1966 was a great year for music...

And The Sunrays and Neil Diamond also played with the BB's but were not included on the posters:
https://www.sahmigo.com/concerts/ds_concerts/1966/1966-06-24_san_francisco.html

This is the original poster for that show which sold at auction last year for $800

...But I do recall others speaking about Orson Welles' "The Magnificent Ambersons" and how Welles realized his own cut of the film, what he wanted as a finished work versus what the studio demanded and released. That's a good one to deep-dive for anyone interested.

It’s sometimes difficult to separate fact from fiction with respect to Welles’s late projects; which were mere ideas, which had a measure of substance, which had a reasonable prospect of actually happening.

But it does seem to be true that Welles actively sought funding, in the 1970s, to enable him to shoot a new ending for Ambersons, featuring the still-surviving actors in their original roles. Although it wouldn’t have been the original ending – instead, it would have been a sort of “many years later” postscript – it would have been in keeping with his original vision.

If he had found the money, would that have been the definitive Ambersons? Well, he didn’t find it, so we’re spared the decision. But the story is a powerful reminder of just how miraculous it is that the original creators were able to return to SMiLE and complete it, all those years later.

C&N

Yes, Welles definitely had his share of battles with studios over his vision versus the studios' final cuts, and it's all a fascinating journey into the inner workings of Hollywood movie-making and politics, and perhaps also a look into the creative mind of someone like Welles. I'd also add his battles over "Touch Of Evil" to my earlier examples, where the studio yet again cut scenes from Welles' original edit and that led Welles to write a long memo outlining his own ideas for the edits...which led to a project to restore the film to Welles' original vision based on that memo and which actually happened after his death.

So again that falls into the questions about original vision versus the released version, and the validity of a "restoration" or reconstruction after the death of the main creator. With Touch Of Evil, more than Ambersons, I'd say if they worked meticulously based on Welles' own notes to do the reconstruction, the question would be (again) is that cut and restoration the definitive version of Touch Of Evil. It's a stretch, yes, but for all those years leading up to BWPS, I think fans making their own mixes and sequences were coming close to that same question and dilemma with far less to work with in terms of original intent or creator's intent...which again is why I think it's helpful that we got BWPS to act as the definite answer in that specific case.

Now let me introduce this somewhat new development into the mix. This article is about Magnificent Ambersons and a project to restore it to Welles' original vision, replicating the scenes that were cut without Welles' consent and presumably lost forever:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/jun/18/magnificent-ambersons-rebirth-for-ruined-orson-welles-masterpiece-that-rivalled-citizen-kane


Read through that, and see if it connects as it did with me to the current debates about AI technology in music. Or the use of AI in general to either finish unfinished works or create works that were intended to be a certain way but never materialized. It's all fascinating to me, and I wonder if the negativity surrounding some of the AI works so far will be put on projects such as this one with film restorations. I can't see a dividing line between the two media and the use of tech to recreate or "finish" lost or impossible projects.

I look at it from Brian's point of view - he is quoted as preferring his 2004 version (over TSS), and he was disappointed in how TSS sounded. I put a lot of stock into what the artist says - if Brian says TSS is the definitive version, then that is the definitive version. If Brian says the 2004 version is the definitive version, then that is the definitive version...and Brian has said as much about BWPS.

Brian speaking about the 2004 version:

At the studio, Mark Linett, our engineer, walked over and handed me a box. “What’s this?” I asked. “That’s SMiLE,” he said. I held it right next to my heart.

That says all I need to know about BWPS. I see TSS as a collection of historical documents, strung together to emulate the completed work (BWPS). I love TSS, and it is my most treasured boxset. And the amount of care and love that went into every aspect of that set is instantly apparent. However, I can't see it as being another official version of Smile, because the artist himself doesn't prefer it. It's like, if Beethoven released his 9th symphony, but years later someone else publishes an early draft of his 9th - we wouldn't call the early draft "official", because the artist himself didn't prefer it. I don't see any difference with Smile.

I think every fan has a right to their own personal preference, but I also think that the artist should have final say in what is the definitive/legitimate/official version. Because, like with my Beethoven hypothetical, in 200 years the fans of the work shouldn't have a say in what is or isn't official/definitive. Rather, Beethoven/Wilson himself should have that say. And Brian has said that BWPS is Smile.

Excellent points, and very important ones to consider.

