The Smiley Smile Message Board

Smiley Smile Stuff => General On Topic Discussions => Topic started by: nakostopoulos on June 04, 2015, 07:35:46 PM



Title: "Love & Mercy" - Board member reviews and discussion
Post by: nakostopoulos on June 04, 2015, 07:35:46 PM
I figure it deserves its own thread, now that the time has come...

I knew I was going to enjoy "Love & Mercy", but I didn't quite know just how much. Paul Dano was amazing, as expected (I want an extended three hour recreation of the "Pet Sounds" sessions), but John Cusack really impressed me with the way he inhabited the spaces of Brian Wilson's speech patterns.

One of the other things that really stood out to me was the way Bill Pohlad used silence as a kind of negative space to contrast with the music.

The opening is incredible, I can't think of many other music-related films that would open on a black screen, with a sound collage playing for two straight minutes; it's a startling, unnerving and deeply evocative way to get us inside the brain of an artist. I think of the whole movie kind of as a natural half-way point between your standard artist biopic like "Ray" and your more off-the-wall experiment like "I'm Not There". (Plus, wait for the brilliant "2001" reference; it was both clever and deeply touching.)

I saw the first teaser back in February, and have played "Pet Sounds" and "SMiLE" probably over 400x. I almost expected that it was in preparation for the movie, and then I'd be able to move on.

Uh, about that...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Alex on June 05, 2015, 08:12:40 AM
Does it outdo this????  :lol :lol :lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bF3HPqfW5ZU


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on June 05, 2015, 08:53:52 AM
The opening is incredible, I can't think of many other music-related films that would open on a black screen, with a sound collage playing for two straight minutes; it's a startling, unnerving and deeply evocative way to get us inside the brain of an artist.

Not at all a music film, but could that be another homage to 2001? As that film opens with like 3-4 minutes of music to a black screen. I'm a huge fan of 2001 and I love that they did at least one homage to that film. Can't wait to see this later today!


Title: Re: \
Post by: nakostopoulos on June 05, 2015, 08:59:33 AM
The opening is incredible, I can't think of many other music-related films that would open on a black screen, with a sound collage playing for two straight minutes; it's a startling, unnerving and deeply evocative way to get us inside the brain of an artist.

Not at all a music film, but could that be another homage to 2001? As that film opens with like 3-4 minutes of music to a black screen. I'm a huge fan of 2001 and I love that they did at least one homage to that film. Can't wait to see this later today!

Well, "2001's" opening is more standard practice of long-form films of that era which had overtures over black sometimes ("Lawrence of Arabia" is another example). The scene in "L&M" didn't strike me as an overture, primarily because there is a short scene of Brian smoking a cigarette in the studio discussing the sounds he's hearing.

Still, I think you'll appreciate the overt "2001" reference when you see it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on June 05, 2015, 09:02:25 AM
The opening is incredible, I can't think of many other music-related films that would open on a black screen, with a sound collage playing for two straight minutes; it's a startling, unnerving and deeply evocative way to get us inside the brain of an artist.

Not at all a music film, but could that be another homage to 2001? As that film opens with like 3-4 minutes of music to a black screen. I'm a huge fan of 2001 and I love that they did at least one homage to that film. Can't wait to see this later today!

Well, "2001's" opening is more standard practice of long-form films of that era which had overtures over black sometimes ("Lawrence of Arabia" is another example). The scene in "L&M" didn't strike me as an overture, primarily because there is a short scene of Brian smoking a cigarette in the studio discussing the sounds he's hearing.

Still, I think you'll appreciate the overt "2001" reference when you see it.

Ahh that makes sense. Thanks for the reply!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Hank Briarstem on June 05, 2015, 03:20:49 PM
I wept.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 05, 2015, 03:23:05 PM
I've now seen the film twice (today) and wrote this in between the showings. Apologies for the lean details, these were just my thoughts and impressions.

This is my review.

------

Bob Dylan on Brian Wilson: "That ear! Jesus, he's got to will that to the Smithsonian."

That ear. That one ear. From it sprang the most inspirational and aspirational popular music of the last 50 years.

Bill Pohlad's LOVE & MERCY is a loving tone poem to Brian Wilson. Breaking free of the conventional shackles that hamstring most biopics about popular artists, LOVE & MERCY lives and breathes. We see not only his creative process but we are taken on a trip through the cerebral hemispheres.

This trip is an occasionally bumpy ride that gives the viewer the most intimately drawn picture that we will likely ever see about a major artist. The film is daring and takes many chances, not the least of which; the dual casting. Both leads are splendid, each of their personal portraits of the man at dramatically different times in his life.

The biggest success, apart from the performances of the two leads is the editing choices. Both 1960s Brian and 1980s Brian are juxtaposed and woven together in an intense way, the only way they could be. The 2001 'homage' to Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite is one of the most inspired things I've seen in quite some time.

LOVE & MERCY is masterful and magical.

------


Title: Re: \
Post by: the professor on June 05, 2015, 08:08:43 PM
the professor usually has a long scholarly analysis, but "wound up" is all I got now, as Larry said inthe other thread. .The movie is uniformly great in all the ways noted here. E Banks? my God--beautiful from head to toe. Everything worked. . . .As NYT says, it's a music bio pic made by someone who appears not to have seen any such pics, which are generally crap and sentimental.

Mike was depicted well and honestly and sympathetically. If Landy and Murray were half that bad, they were monstrous.

I am lost in the world of the movie right now. . . .it will blow your heart away. . .

The professor

edit: the movie ends on a dead end st. in Hawthorne, beneath the mighty 105: how  inspired was that. amazing


Title: Re: \
Post by: thegoldenyear on June 06, 2015, 12:05:33 AM

edit: the movie ends on a dead end st. in Hawthorne, beneath the mighty 105: how  inspired was that. amazing

One of the three times I teared up during the TIFF screening in September, I must say.

If I recall the moment correctly... I'd been so engrossed by the Banks-Cusack scene I'd lost sense of time and wasn't anticipating the end of the film. But my god, when WIBN drifted in, with its eternal message of  - what was it Paul Williams once said were the three core elements of Brian's music? - warmness, serenity and friendship underscoring the scene under the freeway, my eyes suddenly felt very hot and moist. Movies IS magic.

One of those other teary moments came out of the pure pleasure punch of seeing the Pet Sounds sessions brought to glorious life. The third moment, the only one couched in sadness, sprang from the first time Cusack plays the "Love And Mercy" melody to Banks. I don't know whether that happened in real life, but it sure packed a wallop anyway. Because even if it didn't, we all know somewhere along the way Brian's knocked Melinda's socks off with some heartrending melody or other.

I will see L&M Sunday, and again after that I'm sure. Several non-convert friends have asked if I'd like to see it with them, and I can't wait to hear their take(s) on this amazing piece filmmaking.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Doo Dah on June 06, 2015, 03:12:56 PM
I'd like to echo what so many have said before - it's an emotional wallop. While we have devoted our lives into digging in the back story, and while we may know all the drama in this man's life, it's stunning to viscerally feel that turmoil on a personal level.

The studio scenes were as touching as first listening to the old SOT discs back in the day; stripped bare of Hollywood glitz, you're seeing people settling into a job, with all the heavy lifting and hours of tedium that go into great art. Watching Brian and Hal take a smoke break in a regular-Joe parking lot outside of Western (I assume), made it all tangible. Like break time at the warehouse.

Of course, I knew I'd enjoy the studio segments. As would anyone here (hopefully Joe Q. Public gets a deeper appreciation of the process). But what struck me was the juxtaposition between that halcyon time and the brooding tension of the 80's. It's the 80's sections that overwhelmed me and made me feel the claustrophobia. As I mentioned before, we've read about these dramas before, but somehow you were lifted front and center into that lion cage. Disturbing and fascinating on so many levels.

Bravo to the principals in this movie. Dano and Cusack, while physically dissimilar manage to evoke the child in Brian. The excitable, irrepressible and the frightened, withdrawn. It's all there, and you can't look away from the screen - you might miss a twitch, an insight into the enigma. And Atticus...well, what can you say. I hope there's a soundtrack at some point. It's all a part of this magnificent ride.

Leaving the theatre last night I felt as if I was in a state. The same way I felt when I (finally) saw John Frankenheimer's Seconds on TMC. We all know how that went down back in the day. You see... everything's gone full circle.  Damn Phil Spector and his Mind Gangsters!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Moon Dawg on June 06, 2015, 03:16:50 PM
Seeing tomorrow; can't wait.


Title: Re: \
Post by: harrisonjon on June 06, 2015, 04:19:47 PM
It is one of the best movies about music, or about flawed genius, ever made. Beautifully constructed, filmed and acted. The recording scenes are the highlight, and personally I found it impossible not to cry when we saw the Pet Sounds tracks being created, because that music has been a good portion of my emotional support through my adult life. The love story is nicely done but it is fairly conventional; it's the blending with the Brian of 1966-67 that makes the love story of c.1985 so affecting. I'm sure it's a whitewash of a much messier set of meetings and false starts, which is how many relationships begin, but I'm equally sure that the emotional core is true, and the love of a good woman really did give Brian the motivation to overcome his imprisonment by Landy, even if the film does omit the grinding legal work done by Carl et al to boot Landy out.

The most powerful achievement of all, I feel, is how the movie brought out the fact that Brian's disintegration occurs during his moments of greatest artistic triumph: Pet Sounds, GV, Smile. Even though we already know that this is coming, the full impact of what it means - the mourning and loss it entails for Brian, as his confidence collapses - has to be felt through a shared dramatic experience, and this is what the movie gives us.


Title: Re: \
Post by: GhostyTMRS on June 06, 2015, 05:38:26 PM
I just got back from seeing it.

I had the opposite reaction to what I had expected. I assumed I would love the Paul Dano/60's stuff and have a hard time accepting John Cusack/80's Brian. In fact, the Cusack performance blew me away, and those segments with Melinda were easily my favorite parts of the movie. Maybe it's because I've been so steeped in reading about the Pet Sounds/SMiLE era for 30 years, that I was kind of ticking off the beats "okay we go from this to this to this..". The way the Landy era was portrayed was fascinating. Brian's 2nd time around with Landy has, of course, been documented but to finally put visuals to it was enormously satisfying. Paul Giamatti? What can I say? Just incredible. I mean, if they're going to hand out awards for this one, he'd be my odds-on fave for best supporting actor. It may be the performance of his career. Elizabeth Banks was tremendous too,

I will say that all of the 60's era segments were extraordinarily well done, erasing anyone's painful memories of "Summer Dreams" and "An American Family" (although I have an abiding love for "Summer Dreams" because of when it came out and the age I was at the time)...but honestly, the Landy era is what got me.

And good news! The theater was mostly full on a Saturday afternoon!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Wirestone on June 06, 2015, 05:42:56 PM
Ghosty -- I saw it this afternoon, and my reactions were similar to yours. I feel like the '60s territory is very familiar, albeit with an incredible performance by Dano. But the 80s stuff is a revelation, and John Cusack really does something special with his performance. It allows you to see modern-day (or quasi-modern day) Brian as a real, feeling person. Ditto for Melinda. I get the impression that for the people who know Brian, this is the guy they see. He's probably not that way all the time, but at his best he's quirky, charming and quite charismatic.


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 06, 2015, 05:46:32 PM
I saw it too. Can I ask how was the sound at the theaters you've seen it? I'll probably see it again - no, make that I will see it again - but I'll probably go to another theater to compare the sound and delivery of the sound to this one. I felt the soundtrack and audio track in general needs to almost envelop the audience, I noticed there was a lot of very deliberate and meticulous panning of sounds in the stereo field, but the theater I was in (seat center, eye level to screen, aka the prime seat to hear and see the film I'd say) seemed to have too few speakers after the first rows of seats.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on June 06, 2015, 05:50:32 PM
Guitarfool's cat is okay! ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 06, 2015, 05:54:39 PM
I saw it too. Can I ask how was the sound at the theaters you've seen it? I'll probably see it again - no, make that I will see it again - but I'll probably go to another theater to compare the sound and delivery of the sound to this one. I felt the soundtrack and audio track in general needs to almost envelop the audience, I noticed there was a lot of very deliberate and meticulous panning of sounds in the stereo field, but the theater I was in (seat center, eye level to screen, aka the prime seat to hear and see the film I'd say) seemed to have too few speakers after the first rows of seats.

The sound system at the AMC theater I went to (as usual) was terrific. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 06, 2015, 06:00:44 PM
Guitarfool's cat is okay! ;D

Yes! And I was going to post a heartfelt thank you for the well-wishes that were posted last night. The eye has improved a lot, although it's still not 100% normal, but it's much, much better than it looked when i got home from work last night. It destroyed me to see that eye shut and all red/irritated as it was, I thought for sure I'd be going to the vet but somehow it got better. So I made it to the movie today, and even better unless it doesn't back to normal in a few days the cat may not need to see the vet. Happy all around!  :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 06, 2015, 06:04:47 PM
I saw it too. Can I ask how was the sound at the theaters you've seen it? I'll probably see it again - no, make that I will see it again - but I'll probably go to another theater to compare the sound and delivery of the sound to this one. I felt the soundtrack and audio track in general needs to almost envelop the audience, I noticed there was a lot of very deliberate and meticulous panning of sounds in the stereo field, but the theater I was in (seat center, eye level to screen, aka the prime seat to hear and see the film I'd say) seemed to have too few speakers after the first rows of seats.

The sound system at the AMC theater I went to (as usual) was terrific. 

I went to a Regal today, but I'll try a different chain when I see it again. It felt like all the sound was coming from speakers surrounding the first few rows closest to the screen, even the really intense and deliberately loud points where the music is blasting at loud volume didn't seem to be reaching the rows beyond the first few. That is totally on the theater, but when the movie is already playing there's not much you can do in the way of raising an issue about it.

 


Title: Re: \
Post by: GhostyTMRS on June 06, 2015, 06:08:55 PM
Ghosty -- I saw it this afternoon, and my reactions were very similar to yours. I feel like the '60s territory is very familiar, albeit with an incredible performance by Dano. But the 80s stuff is a revelation, and John Cusack really does something special with his performance. It allows you to see modern-day (or quasi-modern day) Brian as a real, feeling person. Ditto for Melinda. I get the impression that for the people who know Brian, this is the guy they see. He's probably not that way all the time, but at his best he's quirky, charming and quite charismatic.

Ditto, and I feel this film will go a long way towards changing the perception some uneducated non-music fans have of Brian today, especially when they see him on a talk show. I will say that, as a Brian Wilson fanatic from the word go (or at least back to the mid-80's) even I walked out of that theater feeling like I knew him a little bit better.


Title: Re: \
Post by: GhostyTMRS on June 06, 2015, 06:12:32 PM
I saw it too. Can I ask how was the sound at the theaters you've seen it? I'll probably see it again - no, make that I will see it again - but I'll probably go to another theater to compare the sound and delivery of the sound to this one. I felt the soundtrack and audio track in general needs to almost envelop the audience, I noticed there was a lot of very deliberate and meticulous panning of sounds in the stereo field, but the theater I was in (seat center, eye level to screen, aka the prime seat to hear and see the film I'd say) seemed to have too few speakers after the first rows of seats.

AMC theater in New Jersey had great sound. I know there's talk of a soundtrack and this may sound very strange, but those weird little mashups of dialogue and Beach Boys tracks that are used as sound design in the film?....Yeah, I'd like to actually have those on an a CD!

In a weird twist of fate, I've begun suffering from tinnitus which makes listening to any sound a little less enjoyable than it would've been two weeks ago. Darn it! If only I had been able to see this movie earlier.... 


Title: Re: \
Post by: ppk700 on June 06, 2015, 06:15:48 PM
Best film I've seen in years, and I'm not just saying that because it was Brian Wilson-related. I loved the Melinda-Brian scenes, and the cast was fantastic.

Also, I left the theater with a free movie poster, which I will be framing and putting on my wall.

It was a cathartic experience.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Amy B. on June 06, 2015, 06:18:47 PM
I just saw it too. What a superb movie, with excellent performances all around and a great soundtrack. I love the space they give to the music and the studio time and the creative process. I feel they were pretty fair to the other Beach Boys. After all, it really wasn't about them. I thought it was interesting how in one scene, Dennis is tinkering at the piano, as if they wanted to hint that yes, some of the other BBs were interested in creating music too. But Dennis's life/creative aspirations are for another movie.

I loved how they used some of Brian's studio instructions verbatim, using recordings from the time. Even Brian describing Murry's beatings is pretty much directly lifted from the interview in I Just Wasn't Made for These Times.

I was really impressed with John Cusack, but especially Paul Dano.  I agree that Giamatti was good, and often over-the-top villains get Oscar buzz... but I think it's Dano who really deserve an award for portraying this complex, unraveling man... and also Elizabeth Banks, just for her very subtle reactions to everything happening around her.

Having seen it and how intense it is, though, I can't imagine being Brian and re-living all of this, and hearing all the disturbing sounds that are put into our ears as viewers as the film tries to recreate the auditory hallucinations. Perhaps he takes comfort in a film that really tries to "get" him.


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on June 06, 2015, 06:25:01 PM
Just got home. Wow. That's all I have to say.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 06, 2015, 06:27:15 PM
Even Brian describing Murry's beatings is pretty much directly lifted from the interview in I Just Wasn't Made for These Times.

That and the scene with Banks and Cusack at the piano where he plays "Love & Mercy" for her.  The discussion of where the music come from is nearly verbatim from IJWMFTT.


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 06, 2015, 06:27:31 PM

edit: the movie ends on a dead end st. in Hawthorne, beneath the mighty 105: how  inspired was that. amazing

One of the three times I teared up during the TIFF screening in September, I must say.

If I recall the moment correctly... I'd been so engrossed by the Banks-Cusack scene I'd lost sense of time and wasn't anticipating the end of the film. But my god, when WIBN drifted in, with its eternal message of  - what was it Paul Williams once said were the three core elements of Brian's music? - warmness, serenity and friendship underscoring the scene under the freeway, my eyes suddenly felt very hot and moist. Movies IS magic.


I have so much to say but I'm still in that awestruck phase. That scene under the highway...SPOILER ALERT...

The symbolism and metaphor used in that scene may have been used in numerous other films going back decades, but *the way* in which it played out here was one of the things that makes this film so unique and to me - innovative. Brian wanted to "go home", and the realization implied as the music played was that he already was home as soon as he got in the car. The old home he thought he was going to was replaced by modern transportation...yet the moment he got in the car and that car parked under the freeway, that was the beginning of the next chapter. The old days were gone, torn down - It was time to build something new and move forward. There would be no going back.

What I loved was that the music began to swell and it drowned out any dialogue or conversation that would follow, and we could plainly see there was a conversation happening. But Wouldnt It Be Nice - the music - was the dialogue, it said as much to bring everything together as any final words or typical film tool of a killer ending punchline could do. The music carried the day, and again what a perfect, beautiful song to be playing at that point in the film. The music says everything necessary just as it does for many listeners when a song just seems to lay out everything you're feeling or need to hear at a particular moment of joy or sadness.

The montage of scenes that came immediately before - I can't think of them without getting choked up. I won't give that away. yet. Some of the best filmmaking technique and camera/editing work I've seen in a long, long time. My God, that scene just destroyed me, reduced me to tears...not the freeway, but anyone who has seen it knows which one. I'd call it brilliant filmmaking on many levels, put into that one montage of a scene. Editing, audio, cinematography, writing/dialogue, acting, all around the horn amazing. Damn.  :)  It already sits at the top of my list of all time scenes in film. Damn, again.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on June 06, 2015, 08:08:18 PM
Too many words, but I'll condense it to this-

The scene with Brian on the floor in the studio, when they get caught... my GOD. I was literally shaking.

So many great musical moments...

But THE SCENE was right at the beginning: "Lonely, Tired, Frightened" with the music building... That's when I knew this was gonna be PERFECT.

Couldn't have wished for more, gimme a blu ray/CD pack. Leggo.


Title: Re:
Post by: SMiLE-addict on June 06, 2015, 09:50:00 PM
I just got back from seeing it.

Can't say much more that already hasn't been said. However, I think this is definitely a movie that will be more appreciated by BB nerds than casual fans. For example, I noticed in one scene they had Brian in the studio replicating the famous pose below. However, first thing I noticed was, THEY GOT THE SHIRT WRONG! The correct shirt is STRIPED! In the movie it was more like a dense swirly pattern.

(http://ec.snagfilms.com/images/MVD/brianwilson/brianwilson_600x337.jpg)

Sheesh! ;) Thought they could pull a fast one on me, eh? :D

Anyway the build-up toward the end and the 'Till I Die scene was fantastic. Brought tears to my eyes. And this is the first movie I've ever seen where almost no one (well, just a couple people) left when the closing credits started. Everyone sat still as soon as Brian started singing!


Title: Re:
Post by: 37!ws on June 06, 2015, 10:38:24 PM
Saw it tonight for the second time. The Mrs. and I need to see it for a third time at least. That is all.


Title: Re: \
Post by: petsite on June 06, 2015, 10:41:34 PM
No long review here. Just one word to describe the film and the voyage it took me on.

Harrowing.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mark H. on June 06, 2015, 10:46:29 PM
The Till I Die scene is amazing film making.  I kind of wish Murry had been fleshed out a bit more - better than I ever expected overall.  What a great way to follow NPP.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Daniel S. on June 07, 2015, 01:28:26 AM
I just got back from seeing it at the Arclight in Hollywood. I loved it. I really liked that it wasn't made for someone who doesn't know who Brian Wilson is. A typical bio pic would be non stop exposition explaining who Brian and the Beach Boys are and what they are doing. Very well done.

I especially liked the sound collages for the audio hallucinations. I wonder if that is in fact how Brian experiences the world.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike Garneau on June 07, 2015, 10:48:10 AM
I saw it for the second time last night. Nothing more to add here that hasn't been said already by you guys. I absolutely love the movie and plan on going for a third time before it leaves the theatre.


Title: Re: \
Post by: TV Forces on June 07, 2015, 01:58:59 PM
Well you guys have made me want to see this movie.  Badly.

I didn't want to at first because like a lot of the fans here, Brian Wilson is too personal.  He probably means more to me than anyone not currently living in my house.  And I figured it would be a disaster because there is so much to explain in such a short period of time.. and John Cusack looks NOTHING like Brian..

But now I can't wait.. 

And I'm trying to get a babysitter asap.


Title: Re: \
Post by: jeffh on June 07, 2015, 02:42:52 PM
How was the attendance at these various showings? Future reviewers, please note how large the crowds were.


Title: Re: Love & Mercy - reviews, info, discussion
Post by: rn57 on June 07, 2015, 02:45:46 PM
How was the attendance at these various showings? Future reviewers, please note how large the crowds were.

As I wrote above, about 85% full at the screening I attended and I would estimate the # of seats at 140.  In other DC theaters at that time (7 pm Saturday, one of the busiest times at multiplexes) it could have been a sellout or close to it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Bittersweet-Sanity on June 07, 2015, 02:48:10 PM
i went to a screening yesterday at 5pm. Lil less than half full. Some older folks, 20somethings, some dude and his daughter in front of me. Think everyone stayed thru the whole thing, except a few who went to the bathroom. Almost everyone stayed thru the Love & Mercy performance at the start of the credits.

Also, i've seen the film 3 times now & Brian's "hey Chuck, can we get a horse in here?" line always got laughs.

Planning to see it w/ a good friend (and someone not at all familiar w/ the myth of B.W.). Hopefully it'll still be playing when she's available in 3 weeks :p


Title: Re: \
Post by: Dwayne on June 07, 2015, 02:57:46 PM
My wife and I saw this movie yesterday at matinee time at the only theatre I could find listed in Oklahoma City (an hour drive from where I live).  We both loved it! It was mostly an older crowd 50's & 60's but the auditorium was about 70% full.  Great movie for the fans and those who like musical bio's but with all the Summer blockbusters out, I can't imagine this doing that great in comparison-I hope I'm wrong though!  If you haven't seen this yet, you are missing out!  I plan to see it again in the theatre if it opens closer to where I live.  The only thing I was surprised about was the small screen time the Beach Boys as a band performing got but it didn't take away from the movie at all.
Dwayne


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on June 07, 2015, 03:10:33 PM
I've gone twice thus far. First time on Friday there were about 10 people in the theater. Today there were 15-20. I'm going again on Wednesday, I'm sure the attendance will be low then too, sadly.

In each showing there were mostly 50+ year olds but surprisingly a few girls around 25 years old showed up alone in each showing I attended.

The horse line, the "why does this feel like prom night?" line, and the Cusack line "It was more like 3 years....at least that's what I tell people" got some good laughs.

First time I saw it I stayed until the very end of the credits. Today, I stayed until 'Love and Mercy' finished and then left, but I noticed most of the crowd stayed behind to watch the credits roll on. I think this really is an emotional punch to the gut, I yet walked out again feeling like I witnessed something momentous.


Title: Re: \
Post by: No. Fourteen on June 07, 2015, 03:24:26 PM
This movie was a dream come true in so many ways.  The detail in the reenactments of visual and audio material fans are familiar with (promos, session chat, concert footage) is pretty remarkable.  The soundtrack is very creative and the auditory episodes they came up with are very effective and disturbing.  No matter how many times you've thought about what Brian has to go through when he is coping with it, to actually experience it (or an interpretation of it) is a bit shocking, particularly if you are watching it in a loud theatre...which i was!  Paul Dano completely becomes Brian, and Cusack does less of an impersonation but still a great job performing the essence of Brian.  Elizabeth Banks is solid (and just about carries the movie), and Paul Giamatti is an appropriately chilling Landy.  Also, hats off for the "2001" sequence....powerful stuff.

I will say that the movie is not very charitable towards Mike.  While even he has acknowledged resistance (and confrontation?  He has referred to talking with Van Dyke  about Cabinessence lyrics, for one thing) regarding aspects of where Brian and his music was headed in '66-'67, I was surprised there wasn't a little more nuance in the depiction.  The one time Mike appears he is about to make amends, Brian quickly cuts him off and proceeds to introduce an olive branch via playing the Good Vibrations chorus riff and inviting him to come up with lyrics.  They wouldn't even let the Mike character have that!  ( And I say this as someone who is not exactly an ardent defender of Mike.)  And speaking of Van Dyke, there is another guy who is not going to be thrilled by the movie's portrayal.  (I know: it's a movie - not a documentary.)

But all in all, a triumph.  Enjoy!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Misterlou on June 07, 2015, 03:33:45 PM
Possible spoiler alert ahead:

I saw it for the second time last night, the second night in a row, same theater, same seat. Interestingly, about the same number of people attended (half-full), with the same demographics (mostly 50 and older). I was just as transfixed the second time as the first. I tuned in even more to the sound design this time around and can only describe it as perfectly accomplished. There's something about the opening music that I remember sort of aurally propelling the viewer into the film, whether they are ready or not. The whole film is fantastic, but the sequence beginning with the pool scene near the end (where Mike confronts Van Dyke Parks), on through what some have called the 2001 homage is in my opinion tour de force filmmaking of the highest order.

Speaking of the Mike vs. Van Dyke scene, I stated in an earlier post that I'm not bothered by the small inaccuracies of the film, and I'm not, as the filmmakers went to great lengths to capture the look and feel of the time periods in question. That being said, I do find myself remaining curious as to why the script had Mike confronting Parks about the lyrics to Heroes and Villains, when it's well known among Beach Boys' Cognoscenti, and surely must have been known to Pohlad and Moverman, that it was the Cabin Essence lyrics that so confounded Mike. A 1976 interview of Van Dyke stating this very thing in front of the (sadly no more) Tower Records is readily available on YouTube. It's not inconceivable that Mike also confronted him about those very H&V lyrics as well, I just find it interesting that what is well known SMiLE lore was excluded from the film... it's easier to understand the exact vehicle not being available for a shoot, but this choice does leave me a little puzzled.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rn57 on June 07, 2015, 03:34:46 PM
This movie was a dream come true in so many ways.  The detail in the reenactments of visual and audio material fans are familiar with (promos, session chat, concert footage) is pretty remarkable.  The soundtrack is very creative and the auditory episodes they came up with are very effective and disturbing.  No matter how many times you've thought about what Brian has to go through when he is coping with it, to actually experience it (or an interpretation of it) is a bit shocking, particularly if you are watching it in a loud theatre...which i was!  Paul Dano completely becomes Brian, and Cusack does less of an impersonation but still a great job performing the essence of Brian.  Elizabeth Banks is solid (and just about carries the movie), and Paul Giamatti is an appropriately chilling Landy.  Also, hats off for the "2001" sequence....powerful stuff.

I will say that the movie is not very charitable towards Mike.  While even he has acknowledged resistance (and confrontation?  He has referred to talking with Van Dyke  about Cabinessence lyrics, for one thing) regarding aspects of where Brian and his music was headed in '66-'67, I was surprised there wasn't a little more nuance in the depiction.  The one time Mike appears he is about to make amends, Brian quickly cuts him off and proceeds to introduce an olive branch via playing the Good Vibrations chorus riff and inviting him to come up with lyrics.  They wouldn't even let the Mike character have that!  ( And I say this as someone who is not exactly an ardent defender of Mike.)  And speaking of Van Dyke, there is another guy who is not going to be thrilled by the movie's portrayal.  (I know: it's a movie - not a documentary.)

But all in all, a triumph.  Enjoy!

It's true that I'd have liked to see something more than the GV composition scene, showing Brian and Mike trying to work out common ground in that period, illustrating the kind of bond they'd had at the start.  Where the portrayal of Murry is concerned, I remember thinking there should have been at least one scene that explained that he had been an amateur musician and songwriter who had encouraged his sons to play music.  As it is, your viewer who goes in not knowing anything about the backstory might think he had no more understanding of being a musician or singer than Landy did.  

