The Smiley Smile Message Board

just watching the DVD from the endless summer series. I noticed that all the beach boys and Mike especially is enjoying the song. Miks is really loose and smyling.

I also like the BW song in my car, performed live in a small solo set in the concert from Brian. He sings this song really well live.

The whole concert is 100% energy !! I hope they release it someday as a live cd !

Bear in mind that by that time a certain faction of fans (proto-brianistas you might say  :p) criticized the band for being a nostalgia-driven jukebox that were squandering and ruining the legacy. Go figure.

BTW, Brian is either lip-synching to In My Car or he sang it live and they later edited the video. I suppose that parts of that (undoubtedly studio) recording were used for the SC album.

I like that version/arrangement of "In My Car" better than the Still Cruisin' release.

A lot of that concert, especially Mike's leads, were re-done in the studio.

You have a DVD of the 1989 TV series? Is that an official release?

It's not an official release.

It was dubbed in later.  His live performance at that show was barely understandable.  The group performance to my memory all these years later) was likely sweetened as well, but still sounded remarkably similar to the live performance

It's sad to hear that...However I do have recordings (had is a better term) of Brian doing three songs in the middle of a Beachago set from 1989, undubbed and natural...and he does just fine. Probably the cameras that made him nervous

That's because they were squandering the legacy, for the most part. Bad Hawaiian shirts, cheesy-sounding organs and synths, cheerleaders, John Stamos, the same lame setlist done over and over again, subpar new material, almost no 70s stuff in the setlist, Mike at his most nasal, Bruce kissing Mike's ass, Al and Carl going along with the all-oldies format... They would redeem themselves in '93, though...

That's a fair summary of the low points of that period.  The last straw for many were the cheerleaders.   Jardine was quoted in ESQ as saying that Love said it was good to have them because they would give good BJs.   

Are you referring to the cheerleaders who were perfectly fine (I believe it was on Shindig) in 1965, with a smiling Brian and Dennis on stage. Or, are you referring to the cheerleaders who were totally unacceptable in the late 1980's/early 1990's when Brian and Dennis were long gone from The Beach Boys? When Al was so critical of the cheerleaders, I wanted to get out that old black and white video of HIM singing "Help Me Rhonda", smiling from ear to ear - only to have a bunch of cheerleaders prancing around behind him.

HAHAHAHAHA!

I guess its a little different in '65 when they were still kids almost, rather than middle age men.

But it shouldn't have been different. The cheerleaders were for the audience's entertainment, not the group's (although some would argue that, you wanna move THIS to the Mike Love "reputation" thread?).

The cheerleaders were used to enhance a few songs, to add a little "something" to the show, to shake things up a bit, to give the audience something extra, to make it more than a traveling juke box get-on-and-get-off show. They were totally harmless. Was it Mike's idea? Probably? What was the vote on it? Was there a vote?

Of all the things Al can bring up about his "down times" in the group, he brings up the cheerleaders, which appear to nothing more than a little fluff added to a Beach Boys' concert. Al Jardine, serious artist. Or is it Al Jardine & Friends Live In Las Vegas, or Al Jardine's Postcards From California, or is it Al Jardine, give 'em something artistic like dredging up a four year-old "Christmas Day" performance?

Did Al run over your dog? Sleep with your wife? If someone attacked Mike like that, you would respond in 3.5 seconds in his defense.
They made the shows tacky and just gave a really sleazy strip club feel to the shows and I love attractive girls as much as the next guy. I noticed Mike hasnt made a move to bring them back in the past 11 years?

Not really a well thought out comparison offered here. In 1965, the boys were young as were most of the fans. Cheerleaders were hip in high school and college. As time marched on, most of us grew up, the Beach Boys became an oldies jukebox band and cheerleaders were about as relevant as Mike Love's cheesy outfits. Palm trees anyone? :p

1) Nah, Al's an animal lover. 2) No, but Dennis did. 3) You're darn right I would! (in my best Jack Nicholson yell  :smokin)

Shindig had dancers on a lot of their performances, I doubt the BB had any say in it.

Even for the middle-aged performers, like, say, Sammy Davis, Jr.?

It was just a stage gimmick, like this IMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_1RdVte9vE

To quote wiki..

In marketing language, a gimmick is a quirky feature that distinguishes a product or service without adding any obvious function or value. ;D

Hate to agree but I do.

They performed their new stuff, which probably some fans do not care for. They also performed more “obscure” songs from their catalogue: Wendy, Hushabye, This Whole World, You’re so good to me and a few others… And they ROCKED, as those videos attest. On a good night they could be pretty great, on an average night, they delivered a good show still. Hey, give Carl Wilson some credit, dammit! And it was a by far more reliable show than the one they put between 1978 and 1982. Or wasn’t it?

This was only a few years before...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IZSoKRwUH0

Not only does it have the terrible dancers, but Carl was obviously happy to have the song interrupted by the presenters. Being honest, the band have always been willing to sacrifice artitistic integrity if it's been in their interests to do so. I would guess that Carl and Al didn't need that much persuading over the cheerleaders.

I don't see where any of them had an objection to playing their legacy songs along with a small sample of their most recent releases, they did/done it their whole career. When you don't have any recent releases or your most recent release is your legacy music, it sort of narrows your choices I imagine. Come on, what band objects to the adoration of their audiences for their legacy music?