I'll add one more element to this: In the case of Smile specifically, the main creative forces behind the work itself were still alive and directly involved in finishing the work. It wasn't a case of scholars decades or centuries later trying to "finish" a dead composer's work based on manuscripts and notes found in archives; Smile was the product of the same two musicians and writers who envisioned and worked on the piece originally, reconvening with the expressly set goal of finishing the work for public performance as a full musical presentation in movements.

If either Brian or Van Dyke were not the ones finishing it, I'd probably feel differently about BWPS being the definitive version, the completed version. But they were the same guys back together picking up where they left off in 1967 finally putting the last chapter in the book of Smile as a complete work from the original creators.

The sad part of unfinished works in general is when the creators are no longer around to actually see it to a natural conclusion and say "this is now finished as I want it." Years ago I went on a few research deep-dives about parallels in other entertainment media like film which seemed to be similar to the Smile saga. I had a decent list going in both music and film, mostly film, but unfortunately that list and my thoughts are long gone or misplaced.

But I do recall others speaking about Orson Welles' "The Magnificent Ambersons" and how Welles realized his own cut of the film, what he wanted as a finished work versus what the studio demanded and released. That's a good one to deep-dive for anyone interested.

And another was Nicholas Ray's "We Can't Go Home Again", a bizarre but unforgettable film experiment that saw Ray battling to edit it into a complete work but never finishing it before his death. Years later the film was "finished" by those close to Ray and using his original thoughts and ideas to finish the edits as they thought Ray would have wanted it had he had the technology, time, and other aspects in his life come together so he could finish it (does that sound familiar?)...but it still isn't and could never be exactly what Nicholas Ray envisioned in his mind as a completed work, which again lends the Wilson-Parks BWPS Smile that much more weight because they were both directly involved in finishing it and calling it done.

Check out the Ray and Welles projects I mentioned, if anything it's an interesting historical trip about two radically different films made by two of the most challenging, frustrating, and respected directors and filmmakers of the last century.

And there was one musical piece I found - cannot remember the name - where the lack of technology hampered a 20th century composer enough to where he couldn't finish his work until technology was developed to allow the work to be performed as he envisioned. If that sounds vaguely familiar to anyone, please fill in the details!

RIP Joe Thomas, wow. He deserves credit for getting Brian back into the songwriting and recording game for sure, and also having the connections in the video production business to get Brian back onto video screens as his own entity rather than part of Beach Boys documentaries and TV specials. Keep in mind too that a lot of what Joe did in those areas was before YouTube and when getting on TV or video actually meant striking a deal with a network, distribution companies, and other outlets to actually get the videos to fans. It wasn't as easy as editing together existing clips and creating fake fan-made promos to go direct to Youtube or Vimeo, you had to play the game and actually strike deals to get releases and distribution.

I think that was Joe's strong point, and the muscle he brought to the table. He would have a multimedia project laid out and ready to go, that included not just the music but also video and live concerts. That's quite an undertaking and involves many moving parts...so when Joe did Brian's concert in Vegas when he had Blondie and Ricky, Nate Ruess, etc, and when Joe was part of the LLC set up with Mike and Brian called "50 Big Ones", he could pitch to various labels and distributors a plan which had all of those elements laid out and ready to go. Labels love it when they can get a ready-made project with little effort from their own in-house teams. I think that's what ultimately helped the 50th anniversary get off the ground, the fact that the label was getting an album, tour, and video with promotions and it was a package ready to unwrap when it was time to kick it off. Results and opinions obviously being mixed on the end results, but Joe also did a similar thing with the Stars and Stripes project, having both an album and video ready to roll, along with live appearances to get the project more visibility and promotion for the band. Credit to Joe for doing that, it's not an easy thing to navigate those kinds of multimedia projects, especially in the 90's and prior to Youtube's dominance in the field.

I've had issues with his musical choices and have mentioned them publicly, specifically the production styles and sounds on those projects where he was most involved with Brian, but again credit to Joe for being the one to inspire Brian to write dozens of new songs and get them released to fans. If Brian needed a collaborator or a facilitator (which was one of Joe's biggest strengths in his work with Brian and the band), Joe was there and got new music flowing again from Brian and also had outlets to promote it. Whether fans have positive or negative opinions of those projects, Joe got the ball rolling and made things happen.

[He loved it.]