But then again, Probyn  (I think it was) said on FB that he hopes that if this movie is a hit, it leads to more films that tell the BBs story from start to end. Obviously, a movie about the pre-late '64 era (ie up to Murry's firing or just after) would illuminate Murry's role more - though the problem is, he'd thoroughly dominate such a movie. "Love & Murry" - nah, I dunno about that.

Where Van Dyke goes, yes, the actor who plays him only shows up in two scenes - but the way he walks away after Mike complains about H&V is a pretty well done piece of physical acting...as I think a veteran actor like VDP would agree.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rn57 on June 07, 2015, 03:47:12 PM
Possible spoiler alert ahead:

I saw it for the second time last night, the second night in a row, same theater, same seat. Interestingly, about the same number of people attended (half-full), with the same demographics (mostly 50 and older). I was just as transfixed the second time as the first. I tuned in even more to the sound design this time around and can only describe it as perfectly accomplished. There's something about the opening music that I remember sort of aurally propelling the viewer into the film, whether they are ready or not. The whole film is fantastic, but the sequence beginning with the pool scene near the end (where Mike confronts Van Dyke Parks), on through what some have called the 2001 homage is in my opinion tour de force filmmaking of the highest order.

Speaking of the Mike vs. Van Dyke scene, I stated in an earlier post that I'm not bothered by the small inaccuracies of the film, and I'm not, as the filmmakers went to great lengths to capture the look and feel of the time periods in question. That being said, I do find myself remaining curious as to why the script had Mike confronting Parks about the lyrics to Heroes and Villains, when it's well known among Beach Boys' Cognoscenti, and surely must have been known to Pohlad and Moverman, that it was the Cabin Essence lyrics that so confounded Mike. A 1976 interview of Van Dyke stating this very thing in front of the (sadly no more) Tower Records is readily available on YouTube. It's not inconceivable that Mike also confronted him about those very H&V lyrics as well, I just find it interesting that what is well known SMiLE lore was excluded from the film... it's easier to understand the exact vehicle not being available for a shoot, but this choice does leave me a little puzzled.

As I said on the other thread, doing a re-enactment of the Cabin Essence confrontation might be too intense even in a film as thoroughly intense as this is.  CE is to this day one of the most overwhelming pieces of music recorded in the last century. When I first heard it in the middle of '76 - right before I even heard PS all the way through - I found it almost impossible to process.  There was some modern classical music I could compare it to. Maybe some things in Zappa's work. When I first heard the Residents over a year later I thought: "Well, these guys are so out there, they seem to be using Cabin Essence as a base for what they're doing." 

In L&M, PS and GV are just incredibly intense. Trying to re-enact CE and the argument over it - or Brian panicking while the Fire music is playing - would be going way over the top, to the point where people might feel they have to leave the theater right then.... with a feeling not unlike what Brian had when he watched Seconds.  Having the argument be at the pool and over H&V brings down the intensity a bit and is the right way to set up the scenes that follow.  I think Pohlad made the right decision there. 

Incidentally, I think the actor playing VDP took the right approach in underplaying a bit.  It's probably tempting for an actor to imitate VDP's verbal fireworks and exaggerate his delivery a bit, but that wouldn't have fitted into those two scenes that well.


Title: Re: \
Post by: TonyW on June 07, 2015, 05:58:42 PM
I attended the Australian premier at the Sate Theatre in Sydney last night. The State is a beautifully ornate theatre built in the mid 1920s and a venue Brian has played on a number of occasions ... and that became central to my experience last night.  The premier was part of the Sydney Film Festival and the film opens nationally on 25 June. The audience in the near full theatre was mainly the arts and theatre crowd of Australia with demographics varying widely from the old and wised to impressionable youth in their late teens early twenties, so its was a vastly different audience from those who will see it later this month.

This is a wholly satisfying experience for Beach Boys fans ... however compared to some of the reviews on this board a reality check is required ...there's no Academy Award winning performances, except perhaps the soundtrack but then again Atticus Ross had wonderful material to work with.  I just felt that Danno and Cusak while portraying Brian quite accurately lacked emotional depth. Nothing in this movie moved me emotionally until the credits. Banks's performance was solid throughout and Giamatti bought the much needed bad wig into the movie. On a basic level the BAD Landy/Murry/Mike triumvirate worked well in contrast to the GOOD triumvirate of Brian/Melinda/Gloria (Where was Carl?). On a simplistic level the movie was good versus bad leading to redemption - a good enough basis for a movie. The strongest scene in the movie for me was the Landy/Melinda confrontation in the car sales showroom.

The music of Brian Wilson is the big winner in this film and I wouldn't be surprised to see Pet Sounds charting in some parts of the world over the next month or so. The studio scenes of the recording of Pet Sounds and Smile where perhaps a bit too familiar for "enlightened" fans of the music. In many cases the scenes were reproductions of scenes we have watched on film many times over the years and not much new was bought to the story - although I did like the momentary look Carol Kaye gave Brian over her shoulder after she had questioned the two basses in two different keys then the band played through and Kaye just knew Brian was right.

While having viewed the movie through the eyes of a seasoned lover of Brian's music and the muse that is his life story, I do acknowledge that my disappointment at nothing new or revelatory will not necessarily impact people not familiar with the Brian Wilson story (apart from a 'few hit songs'), who will find much of this film entertaining and enlightening and a whole new market for Brian's music will open up and more respect will be afforded to Brian and the Beach Boys' music. Leaving the theatre it was obvious from comments all around that the music touched people greatly and "I must buy Pet Sounds' was a common phrase being uttered.

As I mentioned earlier I didn't feel emotional until the credits rolled and Brian's cameo singing Love and Mercy and I realised how important having seen Brian's career unfold, refold, redux and be reborn over the years meant to me ... here I was sitting in a theatre watching the story I knew so well, of a man who's artistic talent and beauty has touched me so deeply and been a part of my daily life for 50 years ... here I was sitting in the theatre where I had sat front row centre, immediately in front of Brian, where eye contact, a smile and a nod during the show was impossible to avoid and on the screen was the redeemed and triumphant Brian as close up as he was that night, being admired by a room full of people who barely knew his story before the film. It was emotional on a personal level ... and that was the way it should have been ... well done to the team behind the film.

The Beach Boys world will be a different place after this movie, the music and the Boys will be more accepted and places such as the Smiley Board will most likely struggle with the changes ... I can see a board melt down happening  ... maybe its time to embrace the changes and not feel possessive of our own little cyber world.


Title: Re: \
Post by: GhostyTMRS on June 07, 2015, 07:32:51 PM
I will say that the movie is not very charitable towards Mike.  While even he has acknowledged resistance (and confrontation?  He has referred to talking with Van Dyke  about Cabinessence lyrics, for one thing) regarding aspects of where Brian and his music was headed in '66-'67, I was surprised there wasn't a little more nuance in the depiction.  The one time Mike appears he is about to make amends, Brian quickly cuts him off and proceeds to introduce an olive branch via playing the Good Vibrations chorus riff and inviting him to come up with lyrics.  They wouldn't even let the Mike character have that!  ( And I say this as someone who is not exactly an ardent defender of Mike.)  And speaking of Van Dyke, there is another guy who is not going to be thrilled by the movie's portrayal.  (I know: it's a movie - not a documentary.)

It's funny, because I was afraid the film was going to completely demonize Mike. I thought it treated him rather sympathetically all things considered.


Title: Re: \
Post by: BiNNS on June 07, 2015, 08:16:46 PM
Drove an hour to see it.....and it was more than worth the drive!
For some reason the scene that stuck out in my mind the most was when Brian dropped acid and the backing track to Don't Talk began to play. I just loved that little moment. The girlfriend got a kick out of Van Dyke's exit from the pool area.
Also, how many of us got our picture taken with the Love And Mercy movie poster at the theatre? I can't be the only one.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ed Roach on June 07, 2015, 08:45:35 PM
Still dealing with these new fangled technologies, & I'm lucky I got this video up on my Dennis page, https://www.facebook.com/roachclips68 , but I posted a brief video there of Brian from todays screening, talking about Rubber Soul


Title: Re: \
Post by: petsite on June 07, 2015, 09:00:31 PM
It was a deeply satisfying experience to see Brian's story told with some dignity and not some TV movie with fake beards etc. It hit me hard watching this film, but it also was a story that I knew so well. I was seeing a story that I had absorbed and lived thru (meaning reading and talking to people all during the '80s that were close to Brian) that it was nice to finally see THAT story come to light.

In the words of Brian "it's a weird trip man."


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on June 07, 2015, 09:10:26 PM
I do find myself remaining curious as to why the script had Mike confronting Parks about the lyrics to Heroes and Villains, when it's well known among Beach Boys' Cognoscenti

Congrats, that may perhaps be the reason. It is a well known factoid. However, a lesser-acknowledged factoid is that Mike confronted Van Dyke on more than one occasion, and at a different time, it was documented that he was not a fan of the 'sunny down snuff' line. They simply chose to combine those two small historical nuggets together to make something that was an even heavier nod to the hardcore fans who did their research, rather than hitting a note that even neophytes would have expected would have been hit.

By the way, there is not nearly enough talk about the potential discovery of a certain holy grail of 49-years-lost tape stems that inexplicably found its way into this film...


Title: Re: \
Post by: petsite on June 07, 2015, 10:54:58 PM
I am glad of two things in this movie.

1.) Bill did not go out of his way to portray Mike Love as an asshole. He came off like a man who was worried as to what was happening to his group, and yes his livelihood. There were changes going on with Brian that I am sure Mike at the time chalked up to drugs etc and thought that his cousin needed a verbal ass kicking to get it together. We know now that drugs took an already delicately balanced Brian and pushed him over the edge.

2.) I liked the way the SMiLE crew was portrayed. (So glad Bob Hanes isn't here to rip me a new one for what I am about to say. We argued ALOT over this). I have always felt that with 3 exceptions, the people that were around Brian during Pet Sounds and SMiLE were absolutely the most self absorbed people who could have invaded his world. Starting with Tom Nolan and carried on by David Leaf and others, these people (Lauren Daro, Mike Vosse, etc etc), these people were said to be hip and the Beach Boys were said to be non-hip and that was the ONLY thing wrong is that the boys couldn't or didn't want to go where the hip people were leading. Well, to put it mildly, these hip people were going NOWHERE. They were the kind of people I knew growing up that would get high and just ramble on about things and think of themselves as enlightened. And the 60's people had a way of thinking they saved the world. They didn't. They were too self-absorbed to save anyone. I always found it funny when they use to show these communes on shows like 60 minutes etc., and the men would spend the day meeting and discussing issues of the day etc, while the women did all of the work and child-rearing. So much for enlightenment. Those people added nothing. And look at them all. Except for Van, David, and Danny, they all went on to do......nothing. Some were homeless and addicted, Lauren worked as a fact checker for a publisher (so much for Mr. Brain Trust). These were evil people. Glad they didn't show them as heroes. Leaf tried to show them that way in the Beatuiful Dreamer video. They weren't. After watching Lauren speak, I told Bob Hanes I felt like I needed a shower.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 07, 2015, 11:21:00 PM
On that note, in the Huffington Post interview with Brian, Cusack and Pohlad...when asked what he hoped people would take away from watching LOVE & MERCY Brian answered 'My message is don't take drugs.  Drugs aren't good for you'.

Of course, Brian has been on record in the last 3-4 years saying "Marijuana helped me write PET SOUNDS".  

I think the fact that his story isn't so linear and single threaded, there are many layers to the Brian Wilson story; that makes it a very interesting subject in the hands of the right filmmaker and writer.  That obviously has nothing to do with the pain that went into living that life.  As just someone observing though, it is endlessly fascinating.


Title: Re:
Post by: 37!ws on June 08, 2015, 05:37:08 AM
On that note, in the Huffington Post interview with Brian, Cusack and Pohlad...when asked what he hoped people would take away from watching LOVE & MERCY Brian answered 'My message is don't take drugs.  Drugs aren't good for you'.

Of course, Brian has been on record in the last 3-4 years saying "Marijuana helped me write PET SOUNDS". 


At the Q&A in Chicago a couple of weeks ago, Brian specified "hard drugs." :)


Title: Re:
Post by: 37!ws on June 08, 2015, 05:39:22 AM
I do find myself remaining curious as to why the script had Mike confronting Parks about the lyrics to Heroes and Villains, when it's well known among Beach Boys' Cognoscenti

Congrats, that may perhaps be the reason. It is a well known factoid. However, a lesser-acknowledged factoid is that Mike confronted Van Dyke on more than one occasion, and at a different time, it was documented that he was not a fan of the 'sunny down snuff' line. They simply chose to combine those two small historical nuggets together to make something that was an even heavier nod to the hardcore fans who did their research, rather than hitting a note that even neophytes would have expected would have been hit.

My thought is that the writers were considering people who aren't die-hard fans. It's more likely that people NOT like us would have heard "Heroes And Villains" (you'd be surprised) and not "Cabinessence."

Quote
By the way, there is not nearly enough talk about the potential discovery of a certain holy grail of 49-years-lost tape stems that inexplicably found its way into this film...

I know exactly what you mean, but deep in my heart I'm sure it has to do with those digitally phase-cancelled mixes that that Irish guy did...


Title: Re: \
Post by: HeyJude on June 08, 2015, 06:19:49 AM
Apologies if this has already been reported, but the “numbers” are in from this weekend’s “limited” run. The film made approx.. $2,222,000 on 483 screens, for a “per screen” average of $4,600, which I believe is quite good. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/

For a comparison, the biggest blockbuster film played on about 3,800 screens.

This puts it at something around #11 for the weekend in terms of total gross, but #5 in terms of dollars per screen. I believe this is considered a pretty good performance for what the mainstream media is characterizing as an “indie”, “Oscar bait” film.

The film will apparently add screens in the coming week(s).

Saw it this weekend. Will have a review soon…


Title: Re: \
Post by: WonderfulLittlePad on June 08, 2015, 07:40:48 AM
Went to it yesterday at 1:30. Theater was about 90% full with a lot of people in their 60s and up.  I loved the movie and can't wait to see it again.  I loved the date scene where Melinda and Brian are getting to know each other and Brian is talking about his rough childhood and you can see his reflection in the mirror of the booth behind Melinda.  After he tells her that heavy, heavy story, she just says, "Well sh*t."  Thought that was awesome.


Title: Re: \
Post by: the professor on June 08, 2015, 08:10:31 AM
Stunning post and historical commentary. They were played as vacuous in the the movie but, as you say, by no means exaggerated.
VDP was a thoughtful young gentleman and musical scholar, and all the conflicts were depicted justly, true to the core of the issues. Ultimately the BB (VDP and BW and then the voices of the BB themselves) absorbed the best of that movement of hipsters and turned it into something sacred--Smile.

I am glad of two things in this movie.

1.) Bill did not go out of his way to portray Mike Love as an asshole. He came off like a man who was worried as to what was happening to his group, and yes his livelihood. There were changes going on with Brian that I am sure Mike at the time chalked up to drugs etc and thought that his cousin needed a verbal ass kicking to get it together. We know now that drugs took an already delicately balanced Brian and pushed him over the edge.

2.) I liked the way the SMiLE crew was portrayed. (So glad Bob Hanes isn't here to rip me a new one for what I am about to say. We argued ALOT over this). I have always felt that with 3 exceptions, the people that were around Brian during Pet Sounds and SMiLE were absolutely the most self absorbed people who could have invaded his world. Starting with Tom Nolan and carried on by David Leaf and others, these people (Lauren Daro, Mike Vosse, etc etc), these people were said to be hip and the Beach Boys were said to be non-hip and that was the ONLY thing wrong is that the boys couldn't or didn't want to go where the hip people were leading. Well, to put it mildly, these hip people were going NOWHERE. They were the kind of people I knew growing up that would get high and just ramble on about things and think of themselves as enlightened. And the 60's people had a way of thinking they saved the world. They didn't. They were too self-absorbed to save anyone. I always found it funny when they use to show these communes on shows like 60 minutes etc., and the men would spend the day meeting and discussing issues of the day etc, while the women did all of the work and child-rearing. So much for enlightenment. Those people added nothing. And look at them all. Except for Van, David, and Danny, they all went on to do......nothing. Some were homeless and addicted, Lauren worked as a fact checker for a publisher (so much for Mr. Brain Trust). These were evil people. Glad they didn't show them as heroes. Leaf tried to show them that way in the Beatuiful Dreamer video. They weren't. After watching Lauren speak, I told Bob Hanes I felt like I needed a shower.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jon Stebbins on June 08, 2015, 08:47:35 AM
Copying my post from the other L&M film thread here...as I want to emphasize that I think the film is great!

I saw the movie yesterday and was thoroughly impressed by it. It had a lasting effect on me, I was a bit shell-shocked all day yesterday due to the emotional impact the film had on me. It's a heavy experience. I was so pleased that it was done in an artful, sensitive, and real way. The film made room for nuance, subtlety, and found a way to reveal and inform without having to be overly direct and predictable. IMO it is the best case scenario. It hit all the right points in a beautiful way. The performances and characterizations were fantastic. Paul Dano was perfect. It didn't matter that John Cusack didn't look like Brian, because he FELT like Brian. I was really impressed with his portrayal. Having been around BW many times, there is a specific vibe he gives off, and Cusack nailed it. This is not a happily ever after movie. It is dark, and leaves you feeling drained but hopeful. Knowing Brian had been dealing with his issues for so long, when it is revealed he's heard voices in his head since 1963, the audience around me gasped. The scenes where there is the Dano-Brian, the Cusack-Brian and the child Brian all interchanging into the bedroom scene, that said to me, you know what? He's always been troubled, he'll always be troubled, and he's still created so much beauty, given so much happiness to the world. The sensitivity that crushes him also makes him a genius. The two things are definitely connected, and the film does an amazing job of illustrating that connection. I am blown away that a film with such depth and rawness made it through the system and has been released in this form. It's a gift to those of us who love Brian, but more so, it will have an impact on his legacy in a responsible way. Thanks to everyone who had a hand in creating this amazing work. You have my respect. And thank you Brian, for all the joy and tears, we're so lucky for the beauty you shared with us.


Title: Re: \
Post by: job on June 08, 2015, 08:54:14 AM
Took my 7 year old with me to a 10:15am showing in Long Beach, CA at a Regal Theater.  The theater was half full.  Sounds was fantastic.

All I can say is that the film was incredibly well done and riveting.  I was left feeling mildly disturbed for the rest of the day.  Wonderful stuff.  Will probably see 25 more times.


Title: Re: \
Post by: the professor on June 08, 2015, 09:16:12 AM
John, as I have said in my posts, I could not agree more.

It is not a great matter, but I did wonder, as the cover of Surfer Girl and Surfin Safari were depicted, whether they showed David in the movie or not. It was going by too fast, but I wondered if they took the effort to depict him and not Al in those scenes.

Back to the aesthetics, this film enhances a listening to NPP, which is so good that I fear we underestimate its quality. It's as good as any music produced today, and is, for example, 1000 times better than the album of the year last year by Beck (un-listenable).

I do wish that the BB together (meaning adding BJ and MK to the album and Al and Dave to all tracks) had done this album and thus could celebrate the movie together....well. . . . .




Copying my post from the other L&M film thread here...as I want to emphasize that I think the film is great!

I saw the movie yesterday and was thoroughly impressed by it. It had a lasting effect on me, I was a bit shell-shocked all day yesterday due to the emotional impact the film had on me. It's a heavy experience. I was so pleased that it was done in an artful, sensitive, and real way. The film made room for nuance, subtlety, and found a way to reveal and inform without having to be overly direct and predictable. IMO it is the best case scenario. It hit all the right points in a beautiful way. The performances and characterizations were fantastic. Paul Dano was perfect. It didn't matter that John Cusack didn't look like Brian, because he FELT like Brian. I was really impressed with his portrayal. Having been around BW many times, there is a specific vibe he gives off, and Cusack nailed it. This is not a happily ever after movie. It is dark, and leaves you feeling drained but hopeful. Knowing Brian had been dealing with his issues for so long, when it is revealed he's heard voices in his head since 1963, the audience around me gasped. The scenes where there is the Dano-Brian, the Cusack-Brian and the child Brian all interchanging into the bedroom scene, that said to me, you know what? He's always been troubled, he'll always be troubled, and he's still created so much beauty, given so much happiness to the world. The sensitivity that crushes him also makes him a genius. The two things are definitely connected, and the film does an amazing job of illustrating that connection. I am blown away that a film with such depth and rawness made it through the system and has been released in this form. It's a gift to those of us who love Brian, but more so, it will have an impact on his legacy in a responsible way. Thanks to everyone who had a hand in creating this amazing work. You have my respect. And thank you Brian, for all the joy and tears, we're so lucky for the beauty you shared with us.


Title: Re: \
Post by: HeyJude on June 08, 2015, 10:05:38 AM
Still working on a review of the film. But I’m shocked at myself that I was so engrossed with the film that I noticed but then nearly semi-forgot that they used what certainly appeared to be isolated vocal elements for “Good Vibrations.” This was discussed, I believe, in the other movie thread (can we perhaps move all discussion to this newer thread now?).

I can’t say for sure based on memory if they could have possibly been *really good* re-creations (Dano does do some vocal work in the movie, and at one point while “recording” a vocal on another song it sounds like Dano singing on top of Brian’s original vocal, essentially doing the second part of a double-tracked vocal). As someone else mentioned, the isolated vocals sounded way too clean to be digital extractions (and if they *are* digital extractions, then it’s effing good enough to give us a “vocals only” mix of the song even if they can’t pan the vocals enough to do a vocal stereo mix).


Title: Re: \
Post by: petsite on June 08, 2015, 11:03:09 AM
You know, I had to wonder what was wrong with me. Everyone is talking about how the film hit them in the gut and Jon Stebbins said he was reeling from it. And yet it didn't hit me like that at all. I found it harrowing, but it didn't kick my ass like it has others.

Then it hit me as to why.

When the long trailer was released, the one that starts with Brian in the car and Melinda walking up to speak to him, THAT KICKED MY ASS. I must have watched that 20 times the first couple of days. It just floored me. Left me a little depressed, it was so visceral. So that kind of let me know what to expect when I saw the movie. It still hit me hard, but I knew what to expect. Had I not had that introduction, I might still be in bed (LOL).


Title: Re: \
Post by: OllieBop on June 08, 2015, 11:20:54 AM
Does anyone know anything about UK release?


Title: Re:
Post by: 37!ws on June 08, 2015, 11:54:46 AM
Olllie -- I think it's 20 June.


Title: Re: \
Post by: OllieBop on June 08, 2015, 12:03:05 PM
Thankyou, cannot find any confirmation online and don't want to have to wait another 6-12 months for DVD/Blu-Ray.


Title: Re: \
Post by: wantsomecorn on June 08, 2015, 12:05:05 PM
In the theater right now - only two other people here but its 2pm on a Monday, so I wasn't expecting much.

I'll have a review coming soon!


Title: Re:
Post by: puni puni on June 08, 2015, 12:24:07 PM
My thought is that the writers were considering people who aren't die-hard fans. It's more likely that people NOT like us would have heard "Heroes And Villains" (you'd be surprised) and not "Cabinessence."

It could have just been that but I doubt it. The script was too smart for it to be that simple. I really think Moverman was just trying to paint something less predictable for people like us. The fact that so many people here were surprised by this decision -- which some have called a historical inaccuracy, but really isn't -- proves that he did his job exceptionally well.


Title: Re: \ U K release
Post by: Zesterz on June 08, 2015, 12:25:55 PM
 was notified that it will be 10 JULY.


Title: Re: \
Post by: krabklaw on June 08, 2015, 04:21:02 PM
I loved the movie and plan on seeing it again soon. The recreation of the 60s was like a dream come true. I was thinking "Wow! I'm actually seeing the creation of my favorite album staged and directed brilliantly in a movie. How many music fans get that kind of a gift?"  I was just so joyful to see and hear this personally transcendent movie experience. Dano and Cusack were both very good, although I think they made a mistake in not at least giving Cusack a hairpiece to make him a better physical match to Brian. Pohlad did a fine job of avoiding most biopic cliches, but was a shade too vague in connecting the dots between the two stories.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Radfahrer on June 09, 2015, 05:16:51 AM
Last sunday I had the chance to see a preview of the movie in Germany. It was the english version with german subtitles. Although I was already impressed when I left the cinema, the movie really grew on me in the last days. So many details, so many great scenes! I really hope I can see it again on the big screen!

Cleary, there went a lot of love into the production of the film. Even the minor roles in the movie had a lot of depth. For example I loved how Dennis was portrayed and although Mike obviously won't win a lot of fans, I've got the impression that many viewers get a chance to better understand his behaviour.

Let alone the convincing acting of Dano and Cusack!

I couldn't ask for more! Great movie!  :thud


Title: Re: \
Post by: petsoundsnola on June 09, 2015, 08:57:04 AM
From my post on Brian's FB page:

There aren't enough superlatives to adequately describe this movie. What I appreciated most was the attention to detail and accuracy on so many levels. Particularly, the costume and set designers should all take a bow. It is obvious you studied Brian and the Beach Boys meticulously.

For example, was Brian's actual house used for the Sloop John B sequence? It looked exactly like the original promo film. Also, the Surf's Up sequence at the piano was an impeccable re-creation.

The studio sequences were the most enjoyable for me. Thank you for the 360-degree shot around the studio. It's as if the filmmakers consciously had audiophiles and Beach Boys geeks like myself in mind when these scenes were shot. This is so much appreciated.

The care taken and reverence given to Brian and his music was quite evident throughout. Thank you to all involved in the making of this film.


Title: Re:
Post by: 37!ws on June 09, 2015, 09:14:42 AM
The studio sequences were the most enjoyable for me. Thank you for the 360-degree shot around the studio. It's as if the filmmakers consciously had audiophiles and Beach Boys geeks like myself in mind when these scenes were shot. This is so much appreciated.

Dennis mugging for the camera after being scolded by Brian: absolutely PRICELESS.


Title: Re: \
Post by: petsoundsnola on June 09, 2015, 09:24:42 AM
The studio sequences were the most enjoyable for me. Thank you for the 360-degree shot around the studio. It's as if the filmmakers consciously had audiophiles and Beach Boys geeks like myself in mind when these scenes were shot. This is so much appreciated.

Dennis mugging for the camera after being scolded by Brian: absolutely PRICELESS.

Definitely.  I like to think of this as a reference to Dennis' latent songwriting talent that was anxious to spring forth, but was self-suppressed out of respect to his brother's vision at the time.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on June 09, 2015, 09:37:33 AM
The studio sequences were the most enjoyable for me. Thank you for the 360-degree shot around the studio. It's as if the filmmakers consciously had audiophiles and Beach Boys geeks like myself in mind when these scenes were shot. This is so much appreciated.

Dennis mugging for the camera after being scolded by Brian: absolutely PRICELESS.
Definitely something that we would have done and did quite often. :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: JakeH on June 09, 2015, 09:48:35 AM
Saw this Sunday at the West L.A. Q&A screening-

I was amazed at how much information was conveyed in the film, and how artfully that was accomplished. Some difficult personal/family issues are handled skillfully and with subtlety -  through visuals and implication.  Whoever it was who framed the story/narrative either understood the nature and roots of the Beach Boys’ dysfunction, or had access to someone who did.  I don't think Brian or his wife Melinda are credited as producers on this movie, but it is obviously their "project" or "baby," with B. Pohlad, et al.  as the artists helping them execute it and convey that which Brian and Melinda want to communicate. 

In my opinion, Landy, as embodied by Paul Giamatti, was not nearly as frightening or as dangerous as the doctor had to have been in real life.  I think (speculate) that this is so because the horror and peril of the Landy situation came into focus like a cancer – slowly, and over time. This gradual process is hard to convey in a 2 hr. movie in which half of that time is devoted to the 60s.  (At the Q&A, by the way, the question was asked of Brian whether Landy was a "hero," or "villain" (strange question, but it was asked). Brian replied with something to the effect of, "both, but mostly villain.")

A few visuals jumped out during the movie. One was the way the members of the Beach Boys are symbolically represented in the swimming pool scene in which they argue over the Smile lyrics: Brian is at one end of the pool, and in deep – up to his neck – in the water. Mike is opposite Brian, sitting on the patio outside the water and dry as a bone (until the end of the scene when you see that his feet are in the water).  Dennis  – fully in the water like Brian, but off by himself at another side of the pool. Carl – next to Mike, standing, half in the water, half out, and in the shallow [i.e., safe] end of the pool. Al in the distant background, standing on the patio, behind Mike and Carl.  Van Dyke, off to the side with his feet dangling in the water, then he gets up and leaves in a huff. At least this is how I remembered that scene; if anyone remembers it differently, please post. I thought that was an incredible visual moment in the film, a truthful one, and one that fans would appreciate. 

And it’s sort of funny I guess that in the scene where Brian gets Murry’s smackdown over “God Only Knows,” Murry is wearing a bathrobe that has vertical red and white stripes, like a “Kingston Trio” bathrobe. Don’t know if this was intentional costume design or a just serendipitous thing, but that really worked for me.

Fans of trivia and minutiae might be interested to know that the scene between the characters of Melinda and Landy that takes place in the alley behind Landy's office was filmed at a building near the corner of Westwood Blvd. and Ohio Ave. in West L.A. This, if I am not mistaken, was indeed the real life location of Landy's office/Brains & Genius.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 09, 2015, 10:34:43 AM
Saw this Sunday at the West L.A. Q&A screening-

I was amazed at how much information was conveyed in the film, and how artfully that was accomplished. Some difficult personal/family issues are handled skillfully and with subtlety -  through visuals and implication.  Whoever it was who framed the story/narrative either understood the nature and roots of the Beach Boys’ dysfunction, or had access to someone who did.  I don't think Brian or his wife Melinda are credited as producers on this movie, but it is obviously their "project" or "baby," with B. Pohlad, et al.  as the artists helping them execute it and convey that which Brian and Melinda want to communicate. 