"I noticed Mike hasnt made a move to bring them back in the past 11 years?"

Normally on this board we would take that as evidence that he didn't want the cheerleaders in the first place, must have been somebody else in charge at the time. Haven't they made a few appearances though since '98?

I don't think that was Carl's choice to have the dancers there, that was the show he was appearing on. They were not his employees and it's pretty tough to tell from that clip exactly what his thoughts are regarding them.

True but he still agreed to take part. My point was that The BBs have never been a band like The Smiths say, who cared that much about integrity. They've been happy to change their lyrics to suit TV shows, record radio jingles, re-record songs for adverts, play plenty of private shows etc. Plus despite the criticism that Mike and Bruce have had about playing county fairs, the band did that from the beginning and started out by just basically playing hits and covers. I don't think anyone should really be surprised by what they;d turned into by 1989.

According to this setlist, there were cheerleaders at a Beach Boys show in 2006  ;)
http://members.tripod.com/~fun_fun_fun/10-28-06.html (http://members.tripod.com/~fun_fun_fun/10-28-06.html)

Ya know, I'm no Brianista and have never been a Blue Board fan for sure. I appreciate Mike, see his shows, believe his voice was absoutely essential to the sound and can't imagine anyone else singing many of his songs. That said, it is getting to the point where it is impossible to talk objectively or even criticize Mike Love on this board at all. It's like a bizarro Blue Board and not in a good way.

I agree, isn't that Solid Gold?  I am pretty sure that they almost always had dancers in the background if the song was uptempo.  I seem to remember a video from Solid Gold where the Beach Boys performed California Dreamin with Brian there on bass, and there were dancers around for that too.

Fair enough, tpesky; your point is well taken. I think the problem is, if it is a problem, is that people are SINGLING OUT Mike for these things that ocurred in the BAND. And I'll repeat the word BAND, meaning a group of guys.

Yes, in the early days, Brian was able to make decisions, musical decisions for the group. He did have that power. However, I'm not ready to concede that Mike had that same power in the ensuing years. All I ever read about is that Mike wasn't a Wilson, he couldn't play an instrument, he couldn't write music, he wasn't an artist, and, he couldn't even SING! Then why would this incompetent guy be able to make so many decisions - on his own - for the group? You'd think he'd be the last guy to have any power.

I have stated a lot lately on this board (and others) that I don't believe Mike alone was responsible for these decisions. Were these Mike's ideas? Maybe. Did he push for them? Probably. Was he a pain in the ass along the way? Maybe. But it's one thing to come up with ideas and another thing to get them implemented, especially in a major rock and roll band with some brilliant musicians, songwriters, and personalities. Basically, he could not have pulled off these things - setlists, final tracklists for albums, the basic musical direction of the band, and cheerleaders - WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE REST OF THE GUYS. Now, of course, people will say that the other guys didn't care, didn't want to stand up for what they believed, or didn't even show up at all for the meeting. Then, don't blame Mike! Blame the rest of the band. Why is the approach to single out Mike? Single out Dennis or Carl or, God forbid, Brian. But, no, it's easier to make excuses for them. So, the blame falls entirely on Mike.

Well, after so many years, I think there is a backlash starting. Some of the old, prevailing theories don't make sense. Message boards like this welcome ALL opinions and a search for the real facts. It used to be up to a few authors or a few books to write the history, or state the facts. Not anymore.

SJS has crowned himself Chief Advocate in charge of  the job of defending anything Mike Love. I say Here Here!! Some poor fool has to do it, right? And let us not demean that job for it is a full time life of sheer drudgery with no 15 minute breaks or even a vacation! The hours are long and hard-all in all its a dead end position. But all in all, our guy is a "compaany" guy who abides by the rigid company policy which he will defend at any cost! I say to him, why not prepare a sort of resume based on his posts on this and other boards and send it off to Mike Love's people asking for a position as some sort of "groom" for ever so talented one. His job description could include the following chores:
   1. Scan all message boards for ANY perfidious comments hurled at his highness or his band.  2. Act as a human shield to thwart any fan who just may throw his shoes at Mr. Frontman at concerts. 3. Polish his rings and be sure that all hats are clean, sanitized boxed and properly shaped.4 Sandals should be shredded after each use and tennis shoes should not become intermingled with Bruce's. Roll out red carpet for anywhere the Lovester may go whether it be the toilet, McDonalds, walking out on stage-alwars have a voluminous supply of rose petals for him to walk on as well.5. Instead of palm trees, have a pond on stage and help Mike to the shore as we all watch him walk on water. 8)   

Let's not kill the messengers, Brothers of the BBs.

I think SJS talks a lot of sense there. Obviously Mike deserves criticism for the cheerleaders debacle but the other group members obviously agreed to go along with it and that goes for every other direction that the band went in.

Mike made some bad moves he is not above reporoach but condsider this. If you go along with something you know is bad isn't that worse then doing something dumb you believe in.

I could be wrong, but doesn't Peter Carlin's book basically say that Mike was pretty much the leader from the mid 1990's on? I think Al was out-voted on everything, and didn't Carl essentially give up his voting right at around the SIP period?

I think it's pretty clear that Mike was the leader but if Carl did give up his vote then that would be strange. The cheerleader shenanigans occurred a few years before SIP anyway so Mike clearly could have been outvoted at that point.