Al Jardine spills the beans again:

“There is some really wonderful footage of our performing,” Jardine said. “But unfortunately, Carl and Dennis are gone, so you don’t have their point of view. You have the narrative, according to Mike Love, and you have me in there somewhere in between, going, uh-hmm, sure. The truth is, we didn’t have enough content the way I would have liked to have done it. The producer did what he could, with what he had.”

https://www.mauinews.com/news/local-news/2024/05/beach-boys-cofounder-reflects-on-career-future/

I'm withholding a lot of opinions for now because it hasn't been streamed yet, but if Al is correct in his words and this film is the narrative according to Mike Love, is that really what fans have been waiting for, or is that what fans can already get from various sources and outlets? We've already seen and heard the narrative according to Mike, and part of that was the "official" bio-pic "An American Family" produced by John Stamos that ran on ABC back in 2000, which was a complete farce.

Side note - From the same interview, Al said this: "Later in life, Brian and I went back on the road together. He loved it. He called me, ‘come out and join me.’ Neither of us were working with Mike (Love) anymore. It was a natural fit.”

He loved it. So much for a miserable Brian being forced to tour all those years, as we were told in another "narrative" that wasn't factual.

Gethen Jenkins, real honky tonk music..."Bottle In My Hand"

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

And then there's one of the best authentic country bands on the scene, Marty Stuart and The Fabulous Superlatives, with Kenny Vaughn and Marty playing dual lead guitar and tearing the roof off the Letterman show back in the day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVMdwpcl3m4

The Red Clay Strays, "Wondering Why":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbxfFKvoAU4

Good band, good sound.

Re: Charley Crockett, he's been releasing album after album for quite some time, I got into him about a year ago when he put out a single "I'm Just A Clown" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku04drQsVjw ) that sounded like a Bill Withers tune with BB King sitting in on lead guitar, I dug it a lot. Then another single after that, "Trinity River" which he's had out for almost a decade, started to get more airplay and that featured gut-bucket, 1930's style muted trumpet with a swing feel! Very cool, a country artist with his feet in a lot of different style pools.

There is a resurgence of honky tonk music too, which I think is very cool. Authentic, sh*t-kicking 50's and 60's honky tonk sounds that may or may not have been inspired by Shooter Jennings' work in that style...whatever the case, it's still kind of underground but bubbling up.

And it's not pure country, but it is too at the same time, like that hybrid sound Roy Orbison had on his biggest hits of the early 60's, Stephen Sanchez:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxldQ9eX2wo


Interesting how many younger guitarists on these records seem to have found the tremolo/vibrato channel on their vintage amps  

This is an interesting little interview clip with Sheryl Crow. Listen to her describe when she's talking to a female writer who needed a male voice for one her demos, who paid a service $5 to create a fake AI John Mayer voice to sing her demo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5DX5cB_m34

If you wonder what many, if not most (surely not all, but probably most) artists think of doing this, watch and listen to her reaction.

I'm not saying ever application of this is the exact same scenario. But in scenarios like this, it's altering some fundamental aspects of how music is created, and I think artists that are sensitive to humans being the driving force behind that process are not embracing of using fake AI voices.

If you want an example of something that has fundamentally changed how music is created, one of many no less, look no further than digital recording technology. It has changed nearly every aspect of how music is recorded and presented to listeners. Modern listeners are now conditioned to hear things which are often physically impossible due to the ease of editing, fixing, and correcting elements of the music. The notion of recording a song with a "human" feel or with imperfections is all but gone from popular music, unless there is an artist with an analog fetish who only records as if it were 60 years ago in an old studio. Drummers sound perfect thanks to beat mapping, singers hit every note perfectly thanks to Melodyne and other pitch correction software, guitar and bass parts are not only played perfectly in time but they're sterilized by editing out all the squeaks and noises inherent in the instrument itself...the list goes on. It's at the point where many younger listeners are so conditioned by this sterilization and fixing that something played 100% real and live can sound "off" or wrong, and that also has removed the notion of a real groove or a pocket from the process, since a beat mapping software will take all of the ebb and flow and variation out of a drum part in order to quantize it to sound perfect.

So based on that, and all of that too is what Sheryl Crow has used on her own music I'm sure, again the question is how is AI as a new tech any different? We're already hearing a majority of pop music that has been altered and sterilized by existing technology to make it sound different than when it was recorded. Some including me would say the same radical shift in the creation of music happened when audio engineers learned how to edit tape seamlessly. It created a product that was not a pure or true reproduction of a musical performance, and also led to some of the greatest popular music ever recorded.

And don't get me wrong, of course I share similar concerns about the AI technology and where or how far it could go, but ultimately it's a tool just like digital recording, sequencing, editing, and quantizing is a tool that has fundamentally altered the process of making and recording music, and shows no signs of disappearing.