Those were my impressions as well.  There were many moments, way too many to list, where I smiled in appreciation.  One of the first that really gave me goosebumps was the 2nd shot of the movie.  As the soundtrack swirls with Atticus Ross' mashup you hear bits of "California Girls", "Help Me Rhonda", "Wendy" and others and slowly the darkened screen reveals an ear.  Then we see 4-5 seconds of Brian in bed at the Bel Air house circa 1970s.

I knew, going in, that there little to no focus given to the 1970s or early 1980s and the troubles Brian went through.  Specifically, the "bed years".  But that one small little sequence conveys so much heaviness and weight.  Especially for Beach Boys fanatics.  Essentially, that one shot says so much about the years in between without really saying anything.  It's just an image of Brian in bed, face obscured by blue robe and girth.  I knew right then that Pohlad "got it".  In Oren Moverman's screenplay, the opening shot is basically what I described above.  It's very powerful as written.  But even more so as documented in the actual film.

Regarding the lineage of LOVE & MERCY, I believe originally John Wells had commissioned a screenplay, in the late 2000's.  Michael Lerner wrote a screenplay called HEROES & VILLAINS and they took it to River Road (Bill Pohlad's company) and he balked initially because the screenplay was more straightforward.  Somewhere in the process Claire Rudnick Polstein was involved (maybe prior to this) and she along with John Wells came back with the idea of a Brian Wilson film and Pohlad then commissioned Oren Moverman.  IIRC that was 2011.  There was a story in the NY Times around that time regarding the film going into pre-production.  There was no script at that point. 

Oren Moverman has mentioned in an interview posted in either this thread or the other that he worked with Brian but more so Melinda on getting fine details of their story.  And I suppose Moverman just relied on the various books and interviews in the telling of the 1960s portion.  I did find it interesting that in the same interview, he mentioned the original screenplay he gave Pohlad was some 170 pages and did include a section for the 1970s.  There were 3 Brian's. 

Obviously there were many revisions along the way.  At the end of the day, they really did Brian justice and gave us (and future generations) a film that uniquely tells the story in a way that is re-watchable and dazzling to behold. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: CenturyDeprived on June 09, 2015, 11:09:37 AM

Fans of trivia and minutiae might be interested to know that the scene between the characters of Melinda and Landy that takes place in the alley behind Landy's office was filmed at a building near the corner of Westwood Blvd. and Ohio Ave. in West L.A. This, if I am not mistaken, was indeed the real life location of Landy's office/Brains & Genius.


I am most certainly a fan of trivia and minutiae, so thanks for that info! Looking at google maps, that intersection brings back memories of being a kid in the '80s in West LA. I guess Landy's office of Brains & Genius was right next to both the former location of All American Burger (Brian must've loved that on occasions where he might have been allowed a burger) as well as right next to the former location of Rhino Records.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on June 09, 2015, 11:17:43 AM
One of the first that really gave me goosebumps was the 2nd shot of the movie.  As the soundtrack swirls with Atticus Ross' mashup you hear bits of "California Girls", "Help Me Rhonda", "Wendy" and others and slowly the darkened screen reveals an ear.  Then we see 4-5 seconds of Brian in bed at the Bel Air house circa 1970s.


When that shot came on the screen I remember gasping "Oh my God"---it was eerie how they got that shot perfectly just like the footage we've all seen countless times. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 09, 2015, 11:44:30 AM
Very perceptive about the pool scene with Van Dyke. The symbolism seems to be out in the open for sharp-eyed viewers to pick up, and very well executed and staged. I already have that in some additional commentary I've been trying to pull together about some more symbolic scenes and the way the filmmakers wove them into the story.

Look more at that swimming pool in the film, there are a lot of symbolic scenes centered around it, IMO.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on June 09, 2015, 12:04:24 PM
Very perceptive about the pool scene with Van Dyke. The symbolism seems to be out in the open for sharp-eyed viewers to pick up, and very well executed and staged. I already have that in some additional commentary I've been trying to pull together about some more symbolic scenes and the way the filmmakers wove them into the story.

Look more at that swimming pool in the film, there are a lot of symbolic scenes centered around it, IMO.

There was one scene where Brian and Carl and Dennis were out on a deck talking about sticking together as brothers and then during the whole 2001 Space Odyssey scene we see the same set up with Brian and Carl, but Dennis is gone. Quite poignant.


Title: Re: \
Post by: JakeH on June 09, 2015, 12:11:48 PM
There was one scene where Brian and Carl and Dennis were out on a deck talking about sticking together as brothers and then during the whole 2001 Space Odyssey scene we see the same set up with Brian and Carl, but Dennis is gone. Quite poignant.

Yeah - that was maybe the saddest moment in the whole film, and it went by in less than a second. Very, very good movie.


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 09, 2015, 12:13:43 PM
Very perceptive about the pool scene with Van Dyke. The symbolism seems to be out in the open for sharp-eyed viewers to pick up, and very well executed and staged. I already have that in some additional commentary I've been trying to pull together about some more symbolic scenes and the way the filmmakers wove them into the story.

Look more at that swimming pool in the film, there are a lot of symbolic scenes centered around it, IMO.

There was one scene where Brian and Carl and Dennis were out on a deck talking about sticking together as brothers and then during the whole 2001 Space Odyssey scene we see the same set up with Brian and Carl, but Dennis is gone. Quite poignant.

Great catch, one of many! If you see the film again, take special note of what happens around and in that pool, and how other scenes are staged. In some cases the symbolism might not hit right away until other scenes are added up together. There seem to be a lot of symbolic scenes happening around that pool.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on June 09, 2015, 12:15:28 PM
Well I am hitting viewing number 2 tonight, so I'll keep my eyes extra open.  :lol ;)


Title: Re: Love & Mercy ongoing discussion
Post by: Lumen on June 09, 2015, 12:17:20 PM
I hate to bury this post in a LOVE & MERCY thread.  But I think in a way its related.  This is an inteview with Carl Wilson from 1984 discussing Beach Boys history, his own personal history and that of his big brother Brian.  A good section of the middle part of the interview is devoted to discussing many things Brian and production, etc.

In the wake of LOVE & MERCY, I find it interesting to listen to Carl's voice in such a wide ranging interview that takes place in a fairly close time in proximity to part of the film.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsXfbTw7wnw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsXfbTw7wnw)


Title: Re: \
Post by: MarcellaHasDirtyFeet on June 09, 2015, 01:23:59 PM
Brian, lying on his back in bed, breathing heavily, almost in such a way that you can feel his despair.

The image still gives me goosebumps the day after watching L&M. What a great way to start the movie. But it's also the end of the movie, or it is for Paul Dano's Brian, at least. The ugliness and sadness and loneliness of The Bedroom Years was rightly left out of the movie; I couldn't have handled anymore of that despair than the glimpse we were given. Still, that future is always hovering over the 1960s parts of the film, a shadow at the edge of our vision. We know where this went, and in reality, Brian didn't escape it until his emancipation from Landy.

Love Melinda's portrayal. Despite the craziness going on around her, she remains thoroughly decent and intelligent-- picking her battles, she avoids goading Landy or arguing with him, and instead just moves forward. Great choice, using her as both our entrance point into Brian's world (exposition about his childhood, etc.) and the eventual savior.

I also really dug Marilyn, and would have loved more screen time for her. She's so sweet and supportive and loving, but most importantly, as Cusack-Brian notes, she was YOUNG. Hosting these swanky dinner parties celebrating her husband's success, inhabiting this beautiful home, but it's invaded by weirdness and illness and you can just see that she's lost in the woods.

Liked how they portrayed Dennis. The Carl's speaking voice sounded just like the Real Carl's. Al who?

Murry is FUCKING SCARY.

Mike Love-- I felt a bit defensive about poor ol' Mike after watching this movie. Didn't care for how aggressive the actor played the part, or how he was written. The scenes with Mike are the ones where I felt like I was watching a bad Beach Boys TV movie featuring former Hollywood star Paul Dano instead of a well-made independent film. Way too heavy handed, in my opinion. Now, if I hadn't been brainwashed by Cam Mott over these past few years, maybe I wouldn't mind, and if I wasn't a Beach Boys fan, maybe it would have been perfectly acceptable within the context of the film itself. Doesn't spoil anything, but it is a minor blemish.

I have also never been more aware of the soundscape of a movie, and it was glorious. The panning was really well done. Really ramped up the anxiety, those aural hallucination effects. Minor quibble-- they did some overdubbing (looping?) of some lines here and there, and they seemed to stand out like a sore thumb to me. I know it's standard practice, especially outdoor scenes, but it pulled me out of the film from time to time. Also, I thought Paul Dano's singing voice sounds a lot like Paul Dano and not Brian. The "double tracking" scenes were kind of silly in that it was clearly the Real BW singing in the headphones and Dano-Brian doubling him into the mic without making it sound particularly good. Meh.

Did any of the studio backing tracks during the Wrecking Crew portions sound like re-recordings to anyone else? Or have the originals been "cleaned up" somehow? A lot of the instrumental bits sounded just ever so slightly different than the original BB tracks.

I was probably (at 30 years old) the youngest person in the theater for my 4:30 p.m. Monday showing in Ithaca, NY, and there might have been a dozen or more people in attendance.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 09, 2015, 02:05:45 PM
Brian Wilson, Revisited

http://www.newsweek.com/2015/06/19/brian-wilson-revisited-340951.html (http://www.newsweek.com/2015/06/19/brian-wilson-revisited-340951.html)


Title: Re: \
Post by: petsoundsnola on June 09, 2015, 02:18:37 PM
I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to  discuss minor quibbles with the historical timelines, but here goes:

1. Murry didn't sell the rights to the Beach Boys' music until 1969, if I recall correctly, not in 1967 during the implosion of SMiLE.

2. Brian didn't make the decision to quit touring just prior to the Japan Tour and after Rubber Soul came out.

3. Brian had completed a track of Good Vibrations in February 1966 and an early version with Tony Asher's lyrics long before the "Tent in the Living Room/Piano in the Sandbox" timeframe of the SMiLE sessions.  The film makes it seems that during this latter SMiLE timeframe, after Pet Sounds was released, that Brian was just beginning to sketch out the song on piano in front of Mike.

These are only minor issues in my opinion that the vast majority of viewers would not notice, and I'm sure there are other ones I didn't catch.


Title: Re: \
Post by: orange22 on June 09, 2015, 03:25:07 PM
Did any of the studio backing tracks during the Wrecking Crew portions sound like re-recordings to anyone else? Or have the originals been "cleaned up" somehow? A lot of the instrumental bits sounded just ever so slightly different than the original BB tracks.

I definitely noticed re-recordings Marcella, and I brought your point up in the L&M Soundtrack thread: http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,21958.0.html


Title: Re: \
Post by: shadownoze on June 09, 2015, 05:14:40 PM
Where are all the people who said that using the wrong truck in the Surfin' Safari cover shoot would make the entire movie uncreditable?


Title: Re: \
Post by: JimC1702 on June 09, 2015, 05:31:42 PM
Saw it this afternoon in Saratoga Springs, NY.  There were 25-30 people, not bad for 3:50 PM matinee on a Tuesday.  It was dead silent in the theater throughout the movie and, as others have mentioned, not one person go up during the ending credits. 

I thought the movie was incredible, obviously much more meaningful to the BB/BW faithful.   My first watery eyes moment was Brian (Dano) singing "Caroline No". 

Cusack did a terrific job with the quirks and mannerisms of 80's Brian.  I got a kick out of the scene with Brian (Cusack) shouting to Melinda and then sheepishly admitting he'd forgotten her apartment number.    That's the Brian we know and love. 

Bring on the DVD and the soundtrack!

Jim


Title: Re: \
Post by: wantsomecorn on June 09, 2015, 06:09:04 PM
Very perceptive about the pool scene with Van Dyke. The symbolism seems to be out in the open for sharp-eyed viewers to pick up, and very well executed and staged. I already have that in some additional commentary I've been trying to pull together about some more symbolic scenes and the way the filmmakers wove them into the story.

Look more at that swimming pool in the film, there are a lot of symbolic scenes centered around it, IMO.

That was a great scene. From what I remember, I thought Carl was in the pool too, with his shirt on, while Dennis was in there also, shirt off.

The metaphor of Brian being in the deep end was great. Carl tries to coax him into coming into the shallow end so they can all talk easier, while Mike just wants Brian to cut the sh*t and get out of the pool. Al stood to the side too, but tried to keep out of any drama.

It captured their personalities perfectly, and you could still sympathize with Mike too, because Brian's behavior was really bizarre and unproductive. For better or worse (depending on whose opinion you prefer) Brian had gone off the deep end.


Another scene I love was the Mike-Brian relationship surrounding Good Vibrations. Mike goes from wanting to go back to the basics, and then a few scenes later, Murry comes over, playing them "I Live for the Sun", which he brags about as a return to form, claiming it'll be a gold record. Obviously it wasn't, and Mike approaches Brian later at the sandbox, wanting to make amends, but still awkward about how to do it. Brian cuts him off and they extend an olive branch towards each other by writing Good Vibrations.


And one last thing: just to show how disconnected Brian has become from his previous life, no other characters except Brian are featured in both parts of the movie. Only Carl gets close, having a phone call with Melinda, but his voice in inaudible.


Title: Re: \
Post by: donald on June 09, 2015, 07:07:21 PM
Apologies if this has already been reported, but the “numbers” are in from this weekend’s “limited” run. The film made approx.. $2,222,000 on 483 screens, for a “per screen” average of $4,600, which I believe is quite good. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/

For a comparison, the biggest blockbuster film played on about 3,800 screens.

This puts it at something around #11 for the weekend in terms of total gross, but #5 in terms of dollars per screen. I believe this is considered a pretty good performance for what the mainstream media is characterizing as an “indie”, “Oscar bait” film.

The film will apparently add screens in the coming week(s).



Saw it this weekend. Will have a review soon…







glad to hear about a broader release.   A 4 hour round trip from here to see it...........all I get is poltergeist and paulblart the mall cop


Title: Re: \
Post by: Compost on June 09, 2015, 07:17:42 PM
This review is more for me than anything.  I need to be honest with myself.  I was as giddy as a kid weeks prior to the release (I'm 41).  Hadn't felt so irrationally jazzed for a long time.

But I gotta say...I'm a little disappointed and probably unjustly so.  Disappointed in myself maybe.

I loved the 60s scenes with Dano - totally absorbing, imaginatively rendered and totally believable.  Heartbreaking portrayal.  Fanboy porn.  Dano deserves some major kudos for his efforts.

And then there's the 80s.  Glossy gloss all over the place (as it was).  But too crisp.  No hairs out of place.  No sweat on upper lips or brows, as though the era were immune from dirt and oil.

And then there's Cusack.  

It was totally impossible for me to forget that it was John Cusack.  80s icon playing my beloved 60s icon in the 80s.  Double-jeopardy.  Triple even.  I've never felt that he was that good of an actor unless he was playing a caricature of himself.  

He gets the ticks and mannerisms down pat, absolutely, but it's always John Cusack before me.  I just couldn't get past it, and so for me, only half the film resonated.

I need to watch this film again, perhaps a little less critically - possibly drunk - and just let my guard down.  I feel like I was afraid to get hurt and was consequently wary throughout.  Like a kid again, scared of heartbreak.

There, I've said it.  I'll bet - I'll hope - that I'm going to really like this film later on but for now, I'll leave it at this:

It was more than I thought I'd ever see and possibly more than I can.



Title: Re: \
Post by: CenturyDeprived on June 09, 2015, 07:44:44 PM
I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to  discuss minor quibbles with the historical timelines, but here goes:

1. Murry didn't sell the rights to the Beach Boys' music until 1969, if I recall correctly, not in 1967 during the implosion of SMiLE.

2. Brian didn't make the decision to quit touring just prior to the Japan Tour and after Rubber Soul came out.

3. Brian had completed a track of Good Vibrations in February 1966 and an early version with Tony Asher's lyrics long before the "Tent in the Living Room/Piano in the Sandbox" timeframe of the SMiLE sessions.  The film makes it seems that during this latter SMiLE timeframe, after Pet Sounds was released, that Brian was just beginning to sketch out the song on piano in front of Mike.

These are only minor issues in my opinion that the vast majority of viewers would not notice, and I'm sure there are other ones I didn't catch.

I loved the film VERY much, but my only quibble with this kind of stuff in the film was the scene where Melinda was driving a Cadillac Allante, circa 1992 (?) and almost runs Brian over, and they then go to Hawthorne. The fake license plate on the car in this scene is really bad! They got a bunch of other cars in the scene to have actual period California plates, not sure why they resorted to a fake plate with incorrect "California" font for the main car; but this is a minor quibble. Just had to share my (very) slight annoyance :)


Title: Re: \Melinda
Post by: Junkstar on June 09, 2015, 08:07:17 PM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...


Title: Re: \
Post by: onkster on June 09, 2015, 08:09:35 PM
Well, y'know I hate to be a downer--but Compost's reaction was almost identical to mine. Except I regard Cusack higher than Compost does.

Loved the 60s scenes so much, I wanted more of 'em. Maybe ALL of 'em--a whole movie of just that. Except that'd be a pretty sad ending unless they jumped to BWPS '04 to tie it all up.

After reading how much stuff was put into the movie, I was worried it'd feel rushed--yet when I saw it, a lot of it felt...slow. The score--this felt more like cool sound effects and editing rather than a score. Was expecting Landy to feel much worse than he came off. Murry felt appropriately sickening...I'm kinda glad we didn't have more of him in there.

I don't think this was a bad movie at all, and I'm still struck by the many excellent things in it, but...I didn't feel blown away as many here have.

Maybe part of the problem is knowing too much about the real-life story, and having already imagined so much of it in my head.

Like it...but wanted so badly to love it.


Title: Re: \Melinda
Post by: Ray Lawlor on June 09, 2015, 08:58:06 PM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

It's never a good week to release a Murry Wilson tribute single.


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on June 09, 2015, 08:58:51 PM
I agree that Landy was not portrayed as menacingly as others have said he was. He just comes across as a buffoon. And the '80s scenes were clearly told from Melinda's point of view because Brian could offer very little from his -- not conducive to the film when its least interesting moments fall upon Banks. Thankfully she only has about one or two scenes devoted to her alone.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ray Lawlor on June 09, 2015, 09:03:22 PM
I agree that Landy was not portrayed as menacingly as others have said he was. He just comes across as a buffoon. And the '80s scenes were clearly told from Melinda's point of view because Brian could offer very little from his -- not conducive to the film when its least interesting moments fall upon Banks. Thankfully she only has about one or two scenes devoted to her alone.

Who says Brian can offer very little info from his point of view ? 


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on June 09, 2015, 09:21:21 PM
puni puni does


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on June 09, 2015, 09:44:43 PM
Who says Brian can offer very little info from his point of view ? 

From recent interviews it seems Melinda has retained much more info about the Landy years than BW is willing to discuss. Melinda is also responsible for just about everything in the '80s portions according to Pohlad and Moverman.


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 09, 2015, 09:53:27 PM
Who says Brian can offer very little info from his point of view ? 

From recent interviews it seems Melinda has retained much more info about the Landy years than BW is willing to discuss. Melinda is also responsible for just about everything in the '80s portions according to Pohlad and Moverman.

Let me ask you this: How many scenes in the film with Paul G's Landy character do not have Elizabeth Banks in the same scenes? Meaning, how many scenes with Landy involved are speculations of what happened behind closed doors versus an eyewitness account of someone who witnessed this stuff as it happened?


Title: Re: \Melinda
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 09, 2015, 09:57:12 PM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

A Murry Wilson tribute, really?

On a related note, I've been trying to get David Hasselhoff's people on the phone to get him on board with a musical tribute to the former East Germany, but they're not returning my calls.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on June 09, 2015, 10:08:34 PM
Who says Brian can offer very little info from his point of view ? 

From recent interviews it seems Melinda has retained much more info about the Landy years than BW is willing to discuss. Melinda is also responsible for just about everything in the '80s portions according to Pohlad and Moverman.
key word is WILLING, not able. If he is more comfortable with Melinda discussing it, well, that is his prerogative.


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on June 09, 2015, 10:29:59 PM
How many scenes in the film with Paul G's Landy character do not have Elizabeth Banks in the same scenes?
Like... none?


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 09, 2015, 10:35:16 PM
How many scenes in the film with Paul G's Landy character do not have Elizabeth Banks in the same scenes?
Like... none?

Exactly. So you're basically getting the story directly from the only other person who was actually there to tell it for many of the events that played out on the screen. So what's the issue with who is telling the story if there is one? Landy was an asshole and acted like one, case closed.


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on June 09, 2015, 11:22:13 PM
There is no issue except, as I already said, it makes for a worse film. I don't think it could have been told any other way though. Banks kind of represents the audience's perspective. Maybe she was a miscast. Her moments were the only times I felt a drag; I remember the friend I went with kept nudging me to say 'I wish they'd go back to '60s Brian.' Everything else was perfect.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Junkstar on June 10, 2015, 05:28:37 AM
Quote
So you're basically getting the story directly from the only other person who was actually there to tell it for many of the events that played out on the screen. So what's the issue with who is telling the story if there is one? Landy was an asshole and acted like one, case closed.

I don't think anyone is defending Landy, his henchmen (who go nameless), the absent extended Wilson family and BB's etc. Half the film is about Brian's lean years as recalled by many, half is Melindas story, as recalled by Melinda. I don't dispute that she potentially saved his soul, I'm just saying it felt forced and a bit empty to me. Yes, she was the only one actually there for the Melinda story. There were enough others there for a deeper tale that didn't make the cut. I get it. It's Hollywood. I don't care all that much, as we all expect to see as palatable a story as possible from big studios. Just didn't grab me personally the way I hoped it would.


Title: Re: \Melinda
Post by: Junkstar on June 10, 2015, 05:41:46 AM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

A Murry Wilson tribute, really?

On a related note, I've been trying to get David Hasselhoff's people on the phone to get him on board with a musical tribute to the former East Germany, but they're not returning my calls.


Yup, really. Im not from the BB camp that flags participants in the legacy as either purely good or purely bad. I think it's a shame there are so few Murry compositions on record for posterity. He was a key player in creating the band as we know them.

Your Hasselhoff project sounds less challenging than trying to unearth the Murry canon of failed sheets, to be honest. Two Step was an easy target as Guy Lombardo had sheets released through Guild and BMI, but there are many more failed Murry compositions people will likely never hear.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on June 10, 2015, 06:21:17 AM
Post from your heart junkster! ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on June 10, 2015, 06:46:20 AM
There is no issue except, as I already said, it makes for a worse film. I don't think it could have been told any other way though. Banks kind of represents the audience's perspective. Maybe she was a miscast. Her moments were the only times I felt a drag; I remember the friend I went with kept nudging me to say 'I wish they'd go back to '60s Brian.' Everything else was perfect.

I would have changed seats.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Junkstar on June 10, 2015, 06:49:17 AM
To be fair, I had a pack of elderly folks surrounding me (they were all together and we were in 'their usual section') and they were gasping with fear and muttering with delight throughout the film.


Title: Re: \
Post by: filledeplage on June 10, 2015, 07:16:48 AM
Quote
So you're basically getting the story directly from the only other person who was actually there to tell it for many of the events that played out on the screen. So what's the issue with who is telling the story if there is one? Landy was an asshole and acted like one, case closed.
I don't think anyone is defending Landy, his henchmen (who go nameless), the absent extended Wilson family and BB's etc. Half the film is about Brian's lean years as recalled by many, half is Melindas story, as recalled by Melinda. I don't dispute that she potentially saved his soul, I'm just saying it felt forced and a bit empty to me. Yes, she was the only one actually there for the Melinda story. There were enough others there for a deeper tale that didn't make the cut. I get it. It's Hollywood. I don't care all that much, as we all expect to see as palatable a story as possible from big studios. Just didn't grab me personally the way I hoped it would.
Junkstar - given that Brian was entrusted via the court to Landy, in order to wrest him (Brian) from his (Landy's) clutches, it would have required a high burden of proof, to convince a court that Landy was self-dealing, etc., and that would be "the will" which appeared to have been a joint effort as between Gloria and Melinda.  

No one else appeared to have met that burden, and the band and family appear to have been marginalized, by being essentially barred from visitation.  That ain't Hollywood. It is remedying predatory behavior. Just sayin'.   ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: RubberSoul13 on June 10, 2015, 07:51:59 AM
Finally saw the film yesterday afternoon at our new theatre here...it's barely two years old and absolutely incredible. Anyway, we went for the matinne basically to save money...it was pretty empty, probably about 15-20 people in the full-sized theater. My girlfriend and I were easily the only people under 65 and just like a Mike and Bruce concert...the only people that really knew anything before going in there. The crowd was pretty silent throughout the film, but all left immediately after it was over. We were the only ones staying through the credits.

Overall, I was pleased and impressed. The 60's scenes were definitely way more entertaining and enjoyable for a Beach Boys fan, but the 80's scenes were probably more pleasing to the elderly folks that came in looking for the next aging rock star drama. I could not get past Cusack. I know it's been said by almost everyone on here, but there is no resemblance whatsoever. All the other roles were pretty spot on. I think Landy was a little underplayed, Mike Love perhaps a little overplayed, but Murry was spot on.

As for other visual comparisons...The Beach Boys looked accurate for the most part. Brian, Al, and Mike all looked really great in my opinion. Carl, Dennis, and Bruce could've been anybody...

Three favorite parts, most of which have been mentioned...the very beginning in stereo. Holy guacamole I was stunned, so powerful. Secondly, Brian inside the piano plucking "You Still Believe in Me" that was done VERY well and felt incredibly real to me. Lastly, the pool scene with Brian in the deep end. The placement and characterization of the other members was sheer perfection.


Title: Re: \
Post by: HeyJude on June 10, 2015, 08:25:14 AM
I scraped together my review and it’s up on my blog. http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com (Links to my blog and facebook page are in my signature below). As usual, I wrote and rewrote and ended up just going with a sort of blurted out, stream of consciousness review to once avoid spending weeks writing it for five minutes per day. Long story short, the film is highly recommended!


Title: Re: \
Post by: krabklaw on June 10, 2015, 08:33:28 AM
Brian already comes across in the 80s part of the movie as a weak and pathetic individual. Do BW fans really wish that they would have shown MORE of that? His passive personality had rendered him impotent to control his own life. It was Melinda that was the catalyzing force to move Brian forward. That part of the movie is really her story, not Brian's. I think Pohlad got the balance right in that regard. Elizabeth Banks gives a great performance too. That scene where Landy yells at her through the door and then totally backs down when she opens it is one of the movie's best. With that one glare, Landy knew that Melinda was not someone he was going to be able to control. The scene where he "gives her access" was wonderful too, as you could sense Melinda's mounting horror even as  she seems to consider going along with Landy's requests.


Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on June 10, 2015, 08:33:55 AM
Finally saw the film yesterday afternoon at our new theatre here...it's barely two years old and absolutely incredible. Anyway, we went for the matinne basically to save money...it was pretty empty, probably about 15-20 people in the full-sized theater. My girlfriend and I were easily the only people under 65 and just like a Mike and Bruce concert...the only people that really knew anything before going in there. The crowd was pretty silent throughout the film, but all left immediately after it was over. We were the only ones staying through the credits.



Funny you mention that.  My fiance and I were also the only ones left after the credits since we stayed to listen to Love and Mercy and One Kind of Love.  

I didn't think I'd like Cusack or Giamanti, but I think they both immersed themselves in the roles.  Especially Cusack, with the mannerisms and facial ticks.  However, it's probably best that they chose to not have him sing.  


Title: Re: \
Post by: NickandthePassions on June 10, 2015, 08:54:08 AM
Anyone know if/when the film will expand to more cities? Closest showing is 72 miles. I traveled to see it, but I have got to see it again. I couldn't take it all in with one viewing.


Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on June 10, 2015, 09:06:41 AM
It was supposed to be this weekend. 

You might want to check Fandango.  There are no extra showings in my neck of the woods though. 

Unfortunately, this is the summer blockbuster season, so most theaters are going to opt to put the big budget movies on their screens.  With Jurassic World being released on Friday, I wouldn't expect L&M to be added to many theaters. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: Amanda Hart on June 10, 2015, 09:07:25 AM
Overall, I was pleased and impressed. The 60's scenes were definitely way more entertaining and enjoyable for a Beach Boys fan, but the 80's scenes were probably more pleasing to the elderly folks that came in looking for the next aging rock star drama. I could not get past Cusack.

I feel exactly the opposite. I really could have done without the shot-for-shot remake of the Sloop promo video and other vintage footage. I can watch the original anytime I want, so why put it in the film when that time could have been spent elsewhere on the story? I was much more invested in the stuff we didn't know and thought Cusack was terrific at portraying Brian during that phase of his life.

Not to take anything away from Dano's performance, or the film overall, but if I'm being picky about how I would have liked to seen those 2 hours used, it wouldn't have been recreated studio or promotional footage that's easily available.


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 10, 2015, 09:16:28 AM
Brian already comes across in the 80s part of the movie as a weak and pathetic individual. Do BW fans really wish that they would have shown MORE of that? His passive personality had rendered him impotent to control his own life. It was Melinda that was the catalyzing force to move Brian forward. That part of the movie is really her story, not Brian's. I think Pohlad got the balance right in that regard. Elizabeth Banks gives a great performance too. That scene where Landy yells at her through the door and then totally backs down when she opens it is one of the movie's best. With that one glare, Landy knew that Melinda was not someone he was going to be able to control. The scene where he "gives her access" was wonderful too, as you could sense Melinda's mounting horror even as  she seems to consider going along with Landy's requests.

+1

Nice post. Sums it up well. I'd add to that a scene which affected me more than i would have expected, when Melinda shows up with a surprise for her and Brian to share, a sweet gesture that most of us do or have done when dating someone and building a relationship, and Landy...I won't spoil it, but that scene really packed more of an emotional punch that i expected.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 10, 2015, 09:16:53 AM
I feel exactly the opposite. I really could have done without the shot-for-shot remake of the Sloop promo video and other vintage footage. I can watch the original anytime I want, so why put it in the film when that time could have been spent elsewhere on the story? I was much more invested in the stuff we didn't know and thought Cusack was terrific at portraying Brian during that phase of his life.

I'm fairly certain the Sloop promo was there to break up the heaviness of the LSD scene that preceded it.  It infuses comfort and humor just as some of the darker tones of the film are revealing themselves.


Title: Re: \Melinda
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 10, 2015, 09:18:55 AM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

A Murry Wilson tribute, really?

On a related note, I've been trying to get David Hasselhoff's people on the phone to get him on board with a musical tribute to the former East Germany, but they're not returning my calls.


Yup, really. Im not from the BB camp that flags participants in the legacy as either purely good or purely bad. I think it's a shame there are so few Murry compositions on record for posterity. He was a key player in creating the band as we know them.

Your Hasselhoff project sounds less challenging than trying to unearth the Murry canon of failed sheets, to be honest. Two Step was an easy target as Guy Lombardo had sheets released through Guild and BMI, but there are many more failed Murry compositions people will likely never hear.

Was the process of unearthing all of that sheet music more difficult than finding out what C50 meant?  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Wirestone on June 10, 2015, 09:22:32 AM
Amanda, I'm with you. The latter-day Brian stuff was my favorite.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Amy B. on June 10, 2015, 09:25:29 AM

After reading how much stuff was put into the movie, I was worried it'd feel rushed--yet when I saw it, a lot of it felt...slow. The score--this felt more like cool sound effects and editing rather than a score. Was expecting Landy to feel much worse than he came off. Murry felt appropriately sickening...I'm kinda glad we didn't have more of him in there.

How much worse could Landy have been portrayed? He was shown as being outwardly charming, if also creepy, but then screaming at a terrified Brian, starving Brian, giving him pills, living in his home, surrounding him with "minders", controlling who he saw, keeping Melinda away, etc. Oh...and making himself the beneficiary. That's pretty damn bad.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Amanda Hart on June 10, 2015, 09:28:42 AM
I feel exactly the opposite. I really could have done without the shot-for-shot remake of the Sloop promo video and other vintage footage. I can watch the original anytime I want, so why put it in the film when that time could have been spent elsewhere on the story? I was much more invested in the stuff we didn't know and thought Cusack was terrific at portraying Brian during that phase of his life.

I'm fairly certain the Sloop promo was there to break up the heaviness of the LSD scene that preceded it.  It infuses comfort and humor just as some of the darker tones of the film are revealing themselves.


I think that is why they included it, I just wish they would have found a more unique way to get that emotional break in. There are lots of really funny moments and stories that go around about this time period, and Brian's life in general because he's a funny guy, and I would have rather seen something new brought in.


Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on June 10, 2015, 09:30:22 AM
I feel exactly the opposite. I really could have done without the shot-for-shot remake of the Sloop promo video and other vintage footage. I can watch the original anytime I want, so why put it in the film when that time could have been spent elsewhere on the story? I was much more invested in the stuff we didn't know and thought Cusack was terrific at portraying Brian during that phase of his life.

I'm fairly certain the Sloop promo was there to break up the heaviness of the LSD scene that preceded it.  It infuses comfort and humor just as some of the darker tones of the film are revealing themselves.


Sloop John B also provided a nice transition to the 80s scene with Brian, Melinda, and Evan Landy on the sailboat, listening to Sloop John B on the boom box.


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 10, 2015, 09:30:51 AM

2.) I liked the way the SMiLE crew was portrayed. (So glad Bob Hanes isn't here to rip me a new one for what I am about to say. We argued ALOT over this). I have always felt that with 3 exceptions, the people that were around Brian during Pet Sounds and SMiLE were absolutely the most self absorbed people who could have invaded his world. Starting with Tom Nolan and carried on by David Leaf and others, these people (Lauren Daro, Mike Vosse, etc etc), these people were said to be hip and the Beach Boys were said to be non-hip and that was the ONLY thing wrong is that the boys couldn't or didn't want to go where the hip people were leading. Well, to put it mildly, these hip people were going NOWHERE. They were the kind of people I knew growing up that would get high and just ramble on about things and think of themselves as enlightened. And the 60's people had a way of thinking they saved the world. They didn't. They were too self-absorbed to save anyone. I always found it funny when they use to show these communes on shows like 60 minutes etc., and the men would spend the day meeting and discussing issues of the day etc, while the women did all of the work and child-rearing. So much for enlightenment. Those people added nothing. And look at them all. Except for Van, David, and Danny, they all went on to do......nothing. Some were homeless and addicted, Lauren worked as a fact checker for a publisher (so much for Mr. Brain Trust). These were evil people. Glad they didn't show them as heroes. Leaf tried to show them that way in the Beatuiful Dreamer video. They weren't. After watching Lauren speak, I told Bob Hanes I felt like I needed a shower.

Not to derail this too much, but I'd side with Bob Hanes if you're lumping Michael Vosse into your "evil people" list, and I know there are quite a few on this board who knew him personally and could say much more about it if they chose.

I just don't think it's fair or even appropriate to make these kinds of claims against someone when they're just not true - Daro, you'd have a case there. But I seriously don't understand where this sentiment against Vosse is coming from or why. Didn't I challenge this same thing when it was announced that he had passed away, and someone used the term "leeches" in that thread?

I could find what I posted in reply to that, but it shouldn't be necessary.

Unless the definition "went on to do nothing" somehow includes a decades-long career in broadcast news and journalism and several notable awards for his work in that field including an Emmy...I just don't get the hatred or the attempt to portray someone falsely.


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 10, 2015, 09:36:00 AM
I feel exactly the opposite. I really could have done without the shot-for-shot remake of the Sloop promo video and other vintage footage. I can watch the original anytime I want, so why put it in the film when that time could have been spent elsewhere on the story? I was much more invested in the stuff we didn't know and thought Cusack was terrific at portraying Brian during that phase of his life.

I'm fairly certain the Sloop promo was there to break up the heaviness of the LSD scene that preceded it.  It infuses comfort and humor just as some of the darker tones of the film are revealing themselves.


Sloop John B also provided a nice transition to the 80s scene with Brian, Melinda, and Evan Landy on the sailboat, listening to Sloop John B on the boom box.

I was saving this for a longer piece, but what the hell...just a teaser and/or something to consider without going all-in with the opinion piece.

At first I wondered about that recreation of the Sloop promo film, how it fit in, why it was used, what the director was going for...

Then it hit me, after about a day or so.

Look at every scene with a swimming pool in that film. Notice who is there, who is in the pool, who jumps in the pool, who stays out, who is in the deep versus shallow end...all of that, make note of each scene in that semi-obsessive way.

Then consider at the exact moment in time that the Sloop film was shot...all of the Beach Boys are in the pool with Brian. All of them, and enthusiastically so. They're along for the fun.

And contrast that with what follows, specifically who is and isn't in the pool.

That is my hint at a guess as to what's being portrayed symbolically by the pool scenes (which are in various stages of the film), and why the Sloop film was so meticulously recreated and included in the narrative.

Think of the concept "all in".  :)



Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on June 10, 2015, 09:38:34 AM
Nice analysis GF!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 10, 2015, 09:54:53 AM
Yes, that was very good GF.

Something else occurred to me about that scene now that it is being mentioned, it's almost like that illustrates the conclusion of PET SOUNDS.  Several scenes later in the tent Mike says something like 'Well PET SOUNDS was a flop'. 

There aren't a really any visual queues in the film of what I would term 'tangible' reality.  There's no scene show album artwork or anything like that.  It's much more cerebral, which was definitely the preferred approach (at least, to this viewer).

Came across this article from Slate Love & Mercy Fact vs Fiction

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/06/10/love_mercy_fact_vs_fiction_how_the_new_brian_wilson_biopic_starring_john.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/06/10/love_mercy_fact_vs_fiction_how_the_new_brian_wilson_biopic_starring_john.html)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Junkstar on June 10, 2015, 10:30:19 AM
Brian already comes across in the 80s part of the movie as a weak and pathetic individual. Do BW fans really wish that they would have shown MORE of that? His passive personality had rendered him impotent to control his own life. It was Melinda that was the catalyzing force to move Brian forward. That part of the movie is really her story, not Brian's. I think Pohlad got the balance right in that regard. Elizabeth Banks gives a great performance too. That scene where Landy yells at her through the door and then totally backs down when she opens it is one of the movie's best. With that one glare, Landy knew that Melinda was not someone he was going to be able to control. The scene where he "gives her access" was wonderful too, as you could sense Melinda's mounting horror even as  she seems to consider going along with Landy's requests.

I have not seen anyone wishing there were more scenes of Brian suffering in the film. If my comments come off giving you that impression, it's probably just poor writing on my part. Just was not personally sold on the Brian story as told primarily through the Melinda character. Good movie, though.


Title: Re: \Melinda
Post by: bgas on June 10, 2015, 10:35:15 AM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

A Murry Wilson tribute, really?

On a related note, I've been trying to get David Hasselhoff's people on the phone to get him on board with a musical tribute to the former East Germany, but they're not returning my calls.


Yup, really. Im not from the BB camp that flags participants in the legacy as either purely good or purely bad. I think it's a shame there are so few Murry compositions on record for posterity. He was a key player in creating the band as we know them.

Your Hasselhoff project sounds less challenging than trying to unearth the Murry canon of failed sheets, to be honest. Two Step was an easy target as Guy Lombardo had sheets released through Guild and BMI, but there are many more failed Murry compositions people will likely never hear.

Not certain what you mean by "failed sheets", but I think Jim Murphy could chime in with how many of Murry's compositions are actually on records. I'd bet on quite a few..


Title: Re: \Melinda
Post by: Junkstar on June 10, 2015, 10:35:41 AM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

A Murry Wilson tribute, really?

On a related note, I've been trying to get David Hasselhoff's people on the phone to get him on board with a musical tribute to the former East Germany, but they're not returning my calls.


Yup, really. Im not from the BB camp that flags participants in the legacy as either purely good or purely bad. I think it's a shame there are so few Murry compositions on record for posterity. He was a key player in creating the band as we know them.

Your Hasselhoff project sounds less challenging than trying to unearth the Murry canon of failed sheets, to be honest. Two Step was an easy target as Guy Lombardo had sheets released through Guild and BMI, but there are many more failed Murry compositions people will likely never hear.

Was the process of unearthing all of that sheet music more difficult than finding out what C50 meant?  ;D

I'm assuming I pissed you off in the 90's or something.


Title: Re: \Melinda
Post by: Junkstar on June 10, 2015, 10:38:23 AM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

A Murry Wilson tribute, really?

On a related note, I've been trying to get David Hasselhoff's people on the phone to get him on board with a musical tribute to the former East Germany, but they're not returning my calls.


Yup, really. Im not from the BB camp that flags participants in the legacy as either purely good or purely bad. I think it's a shame there are so few Murry compositions on record for posterity. He was a key player in creating the band as we know them.

Your Hasselhoff project sounds less challenging than trying to unearth the Murry canon of failed sheets, to be honest. Two Step was an easy target as Guy Lombardo had sheets released through Guild and BMI, but there are many more failed Murry compositions people will likely never hear.

Not certain what you mean by "failed sheets", but I think Jim Murphy could chime in with how many of Murry's compositions are actually on records. I'd bet on quite a few..

Thanks, I'll try to connect with Jim. From all sources so far, a few is more likely than quite a few if you disregard Many Moods and the Sunrays.


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on June 10, 2015, 10:43:47 AM
I would have changed seats.
Probably would have done less good. The theater we went to served alcohol and one person had to shush us at one point. Sorry about that. The film was just so good.  :P


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on June 10, 2015, 10:46:23 AM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

A Murry Wilson tribute, really?

On a related note, I've been trying to get David Hasselhoff's people on the phone to get him on board with a musical tribute to the former East Germany, but they're not returning my calls.


Yup, really. Im not from the BB camp that flags participants in the legacy as either purely good or purely bad. I think it's a shame there are so few Murry compositions on record for posterity. He was a key player in creating the band as we know them.

Your Hasselhoff project sounds less challenging than trying to unearth the Murry canon of failed sheets, to be honest. Two Step was an easy target as Guy Lombardo had sheets released through Guild and BMI, but there are many more failed Murry compositions people will likely never hear.

Was the process of unearthing all of that sheet music more difficult than finding out what C50 meant?  ;D

I'm assuming I pissed you off in the 90's or something.

I would say much more recently...


Title: Re: \Melinda
Post by: bgas on June 10, 2015, 10:47:13 AM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

A Murry Wilson tribute, really?

On a related note, I've been trying to get David Hasselhoff's people on the phone to get him on board with a musical tribute to the former East Germany, but they're not returning my calls.


Yup, really. Im not from the BB camp that flags participants in the legacy as either purely good or purely bad. I think it's a shame there are so few Murry compositions on record for posterity. He was a key player in creating the band as we know them.

Your Hasselhoff project sounds less challenging than trying to unearth the Murry canon of failed sheets, to be honest. Two Step was an easy target as Guy Lombardo had sheets released through Guild and BMI, but there are many more failed Murry compositions people will likely never hear.

Not certain what you mean by "failed sheets", but I think Jim Murphy could chime in with how many of Murry's compositions are actually on records. I'd bet on quite a few..

Thanks, I'll try to connect with Jim. From all sources so far, a few is more likely than quite a few if you disregard Many Moods and the Sunrays.

Off the top of my head...  
There were two on an obscure John Buzon Trio LP
Think the  Hollywood Flames did one or two  
Several versions of Two Step were recorded
The Bachelors recorded at least one.
and... time for Jim to jump in.  


Title: Re: \
Post by: Amy B. on June 10, 2015, 10:47:56 AM
Van Dyke just re-tweeted this:

Nicky Smith ‏@MUGGER1992  53m53 minutes ago
Brian Wilson biopic LOVE & MERCY bores & inexplicably snubs @thevandykeparks. Watch BEAUTIFUL DREAMER doc instead  http://www.splicetoday.com/moving-pictures/mercy-me-mr-wilson …

I guess we know how VDP feels about the movie. (I really don't think he was "snubbed," though. The movie isn't about the Smile process.)


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on June 10, 2015, 10:48:40 AM
Just got the new Rolling Stone, small piece on Paul Dano: 

    (http://i62.tinypic.com/2dm6175.jpg)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 10, 2015, 10:57:11 AM
Van Dyke just re-tweeted this:

Nicky Smith ‏@MUGGER1992  53m53 minutes ago
Brian Wilson biopic LOVE & MERCY bores & inexplicably snubs @thevandykeparks. Watch BEAUTIFUL DREAMER doc instead  http://www.splicetoday.com/moving-pictures/mercy-me-mr-wilson …

I guess we know how VDP feels about the movie. (I really don't think he was "snubbed," though. The movie isn't about the Smile process.)

I wish VDP wasn't so bitter.  It's very unbecoming.  LOVE & MERCY is two hour movie about the two points in Brian Wilson's life.  Keywords, two hour and Brian Wilson.  VDP is credited as being the lyricist with BDW on SMiLE.  It's not like Tony Asher is delved into much either.  VDP's character has more screen time than Asher's, IIRC. 

It would seem that VDP has an issue with Mrs. Wilson.  I'm just guessing though.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paul J B on June 10, 2015, 11:00:08 AM
Van Dyke just re-tweeted this:

Nicky Smith ‏@MUGGER1992  53m53 minutes ago
Brian Wilson biopic LOVE & MERCY bores & inexplicably snubs @thevandykeparks. Watch BEAUTIFUL DREAMER doc instead  http://www.splicetoday.com/moving-pictures/mercy-me-mr-wilson …

I guess we know how VDP feels about the movie. (I really don't think he was "snubbed," though. The movie isn't about the Smile process.)

I was just about to post my thoughts on the film ....have been trying to figure out what to say since seeing it Monday.... but after reading that. This guy is really starting to rub me and a lot of other people the wrong way. If VDP has something to say (which apparently he does not as he chose NOT to be included in TSS book) then he should say it. Good god, re-tweeting some others persons comment about it being boring and being snubbed.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Shark on June 10, 2015, 11:09:46 AM
Junkstar- Is that really you?

Just saw the movie last night with my girlfriend.  Only two other people in the theater for a 7:45PM show.  I thought it was an amazing film.  Kudos to everyone involved.  Going to try and get out to see it at least one more time.  One quick comment on how Mike was portrayed...my girlfriend who knows very little about the history of the band (she knows who Mike was going in and has met Bruce in person but very little about the actual history) turned to me at one point and said, "I hate Mike."  She laughed at the part when Brian was recording the cellos on Good Vibrations and Mike started complaining about how long it was taking and Brian said something along the lines of "If you don't like it, you can just leave."  I felt that they portrayed Mike somewhat fairly, maybe a little bit overboard with the acting, but I don't think most people will leave hating Mike Love. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: Amy B. on June 10, 2015, 11:16:12 AM
I was just about to post my thoughts on the film ....have been trying to figure out what to say since seeing it Monday.... but after reading that. This guy is really starting to rub me and a lot of other people the wrong way. If VDP has something to say (which apparently he does not as he chose NOT to be included in TSS book) then he should say it. Good god, re-tweeting some others persons comment about it being boring and being snubbed.

Forgive me for not posting tweets properly (screenshots or whatever):

Van Dyke Parks ‏@thevandykeparks  25m25 minutes ago
A signature one-shot can make a truly great movie. Like my idea of  bowed-8th-note cello  in "Good Vibrations". Oops.


OK, so I guess his problem is that the part in the movie with the cellos in GV (Brian continuously recites the "ta-ta-ta" rhythm to the players until Mike finally tells him enough is enough)-- VDP doesn't get credit for the idea. I know VDP is probably bitter that he didn't get the recognition or income that he deserved, but this movie is not about him. It's about Brian's process, his way of thinking about music, his sensitivity, his decline, etc. It's about Brian. It really wouldn't have made sense to have a scene where VDP said, "Hey Brian, how about triples" and Brian said, "Great idea, Van Dyke!" I think Bill Pohland just wanted to get across that Brian would obsess over sounds and do whatever he could to get exactly what he wanted through the players' instruments. There were a lot of musical ideas in the movie that were probably not Brian's (the Wrecking Crew said they would make suggestions a lot, like staccato notes, etc) where the originator of the idea did not get credit in the movie. That's not what this was about, though. I wonder if VDP has even seen the movie.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mooger Fooger on June 10, 2015, 11:25:05 AM
This passive-agressive approach by VDP is wearing thin. Why doesn't he deal with the problem head-on isntead of this constant woe-is-me whining? Seems pretty childish to me.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 10, 2015, 11:53:26 AM
Just got the new Rolling Stone, small piece on Paul Dano

That was a nice read.  Thanks for posting.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jcc on June 10, 2015, 11:55:02 AM
I saw the film on Saturday night with my brother and my father-in-law at the ArcLight in Hollywood.  Great evening, and afterwards there was a Q&A with Brian, Melinda, Bill Pohlad, and Paul Dano.  The film was phenomenal, and I can't wait to see it again, especially after reading all of the commentary in the thread so far (especially regarding the symbolism of people in the pool).  A few things I noticed:

1) My father-in-law was hooked in by the Moody Blues concert (B and M's first date).  He likes the Beach Boys, but the Moody Blues are his favorite band.  He thought the inclusion of "Nights in White Satin" was cool.

2) Didn't have a problem with the Cusack scenes.  After a while, Cusack just seems to become Brian.  As far as Landy not being "menacing" enough, remember that Landy was really only menacing to Brian because he had the power of conservator over Brian.  Landy was a pretentious buffoon, but what if the buffoon had the power to make life and death decisions over you, to include institutionalizing you for indefinite periods of time if necessary?  Then the buffoon becomes pretty damn menacing, in my opinion.

3) I don't think the movie was unfavorable to Mike Love at all.  We all have the hindsight of 50 years and we know how the story plays out.  In the 1960's, it was unthinkable that a rock-and-roll band would last 5 years, let along 50.  The peak and the downfall were coming.  I don't look down at Mike for being risk averse and wanting to delay the inevitable as long as possible.  The movie portrays that very well.

4) At the same time, Mike is not a monster.  He and Brian treat each other on generally equal terms.  Notice that the only person that Brian feels comfortable putting in his place is Mike, not Murry, and certainly not Landy.   Mike is not abusive, he's just a stick-in-the-mud when he senses his cousin may very well be descending into madness.

5) The scene with 70's Brian on his back in bed is amazing.  It's reminiscent of certain scenes in the Godfather where there's no action on the screen, but the scene conveys the horror...sort of like looking at a terrible car accident immediately after it's happened but before the police and the paramedics or other first responders have arrived.

6) Did anyone notice the last scene in the pool, which I'm assuming is supposed to be at the Bellagio house in 1968-1969 or the early 1970's, where it's just Brian in the pool...and there's leaves everywhere and it looks like even the buildings are sort of crumbling?  Speaking of the "pool" symbolism and all.

7) Like a lot of people, I'm very interested to see deleted scenes.  I'm sure there's going to be a few on the DVD release.

8. The movie would have obtained ultimate cinematic perfection if during the climactic scene between Landy and Melinda if when the door opened, Melinda had screamed, "You're out of the band, Buckwheat!!"


One last note, the Brian that was at the Q&A was very animated, "with it", and was actually very funny at points.  Unfortunately most of the questions came from what my brother best characterized as "film nerds" making references to the sound editing as "Kubrickesque".   But there was one guy who asked Brian a question and I couldn't really hear it, but he was talking about Pet Sounds being the last of "Brian's streak" and about how if SMiLE had come out that it would have beaten Sgt. Pepper and it would have changed the history of the band.

It was sort of winding up to be an obnoxious question, but then Brian took control, cut the guy off mid-sentence, and started asking him questions.  And these were not delivered in a wimpy tone of voice, but more like Brian was doing an interrogation.  Sort of like R.Lee Ermey in Full Metal Jacket. Again, this is how I remembered it, so if I get this wrong, please feel free to correct me.

BRIAN:  Do you like SMiLE?

Fan:  Uh, yeah, Brian, it was a great album.

BRIAN: How about Pet Sounds?  Did you like that too?

Fan:  Brian, Pet Sounds is really great.  I love Pet Sounds.

BRIAN:  Well which one did you like best?

Fan:  Brian I'd have to say SMiLE.  That one's really your masterpiece!

BRIAN:  Great.  Thank you for your question!









Title: Re:
Post by: pixletwin on June 10, 2015, 11:56:55 AM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

A Murry Wilson tribute, really?

On a related note, I've been trying to get David Hasselhoff's people on the phone to get him on board with a musical tribute to the former East Germany, but they're not returning my calls.


Yup, really. Im not from the BB camp that flags participants in the legacy as either purely good or purely bad. I think it's a shame there are so few Murry compositions on record for posterity. He was a key player in creating the band as we know them.

Your Hasselhoff project sounds less challenging than trying to unearth the Murry canon of failed sheets, to be honest. Two Step was an easy target as Guy Lombardo had sheets released through Guild and BMI, but there are many more failed Murry compositions people will likely never hear.

Was the process of unearthing all of that sheet music more difficult than finding out what C50 meant?  ;D

I'm assuming I pissed you off in the 90's or something.

I would say much more recently...

Shouldn't they rather take it PM then?


Title: Re: \
Post by: CenturyDeprived on June 10, 2015, 12:06:33 PM
Van Dyke just re-tweeted this:

Nicky Smith ‏@MUGGER1992  53m53 minutes ago
Brian Wilson biopic LOVE & MERCY bores & inexplicably snubs @thevandykeparks. Watch BEAUTIFUL DREAMER doc instead  http://www.splicetoday.com/moving-pictures/mercy-me-mr-wilson …

I guess we know how VDP feels about the movie. (I really don't think he was "snubbed," though. The movie isn't about the Smile process.)

I feel bad for VDP that he feels that way, and perhaps it's understandable he does, to a point.

I think if he and Brian were currently on better terms (who knows what causes the current state of their relationship), that VDP would have possibly had a bit more representation in the film. Just a bit, like one more scene or something. 


Title: Re: \Melinda
Post by: Junkstar on June 10, 2015, 12:07:56 PM
Just got home from seeing the film. My only complaint is that it felt too much like a movie about Melinda to me. Great acting by all involved but the later years all seemed based on Melindas experience. Maybe if the early years had been based on Marilyn's experiences it might have balanced it out? My other takeaway was that this was probably not the best week for me to release a Murry Wilson tribute single. Fresh wounds...

A Murry Wilson tribute, really?

On a related note, I've been trying to get David Hasselhoff's people on the phone to get him on board with a musical tribute to the former East Germany, but they're not returning my calls.


Yup, really. Im not from the BB camp that flags participants in the legacy as either purely good or purely bad. I think it's a shame there are so few Murry compositions on record for posterity. He was a key player in creating the band as we know them.

Your Hasselhoff project sounds less challenging than trying to unearth the Murry canon of failed sheets, to be honest. Two Step was an easy target as Guy Lombardo had sheets released through Guild and BMI, but there are many more failed Murry compositions people will likely never hear.

Not certain what you mean by "failed sheets", but I think Jim Murphy could chime in with how many of Murry's compositions are actually on records. I'd bet on quite a few..

Thanks, I'll try to connect with Jim. From all sources so far, a few is more likely than quite a few if you disregard Many Moods and the Sunrays.

Off the top of my head...  
There were two on an obscure John Buzon Trio LP
Think the  Hollywood Flames did one or two  
Several versions of Two Step were recorded
The Bachelors recorded at least one.
and... time for Jim to jump in.  

Yes, Flames stuff still for sale widely along with Bonnie Lou. These are not the tracks I'm looking for, but thanks. I was unaware of John Buzon and will look him up.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Junkstar on June 10, 2015, 12:11:18 PM
Junkstar- Is that really you?

Yep. Thanks for noticing! Came to promote my new single and quickly got sucked into a few threads.


Title: Re:
Post by: Junkstar on June 10, 2015, 12:17:40 PM
Quote
Shouldn't they rather take it PM then?

Agreed. It's a mod after all.

Forgot one more thing about the movie experience. One of the elderly couples was there for a second viewing. They had never read any of the books, seen any of the docs, etc. They were converts from the film alone. These are Brian and Melinda's peers now. Maybe they simply nailed it and I'm being too hard.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Pretty Funky on June 10, 2015, 12:41:01 PM
Welcome to the board Junk. Long time since Ego folded but some good and bad debate here as well.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 10, 2015, 12:45:56 PM
BRIAN:  Do you like SMiLE?
Fan:  Uh, yeah, Brian, it was a great album.
BRIAN: How about Pet Sounds?  Did you like that too?
Fan:  Brian, Pet Sounds is really great.  I love Pet Sounds.
BRIAN:  Well which one did you like best?
Fan:  Brian I'd have to say SMiLE.  That one's really your masterpiece!
BRIAN:  Great.  Thank you for your question!

That is kind of perfect example of why wouldn't really want to meet Brian (or really anyone famous I admire).  What could I possibly say to them or ask them that they haven't heard or been asked before?

I honestly think a body should have a darn good question before they stand up and ask something.  Otherwise you risk wasting everyone's time.  If given the opportunity and the mood was right I might ask Bill Pohlad about what scenes did he excise from the film and might we see them in a Blu Ray release?  Also, when should we expect the soundtrack?

 :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mooger Fooger on June 10, 2015, 12:52:21 PM
I only ever met Brian once. It was a moment I had imagined and rehearsed a million times in my head. When the moment came to speak with him, I simply said, "Your music has helped me through some very difficult times in my life, and I wanted to thank you for that." to which Brian seemed moved by and then added, "Well I hope it helped you through the good times as well!"

It was perfect.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 10, 2015, 12:54:38 PM
And who says the man isn't lucid?  That sounds like it was a very nice interaction.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paul J B on June 10, 2015, 01:02:46 PM

8. The movie would have obtained ultimate cinematic perfection if during the climactic scene between Landy and Melinda if when the door opened, Melinda had screamed, "You're out of the band, Buckwheat!!"


Thank you for that. Been kind of a crummy couple of days for me and I just laughed out loud.

I'll try to post my thoughts about the film tomorrow but I need to stress one of the most important things about it before it's too late. You need to HEAR it on the big screen. Its a good movie and will be good on a set at home, but the movie theater sized images with the surround sound will never be beat. The sound and sounds are very important to the film and this will not be in theaters long even if it did end up winning awards. Really.... if you plan to go get out there now and see it in a theater with great sound.

That said I'm having a hard time figuring out what to say about it because the word "disturbing" keeps coming to mind.



Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on June 10, 2015, 01:17:41 PM
Junkstar- Is that really you?

Yep. Thanks for noticing! Came to promote my new single and quickly got sucked into a few threads.

Is there a link for your single somewhere?


Title: Re:
Post by: 37!ws on June 10, 2015, 02:57:52 PM
That is kind of perfect example of why wouldn't really want to meet Brian (or really anyone famous I admire).  What could I possibly say to them or ask them that they haven't heard or been asked before?

Which is exactly why at the post-screening Q&A a coupla weeks ago, I asked a question my wife was too mesmerized to ask after seeing the movie:

"What do you usually order when you go to In-N-Out?"


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jcc on June 10, 2015, 03:37:58 PM
And who says the man isn't lucid?  That sounds like it was a very nice interaction.


Brian can clearly turn it on or off depending on the situation and how he's feeling.  That's what's so funny about him. 

He also thanked the audience for coming and seeing the movie, and expressed that he was happy that through the film we could understand his life and what he had gone through.  Overall he was very charming, and the crowd gave him a standing ovation when he was introduced.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Pretty Funky on June 10, 2015, 10:21:45 PM
Junkstar- Is that really you?

Yep. Thanks for noticing! Came to promote my new single and quickly got sucked into a few threads.

Is there a link for your single somewhere?

https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/george-faulkner-sings-murry/id1001835151


Title: Re: \
Post by: WonderfulLittlePad on June 11, 2015, 06:05:17 AM
Has anybody seen the movie added to more theaters this weekend?  It hasn't been added to any in South Louisiana.


Title: Re: \
Post by: LostArt on June 11, 2015, 06:39:53 AM
Has anybody seen the movie added to more theaters this weekend?  It hasn't been added to any in South Louisiana.

I had to drive 95 miles to see it on opening weekend, and I was hoping to see another showing this weekend, closer to where I live.  Nothing.  I'm hoping for next week, otherwise I'll have to wait for the BluRay to see it again.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rn57 on June 11, 2015, 07:23:43 AM
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/06/10/love_mercy_fact_vs_fiction_how_the_new_brian_wilson_biopic_starring_john.html

Practically ever since it started, Slate has run articles about what's fictional and what's not in hit movies based on fact, and this is the one for L&M.  As the threads on the film here attest, the article could've been ten times as long and not covered all the details, but here most of the major points seem to be covered.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 11, 2015, 07:31:47 AM
Has anybody seen the movie added to more theaters this weekend?  It hasn't been added to any in South Louisiana.

It is definitely going wider this weekend (tomorrow).  I checked Fandango for several smaller cities around my state (Ohio) and it is being added. Dayton, for example, didn't get it last week but will tomorrow.  

I did find two theaters in New Orleans that have it.  

http://www.fandango.com/love26mercy_181116/movietimes?location=New Orleans LA (http://www.fandango.com/love26mercy_181116/movietimes?location=New Orleans LA)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Larry Franz on June 11, 2015, 07:41:02 AM
It was reported that the movie will "expand slowly over the summer". Moviefone added another 50 theaters for tomorrow. Good news for the board member from Greenville, SC -- it's now playing 45 miles away instead of 400.

Regarding the Slate article: The movie doesn't say Melinda was the first to warn Brian's family or even that she persuaded Carl to intervene (although you could draw that conclusion). You don't know from the movie how Carl or Audrey responded to Melinda's phone calls. They may have said, "we know".


Title: Re: \
Post by: WonderfulLittlePad on June 11, 2015, 08:12:05 AM
Has anybody seen the movie added to more theaters this weekend?  It hasn't been added to any in South Louisiana.

It is definitely going wider this weekend (tomorrow).  I checked Fandango for several smaller cities around my state (Ohio) and it is being added. Dayton, for example, didn't get it last week but will tomorrow.  

I did find two theaters in New Orleans that have it.  

http://www.fandango.com/love26mercy_181116/movietimes?location=New Orleans LA (http://www.fandango.com/love26mercy_181116/movietimes?location=New Orleans LA)

yep, drove 150 miles roundtrip to see it last weekend in NOLA, but those are the same two theaters that had it last week.  So none added this week.  Was hoping that Baton Rouge would get it so that I could see it again.  First world problems I know.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 11, 2015, 08:13:32 AM
Has anybody seen the movie added to more theaters this weekend?  It hasn't been added to any in South Louisiana.

It is definitely going wider this weekend (tomorrow).  I checked Fandango for several smaller cities around my state (Ohio) and it is being added. Dayton, for example, didn't get it last week but will tomorrow.  

I did find two theaters in New Orleans that have it.  

http://www.fandango.com/love26mercy_181116/movietimes?location=New Orleans LA (http://www.fandango.com/love26mercy_181116/movietimes?location=New Orleans LA)

yep, drove 150 miles roundtrip to see it last weekend in NOLA, but those are the same two theaters that had it last week.  So none added this week.  Was hoping that Baton Rouge would get it so that I could see it again.  First world problems I know.

I am a little surprised Baton Rouge isn't getting it.  It is a college town after all.  Bummer.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Larry Franz on June 11, 2015, 08:35:54 AM
<deleted>


Title: Re: \
Post by: joe_blow on June 11, 2015, 10:48:26 AM
I saw it last night and was very impressed. Hearing the music with great theater sounds blew me away. Cal me odd, but i though the actor who played Murry in Summer Dreams was the best and the one who played Mike Love in American Family was the most Love-like. Something neat I noticed in Love and Mercy was the quick reference to Carl and Dennis playing on Pet Sounds.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Ebb and Flow on June 11, 2015, 10:59:42 AM
I saw it last night and was very impressed. Hearing the music with great theater sounds blew me away. Cal me odd, but i though the actor who played Murry in Summer Dreams was the best

Summer Dreams may be a piece of ****, but the actor who played Murry in that was like casting from the Gods.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8WYfIuF9o&t=59m14s


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 11, 2015, 11:01:51 AM
Mercy, me:

http://www.splicetoday.com/moving-pictures/mercy-me-mr-wilson (http://www.splicetoday.com/moving-pictures/mercy-me-mr-wilson)

VDP retweeted the link to this so obviously he agrees with this.  

Here's my biggest beef with this.  LOVE & MERCY is a two hour film.  A two hour film about the life of Brian Wilson; not Van Dyke Parks, Tony Asher, Mike Love or anyone else.  Did VDP inspire the idea of the cello triplets for "Good Vibrations"?  As far I have always heard, yes.  However, did he work directly with the cello players to staccato over and over, take after take?  I don't know.  I do know that Danny Hutton was interviewed a few years ago and said point blank: he witnessed Brian work with the cello players for take after take on the staccato.

I don't know what is creating the burr in VDP's saddle but clearly there is something.  And there is obviously a segment of people whether it's Myke Luhv or the guy "Carl Wilson" who wrote the piece the other day for BBC or this fellow writing some blog; some are just rubbed the wrong way by the adulation shown to Brian Wilson.

BEAUTIFUL DREAMER and IJWMFTT are both great companion pieces to LOVE & MERCY.  Both documentaries flesh out things that just cannot be covered in the confines of 120 minutes.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Autotune on June 11, 2015, 11:07:32 AM
deleted


Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on June 11, 2015, 11:15:09 AM
I saw it last night and was very impressed. Hearing the music with great theater sounds blew me away. Cal me odd, but i though the actor who played Murry in Summer Dreams was the best and the one who played Mike Love in American Family was the most Love-like. Something neat I noticed in Love and Mercy was the quick reference to Carl and Dennis playing on Pet Sounds.



Never saw Summer Dreams, but I've always thought the performances in American Family were actually pretty good.  I thought Kevin Dunn played a good Murry.  The Mike character was spot on.  Dennis too.  I thought the guy who did Brian was alright, but it got very cartoony once you got to the Smile era. 

While it doesn't compare to Love and Mercy, I think that American Family isn't at all the piece of garbage it's made out to be. 


Title: Re: Is Elizabeth Banks as Melinda a Manic Pixie Dream Girl? - Washington Post
Post by: rn57 on June 11, 2015, 01:53:06 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2015/06/11/when-a-manic-pixie-dream-girl-is-anything-but/

The term "Manic Pixie Dream Girl" was coined nearly a decade ago by film critic, Nathan Rabin, to describe Kirsten Dunst's character in Cameron Crowe's Elizabethtown and has come to be used frequently since then to describe, as Rabin put it (and as repeated in Wikipedia's entry on the topic) "that bubbly, shallow cinematic creature that exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures." - ie, kind of a female Peter Pan. (Though of course Peter Pan is always played by a female but that's another topic.)

In the blogpost above, the question is posed as to whether Elizabeth Banks's role does or doesn't resemble the stereotypical MPDG as seen in a lot of movies. (Including, I suspect, one or two the Lovester is judging right now at that festival in NYC.) The blogger argues the role of Melinda shows too much independence and strength to be called that. But the post does illustrate the one flaw of much substance that I saw in L&M: that Bank's part is not that strongly written. Had Oren Moverman (and his co-writer whose name I forget just now) really developed the role the way they could have, the MPDG thing wouldn't be coming to mind at all.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Larry Franz on June 11, 2015, 02:17:41 PM
I thought Banks's part was well-written and her performance was subtle and convincing. Granted that the character is helpful, understanding and attractive, but she isn't manic, pixie-like or a girl.

PS -- Maybe if the passage of time had been conveyed more clearly, Melinda wouldn't have seemed so perfect. But the point of the story was to show her role in Brian's recovery, not to analyze her own lack of perfection.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 11, 2015, 04:17:51 PM
Never saw Summer Dreams, but I've always thought the performances in American Family were actually pretty good.  I thought Kevin Dunn played a good Murry.  The Mike character was spot on.  Dennis too.  I thought the guy who did Brian was alright, but it got very cartoony once you got to the Smile era.  

While it doesn't compare to Love and Mercy, I think that American Family isn't at all the piece of garbage it's made out to be.  

It's not awful.  It has its moments.  I think my biggest problem is the over reliance on caricatures and not enough character development.  Everyone in the film is one dimensional.  Brian is played like a buffoon in Part II when in 1966 he was anything but.  He was at his creative peak and very focused.  We see little of that in AN AMERICAN FAMILY.  In fact, we see little of the creative ocean that was Brian Wilson from 1963-1967.  LOVE & MERCY is the exact opposite.  

Also, I'm not gonna front, Mike is treated as the figurehead of the band.  A scene that always made me want to throw something is when Brian is trying to feel his way through what would become "I Get Around".   The film tries too hard to make Mike the creative touchtone of those types of moments.   That stuff just gets under my skin.


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on June 11, 2015, 06:42:12 PM
Just remembered a line spoken by Max Schneider's VDP: "I have been writing lyrics professionally since I was 14 years old."

This is totally false, isn't it? VDP hadn't written a song until he was 21, much less lyrics before he was enlisted for Smile. Even the words for his first single, "Come to the Sunshine" and "Farther Along", came from an uncredited Danny Hutton.


Title: Re: \
Post by: ontor pertawst on June 11, 2015, 06:44:12 PM
Go tell him and see if that'll stir up any drama. I doubt it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: JimC1702 on June 11, 2015, 06:55:11 PM
Forgot to mention in my earlier post that "Love and Mercy" seems to draw pretty heavily on the "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times" video.  Some things were taken verbatim from that film, like Brian's description of how Murray beat then as kids (the restaurant scene in L&M), and him saying how sometimes "your soul comes out to play". 

Jim


Title: Re: \
Post by: Junkstar on June 11, 2015, 07:18:51 PM
Junkstar- Is that really you?

Yep. Thanks for noticing! Came to promote my new single and quickly got sucked into a few threads.

Is there a link for your single somewhere?

I put it in a diff sub board here related to associated music or something. Here's the iTunes link: https://itun.es/us/pQST7 it's on Spotify, google Play and Amazon too. Thanks, man.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Junkstar on June 11, 2015, 07:21:38 PM
Ok, that was unnecessary as PFunky had it covered. Need to get back in the swing here and pay closer attention. Apologies.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on June 11, 2015, 07:23:43 PM
Forgot to mention in my earlier post that "Love and Mercy" seems to draw pretty heavily on the "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times" video.  Some things were taken verbatim from that film, like Brian's description of how Murray beat then as kids (the restaurant scene in L&M), and him saying how sometimes "your soul comes out to play". 

Jim


Bill Pohlad has said he used that film as a reference, including that the casting of John Cusack was based on Brian's appearance in that movie.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 11, 2015, 09:37:04 PM
According to BoxOfficeMojo LOVE & MERCY will be in 572 theaters starting today, June 12th.  Up from 480.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Stephen W. Desper on June 12, 2015, 05:43:33 AM
COMMENT: 

Liked the movie, of course.  Don't know if this link was posted before, but found the "Academy Conversations: Love & Mercy"
quite fascinating and wanted to post the link here.

Academy Conversations >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdB71BA9HOI#t=18

The Academy Conversations sequence is followed by Brian and Melinda on "The View" in case you missed it.


~swd


Title: Re: \
Post by: filledeplage on June 12, 2015, 07:35:34 AM
COMMENT: 

Liked the movie, of course.  Don't know if this link was posted before, but found the "Academy Conversations: Love & Mercy"
quite fascinating and wanted to post the link here.

Academy Conversations >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdB71BA9HOI#t=18

The Academy Conversations sequence is followed by Brian and Melinda on "The View" in case you missed it.


~swd
Thanks, Mr. Desper, for the link. 

Just saw it and thoroughly enjoyed it.   ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: DennysDrums83 on June 12, 2015, 07:48:19 AM
According to BoxOfficeMojo LOVE & MERCY will be in 572 theaters starting today, June 12th.  Up from 480.

Is there an updated list?  To my knowledge, it is still not playing ANYWHERE in my state.


Title: Re: Is Elizabeth Banks as Melinda a Manic Pixie Dream Girl? - Washington Post
Post by: Amy B. on June 12, 2015, 08:05:15 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2015/06/11/when-a-manic-pixie-dream-girl-is-anything-but/

The term "Manic Pixie Dream Girl" was coined nearly a decade ago by film critic, Nathan Rabin, to describe Kirsten Dunst's character in Cameron Crowe's Elizabethtown and has come to be used frequently since then to describe, as Rabin put it (and as repeated in Wikipedia's entry on the topic) "that bubbly, shallow cinematic creature that exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures." - ie, kind of a female Peter Pan. (Though of course Peter Pan is always played by a female but that's another topic.)

In the blogpost above, the question is posed as to whether Elizabeth Banks's role does or doesn't resemble the stereotypical MPDG as seen in a lot of movies. (Including, I suspect, one or two the Lovester is judging right now at that festival in NYC.) The blogger argues the role of Melinda shows too much independence and strength to be called that. But the post does illustrate the one flaw of much substance that I saw in L&M: that Bank's part is not that strongly written. Had Oren Moverman (and his co-writer whose name I forget just now) really developed the role the way they could have, the MPDG thing wouldn't be coming to mind at all.

Hollywood suffers from a chronic case of underdeveloped female characters, whether on TV (particularly sitcom wives) or in movies. Whether it's the MPDG or some other type, these women exist to react to the male protagonists or antagonists. The character of Marilyn is a bit like that in L&M. She barely shows a personality, except to smile when Brian does something great, call him "honey" a lot, and hold him when he gets upset. I would say that as Hollywood goes, the Melinda character is pretty well drawn. She is still completely revolving around Brian, but then again, everyone in the movie is.


Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on June 12, 2015, 08:07:44 AM
Forgot to mention in my earlier post that "Love and Mercy" seems to draw pretty heavily on the "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times" video.  Some things were taken verbatim from that film, like Brian's description of how Murray beat then as kids (the restaurant scene in L&M), and him saying how sometimes "your soul comes out to play". 

Jim


Also, the scene at the end where Brian is taking Melinda to the site of this childhood home mirrors a shot of Brian and Melinda driving around from IJWMFTT.  

On The View, Melinda mentioned that the origins of Love and Mercy go back to 1996 with Don Was.  She didn't make a direct connection with IJWMFTT and L&M, but with the Don Was mention, I would assume that discussion for a movie started with that documentary.

Speaking of which, I'd love a sequel of IJWMFTT that convers the last 20 years
-Carl's death
-Albums Imagination - NPP
-Brian's return to the road as a solo touring act
-The revival of Smile
-The Beach Boys reunion
-Love and Mercy


Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on June 12, 2015, 08:12:41 AM
Never saw Summer Dreams, but I've always thought the performances in American Family were actually pretty good.  I thought Kevin Dunn played a good Murry.  The Mike character was spot on.  Dennis too.  I thought the guy who did Brian was alright, but it got very cartoony once you got to the Smile era.  

While it doesn't compare to Love and Mercy, I think that American Family isn't at all the piece of garbage it's made out to be.  

It's not awful.  It has its moments.  I think my biggest problem is the over reliance on caricatures and not enough character development.  Everyone in the film is one dimensional.  Brian is played like a buffoon in Part II when in 1966 he was anything but.  He was at his creative peak and very focused.  We see little of that in AN AMERICAN FAMILY.  In fact, we see little of the creative ocean that was Brian Wilson from 1963-1967.  LOVE & MERCY is the exact opposite.  

Also, I'm not gonna front, Mike is treated as the figurehead of the band.  A scene that always made me want to throw something is when Brian is trying to feel his way through what would become "I Get Around".   The film tries too hard to make Mike the creative touchtone of those types of moments.   That stuff just gets under my skin.

Turning Brian into a buffoon is my biggest gripe with American Family.  The scene that always gets me is when Brian plays Mike a demo of Good Vibrations.  And when Mike agrees to help Brian write the lyrics, Brian gives Mike a huge hug as if to save "Thank you great savior!!!!" 

I like the way that exchange was handled in Love and Mercy much better with Mike saying "You've got something there" when he heard Brian playing the piano riff, and Brian asks if Mike had any lyrics. 


Title: Re: LOVE & MERCY
Post by: Lumen on June 12, 2015, 11:05:59 AM
IndieWire: Paul Dano Made a Beach Boys-Inspired Mixtape That You Will Totally Dig

http://www.indiewire.com/article/paul-dano-made-a-beach-boys-inspired-mixtape-that-you-will-totally-dig-20150612?utm_campaign=Indiewire&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_content=1434127004 (http://www.indiewire.com/article/paul-dano-made-a-beach-boys-inspired-mixtape-that-you-will-totally-dig-20150612?utm_campaign=Indiewire&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_content=1434127004)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Misterlou on June 12, 2015, 10:12:01 PM
My apologies if this has been posted already, but the presence of this "anatomy of a scene" holds promise for full audio commentary from the director of Love & Mercy, Bill Pohlad, when the blu-ray comes out.

http://www.nytimes.com/video/movies/100000003709209/anatomy-of-a-scene-results.html?playlistId=100000002420711


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cyncie on June 12, 2015, 10:20:02 PM
So much good PR on this film, and I still haven't been able to travel the 100 miles north to see it!!!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Komera on June 12, 2015, 11:54:51 PM
I saw it last night and was very impressed. Hearing the music with great theater sounds blew me away. Cal me odd, but i though the actor who played Murry in Summer Dreams was the best and the one who played Mike Love in American Family was the most Love-like. Something neat I noticed in Love and Mercy was the quick reference to Carl and Dennis playing on Pet Sounds.



Never saw Summer Dreams, but I've always thought the performances in American Family were actually pretty good.  I thought Kevin Dunn played a good Murry.  The Mike character was spot on.  Dennis too.  I thought the guy who did Brian was alright, but it got very cartoony once you got to the Smile era. 

While it doesn't compare to Love and Mercy, I think that American Family isn't at all the piece of garbage it's made out to be. 

Someone posted Summer Dreams on YouTube, if you want to have a gander at it.  It's got subtitles, in I don't know what language.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8WYfIuF9o

There is at least one other place online that has it watchable, without the subtitles.  Which is where I went to rewatch it before it was posted to YouTube.  But for the life of me, I can't remember where I found it.


Title: Re: LOVE & MERCY reviews
Post by: Lumen on June 13, 2015, 04:30:12 PM
‘Love & Mercy’ is an all-time biopic:

http://www.voxmagazine.com/2015/06/love-mercy-is-an-all-time-biopic/ (http://www.voxmagazine.com/2015/06/love-mercy-is-an-all-time-biopic/)

Love & Mercy—The AllMovie Review:

http://www.allmovie.com/blog/post/love-and-mercy-the-allmovie-review (http://www.allmovie.com/blog/post/love-and-mercy-the-allmovie-review)


Title: Re: Love and Mercy - News and Reviews - Deadline.com on Friday 6/13 box office
Post by: rn57 on June 13, 2015, 07:27:42 PM
http://deadline.com/2015/06/jurassic-world-weekend-box-office-spy-entourage-insidious-chapter-3-1201441812/

L&M was America's 10th highest grossing film last night.  Deadline's data suggests this weekend will mark a box-office dropoff of minus 25 to 30 percent from last weekend, which is a bit less than the 50 to 60 percent dropoff most films with a wide opening experience in America.  This suggests word of mouth a bit better than what your average multiplex picture gets.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on June 14, 2015, 05:40:28 AM
So it's grossed nearly 5 million in 2 weeks on less than 500 screens...  :o

I'm a complete novice when it comes to box office figures but that sounds pretty good.


Title: Re: \
Post by: RJM on June 14, 2015, 06:26:22 AM
Um, no. That article said a total gross of 4 and a half million.  A half a billion gross in two weeks is impossible even for a popcorn movie blockbuster.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films


For the type of movie that L & M is (a music biopic with an artsy bent), 4 and a half million is nothing to sneez at, though.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on June 14, 2015, 06:42:55 AM
 :lol :lol

Sorry, I accidentally typed those two zeros, I meant 5 million


Title: Re: \
Post by: Komera on June 14, 2015, 07:56:20 AM
Anyone besides me suddenly getting a lot of YouTube notifications of replies on videos commented on way long ago?  Gee, I wonder why a lot of people are suddenly starting to watch Beach Boys related videos.  Hmm...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Hot Rod on June 14, 2015, 09:27:57 AM
So I watched the movie last night and here are my thoughts.

First of all, the movie was perfect and wonderful.
All the actors were really good. Paul Dano's playing was out of this world. He was so good. The way he sang and played God Only Knows and Surf's Up was amazing.
Johny Cusack was wonderful, too. I don't know why he didn't sing, maybe he just can't sing at all. But his way of playing Brian was also perfect.
Elizabeth Banks was so cool and tough and kicking Landy's ass. Wonderful performance.
Speaking of Landy, holy sh**, Paul Giamatti's Landy gave me the creeps more than once. He was amazing. Before the movie I didn't know how much control Landy had over Brian's life, but ths was just scary. So glad Melinda had the guts to stand up against him.
The soundtrack was amazing, but I don't think it needs to be released, because it was mostly just Beach Boys songs
And the idea to show a video of a live performance of "Love and Mercy" of Brian and his wonderful band was another wonderful idea.
All in all i give this 5/5

Then I can go to the sad part. I went to the 10 o'clock showing and there were 5 people in the cinema, on a Saturday night, first week of showing. It was so sad to see that this amazing movie will not be seen by too many people in Germany. I thought about this and I think the reasons are:
1. no one here, except Beach Boys fans, knows who Brian Wilson is.
2. when the general public people think of The Beach Boys, they think of Surfin USA and Fun Fun Fun and not of Pet Sounds and Smile
3. the title Love and Mercy, while perfect for any Brian Wilson fan, doesn't say anything about the content of the movie or gets anybody interested, because really no one knows the song. If they had used "Good Vibrations" as the title, more people might think "hey, it could be about The Beach Boys".
I hope you could follow my thoughts. Can't wait to own ths thing on dvd.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Cincinnati Kid on June 14, 2015, 05:41:58 PM
Pet Sounds is back on the Billboard 200 at #182.  ;D  Sounds of Summer is up to #139. 


Title: Re:
Post by: undercover-m on June 14, 2015, 07:45:28 PM
^ That's awesome! I was hoping that this, along with some of the other recent musician-centered movies, would he "re-spark" people's interest in older music. Makes me happy :).

The studio sequences were the most enjoyable for me. Thank you for the 360-degree shot around the studio. It's as if the filmmakers consciously had audiophiles and Beach Boys geeks like myself in mind when these scenes were shot. This is so much appreciated.

Dennis mugging for the camera after being scolded by Brian: absolutely PRICELESS.
That part was hilarious :D

I just saw it with my parents. I was probably the youngest out of the other 10, maybe 15 people that were there . It's actually playing in a handful of theatres around this area, so my sympathies for those who had to drive for half a day :/

Overall, I really enjoyed it. Paul Dano is quite the singer! I want to see more movies with him in it. Like other people on this thread, I absolutely loved the 60's scenes. The Pet Sound sessions were awesome (and that music has helped me get through finals, haha). Or maybe I'm just a total fangirl for 60s Beach Boys anyway.

And overall, I thought the acting was good. My dad wasn't a huge fan of Cusack's performance in this film, although he thinks he's a fine actor otherwise.
I actually giggled at Mike Luhv's post-Japan transformations, hat and beard and all. I thought the relationship between him and Brian was interesting, although the GV scene was well-done. Banana and Louie were clearly the star performers ;).

Speaking of Banana, Dano seems to like using 'bananas" as an interjection in his interviews...?

side note: I lectured my dad on all of the history he wasn't sure of, like who the Wrecking Crew was, etc.... thanks to this forum, I now know all that. Thanks guys :P


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on June 15, 2015, 04:59:10 AM
Pet Sounds is back on the Billboard 200 at #182.  ;D  Sounds of Summer is up to #139. 

Pet Sounds back on the charts, that's amazing.

Thanks for the review, undercover


Title: Re: \
Post by: SufferingFools on June 15, 2015, 06:10:07 AM
Just saw this over the weekend, with an audience of about 20.  It's not often I come out of a movie without a single criticism, but this is one of those times.

Random thoughts:

That recreation of the Sloop John B video was astounding.  

Paul Giamatti managed to be as frightening and detestable as the real Landy without looking a thing like him.

Both of the leads clearly had studied Brian's mannerisms and were believable in the role.  Cusack's fidgeting and shuffling around on the sidewalk in the final sequence was fantastic.  It was easy to forget that Paul Dano wasn't Brian.

Good portrayal of the pressure Mike Love brought to bear on Brian, with the fact that the band members depended on his hit-making for their livelihood and Mike's disapproval gave Brian a lot of self-doubt.

The knowledge of Brian's history is so evident throughout the film.  I was impressed, for example, by the choice of "Day by Day" for that flashback sequence, since that was the first Four Freshmen record Brian had heard.  

Don't think we heard any Phil Spector recordings in the film; could be wrong.  It would have been nice to hear strains of "Be My Baby" at some point, but maybe there was a rights problem.

I never knew about Gloria, but it's good that she got her due in the film.

The floating quote "I'm a genius too" was spoken by Murry during that infamous "Help Me Ronda" session, but when disembodied it applies equally to Landy, who was fond of claiming that Brian's return to action was "proof" that in his own field Landy was a genius.  (Not to mention the "I'm a f****n' genius" apparel he used to wear and the "Brains & Genius" partnership he named.)

Everything worked so well in this film.  I'm really happy that Brian was able to be involved and see its completion.


Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on June 15, 2015, 06:18:50 AM
Another stray, random observation. 

Landy is a terrible griller.

I mean, the guy can only grill one burger at a time?  Perhaps this was part of his way of controlling Brian. 

But, one burger at a time, and no sides?  What a terrible host. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: marcusb on June 15, 2015, 06:34:19 AM
Another stray, random observation. 

Landy is a terrible griller.

I mean, the guy can only grill one burger at a time?  Perhaps this was part of his way of controlling Brian. 

But, one burger at a time, and no sides?  What a terrible host. 

Man, I couldn't get over how child like Brian was in that scene. And I feel like that just was scratching the surface of that type of behavior.


Title: Re: \
Post by: WonderfulLittlePad on June 15, 2015, 06:46:08 AM
Numbers are in.  Not bad at all.

10   -   Love & Mercy   RAtt.   $1,765,000   -16.8%   573   +92   $3,080   $4,774,000   -   2


Title: Re: \
Post by: SufferingFools on June 15, 2015, 06:56:37 AM
Another stray, random observation. 

Landy is a terrible griller.

I mean, the guy can only grill one burger at a time?  Perhaps this was part of his way of controlling Brian. 

But, one burger at a time, and no sides?  What a terrible host. 

Man, I couldn't get over how child like Brian was in that scene. And I feel like that just was scratching the surface of that type of behavior.

Landy used to say he was "re-parenting" Brian, so that probably would have involved some degree of forcing him into a childlike role.


Title: Re: \
Post by: marcusb on June 15, 2015, 07:20:41 AM
Another stray, random observation. 

Landy is a terrible griller.

I mean, the guy can only grill one burger at a time?  Perhaps this was part of his way of controlling Brian. 

But, one burger at a time, and no sides?  What a terrible host. 

Man, I couldn't get over how child like Brian was in that scene. And I feel like that just was scratching the surface of that type of behavior.

Landy used to say he was "re-parenting" Brian, so that probably would have involved some degree of forcing him into a childlike role.

Yeah, and in the film Landy tells Melinda that Brian is basically a child. Combine that kind of mental abuse and all the medication and it's just such a sick situation. THEN add the financial situation. f***.


Title: Re: \
Post by: TV Forces on June 15, 2015, 07:30:25 AM
I saw the film Saturday night and loved it. I'm afraid I may have read too many reviews and watched the trailer too many times because I was expecting a much more emotional and devastating film than I got. I did tear up seeing Brian sing "Love & Mercy" at the end. Because you really feel the victory from leaving Landy. None of what we got from "Imagination" onward would have happened under Landy.

I'm always concerned about things being changed for dramatic effect in movies because people will then believe that version. I have to keep telling my parents that certain things in "Walk the Line" didn't happen that way, but they don't believe me since it was in some movie with backing from the families. I don't love the appearance that Brian went to bed for a couple years after SMiLE and did nothing else until the late 80s. He continued to make great music for a few more years. And they make it sound like the guys did Smiley Smile without Brian's involvement even though he's all over those session tapes and the album itself.

A few things weren't explained at all.. like WHY did Brian have a panic attack on the plane. WHY did they fire Murray. (I know these things, but my wife didn't.) WHY "Pet Sounds" was considered such a bad career move by Mike just because it was sad songs when the guys did plenty of sad songs before, from "In My Room" to key tracks on the "Today" and "Summer Days" albums. Mike didn't come off as good as I thought he would based on some of the opinions here. I figured his reactions to SMiLE sessions would be what's understandable, but there's nothing unacceptable about the "Pet Sounds" sessions in the movie and they didn't show any band blowout from the weirdness of the "Fire" sessions, and we know from clips that the other guys were there.

Also, a couple unnecessary digs at the Beach Boys itself.. like "we're too shallow for the deep end" and that guy telling Brian that HE's the Beach Boys.. Dennis and Carl are very supportive throughout the movie. John Cusack I just couldn't picture as Brian.. He altered his style of speaking, but not his look or voice.  Because Dano looked so much more like Brian, it seemed like a movie that is half Brian and half Cusack.

Unfortunately for us, in our theater was a woman who laughed at all the inappropriate parts.. thinking Brian's weird behavior was funny instead of sad.  

But yes, I think a failing might be that they didn't explain (aside from "sad music") why the Pet Sounds material was so objectionable to the other guys.  The Beach Boys had plenty of sad songs before.


Title: Re: \
Post by: TV Forces on June 15, 2015, 07:38:01 AM
"Pet Sounds" is #23 on Amazon's music sales chart.

"Sounds of Summer" is #40.

"No Pier Pressure" is #59.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Paul J B on June 15, 2015, 09:26:07 AM
TV Forces,

I think you might be letting your knowledge of Brian cloud some of the things that bothered you about the movie. Many of the critics that are raving about the film love the fact that it makes you think. Your typical biopic tries too hard to show us a talented person and has to rely on a lot of fake drama to drive the point home and make us feel empathy for the talented figure. Most of your WHY questions were either answered or left for the viewer to ponder intentionally. In the opening scene Brian talks about "not losing it" later he is IS losing it on a plane. The film is full of foreshadowing and metaphor like that. Mike comments about "all the songs" being sad, much different from a few sad tracks in between a lot of fun in the sun tracks. I get what you are saying because you and I and a lot of people already know so much about Brian and the Beach Boys that we may feel some things came up short but I really think that is on us. I'm going to see it again tomorrow.

Hope I don't seem like I'm trying to argue with you. Just a fun discussion.

Also, sort of an aside but I'm leaning toward agreeing with the critics that feel a lot in this film is award worthy. If Reese Witherspoon deserved an Oscar for portraying June Cash , as well as Walk the Line getting a best picture nomination, then Love and Mercy most certainly is award worthy.





Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 15, 2015, 10:52:52 AM
Also, sort of an aside but I'm leaning toward agreeing with the critics that feel a lot in this film is award worthy. If Reese Witherspoon deserved an Oscar for portraying June Cash , as well as Walk the Line getting a best picture nomination, then Love and Mercy most certainly is award worthy.

No doubt.  I saw WALK THE LINE in the theater and remember being very impressed.  James Mangold is a great director.  LOVE & MERCY is on a whole different plane of existence though.  I don't know how the award nominations would go down but it's criminal negligence if Paul Dano is not nominated.  Cusack is tremendous but I think the heart of the film belongs to Dano.  Atticus Ross deserves something, hopefully appreciation from anyone who appreciates sound mixing in films is enough.  DP Robert Yeoman is perhaps the most unsung in all of the threads I've seen.  The images are so stark that they are still with me even a week after I last saw the film.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paul J B on June 15, 2015, 11:18:21 AM
Editing too. The editing on L&M kicks it. I think awards and in particular the award shows are for the most part really lame. But if people are going to pass them out then L&M should certainly be in the mix.


Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on June 15, 2015, 11:28:16 AM
Judging by the positive reviews and positive response to the film, I think there will be plenty of Oscar nominations. 

The fact that a limited run movie cracked the Top 10 during its second week in theaters (moving up a place) during the height of the summer blockbuster season is very impressive, and says a lot about the quality of the movie. 



Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on June 15, 2015, 02:16:25 PM
The looney lady is at it again on FB:   

>>

Carol Kaye II

2 hrs · .



Completely wrong 'facts' in that Love & Mercy movie....I never wore that fire-hat, never looked like that, never said those words (Brian never wrote in "2 keys", they make that up because no-one knew what I said!) - thanks to my fans who spotted the ditsy stuff right away, they know I'm not like that at all...

 and no, there was never any competition between Beach Boys and Beatles, Brian Wilson never talked about the Beatles except to mention in-passing, 1-2 times, how good they were, is ALL.....and......they take license with a lot of things wrong in the movie:
For instance, they state that Paul McCartney came to one of our sessions. if that's "true" (and it's NOT), why did it take another 35 years before Paul *knew* it was Carol Kaye on bass and not Brian who played bass on those BB hits?

Paul always complimented Brian in magazine articles on his bass-playing on the Beach Boys hits, until about 2000 when he finally learned it was me! that's quite a well-known fact much written about in all the magazines.........oops.....guess the movie-makers didn't check out that FACT! LOL..... No, Paul McCartney NEVER came to one of our recording sessions at all. I never said "don't see the movie", which a Hollywood Bio-Pic, but just know it's not correct in facts, enjoy the music tho'......that's real. << 

What's just as bizarre are her followers/fans; you really have to read their fandulations to see the looney fools group


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on June 15, 2015, 02:50:31 PM
Lyle Ritz says that the bassline in WIBN was in a different key.

The movie never states that McCartney attended any session.

It was the notes of those basslines that McCartney was enamored with, not the bassplaying.

I can believe that Brian hardly mentioned the Beatles but not that he didn't see them as competition, along with other groups of the day.


Title: Re:
Post by: 37!ws on June 15, 2015, 03:14:16 PM
Here's the thing:

- I commented on her post that I saw the movie twice and don't recall any mention of McCartney attending any session. But people who were actually around at the time have corroborated that Macca indeed WAS there, but during the vocal overdub sessions, when no session musicians would have been there to say whether or not he was indeed there. And despite popular rumor, Macca did NOT participate in the session; he was just present. Carol's response was something like "no wonder he didn't know it wasn't Brian who played bass on it" or something.

- I can believe the lack of mention of the Beatles too, but...Carol was not with Brian every second of his life. She doesn't know what he said outside of the recording dates.

- And the same thing with how she talks about how she's glad she got away from the scene before drugs were a thing. I remember many years ago -- I think on PSML -- she said that Brian was very strict about not having drugs in the studio, that everybody be clear-headed. Dave Prokopy sent her a copy of his Smile tape set, which included the infamous "D[a/e]nny, do you have any hash joints left? I know you do" and "You guys feelin' the acid yet?" lines from Brian. Her response was one of surprise, in that Brian might have been a bit looser with the singers. (Of course, I think the most widely-held belief is that Brian was addressing some of the Vosse Posse, who were sitting in the control room.) That was back when Carol was very diplomatic and didn't get offended if someone said that pi is 3.14159 but she believes it's 3.14157. The implications from her diatribes are that basically if she didn't see/hear Brian do something, that means he never ever did it.


Title: Re:
Post by: southbay on June 15, 2015, 03:27:22 PM
 saw it this past weekend and was amazed by all of the historical accuracies, down to room decorations except that for the period in question Carl's hair was parted on the wrong side :afro


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 15, 2015, 06:07:25 PM
Until she suggested it, I never would have said her character came across as 'a bit of a ditz'. Unless there was a tape recorder going 24/7 it's impossible to completely document conversations that occurred nearly 50 years ago at Western Studios. A screenwriter must embellish a little bit to fit a scene perhaps.

The scene in question took me back to a comment Carol Kaye herself has made, more than once. That Brian was always focussed and knew exactly what he wanted when he came into he studio. If I watch the film 10 more times (I will) I wouldn't have thought "wow they portrayed Carol Kaye as a "bimbo" (her words). Now, I'll definitely think it.

And reading from the Facebook posters lapping up her 50 year old memories, it's kind of a drag to see that there are so many easily led automatons. "Oh Carol, you tell 'em!" Good grief, the movie is reverential to her, Blaine and all the other studio musicians. This is a woman that is seeing what she wants to see, personal opinion.


Title: Re: \
Post by: the professor on June 15, 2015, 08:45:23 PM
can anyone explain the bit about the "2 keys"? is it true? if not, how can this film, which labors so hard for accuracy, make up an ahistorical sequence like this of such specificity? what song was it again? can we determine if if fact BW wrote parts in 2 keys for some purpose?



The looney lady is at it again on FB:   

>>

Carol Kaye II

2 hrs · .



Completely wrong 'facts' in that Love & Mercy movie....I never wore that fire-hat, never looked like that, never said those words (Brian never wrote in "2 keys", they make that up because no-one knew what I said!) - thanks to my fans who spotted the ditsy stuff right away, they know I'm not like that at all...

 and no, there was never any competition between Beach Boys and Beatles, Brian Wilson never talked about the Beatles except to mention in-passing, 1-2 times, how good they were, is ALL.....and......they take license with a lot of things wrong in the movie:
For instance, they state that Paul McCartney came to one of our sessions. if that's "true" (and it's NOT), why did it take another 35 years before Paul *knew* it was Carol Kaye on bass and not Brian who played bass on those BB hits?

Paul always complimented Brian in magazine articles on his bass-playing on the Beach Boys hits, until about 2000 when he finally learned it was me! that's quite a well-known fact much written about in all the magazines.........oops.....guess the movie-makers didn't check out that FACT! LOL..... No, Paul McCartney NEVER came to one of our recording sessions at all. I never said "don't see the movie", which a Hollywood Bio-Pic, but just know it's not correct in facts, enjoy the music tho'......that's real. << 

What's just as bizarre are her followers/fans; you really have to read their fandulations to see the looney fools group



Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 15, 2015, 10:18:34 PM
can anyone explain the bit about the "2 keys"? is it true? if not, how can this film, which labors so hard for accuracy, make up an ahistorical sequence like this of such specificity? what song was it again? can we determine if if fact BW wrote parts in 2 keys for some purpose?

It's in the scene for the "Wouldn't It Be Nice" backing track.  Lyle Ritz is supposed to play in one key on the double bass and Carol is to play another on her bass.  I'm not even remotely musical enough to know if two keys are being played on the real track.  I do know that the expository dialogue in the scene is interesting and gets the point across that Brian heard in his head what he wanted and the musicians followed.


Title: Re:
Post by: Komera on June 16, 2015, 12:03:32 AM
saw it this past weekend and was amazed by all of the historical accuracies, down to room decorations except that for the period in question Carl's hair was parted on the wrong side :afro

He was ever consistent with the hair parting?  I never got that feeling from Carl.  Seemed to me he'd part his hair however the wind blew it on that particular morning.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mooger Fooger on June 16, 2015, 03:29:26 AM
I saw this last night at Off Broadway in Köln. A small cinema, bt awesome sound and picture quality.

The film was very different to my expectations. It had a very documentary feel to it, especially the 60's era studio footage. I really felt like a fly on the wall.

But the soundtrack. That won me over from the first frame of film. This is something I really hope gets the red carpet treatment. If not, then I will be ripping my Blu-Ray to may my own. Gave me goosebumps throughout the whole picture.

Finally a film about the Beach Boys (well, Brian I know) that doesn't make me cringe.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 16, 2015, 06:30:05 AM
I got curious this morning and looked at CK's Facebook page again and her whole rant from yesterday is gone. 

Unrelated question: When does happy hour start on the west coast?  :o


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on June 16, 2015, 06:37:14 AM
can anyone explain the bit about the "2 keys"? is it true? if not, how can this film, which labors so hard for accuracy, make up an ahistorical sequence like this of such specificity? what song was it again? can we determine if if fact BW wrote parts in 2 keys for some purpose?

It's in the scene for the "Wouldn't It Be Nice" backing track.  Lyle Ritz is supposed to play in one key on the double bass and Carol is to play another on her bass.  I'm not even remotely musical enough to know if two keys are being played on the real track.  I do know that the expository dialogue in the scene is interesting and gets the point across that Brian heard in his head what he wanted and the musicians followed.

Yeah... I have a degree in music composition and all I can figure is they are referencing Brian's odd bass placements (which are rarely rooted, as is typical). It's a common thing in jazz and something no jazz musician would have found perplexing if that is what it is referring to.  I can sort of see why Carol Kaye's nose would have wrinkled a bit at that. :lol


Title: Re:
Post by: southbay on June 16, 2015, 08:12:14 AM
saw it this past weekend and was amazed by all of the historical accuracies, down to room decorations except that for the period in question Carl's hair was parted on the wrong side :afro

He was ever consistent with the hair parting?  I never got that feeling from Carl.  Seemed to me he'd part his hair however the wind blew it on that particular morning.

Oh yes.  Carl was a dedicated right sider from the very beginning through Pet Sounds. Starting with the Smile sessions, he began a brief flirtation with parting it on the left side.  Clearly this did not work out as he quickly abandoned the left sided-ness and emerged with what would become his signature down the middle part on Sunflower.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 16, 2015, 10:32:58 AM
can anyone explain the bit about the "2 keys"? is it true? if not, how can this film, which labors so hard for accuracy, make up an ahistorical sequence like this of such specificity? what song was it again? can we determine if if fact BW wrote parts in 2 keys for some purpose?

It's in the scene for the "Wouldn't It Be Nice" backing track.  Lyle Ritz is supposed to play in one key on the double bass and Carol is to play another on her bass.  I'm not even remotely musical enough to know if two keys are being played on the real track.  I do know that the expository dialogue in the scene is interesting and gets the point across that Brian heard in his head what he wanted and the musicians followed.

Yeah... I have a degree in music composition and all I can figure is they are referencing Brian's odd bass placements (which are rarely rooted, as is typical). It's a common thing in jazz and something no jazz musician would have found perplexing if that is what it is referring to.  I can sort of see why Carol Kaye's nose would have wrinkled a bit at that. :lol

And for anyone curious exactly what this is about, here is the scene in question.

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/love-and-mercy-brian-wilson-wouldnt-it-be-120447550237.html (https://www.yahoo.com/movies/love-and-mercy-brian-wilson-wouldnt-it-be-120447550237.html)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 16, 2015, 11:26:42 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VT-uPyCfXY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VT-uPyCfXY)

Full Q&A from a screening last week in Los Angeles.  I haven't watched it yet but it looks cool.


Title: Re:
Post by: southbay on June 16, 2015, 12:20:29 PM
very good.  Brian seemed very relaxed there, offered some really good comments. Strange o hear him talk about Landy, I wonder what goes through his mind when he speaks of him.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Misterlou on June 16, 2015, 12:25:17 PM
I've seen it three times now in the theater (the wife said no more). I was reading one critic's review, discussing how he felt the film portrays, among other things, the creation of Pet Sounds and the destruction of Smile. That comment got me thinking about the inclusion of the brief scene from the recording of Mrs. O'Leary's Cow, and what better way to represent the destruction of Smile, if you will, than to cut from Paul Dano singing Surf's Up to the scene of Brian in the studio, running with fire in his hands, the fire that destroys. That for me was the most powerful scene in the film among many powerful scenes.

Interesting, my wife interpreted that scene as Brian was playing around, having fun in the studio, but if you look at his expression, he looks like he's hurting to me, like a man defeated.

I also thought Love to Say Dada would have been a great song to play over his LSD trip, not that Don't Talk (I think that's what we hear) wasn't. If there was ever a song that sounds like LSD, (not that I've taken it), Love to Say Dada, I think, would be it. And of course we know the lore behind the title. An amazing, ethereal beginning to that song, yes indeed. And an amazing film that follows you home, even after repeated viewings.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 16, 2015, 12:46:57 PM
I've seen it three times now in the theater (the wife said no more). I was reading one critic's review, discussing how he felt the film portrays, among other things, the creation of Pet Sounds and the destruction of Smile. That comment got me thinking about the inclusion of the brief scene from the recording of Mrs. O'Leary's Cow, and what better way to represent the destruction of Smile, if you will, than to cut from Paul Dano singing Surf's Up to the scene of Brian in the studio, running with fire in his hands, the fire that destroys. That for me was the most powerful scene in the film among many powerful scenes.

I went last night to a yet another showing (my fourth time) and it was again nice to drink in the nuances of the scenes.  Subtle details like the one you mention.  Not much of SMiLE is shown.  I think Bill Pohlad said (in some other interview) that there were more scenes for SMiLE stuff shot but they didn't' make the final cut.  "Surf's Up" segueing into 'The Fire Sessions' was a power 1-2 punch.  And Dano in the deep end with the soundtrack collage of like 5 or 6 SMiLE songs all going at once.  So much water imagery.
 
Interesting, my wife interpreted that scene as Brian was playing around, having fun in the studio, but if you look at his expression, he looks like he's hurting to me, like a man defeated.

It's the one time in the film that I think Paul Dano's Brian seems manic.


Title: Re: \
Post by: TonyW on June 16, 2015, 01:07:25 PM
Its a week out from general release in Australia and the ads for the movie release are starting to appear on TV stations (I saw them on Foxtel).


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 16, 2015, 01:46:08 PM
Nice piece from National Review:

http://www.nationalreview.com/node/419838/print (http://www.nationalreview.com/node/419838/print)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mooger Fooger on June 16, 2015, 04:17:38 PM
OK I saw it again today. Much, much better the second time around, and it was excellent the first time. The hook for me is the opening musical sequence. Goosebumps and tears all rolled into one. For the second time in 24 hours I am gob-smacked.


Title: Re: \
Post by: send me a picture and i'll tell you on June 16, 2015, 08:58:09 PM
Okay, Brian Wilson (or your people), if you're out there-- listen.

THIS is what should be playing during the end credits:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XqLTe8h0-jo


Title: Re:
Post by: undercover-m on June 16, 2015, 09:25:08 PM
Interesting, my wife interpreted that scene as Brian was playing around, having fun in the studio, but if you look at his expression, he looks like he's hurting to me, like a man defeated.
Yeah, I've always felt that way about the song Mrs. O'Leary's Cow, as well as in that scene. I was tearing up whenever it seemed like Brian was on the verge of his emotions. Maybe externally he's having fun, but on the inside, he's hurting.

And this makes me wonder, have people brought others with them to see the movie who know nothing/little about the Beach Boys? How did they respond? I felt I was emotionally involved because of my life-long love for their songs and more recently, them as a band, and my dad, as an old music lover, really enjoyed it. Because I feel like the fire-hat recording sessions doesn't make a ton of sense out of context :P.

Also, yeah, Love to Say Dada would be a good choice hence its title.
I guess the instrumental version of Don't Talk they used works, although I've never tripped on acid (not even in chemistry labs), I get the sense of feeling all floaty-floaty from it, haha.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Big Daddy on June 17, 2015, 01:37:29 AM
I saw the movie a little over a week ago and I'm torn on my opinions of the movie. From a purely artistic standpoint, what they did with the movie I found to be rather breath-taking.

However, I feel like the story-telling, relationships and character development left a lot to be desired. For me, that is the meat and potatoes of a movie. I get the feeling that the void in these departments probably has more to do with a lack of direct involvement with Brian Wilson himself than anything else. Some of it may just be that I have a different preference for things I would have liked to have seen with greater focus:

1. To me, the love story of Brian and Melinda barely seems convincing. Part of this is probably Cusack's fault. While he may capture certain ticks or mannerisms or do a good job mimicking Brian interviews we can all see on Youtube, his portrayal lacks heart and charm. More often than not he makes Brian look like a creep who can barely talk. If you watch Brian interviews throughout the decades, he could always talk like a normal person, but here and there he would choose to be more reserved. Back to the original point, it almost appears that there is no reason for Melinda to fall in love with him other than the fact that he is a Beach Boy. This relationship just comes across as shallow in the movie. The part where he played Love and Mercy on the piano when she entered the room was the only part with Cusack where I could see a blossoming love. I'm sure part of this is the writers fault as well.

2. The scene with Murray basically shooting down God Only Knows certainly comes off as a pivotal moment in the movie. The problem is that the audience barely knows who this guy is. Their relationship is hardly explored at all. This opens up a huge can of worms with me, where is the rest of his family? Where is his mother? Where are his brothers? Where is his wife Marilyn? These are really the most crucial supporting characters of the 60s Brian Wilson story. In my opinion, the dynamics of the Wilson family relationships are the most important ground to be covered in the 60s. I feel like we see more of Hal Blaine than Carl Wilson or Dennis Wilson.

3. Where is the focus on what drives him as a musician or what he wanted his songs to accomplish? These are important questions. We get to watch him in the studio with the wrecking crew. We get to hear him talk about needing to "get this stuff" out of him. What did it feel like to harmonize with his brothers? Were any of his songs messages to the people around him? Certainly he had deep conversations with a guy like Tony Asher while developing lyrics for Pet Sounds. What about Van Dyke? Why don't we get to see how other musical influences affected him like the Freshmen and Phil Spector?

4. The studio portrayal by Dano seemed off to me. Just from listening to the Pet Sounds sessions, he always seemed to know exactly what he wanted, was well composed and professional. They make him look like a little kid having a blast in the studio, but 97% of the stuff I've heard from sessions was him honing in on a precise sound. He just doesn't come across anywhere nearly as efficient and intelligent and as he actually was when recording. I've heard in interviews with Brian that recording the vocals with his brothers on Pet Sounds that it was very much a religious and spiritual effort. I would have loved to have seen that conveyed.


I suppose I just feel like the fundamentals of the movie are severely lacking. The movie fails to capture the most endearing qualities of Brian Wilson and his story. Seems like more flash than substance to me. The strengths of the move are audio/visual effects and interesting scene juxtaposition and sequencing. The movie is clever in spades, but lacks heart and soul.


Title: Re: \
Post by: James Hughes-Clarke on June 17, 2015, 05:47:11 AM
can anyone explain the bit about the "2 keys"? is it true? if not, how can this film, which labors so hard for accuracy, make up an ahistorical sequence like this of such specificity? what song was it again? can we determine if if fact BW wrote parts in 2 keys for some purpose?

It's in the scene for the "Wouldn't It Be Nice" backing track.  Lyle Ritz is supposed to play in one key on the double bass and Carol is to play another on her bass.  I'm not even remotely musical enough to know if two keys are being played on the real track.  I do know that the expository dialogue in the scene is interesting and gets the point across that Brian heard in his head what he wanted and the musicians followed.

Yeah... I have a degree in music composition and all I can figure is they are referencing Brian's odd bass placements (which are rarely rooted, as is typical). It's a common thing in jazz and something no jazz musician would have found perplexing if that is what it is referring to.  I can sort of see why Carol Kaye's nose would have wrinkled a bit at that. :lol

I THINK I can explain this.  The arpeggio guitar part in the middle section of WIBN (which repeats the intro of the song) is played in A.  But the bass part is in D.  If you combine the two, i.e. of you play an A chord with a D in the bass, you get (I think) a Dmaj9 chord.  So the middle bit is essentialy in D, but PLAYED IN ISOLATION, the guitar arpeggio sounds like it's in A.  I could probably explain it better with a guitar - I'll put something on YouTube if I get a chance!

I'm sure it wouldn't have taken Carol Kaye long to understand what Brian was getting at, once she'd heard the 'bigger picture'.



Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on June 17, 2015, 06:07:44 AM
I saw the movie a little over a week ago and I'm torn on my opinions of the movie. From a purely artistic standpoint, what they did with the movie I found to be rather breath-taking.

However, I feel like the story-telling, relationships and character development left a lot to be desired. For me, that is the meat and potatoes of a movie. I get the feeling that the void in these departments probably has more to do with a lack of direct involvement with Brian Wilson himself than anything else. Some of it may just be that I have a different preference for things I would have liked to have seen with greater focus:

1. To me, the love story of Brian and Melinda barely seems convincing. Part of this is probably Cusack's fault. While he may capture certain ticks or mannerisms or do a good job mimicking Brian interviews we can all see on Youtube, his portrayal lacks heart and charm. More often than not he makes Brian look like a creep who can barely talk. If you watch Brian interviews throughout the decades, he could always talk like a normal person, but here and there he would choose to be more reserved. Back to the original point, it almost appears that there is no reason for Melinda to fall in love with him other than the fact that he is a Beach Boy. This relationship just comes across as shallow in the movie. The part where he played Love and Mercy on the piano when she entered the room was the only part with Cusack where I could see a blossoming love. I'm sure part of this is the writers fault as well.

2. The scene with Murray basically shooting down God Only Knows certainly comes off as a pivotal moment in the movie. The problem is that the audience barely knows who this guy is. Their relationship is hardly explored at all. This opens up a huge can of worms with me, where is the rest of his family? Where is his mother? Where are his brothers? Where is his wife Marilyn? These are really the most crucial supporting characters of the 60s Brian Wilson story. In my opinion, the dynamics of the Wilson family relationships are the most important ground to be covered in the 60s. I feel like we see more of Hal Blaine than Carl Wilson or Dennis Wilson.

3. Where is the focus on what drives him as a musician or what he wanted his songs to accomplish? These are important questions. We get to watch him in the studio with the wrecking crew. We get to hear him talk about needing to "get this stuff" out of him. What did it feel like to harmonize with his brothers? Were any of his songs messages to the people around him? Certainly he had deep conversations with a guy like Tony Asher while developing lyrics for Pet Sounds. What about Van Dyke? Why don't we get to see how other musical influences affected him like the Freshmen and Phil Spector?

4. The studio portrayal by Dano seemed off to me. Just from listening to the Pet Sounds sessions, he always seemed to know exactly what he wanted, was well composed and professional. They make him look like a little kid having a blast in the studio, but 97% of the stuff I've heard from sessions was him honing in on a precise sound. He just doesn't come across anywhere nearly as efficient and intelligent and as he actually was when recording. I've heard in interviews with Brian that recording the vocals with his brothers on Pet Sounds that it was very much a religious and spiritual effort. I would have loved to have seen that conveyed.


I suppose I just feel like the fundamentals of the movie are severely lacking. The movie fails to capture the most endearing qualities of Brian Wilson and his story. Seems like more flash than substance to me. The strengths of the move are audio/visual effects and interesting scene juxtaposition and sequencing. The movie is clever in spades, but lacks heart and soul.

You make a lot of good points about things left out / not fully explained. 

I think this could actually work for the movie though.  Brian's fans won't need an explanation.  But for newcomers, the movie might convince them to explore the Brian Wilson story a little further. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on June 17, 2015, 06:28:07 AM
Okay, Brian Wilson (or your people), if you're out there-- listen.

THIS is what should be playing during the end credits:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XqLTe8h0-jo

How about..... no.  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on June 17, 2015, 06:34:20 AM
Okay, Brian Wilson (or your people), if you're out there-- listen.

THIS is what should be playing during the end credits:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XqLTe8h0-jo

That's a decent version of God Only Knows, but I'm glad they chose to highlight songs from Brian's solo career with Love and Mercy (this kinda had to use Love and Mercy at some point) and One Kind of Love. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: JasonK on June 17, 2015, 07:34:28 AM
I've seen the movie twice now- (don't know if I've seen a movie twice in the theater since Empire Strikes Back.)
I liked it.  The attention to detail is outstanding, in a way that only serious BB fans will appreciate.  The way Dennis would flip his hair, little things like that.  I thought they portrayed Mike very fairly.  Some people are just business and goal oriented.  If I was him I wouldn't take offense to the film, but I'm not him.  They did compress a lot of the history, but like people have said, it's a two hour movie.

Just my two cents:

Favorite Parts: when Mike freaks out about the cello, the '2001' portion at then end- very artistic and well-done.  I think I actually preferred Cusack's Wilson.  Dano was great, but the movie is showing Brian at such a delicate time in his life, I kind of wished we had seen him earlier, when he was more of a confident, dominant personality as he could be.  Dano seemed so fragile the entire time in his portrayal, which I understand was the point the movie was trying to make about the time period.

Least Favorite: I thought it was about 5 minutes too long.  I could see where someone who wasn't a super fan would get a little bored.  Also, I was seeing it in an old, art-house theater in Austin, but I was underwhelmed by the sound.  Not the soundtrack or how they did it, but the music never seemed loud enough, like I was kind of straining to hear what was going on.  As far as attendance, there were about twenty people both times, and all were over 60 except for me.  For what its worth.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on June 17, 2015, 12:03:00 PM
3. Where is the focus on what drives him as a musician or what he wanted his songs to accomplish? These are important questions. We get to watch him in the studio with the wrecking crew. We get to hear him talk about needing to "get this stuff" out of him. What did it feel like to harmonize with his brothers? Were any of his songs messages to the people around him?

What drives him as a musician? Brian says that in the movie: "Tony and I think that if you close your eyes when listening, it can take you to a place." With that statement and others in that GOK scene one can deduce that Brian's drive was fueled by his passion for sharing musical beauty/spirituality with the world. What did it feel like to harmonize with his brothers? You experience that feeling when all the guys are singing the harmonies to You Still Believe In Me....we don't need to be told what it was like because the film lets us experience it first hand.

Quote
They make him look like a little kid having a blast in the studio, but 97% of the stuff I've heard from sessions was him honing in on a precise sound. He just doesn't come across anywhere nearly as efficient and intelligent and as he actually was when recording.

The Banana and Louie scene, and Brian teaching someone the proper way to toot the horn (ei Brian having fun in the studio) take at best 30 seconds of time in the movie. The rest of the studio scenes are Brian teaching musicians how to play what he wants. He's confident, professional, yet still has that endearing happiness for the music. And given that the studio chatter was nearly almost all taken word for word from the actual sessions, there is no way Dano doesn't sound efficient and intelligent. I think 90% of the studios scenes portrayed Brian as a very meticulous and explorative producer. The other 10% showed Brian's childlike love for the music he was making.

Quote
Why don't we get to see how other musical influences affected him like the Freshmen and Phil Spector?

Cusack's character talks about how the Four Freshmen influenced his harmonies, and Dano's character plays Be My Baby on the piano for seemingly 30 minutes to get him in the mood for writing GV. I could be mistaken, but I also think during the 2001 homage the Four Freshmen are playing in the background....showing the viewer first hand the music that inspired it all.

Quote
More often than not he makes Brian look like a creep who can barely talk. If you watch Brian interviews throughout the decades, he could always talk like a normal person, but here and there he would choose to be more reserved. Back to the original point, it almost appears that there is no reason for Melinda to fall in love with him other than the fact that he is a Beach Boy.

Before she was even told who Brian actually was you could tell by her mannerisms that she was curious about and interested in Brian. And even after she found out who Brian was I felt she was attracted to Brian's personality more than anything. Cusack's character emits a childlike love of the world, yet he is also fragile and scared - as well as being attracted to the former, Melinda wants to help Brian with the latter.

Quote
2. The scene with Murray basically shooting down God Only Knows certainly comes off as a pivotal moment in the movie. The problem is that the audience barely knows who this guy is. Their relationship is hardly explored at all. This opens up a huge can of worms with me, where is the rest of his family? Where is his mother? Where are his brothers? Where is his wife Marilyn? These are really the most crucial supporting characters of the 60s Brian Wilson story.

But they learn who Murry is in that scene. We learn that Murry is a hardass, a broken man who got fired from the band, a man whose marriage is falling apart, a bitter man who can't appreciate or understand what Brian was trying to accomplish with his new material. Honestly, there's almost nothing more fitting for Murry than to be introduced via shooting down one of the greatest love songs ever made.

Where are Brian's brothers? They're all over the film - supporting Brian and his efforts to make Pet Sounds. They ease his mind during his mid-flight panic attack. They are there in the control booth fighting for Brian when Mike was questioning some of the production. They are there during SMiLE's collapse, saying they all have to stick together. Marilyn is there supporting Brian as well, giving him comfort when he is at his lowest, and if we were left wondering what happened to her Cusack tells us that she saved his life, and that he wasn't a good father/husband which is why the marriage didn't last. And though these characters are important to Brian, the main focus of the movie is on Brian and his soul. It isn't meant to be a movie about Brian and everyone he knew. It's meant to be about himself and his demons.

It's all in the details. We get snapshots of Brian's real life demons (Mike being a pain, Murry being emotionally and physically abusive, Landy, etc) but when they're all looked at as a whole, Brian's life and his struggles become overpowering, which makes his redemption all that much more incredible.


Title: Re: Love & Mercy: News & Reviews
Post by: Lumen on June 17, 2015, 06:54:34 PM
I thought this probably belonged here.  Just came across it while looking around the iTunes store:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/meet-the-filmmaker/id301899522?mt=2

There is both an audio and a video version of the panel (John Cusack, Brian and Bill Pohlad).  Just starting to dive in, haven't listened at all - was eager to share.  Should be a good one!


Title: Re: \
Post by: aeijtzsche on June 17, 2015, 08:24:32 PM
can anyone explain the bit about the "2 keys"? is it true? if not, how can this film, which labors so hard for accuracy, make up an ahistorical sequence like this of such specificity? what song was it again? can we determine if if fact BW wrote parts in 2 keys for some purpose?

It's in the scene for the "Wouldn't It Be Nice" backing track.  Lyle Ritz is supposed to play in one key on the double bass and Carol is to play another on her bass.  I'm not even remotely musical enough to know if two keys are being played on the real track.  I do know that the expository dialogue in the scene is interesting and gets the point across that Brian heard in his head what he wanted and the musicians followed.


Yeah... I have a degree in music composition and all I can figure is they are referencing Brian's odd bass placements (which are rarely rooted, as is typical). It's a common thing in jazz and something no jazz musician would have found perplexing if that is what it is referring to.  I can sort of see why Carol Kaye's nose would have wrinkled a bit at that. :lol

I THINK I can explain this.  The arpeggio guitar part in the middle section of WIBN (which repeats the intro of the song) is played in A.  But the bass part is in D.  If you combine the two, i.e. of you play an A chord with a D in the bass, you get (I think) a Dmaj9 chord.  So the middle bit is essentialy in D, but PLAYED IN ISOLATION, the guitar arpeggio sounds like it's in A.  I could probably explain it better with a guitar - I'll put something on YouTube if I get a chance!

I'm sure it wouldn't have taken Carol Kaye long to understand what Brian was getting at, once she'd heard the 'bigger picture'.





Absolutely my least favorite moment in the whole film, because the dialog is so clunky, and it's so didactically hitting you on the head with "Brian is blowing these studio musician's minds" thing.  And as you say above, Carol would not have had any problem seeing what was going on.

The moment is referencing a fairly obscure comment by Lyle Ritz from the PS box set, where he's talking about WIBN, and how his bass part seemed to be written in a different key from the rest of the band during the bridge.

It's not.



Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on June 17, 2015, 08:54:50 PM
can anyone explain the bit about the "2 keys"? is it true? if not, how can this film, which labors so hard for accuracy, make up an ahistorical sequence like this of such specificity? what song was it again? can we determine if if fact BW wrote parts in 2 keys for some purpose?

It's in the scene for the "Wouldn't It Be Nice" backing track.  Lyle Ritz is supposed to play in one key on the double bass and Carol is to play another on her bass.  I'm not even remotely musical enough to know if two keys are being played on the real track.  I do know that the expository dialogue in the scene is interesting and gets the point across that Brian heard in his head what he wanted and the musicians followed.


Yeah... I have a degree in music composition and all I can figure is they are referencing Brian's odd bass placements (which are rarely rooted, as is typical). It's a common thing in jazz and something no jazz musician would have found perplexing if that is what it is referring to.  I can sort of see why Carol Kaye's nose would have wrinkled a bit at that. :lol

I THINK I can explain this.  The arpeggio guitar part in the middle section of WIBN (which repeats the intro of the song) is played in A.  But the bass part is in D.  If you combine the two, i.e. of you play an A chord with a D in the bass, you get (I think) a Dmaj9 chord.  So the middle bit is essentialy in D, but PLAYED IN ISOLATION, the guitar arpeggio sounds like it's in A.  I could probably explain it better with a guitar - I'll put something on YouTube if I get a chance!

I'm sure it wouldn't have taken Carol Kaye long to understand what Brian was getting at, once she'd heard the 'bigger picture'.





Absolutely my least favorite moment in the whole film, because the dialog is so clunky, and it's so didactically hitting you on the head with "Brian is blowing these studio musician's minds" thing.  And as you say above, Carol would not have had any problem seeing what was going on.

The moment is referencing a fairly obscure comment by Lyle Ritz from the PS box set, where he's talking about WIBN, and how his bass part seemed to be written in a different key from the rest of the band during the bridge.

It's not.



One of the best profile pics in the history of the message boards, bar none!  :)

I've also transcribed that bass and guitar part, and it does do something cool as James outlined. You get the sound of a Dmajor7th starting that bridge because the bass note is a strong D root, yet the intro sounds more like the A to Bmin7 arpeggio that is actually being played on the guitar. It's a neat trick of playing with the perception of hearing the chord as something different based on the root note played underneath. Hendrix did a similar thing later with All Along The Watchtower where what had been a straightforward A major chord in the song suddenly sounds like an F#minor7 because he played that F# root in the bass under the guitar's A chord. Simple but a very, very cool effect.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard on June 17, 2015, 10:28:51 PM
I am glad of two things in this movie.

1.) Bill did not go out of his way to portray Mike Love as an asshole. He came off like a man who was worried as to what was happening to his group, and yes his livelihood. There were changes going on with Brian that I am sure Mike at the time chalked up to drugs etc and thought that his cousin needed a verbal ass kicking to get it together. We know now that drugs took an already delicately balanced Brian and pushed him over the edge.

2.) I liked the way the SMiLE crew was portrayed. (So glad Bob Hanes isn't here to rip me a new one for what I am about to say. We argued ALOT over this). I have always felt that with 3 exceptions, the people that were around Brian during Pet Sounds and SMiLE were absolutely the most self absorbed people who could have invaded his world. Starting with Tom Nolan and carried on by David Leaf and others, these people (Lauren Daro, Mike Vosse, etc etc), these people were said to be hip and the Beach Boys were said to be non-hip and that was the ONLY thing wrong is that the boys couldn't or didn't want to go where the hip people were leading. Well, to put it mildly, these hip people were going NOWHERE. They were the kind of people I knew growing up that would get high and just ramble on about things and think of themselves as enlightened. And the 60's people had a way of thinking they saved the world. They didn't. They were too self-absorbed to save anyone. I always found it funny when they use to show these communes on shows like 60 minutes etc., and the men would spend the day meeting and discussing issues of the day etc, while the women did all of the work and child-rearing. So much for enlightenment. Those people added nothing. And look at them all. Except for Van, David, and Danny, they all went on to do......nothing. Some were homeless and addicted, Lauren worked as a fact checker for a publisher (so much for Mr. Brain Trust). These were evil people. Glad they didn't show them as heroes. Leaf tried to show them that way in the Beatuiful Dreamer video. They weren't. After watching Lauren speak, I told Bob Hanes I felt like I needed a shower.

Absolutely this. Especially #2. I would have disagreed until Daro popped in awhile ago and revealed what a petty, stuck-up, useless prick he is/was. It actually gave me even more sympathy for Mike's point of view--I wouldnt want my family to hang out with such a character either. And I agree, he reminds me of people I know now in college who do drugs (and not like weed or psychedelics, Im talking coke and heroin) and brag about how much theyve supposedly learned doing so, all while conducting themselves in the most immature, self-centered ways I could imagine.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mooger Fooger on June 18, 2015, 10:17:42 AM
Domestic takings are currently at $4.7 million. International earnings have not yet been properly calculated.

Woo hoo!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Emdeeh on June 18, 2015, 11:15:20 AM
NPR's Fresh Air ran a discussion with Oren Moverman on Love & Mercy today. They also ran parts of a late '80s interview with Brian. Here's the link to listen and download:
http://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/

Haven't seen the movie yet, but it's opening in town tomorrow. Think I'll go see it on Saturday.  ;D




Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on June 18, 2015, 11:21:38 AM
NPR's Fresh Air ran a discussion with Oren Moverman on Love & Mercy today. They also ran parts of a late '80s interview with Brian. Here's the link to listen and download:
http://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/

Haven't seen the movie yet, but it's opening in town tomorrow. Think I'll go see it on Saturday.  ;D




see an early show, they're generally less crowded


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on June 18, 2015, 11:32:07 AM
NPR's Fresh Air ran a discussion with Oren Moverman on Love & Mercy today. They also ran parts of a late '80s interview with Brian. Here's the link to listen and download:
http://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/

Haven't seen the movie yet, but it's opening in town tomorrow. Think I'll go see it on Saturday.  ;D



Thanks! I am so glad to hear the movie finally made it down your way. Enjoy! :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: donald on June 18, 2015, 11:45:33 AM
Today onNPR show fresh air with Terry Gross:    Oren Moverman interview re Love and Mercy along with re airing of previous Fresh Air Brian interviews.    some will be on podcast as well.

Happy listening


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paul J B on June 18, 2015, 12:27:30 PM
Finally getting around to posting my 2 cents....have seen it twice now. At this stage in the game I can't add much to what has already been discussed at length. In the latest crazy thread (the myth one) a guy named Ron posted something about "movies" never being as good as the "book". There is a bit of truth to that statement regarding this movie. However, that falls on us hardcore fans and not the film itself. I think knowing TOO much about the history of Brian Wilson did/does skew my perspective of the film somewhat. Seeing too many clips prior to the actual viewing of the movie also was a bad idea in hindsight. That being said I liked it very much and would give it a solid thumbs up. I'm still not sure it was as brilliant a piece of work as many critics and fellow Smiley Smilers feel it was, but still a way better than average movie and probably as good a biopic as one could hope to make. Probably.

Can't remember where its from or who said it but there is a belief out there that for a movie to be great and succeed you only need one great scene or two and the audience will walk away happy. The "faking it" scene in When Harry Met Sally is a prime example. This film had many of those great scenes and two incredible ones.

Incredible scene #1

The opening. Brilliant ...stunning,...awesome. What an incredible freakin' way to introduce the audience to Brian. Keep in mind...the audience. Not Smiley Smilers. When Dano says " I think I've got the music part, it's like a cry but a happy cry" and the screen goes black for a decent length as the sounds and music flow in. That scene right there deserves an award.

Incredible scene #2

The Cusak lying in bed sequence. Left me speechless even after seeing it twice. The first time I saw it  I did not even notice In My Room was playing. The imagery was so awesome I honestly was stunned when I saw it the second time 2 days ago, and heard In My Room playing. And wow ....just wow...did I say WOW...the symbolism when the shot of Brian, Carl and Denny flicks by and Denny is gone, having literally and figuratively gone over the edge. Did you notice the body of water down there in the initial scene when Denny had his back to the camera. Another award for that scene/sequence as well.

I could go on and on but most of us have seen it now. Some gripes were sort of legit but any inaccuracies or gripes even if warranted are far out numbered by the great things in this film.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 18, 2015, 12:39:45 PM
Thanks for the head's up, I'm looking forward to listening.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 18, 2015, 12:47:35 PM

Incredible scene #1

The opening. Brilliant ...stunning,...awesome. What an incredible freakin' way to introduce the audience to Brian. Keep in mind...the audience. Not Smiley Smilers. When Dano says " I think I've got the music part, it's like a cry but a happy cry" and the screen goes black for a decent length as the sounds and music flow in. That scene right there deserves an award.

Pretty sure this scene is pulled from a later sequence where Brian is talking to Tony Asher about whatever song (I think "You Still Believe in Me") but they trimmed it down to the point where its just what you see.  I agree it works great.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Pet Sounder on June 18, 2015, 03:57:31 PM
I've seen the film twice now.  As a Beach Boys fan, I'm so thankful that a quality, artful and thoughtful film has been made that I can point friends to and say "this is why I love this music so much."  Taking the whole film into account, I was very happy with it.

FAVORITES:

Cusack did better than I expected.  I thought he really captured current Brian well.  I was nervous at first, but he knocked it out of the park.

The score was amazing.  I'll be very disappointed if the soundtrack is never released.

Dano did a very good job at capturing younger Brian's spirit.  When I first saw the GV session film footage a few years ago I was hoping that "that Brian" would be portrayed well on film, if the film ever happened.

The film editing was more artful than I was expecting, especially the montage at the end.  That sequence stayed with me long after I saw the movie.  

The studio scenes were an absolute joy to watch - especially GV!  The 360 degree shot was perfect.

Even though they had minor parts, I really enjoyed how Carl and Dennis were portrayed.  They were written and acted well.  That was an unexpected surprise.

The attention to clothes and environments was excellent.  I know that the actual Western location was used.  Does anyone know if any other locations were filmed at the historical locations?

I think Mike was portrayed very fairly.  I actually feel like I understood his motivations better as a result of how he was presented in the film.  I'm hoping that Mike can understand that if he ever ends up seeing the film.  I think the film actually helps his image rather than hurt it.

MINOR COMPLAINTS:

Most of the historical inaccuracies didn't really bother me, except for one - the GOK session.  I'm going off of memory here, but I think they only showed half or 2/3 of the musicians in the room as were actually there.  Bruce was in the booth during that session and described how the players were almost sitting on each other.  And if I remember correctly, there were no string players portrayed in that scene.  I think the string part in GOK is one of the high points of Brian's career.  To feature the song in the film without including that was somewhat disappointing.  It also would have made a great visual stressing Brian's relentless pursuit of musical perfection by showing him cramming as many musicians into that studio as he could.

I thought there could have been longer or more studio scenes.  Maybe take one more PS track and give it the same treatment that they gave GV.  And maybe one more Smile track - like the session for DYLW or something.

I think Dano was just slightly more childlike in his conversation and mannerisms (at times) that Brian really was.  But just slightly.  He really did an excellent job.

I would have liked to see even a brief clip of Tony Asher composing with Brain at Brian's house - Brian still asleep when Asher showed up in the late morning, or Brian wanting to watch Flipper first and crying at the end of the episode, or a conversation between them before Brian would start playing his feels at the piano.

And as a fan fantasy, I would have loved to see a BW film just focusing on 1965 - 1971.  I think showing Brian slowly retreating from the world while still composing some amazing stuff intermittently would have been interesting to see.  But I understand that in doing so you don't get a very good perspective on his life as a whole, so I understand the route that they took.

I'm hoping that the Blu Ray will include all of the deleted scenes!


Title: Re:
Post by: undercover-m on June 18, 2015, 11:01:53 PM
^ Thanks for the link! I've been meaning to listen to more npr...

On the topic of rising album sales, I went into a record store earlier this week and there were no Beach Boys albums! Good for my wallet, i guess. And I'm gonna take it as a sign that people are re-gaining interest in them! :)

There was also a large BWPS poster on the wall. Whoever works there has good music taste.


Title: Re: \
Post by: coco1997 on June 19, 2015, 07:01:59 AM
Now that we know that the original script contained scenes set in the '70s, what actor could have played circa-1970s/overweight Brian?


Title: Re: \
Post by: marcusb on June 19, 2015, 07:05:50 AM
Now that we know that the original script contained scenes set in the '70s, what actor could have played circa-1970s/overweight Brian?

Zach Galifianakis

(https://sugarinc-a.akamaihd.net/files/ons1/192/1922398/36_2009/b930e95bbcaf58cb_zac-g-robe.jpg)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 19, 2015, 07:54:27 AM
According to BoxOfficeMojo, LOVE & MERCY is now in 792 theaters.  That's up from roughly 580 theaters last week.

There was a poster in Baton Rouge that was hoping the film would play there, it is now playing in 2 theaters in Baton Rouge, LA.

http://www.fandango.com/love26mercy_181116/movietimes?location=70801



Title: Re: \
Post by: curth on June 19, 2015, 08:27:19 AM
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1069362_10200769145189689_1704556823_n.jpg?oh=e0978fda9f09823ccf343f11f70a7ac9&oe=55E880B4 (https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1069362_10200769145189689_1704556823_n.jpg?oh=e0978fda9f09823ccf343f11f70a7ac9&oe=55E880B4)

I saw this on the Imagination List. Don't know how to post a pic here, but the guy in the pic is the guy you see laying in bed twice in L&M. His name is Jeff Holman. He is listed in the IMDB credits as Brian "Present". The pic is from his Facebook page.Must feel like crap having been cut out of the movie.(https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1069362_10200769145189689_1704556823_n.jpg?oh=e0978fda9f09823ccf343f11f70a7ac9&oe=55E880B4)


Title: Re: \
Post by: ontor pertawst on June 19, 2015, 08:28:17 AM
I think that other than the bedroom glimpses, the 70s scenes were cut out at the script stage and not actually filmed. Nice job sleeping tho, Holman. Pretty intense shots, huh?


Title: Re: \
Post by: WonderfulLittlePad on June 19, 2015, 09:40:32 AM
According to BoxOfficeMojo, LOVE & MERCY is now in 792 theaters.  That's up from roughly 580 theaters last week.

There was a poster in Baton Rouge that was hoping the film would play there, it is now playing in 2 theaters in Baton Rouge, LA.

http://www.fandango.com/love26mercy_181116/movietimes?location=70801



Yep, very happy.  Going to the morning show at the Mall tomorrow.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 19, 2015, 09:58:26 AM
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1069362_10200769145189689_1704556823_n.jpg?oh=e0978fda9f09823ccf343f11f70a7ac9&oe=55E880B4 (https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1069362_10200769145189689_1704556823_n.jpg?oh=e0978fda9f09823ccf343f11f70a7ac9&oe=55E880B4)(https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1069362_10200769145189689_1704556823_n.jpg?oh=e0978fda9f09823ccf343f11f70a7ac9&oe=55E880B4)

I knew it!  Thanks for finding this.  I didn't think it was either Dano or Cusack.  And in the script it refers to Brian Past, Brian Present and Brian Future.  Brian Present is the 1970s.  It's interesting to me that Dano's scenes are all book-ended (with the exception of the very opening scene) by the two shots of Brian laying in bed at the Bel Air house.

As I have mentioned before in my random stream of consciousness postings about LOVE & MERCY, those two shots convey such a heaviness and gravity that we know the person we are seeing is in a very bad place and has been through "it".  It's just enough of a peak to know that I think it's wise that Pohlad/Moverman decided not to continue to strip away and pair down the film to shape it into what we have in theaters now.  Seeing Brian in the 1970s might've been way too painful.

BTW I don't think he was cut out of the movie.  I think by the time shooting commenced the intention was to do what you see.  Show Brian Present (1970s) as basically catatonic.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 19, 2015, 10:02:31 AM
I think that other than the bedroom glimpses, the 70s scenes were cut out at the script stage and not actually filmed. Nice job sleeping tho, Holman. Pretty intense shots, huh?

So intense!  When I saw the first one, during the 1st screening I attended, I was like THEY DID IT!  I knew the film was going to be a home run.


Title: Re: \
Post by: WonderfulLittlePad on June 19, 2015, 10:18:39 AM


 Seeing Brian in the 1970s might've been way too painful.

[/quote]

Plus the audience may not feel much sympathy for a man who was eating, drinking, sleeping and doing drugs for a 3 plus years.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paul J B on June 19, 2015, 12:42:49 PM
Well then..... Mr. Holman is an unsung hero in the film. Not sure if everyone got it, but the people that are members here sure did. As JCM has been saying, so much of the story in this film is in the details. That shot of Brian in bed was worth a thousand words and then some. One of the reasons I found the film especially disturbing the first time was due to shots like that where it felt like you were back in time and actually in the room with Brian, The Beach Boys, ect.

When Brian is in the car with Melinda and Brian says "no he's not my friend, he's my body guard" that was another moment when you felt like you were really there in the backseat. Actually that whole scene was great as so much of the film is.

I hope there is a directors cut and not just deleted scenes as bonus material.


Title: Re: \
Post by: mikeddonn on June 19, 2015, 04:56:31 PM
I've just booked a ticket for the UK premier in Edinburgh.  20th of June, a very appropriate day to see a film about Brian's life.

I couldn't wait for general release in July! ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Emdeeh on June 19, 2015, 05:52:32 PM
20th of June, a very appropriate day to see a film about Brian's life.

Yup! That's exactly why I'm going to see it tomorrow instead of tonight.  8)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Komera on June 19, 2015, 07:48:30 PM
(http://desi-movie.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Love-And-Mercy-2015.jpg)

Found this.  Too bad I can't read Japanese.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocker on June 20, 2015, 05:19:43 AM
I saw it yesterday.

It really is a very good movie! My expectations were fo course quite high after reading this board and the articles.

A few notes from me:

- I don't like Dano's singing, it is quite pitchy at times. That of course works quite well when "Brian" plays a song not in a recording setting (God Only Knows) but Surf's Up didn't do it for me and also the times his voice was used in mix with the original recordings. That said, I want to mention that his acting was fantastic! He even walked liked Brian!

- Of course the snippets and mixes of Beach Boys recordings was cool. Mike's isolated 'til I die, Carl's acapella Good Vibrations (they had Brian singing the Asher lyrics, which in reality was also Carl btw), I believe the early pre-Pet Sounds sequence had Brian's single tracked lead of Don't Worry Baby.

- The way the movie jumps between the 60s and 80s could've been irritating but works really well.

- Dennis' moves playing drums on stage looked a little goofy.

- The Mike-Brian confrontation(s) were more or less just as I always thought they did happen back then. Now, I wasn't there but to me this looks very realistic and it doesn't blame anyone for any wrong decision or opinion.

- Apart from the main characters whose actors did a great job, I also liked the other cast. Marylin and Carl were almost perfect imo. Mike of course has MUCH too much hair but when wearing a cap it doesn't matter. Murry was casted very well, too. In fact his role was so in each of the three bigger Beach Boy-movies (Summer Dreams, An American Family, Love&Mercy). But I guess my favorite Murry will remain Arlen Dean Snyder from Summer Dreams.



- Naturally I saw the german udbbing. These things can destroy a movie but thankfully it was very well done. It sounds funny though as a german accented Mike was citing the lyrics to "Hang on to your ego". I am looking forward to the DVD and seeing the movie with it's original dubbing.



The ending Love&Mercy performance, where does it come from? Is it the performance from "Brian Wilson On Tour"? I haven't seen that in a long time


Title: Re: \
Post by: Emdeeh on June 20, 2015, 03:16:25 PM
Just got back from seeing it -- what an odd film!

My reaction is based on the choice to do a split portrayal of Brian. Dano was brilliant and totally convincing in my opinion. I thought Cusack (who is one of my favorite actors) did a good job, but he didn't convince me that he was playing the same person 20 years later. So it felt to me like the film was telling two different stories about two different men instead of about one man.

The studio recreations are fantastic. I've taken a tour of the actual studio Brian used, and it's a tiny space! They did such a great job of showing real musicians working that space.

I was happy with the portrayals of Carl and Dennis, right down to Carl's ubiquitous shades. And I loved that little grace note of Dennis at the piano. I thought Marilyn was treated quite well too. Landy was totally slimy, which is what I expected from Giamatti (who plays slimy quite well).

This movie, as odd as it is, is definitely an improvement on its two made-for-tv predecessors, imho.


Title: Re: \
Post by: mikeddonn on June 20, 2015, 04:42:46 PM
Just been at the UK Premier in Edinburgh. What a fabulous film, I shed a few tears.  The end performance of Love and Mercy by Brian was a great touch.

A surprise was that Bill Pohlad was there with his son who played child Brian.  Bill did a Q and A afterward!  He said that he was after Seth Rogen to play 70s Brian but after speaking with Brian and Melinda felt that more focus would be on the development of 80s Brian, with little time to do 70s Brian.  The Pet Sounds era and SMiLE decline was also a must do.

He also said it was difficult to find anyone who had anything positive to say about Landy.  And that Mike Love reacted probably the way a lot of people would have done in the same situation.  He also said Brian could be inconsistent sometimes when he was trying to get info from him, but that we're all capable of that too.  He mentioned a script had been flying around Hollywood for years called, "Heroes and Villains" but they asked the scriptwriters to re-do it as it was just your usual biopic stuff.  It was only then they decided to make it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Emdeeh on June 20, 2015, 04:56:34 PM
Something I forgot to mention, the art house cinema was giving away both postcard and poster versions of the movie one-sheet art to patrons. I got a couple of each.


Title: Re: \
Post by: shadownoze on June 20, 2015, 06:19:17 PM
He said that he was after Seth Rogen to play 70s Brian...

Oh, man, how grateful we all should be that this plan never came to pass!


Title: Re: \
Post by: RJM on June 20, 2015, 06:40:29 PM
Just got back from seeing it -- what an odd film!

My reaction is based on the choice to do a split portrayal of Brian. Dano was brilliant and totally convincing in my opinion. I thought Cusack (who is one of my favorite actors) did a good job, but he didn't convince me that he was playing the same person 20 years later. So it felt to me like the film was telling two different stories about two different men instead of about one man.

The studio recreations are fantastic. I've taken a tour of the actual studio Brian used, and it's a tiny space! They did such a great job of showing real musicians working that space.

I was happy with the portrayals of Carl and Dennis, right down to Carl's ubiquitous shades. And I loved that little grace note of Dennis at the piano. I thought Marilyn was treated quite well too. Landy was totally slimy, which is what I expected from Giamatti (who plays slimy quite well).

This movie, as odd as it is, is definitely an improvement on its two made-for-tv predecessors, imho.

I have yet to see it, and sad to say, I will be unable to see it until it comes out on DVD.

That said, Cusack mentioned in one of the interviews that when he met Brian before filming started, he noticed that when Brian talked about his past, he would seem detached and dispassionate. Almost as if he was talking about a completely different person and not himself. When I first became a fan (during the Landy era, as a matter of fact) I had a hard time believing that the weird, strange older guy was the same guy from the early-to-mid 60's pictures of the BB. That, probably influenced Cusack in how he portrayed middle-aged Brian. Plus, Pohlad deliberately kept Cusack and Dano apart for most of the shoot so that they wouldn't be able to compare notes on how they played Brian. For the artistic intent, there had to be two different Brians.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cam Mott on June 21, 2015, 09:07:49 AM
I liked it very much as a movie and I think it set's a new benchmark for bio pics. The period detail was outstanding and the studio recreations will have you calling a doctor because your fanboy (and fangirl) boner will last much more than four hours. I liked Dano's performance less and Cusack's more than I expected going in but both did an outstanding job.  Loved Elizabeth Banks and really all of the actors. Outstanding soundtrack and, well, pretty much everything.

It has heart for days. It was more sympathetic and less sympathetic at the same time toward those involved in many ways than other biopics. If you are expecting accuracies in every plot point you might be a little disappointed but overall it is a well told movie.   


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 21, 2015, 05:20:20 PM
This past weekend was the 'wide' release, 792 theaters, up from previous 580 (rough) 480 (rough) the previous two weekends in 'limited' release. As an estimate it apparently made just about what it made last weekend, while still in 'limited' release.

I suspect we may be on the downward side of the theatrical run for LOVE & MERCY, at least in the U.S.  Probably another 2 weeks or so and the wait for Blu-Ray/DVD/Digital begins.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mooger Fooger on June 21, 2015, 05:31:12 PM
I saw it again with my fabulous wife for a 3rd time! The opening musical score reduced me to tears again. If that is how Brian hears the songs in his head, then I feel truly honoured to be able to appreciate his music as much as I do.

This viewing has had me swelling with emotion long after we left the cinema.

It is by far my favourite bio pic. I will be getting this on bluray the day it comes out.

Oh man do I hope there is an OST for this.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 21, 2015, 05:48:42 PM
That's awesome that you're wife accompanied you a 3rd time.  I've now seen L&M 4 times, unfortunately haven't been able to talk my wife into going.  This past Friday night we went out for our 15th wedding anniversary (coming up on the 24th) and I had basically worn her down to finally see L&M with me.  I just wanted to share the experience, since she knows how much BW's music means to me, etc. 

She stopped off at Lady Foot Locker to buy some new sneakers for her workout class and I made a split decision, I know she didn't want to go see L&M and was just going for me...and that she REALLY wanted to see INSIDE OUT.  So, I surprised her.  Happy wife, happy life.

I agree about the OST...  it will be such a missed opportunity if there isn't a score/soundtrack for L&M.  But I'm just a dude, not someone who knows the commercial appeal of such a thing.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Aum Bop Diddit on June 21, 2015, 08:21:46 PM
Funniest line from Dano as Brian -- "Surfers don't even like our music!"  To which "Dennis" adds -- "they don't."  Hilarious.

Loved the film.  Quibble -- Giamatti's scenery chewing as Landy.  Of the three "villains," Mike Love I think is the most fairly presented.  His qualms and fears at least come from a specific even rational even loving point of view.  Enjoyed the writing of GV scene as well as all the record making scenes.  Murray is somewhere in between but feel they could have humanized him a little more (the bathrobe is a nod to Murry's own bed stuck depression?).  Landy is a cartoon.

Where was Audree?

I think the movie is clearly also a love story and one of redemption.  Obviously in this case it is the story Brian Wilson and Melinda Ledbetter get to tell.

Visuals, audio, editing astounding.  Dano and Cusack wonderful.  Great directing choices down the line.  As so many have said, it raises the biopic bar.  The person I saw it with loved it and she is only peripherally aware of the Brian saga.  Definitely look forward to the "extras."

Another amazing gift us hardcore fans have received.


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on June 22, 2015, 02:57:34 AM
I think it's worth adding that, according to friends of mine who'd know, the schizo- portions were depicted very realistically. One friend who is bipolar schizoaffective (same diagnosis as Brian) told me that it was the most "spot-on" of any film he can remember.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Craig Boyd on June 22, 2015, 09:25:34 AM
He said that he was after Seth Rogen to play 70s Brian...

Oh, man, how grateful we all should be that this plan never came to pass!

He didn't say that. He was coy about giving a name but mentioned the late Philip Seymour Hoffman as someone who he'd thought about for 70s era Brian.

What a film though. Really moving with great performances all round and the sound design with all the different fragments of harmonies and voices really needs to be experienced with a multi-speaker setup.


Title: Re:
Post by: 37!ws on June 22, 2015, 12:14:46 PM
Where was Audree?

Montage early in the film. She and Murry are off in the wings at a show.


Title: Re: \
Post by: WonderfulLittlePad on June 22, 2015, 12:30:57 PM
Saw it for a second time on Saturday.  Man, I think I enjoyed it better the second time around.  Great film all the way around.  Only thing I would want to see is a picture of Brian working in the studios during the 60s and a picture of present day Brian and Melinda at the end.  The Love and Mercy closeout to the film was awesome, but I feel like a lot of people feel like Taylor is Melinda.


Title: Re: \
Post by: joshferrell on June 22, 2015, 01:29:25 PM
I'm glad they didn't use someone for the 70's Brian because the far away footage of him laying in bed,faceless, says a lot!!!


Title: Re: \
Post by: mikeddonn on June 22, 2015, 03:37:47 PM
He said that he was after Seth Rogen to play 70s Brian...

Oh, man, how grateful we all should be that this plan never came to pass!

He didn't say that. He was coy about giving a name but mentioned the late Philip Seymour Hoffman as someone who he'd thought about for 70s era Brian.

What a film though. Really moving with great performances all round and the sound design with all the different fragments of harmonies and voices really needs to be experienced with a multi-speaker setup.

Thank you, I got the names mixed up. You are correct. My bad!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on June 22, 2015, 03:55:16 PM
Saw it for a second time on Saturday.  Man, I think I enjoyed it better the second time around.  Great film all the way around.  Only thing I would want to see is a picture of Brian working in the studios during the 60s and a picture of present day Brian and Melinda at the end.  The Love and Mercy closeout to the film was awesome, but I feel like a lot of people feel like Taylor is Melinda.

I don't think people would make that assumption.  Never does the movie suggest Melinda has any musical talent so I don't think people would come to the conclusion of her being his backup singer.  Plus the movie makes Brian and Melinda out to be more or less the same age while Taylor is clearly much younger than him in that clip.  I do wish they had shot a new concert sequence of Love and Mercy especially for the film instead of using nearly 13 year old footage from the Pet Sounds Live show (though it is cool to see it as it wasn't on the Pet Sounds Live DVD).


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cyncie on June 22, 2015, 09:45:58 PM
Finally got to see this yesterday. A very powerful film, well done all the way round. Certain scenes have continued to come back into my thoughts all through the day. All I can say is "God bless Brian Wilson."


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nile on June 23, 2015, 12:26:42 AM
Ufff...
Got to see L&M 2 days ago and I´m still under spell from this GORGEOUS movie! There were 8 of us in the theater, mind you it was 22:15h play but that didn´t  bother me at all!
The scenes with Dano are so well done, my wife at first thought (in the opening scenes) it was Brian himself, that it was some kind of documentary. Cusack was also great, deeply touching... Banks great!
The scenes in studio were so joyfull (at least for the Pet sounds), so great to see something like this..
2 hors wnet by so fast and of course Im going to see it again, this time by myself so I can absorbe all beauty ...
And to see Brian sing L&M at the end, well what I can say tears ran down my face without control..
Since I´m Smile freak I wish they gave us some of of the Smile studio scenes, but hey there will be DVD so we can hopefully enjoy these deleted scenes there, like these:

"Dinner party guests silverware and glass music "session", with Brian chanting over the "cacaphony"
Heroes and Villains (Brian and VDP work composing session)
Smile montage (Columbia):
a. Heroes and Villains (Brian demonstrates to group on piano)
b. Beach Boys harmonize on “Prelude”
c. Session musicians playing kazoos, toy whistles, bells and various childhood instruments
d. Brian piano theme, which “deteriorates as the take comes to an end and the notes played become random and jumbled.”

Hopefully...


Title: Re: \
Post by: WonderfulLittlePad on June 23, 2015, 06:35:33 AM
Saw it for a second time on Saturday.  Man, I think I enjoyed it better the second time around.  Great film all the way around.  Only thing I would want to see is a picture of Brian working in the studios during the 60s and a picture of present day Brian and Melinda at the end.  The Love and Mercy closeout to the film was awesome, but I feel like a lot of people feel like Taylor is Melinda.

I don't think people would make that assumption.  Never does the movie suggest Melinda has any musical talent so I don't think people would come to the conclusion of her being his backup singer.  Plus the movie makes Brian and Melinda out to be more or less the same age while Taylor is clearly much younger than him in that clip.  I do wish they had shot a new concert sequence of Love and Mercy especially for the film instead of using nearly 13 year old footage from the Pet Sounds Live show (though it is cool to see it as it wasn't on the Pet Sounds Live DVD).

Well my girlfriend and her daughter both thought that was Melinda as you can't really see Taylor singing and only see her as they are taking a bow.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on June 23, 2015, 08:37:12 PM
Saw it for a fifth time this morning, this time at a different theater for a change.  All of my viewings have been at AMC theaters.  This one I went to today had reclining leather seats, that was a nice change of pace.

I was looking on some movie site and as of Friday I think the movie will be down to 2 theaters in my city (from the peak of 6, this past weekend). 

Pretty sure I'll go back for at least one more viewing before it is completely gone.  This morning already marked the most times I've seen a film in a theater.  Previous personal record was THE THIN RED LINE in 1999, 4 times.

 :o


Title: Re: \
Post by: Kurosawa on June 24, 2015, 12:26:14 AM
Best biopic I've ever seen of a musician, better than Ray, IMO, mostly because Brian himself means more to me as a person than Ray Charles did. But it's also very musical, much more so than other movies about music. I think a lot of it would work as a movie with just music. Heck, a lot of it did.

I think for pure Beach Boys fandom the 60's studio scenes are the most exciting, but the story with Brian and Melinda was just as captivating and they blended them both beautifully. This movie really was a love letter to Beach Boys fans and is just an amazing film.


Title: Re: \
Post by: bluesno1fann on June 24, 2015, 04:41:04 AM
Gonna see it tomorrow (which is the day Love And Mercy comes out in Australia) with my girlfriend, who likes The Beach Boys as well. I am so excited, it's a shame that it's only playing in selected theaters instead of being given a general release.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paul J B on June 24, 2015, 12:02:54 PM
Saw it for a fifth time this morning, this time at a different theater for a change.  All of my viewings have been at AMC theaters.  This one I went to today had reclining leather seats, that was a nice change of pace.

I was looking on some movie site and as of Friday I think the movie will be down to 2 theaters in my city (from the peak of 6, this past weekend). 

Pretty sure I'll go back for at least one more viewing before it is completely gone.  This morning already marked the most times I've seen a film in a theater.  Previous personal record was THE THIN RED LINE in 1999, 4 times.

 :o

That's insane, in a good way. I saw it twice, one week apart, in the same theater but the second time they moved it to another screening room that was inferior. The sound was not the same quality and the screen was smaller to the point that the image was cropped. It was really unfortunate but who are you going to complain to.

The latest rotten tomatoes numbers seem to have leveled off at about 90% approval between critic and audience. Better than I would have assumed last year when we heard about it.


Title: Re: "Love & Mercy" - Board member reviews and discussion
Post by: bluesno1fann on June 25, 2015, 02:16:45 AM
Just saw the film. It really was amazing, lived up to all its hype. Very intense too, particularly the 'Til I Die sequence. Both Dano (who my girlfriend said looked so much like Brian. She loved the film BTW, and said she needs to get into The Beach Boys more) and Cusack were perfectly cast as Brian, and it gave me the chills when I saw the scene with Brian completely drugged up on the piano with Landy yelling at him - that fucking scumbag. Very disturbing.


Title: Re: \
Post by: MyDrKnowsItKeepsMeCalm on June 25, 2015, 06:26:03 AM
Saw the film last week and loved it.

In a funny coincidence, the same night I was in a NYC theater watching the film, Nate Ruess was playing live at a club right around the corner. "It felt like the stars had aligned..."



Title: Re: \
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on June 25, 2015, 06:59:11 AM
A couple of things that I'm not sure whether or not they've been pointed out already:

1. I'm choosing to read the scene where Dano cancels the session because of bad vibes as a filmic representation of Surf's Up going unfinished. It looks like a big string section that is being sent home. Is it possible that what we're being shown is the recording session for Surf's Up section 2 being cancelled? Maybe not, but that's how I'm choosing to understand it.

2. From a filmic point of view, anyone notice the nods to 2001: A Space Odyssey? The fade out intro with the sounds and, especially, the moments near the end of Cusack in bed with visions. Watching it with friends, we were sure that Cusack was going to reach out to a large monolith on the other side of the room at any moment. The only thing that could have topped it off would have been a cut away to Al Jardine as the Star Child.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on June 25, 2015, 07:05:40 AM
A couple of things that I'm not sure whether or not they've been pointed out already:

1. I'm choosing to read the scene where Dano cancels the session because of bad vibes as a filmic representation of Surf's Up going unfinished. It looks like a big string section that is being sent home. Is it possible that what we're being shown is the recording session for Surf's Up section 2 being cancelled? Maybe not, but that's how I'm choosing to understand it.

2. From a filmic point of view, anyone notice the nods to 2001: A Space Odyssey? The fade out intro with the sounds and, especially, the moments near the end of Cusack in bed with visions. Watching it with friends, we were sure that Cusack was going to reach out to a large monolith on the other side of the room at any moment. The only thing that could have topped it off would have been a cut away to Al Jardine as the Star Child.

1. Flippin great point and something I never even thought of. I kept wondering what session that could be, but couldn't think of any song on Smile that involved that many string players. Surf's Up part II would fit that bill perfectly.

2. I mentioned this before, but in that cancelled session scene, Dano walks to a wall and puts his hands up to touch it, and it mimics almost exactly how the one of the apes reacted to the monolith in 2001 (touching the monolith in pure wonder with arms raised high). The film seemed to make homages to several past films/directors. I can't wait to get the Blu-ray to really study it.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on June 25, 2015, 07:06:06 AM
The only thing that could have topped it off would have been a cut away to Al Jardine as the Star Child.
:lol Perfect!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on June 25, 2015, 07:15:18 AM
2. I mentioned this before, but in that cancelled session scene, Dano walks to a wall and puts his hands up to touch it, and it mimics almost exactly how the one of the apes reacted to the monolith in 2001 (touching the monolith in pure wonder with arms raised high). The film seemed to make homages to several past films/directors. I can't wait to get the Blu-ray to really study it.

I know exactly the part from 2001 you mean (it always startles me to the core) and I can absolutely see the connection that you are pointing out.

It's worth noting that I'm Not There, by the same screenwriter, had many nods to other films - most notably Fellini's early 60s work and also Jean Luc Godard.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Craig Boyd on June 27, 2015, 03:56:35 AM
Man having seen it for the second time in Edinburgh on Thursday it just gets better. I picked up on little nuances in the performances I didn't the first time, there are a few brief moments when the thought of Cusack playing a part left my mind and I could've sworn it was Brian up on that screen. Having seen it twice now I think Dano gives more of an 'immediate' performance but Cusack's is more subtle and will take a few viewings to fully sink in and be appreciated. 

If anyone here is able to get themselves to Edinburgh on Sunday the Odeon on Lothian Road is showing L&M at 6pm as it's the last day of the International Film Festival.


Title: Re: \
Post by: CoolWater on July 08, 2015, 09:31:21 AM
Was sitting around thinking about 'The Meeting' as portrayed in the movie. Through the years I've spent probably too much idle time imaging being a fly on the wall when the band confronted Brian, Van Dyke walking out, Smile dying. The movie leans heavily toward depicting Brian as incapcitated/unabale (Rather than unwilling) at that pivotal moment of being able to defend the project, his vision, his partnership with Van Dyke, etc.

This is  the scene in the movie I feel most conflicted over. Was Brian  so out of it at that point of 1967 as to be unable to defend his masterpiece? I always imagined it was more he had tried, over and over, and finally faced with pressure from the label, and criticism and hostility from Mike, he was unwilling to defend it or perhaps was brow beaten to the point he didn't want to fight anymore, and caved, lacking the strong support from his brothers he needed. Or did he simply close him self off and refuse to deal with it at all, at that life defining moment, perhaps as a result of the onset of his mental illness and illicit drug use?

I'm interested to hear others take on this pivoltol moment in BB history and the scene in the movie, and hear how it compares with other sources,  other opinions.  


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on July 08, 2015, 10:12:12 AM
There is an outtake where Brian says to Hal he can't make any more "weird music" because he's a father now.


Title: Re: Love & Mercy discussion
Post by: Lumen on July 08, 2015, 11:37:12 AM
http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/sight-sound-magazine/interviews/bill-pohlad-love-mercy?utm_content=buffer06a7e&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer (http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/sight-sound-magazine/interviews/bill-pohlad-love-mercy?utm_content=buffer06a7e&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer)

Someone in the other thread mentioned a very positive review in Sight & Sound, this isn't the film review but a web exclusive interview with Bill Pohlad.  Also some other on-set photos I haven't seen anywhere else. 

(http://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk/files/styles/full/public/image/love-and-mercy-2015-002-young-brian-hands-aloft-at-studio-mic-ORIGINAL.jpg?itok=6q9GxIKt)

(http://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk/files/styles/full/public/image/pohlad-bill-002-standing-beside-paul-dano-against-sportscar-and-so-cal-bungalow-in-love-and-mercy-2015-ORIGINAL.jpg?itok=8Rat55eu)


Title: Re:
Post by: 37!ws on July 08, 2015, 11:53:01 AM
2. I mentioned this before, but in that cancelled session scene, Dano walks to a wall and puts his hands up to touch it, and it mimics almost exactly how the one of the apes reacted to the monolith in 2001 (touching the monolith in pure wonder with arms raised high). The film seemed to make homages to several past films/directors. I can't wait to get the Blu-ray to really study it.

Dude...don't even go there! I know very well that once the Blu-ray/DVD comes out, I'll never be able to watch that thing from start to finish again because the Mrs. will be constantly pausing it, reversing it, etc., to examine stuff that we didn't catch the (so far) three times we saw it in the theater...


Title: Re:
Post by: rab2591 on July 08, 2015, 12:07:30 PM
2. I mentioned this before, but in that cancelled session scene, Dano walks to a wall and puts his hands up to touch it, and it mimics almost exactly how the one of the apes reacted to the monolith in 2001 (touching the monolith in pure wonder with arms raised high). The film seemed to make homages to several past films/directors. I can't wait to get the Blu-ray to really study it.

Dude...don't even go there! I know very well that once the Blu-ray/DVD comes out, I'll never be able to watch that thing from start to finish again because the Mrs. will be constantly pausing it, reversing it, etc., to examine stuff that we didn't catch the (so far) three times we saw it in the theater...

:lol

But we're crazed fans, it's in our blood to do this stuff! ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on July 08, 2015, 03:16:58 PM
Here's a strange name I remember seeing in the credits: Jonathan Paley (brother to Andy). Was he actually involved with the movie? IMDB says yes. A "Derek Taylor" is also credited as "production assistant".


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on July 08, 2015, 03:45:31 PM
In the EPK he's listed as a Stunt Performer.


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on July 08, 2015, 05:49:40 PM
Was sitting around thinking about 'The Meeting' as portrayed in the movie. Through the years I've spent probably too much idle time imaging being a fly on the wall when the band confronted Brian, Van Dyke walking out, Smile dying. The movie leans heavily toward depicting Brian as incapcitated/unabale (Rather than unwilling) at that pivotal moment of being able to defend the project, his vision, his partnership with Van Dyke, etc.

This is  the scene in the movie I feel most conflicted over. Was Brian  so out of it at that point of 1967 as to be unable to defend his masterpiece? I always imagined it was more he had tried, over and over, and finally faced with pressure from the label, and criticism and hostility from Mike, he was unwilling to defend it or perhaps was brow beaten to the point he didn't want to fight anymore, and caved, lacking the strong support from his brothers he needed. Or did he simply close him self off and refuse to deal with it at all, at that life defining moment, perhaps as a result of the onset of his mental illness and illicit drug use?

I'm interested to hear others take on this pivoltol moment in BB history and the scene in the movie, and hear how it compares with other sources,  other opinions.  

Consider that they had to compress events that played out over several months and with more people involved into one scene to both symbolize and summarize that chapter of the story. There was so much symbolism in that one scene, both in the visuals and the dialogue, this will be one to rewind on DVD for sure. But consider that the swimming pool (or pools) play a heavy symbolic role throughout the entire film. And note too how carefully staged and shot that scene was as to be able to draw a conclusion about the mindsets of the people surrounding Brian simply by showing who was and wasn't in that pool, and where they were positioned in and out of the pool. If you took a snapshot of it, those with a working knowledge of the Smile history would be able to see the symbolism right away, and those who don't know quite as much of the story could draw conclusions from the visual alone.

That's solid filmmaking, I'd say, to be able to sum up for the storyline what could be perhaps the biggest mystery of the band's history, and to have it tie into the storyline. They couldn't have done too much beyond that because it wasn't a film focused squarely on the ins and outs of Smile, and if anything the film focuses more on Pet Sounds' creation and inner workings than Smile. If they cut it to allow perhaps 15 more minutes of content, then maybe more detail and more specifics could have been described.

Just watch the pool scenes after the meeting scene, and specifically listen to the collage of music that accompanies them on the soundtrack. The visuals combined with the audio are as emotional as anything in the film, especially for Smile fans, but it took multiple viewings for me to catch all of the amazing audio. Not a single edit of music is wasted, and it combines to help tell the story of the post-Smile period conceptually almost as poignantly as reading the histories which have been written.

And listen close to what Marilyn is saying to Brian from the house as he sits on the edge of what looks like a pool which has been left neglected and untouched and looks anything but clean enough to jump in. It's the brilliance of showing life's joy from one perspective and utter heartbreak and loss from another, and it's a crushing moment. Watch and listen to that scene closely. It's again near the end of the 60's scenes in the storyline.


Title: Re: \
Post by: debonbon on July 09, 2015, 05:54:40 AM
Not sure if this has been discussed yet and it's a smallish thing but did anyone else find it odd that neither John nor Paul talked out one side of their mouths in their performances? Watch any Brian interview and you see it (this is nothing new to anyone on here obviously), it's not a subtle thing and I find it perplexing that neither actor did it, especially Cusack who is very much an actor's actor.

My only real disappointment with the film was how quickly Smile is dealt with and the non inclusion of the building fire after the Mrs o'Leary's Cow session. To me that track and the paranoia surrounding it is a pivotal point in Brian's breakdown.


Title: Re: \
Post by: puni puni on July 09, 2015, 06:01:46 AM
Again, the fire episode is touched upon in a (poorly written) outtake.

In the EPK he's listed as a Stunt Performer.
Yeah, but is it really that Jonathan Paley? Mark Linett and Darian Sahanaja's involvement are not too surprising, but Andy Paley's brother seems out of nowhere, and for a strange credit too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: KDS on July 09, 2015, 06:08:35 AM
Not sure if this has been discussed yet and it's a smallish thing but did anyone else find it odd that neither John nor Paul talked out one side of their mouths in their performances? Watch any Brian interview and you see it (this is nothing new to anyone on here obviously), it's not a subtle thing and I find it perplexing that neither actor did it, especially Cusack who is very much an actor's actor.

My only real disappointment with the film was how quickly Smile is dealt with and the non inclusion of the building fire after the Mrs o'Leary's Cow session. To me that track and the paranoia surrounding it is a pivotal point in Brian's breakdown.

I thought I noticed Cusack doing it a couple times. 

The symbolism of pools/water has been discussed.  I might be late on this observation, but when Melinda first meets Brian in the car dealership, Brian mentions how the color blue is soothing. 

Maybe that's why I just bought a blue car. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: debonbon on July 09, 2015, 06:19:30 AM
Not sure if this has been discussed yet and it's a smallish thing but did anyone else find it odd that neither John nor Paul talked out one side of their mouths in their performances? Watch any Brian interview and you see it (this is nothing new to anyone on here obviously), it's not a subtle thing and I find it perplexing that neither actor did it, especially Cusack who is very much an actor's actor.

My only real disappointment with the film was how quickly Smile is dealt with and the non inclusion of the building fire after the Mrs o'Leary's Cow session. To me that track and the paranoia surrounding it is a pivotal point in Brian's breakdown.

I thought I noticed Cusack doing it a couple times. 


He did the facial tics and pauses well but never really did the side of mouth thing, Paul didn't do it at all.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paul J B on July 09, 2015, 06:50:28 AM
And listen close to what Marilyn is saying to Brian from the house as he sits on the edge of what looks like a pool which has been left neglected and untouched and looks anything but clean enough to jump in. It's the brilliance of showing life's joy from one perspective and utter heartbreak and loss from another, and it's a crushing moment. Watch and listen to that scene closely. It's again near the end of the 60's scenes in the storyline.

This right here is why I spent too much time reading this board! Guitarfool you need to write your own book or something. I saw the film twice and know the scene well, knew Marilyn said the 'S' word but never made the connection to the album even though I got most of the symbolism.....unreal. There are so many subtle things like that going on in this film that you really do need to see it several times before it sinks in.

Another great scene that has not had much discussion is Melinda not saying one word when Landy is outside her office having a fit. The range of emotion from Banks through that scene is top notch acting. She did not say one word and you knew exactly what she was feeling. What Landy did he did to himself and he knew it, and that scene nailed it.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on July 09, 2015, 06:51:05 AM
Deleted.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on July 09, 2015, 06:58:08 AM
Deleted.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on July 10, 2015, 01:43:11 PM
My full written review, on Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R3UC4LQDH0Q13N/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B01127XNHQ (http://www.amazon.com/review/R3UC4LQDH0Q13N/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B01127XNHQ)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Misterlou on July 10, 2015, 06:20:39 PM
My full written review, on Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R3UC4LQDH0Q13N/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B01127XNHQ (http://www.amazon.com/review/R3UC4LQDH0Q13N/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B01127XNHQ)
Well written review of an amazing film. Good work!


Title: Re: Love & Mercy discussion
Post by: Misterlou on July 10, 2015, 06:21:31 PM
http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/sight-sound-magazine/interviews/bill-pohlad-love-mercy?utm_content=buffer06a7e&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer (http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/sight-sound-magazine/interviews/bill-pohlad-love-mercy?utm_content=buffer06a7e&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer)

Someone in the other thread mentioned a very positive review in Sight & Sound, this isn't the film review but a web exclusive interview with Bill Pohlad.  Also some other on-set photos I haven't seen anywhere else.  

(http://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk/files/styles/full/public/image/love-and-mercy-2015-002-young-brian-hands-aloft-at-studio-mic-ORIGINAL.jpg?itok=6q9GxIKt)

(http://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk/files/styles/full/public/image/pohlad-bill-002-standing-beside-paul-dano-against-sportscar-and-so-cal-bungalow-in-love-and-mercy-2015-ORIGINAL.jpg?itok=8Rat55eu)
I want that Mustang. Did Brian drive a Shelby Mustang back then? In the Smile box set book, there is a photo of a Corvette and a Mustang in his garage, but it definitely wasn't a Shelby, whereas the Mustang in this photo has Shelby striping on the side (I'm a Mustang guy).


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on July 10, 2015, 10:42:46 PM
Snapped this in downtown Olympia, WA the other day:

(http://i59.tinypic.com/rvhxzo.jpg)


Title: Re: \
Post by: undercover-m on July 10, 2015, 11:53:43 PM
That's a beautiful theatre! Did you see the movie there, too?


Title: Re: Love & Mercy discussion
Post by: Lumen on July 11, 2015, 05:02:27 AM
I want that Mustang. Did Brian drive a Shelby Mustang back then? In the Smile box set book, there is a photo of a Corvette and a Mustang in his garage, but it definitely wasn't a Shelby, whereas the Mustang in this photo has Shelby striping on the side (I'm a Mustang guy).

It sure is a beautiful car.  I too am kind of a Mustang guy.  I don't recall this exterior shot in the movie.  Nor do I recall Paul Dano in that exact wardrobe.  Maybe another deleted scene or flashback?



Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on July 11, 2015, 05:41:35 AM
A "Derek Taylor" is also credited as "production assistant".

Doubt it's the Derek Taylor: he died nearly 18 years ago.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on July 11, 2015, 08:51:56 AM
That's a beautiful theatre! Did you see the movie there, too?

No! I saw it in Portland on release day ... Been meaning to see it again, but will probably wait for the DVD at this point.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Komera on July 11, 2015, 03:03:05 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed yet and it's a smallish thing but did anyone else find it odd that neither John nor Paul talked out one side of their mouths in their performances? Watch any Brian interview and you see it (this is nothing new to anyone on here obviously), it's not a subtle thing and I find it perplexing that neither actor did it, especially Cusack who is very much an actor's actor.

My only real disappointment with the film was how quickly Smile is dealt with and the non inclusion of the building fire after the Mrs o'Leary's Cow session. To me that track and the paranoia surrounding it is a pivotal point in Brian's breakdown.

If you aren't accustomed to talking to the side, faking it looks really weird.
(Points to An American Family as evidence #1)
(Points to pre-release photos of John and Elizabeth as evidence #2)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on July 12, 2015, 08:37:31 PM
Well, I finally saw Love & Mercy tonight, I think everything that needs to be said about it has already been said by posters on the board.

I was absolutely speechless by the credits. Paul Dano was outstanding, John Cusack was so much better than I ever expected.

Elizabeth Banks, Paul Giamitti, everyone was incredible.

I will say I found one scene in particular really inspired, when Brian was putting the headphones on and he was hearing the voices, really incredible.

Oh and when he was floating in the pool during the smile era.

Every possible expectation blown away. Massive kudos to all involved with Love & Mercy.


Title: Re: \
Post by: thebaron on November 10, 2015, 12:05:19 AM
can anyone explain the bit about the "2 keys"? is it true? if not, how can this film, which labors so hard for accuracy, make up an ahistorical sequence like this of such specificity? what song was it again? can we determine if if fact BW wrote parts in 2 keys for some purpose?

It's in the scene for the "Wouldn't It Be Nice" backing track.  Lyle Ritz is supposed to play in one key on the double bass and Carol is to play another on her bass.  I'm not even remotely musical enough to know if two keys are being played on the real track.  I do know that the expository dialogue in the scene is interesting and gets the point across that Brian heard in his head what he wanted and the musicians followed.


Yeah... I have a degree in music composition and all I can figure is they are referencing Brian's odd bass placements (which are rarely rooted, as is typical). It's a common thing in jazz and something no jazz musician would have found perplexing if that is what it is referring to.  I can sort of see why Carol Kaye's nose would have wrinkled a bit at that. :lol

I THINK I can explain this.  The arpeggio guitar part in the middle section of WIBN (which repeats the intro of the song) is played in A.  But the bass part is in D.  If you combine the two, i.e. of you play an A chord with a D in the bass, you get (I think) a Dmaj9 chord.  So the middle bit is essentialy in D, but PLAYED IN ISOLATION, the guitar arpeggio sounds like it's in A.  I could probably explain it better with a guitar - I'll put something on YouTube if I get a chance!

I'm sure it wouldn't have taken Carol Kaye long to understand what Brian was getting at, once she'd heard the 'bigger picture'.





Absolutely my least favorite moment in the whole film, because the dialog is so clunky, and it's so didactically hitting you on the head with "Brian is blowing these studio musician's minds" thing.  And as you say above, Carol would not have had any problem seeing what was going on.

The moment is referencing a fairly obscure comment by Lyle Ritz from the PS box set, where he's talking about WIBN, and how his bass part seemed to be written in a different key from the rest of the band during the bridge.

It's not.



One of the best profile pics in the history of the message boards, bar none!  :)

I've also transcribed that bass and guitar part, and it does do something cool as James outlined. You get the sound of a Dmajor7th starting that bridge because the bass note is a strong D root, yet the intro sounds more like the A to Bmin7 arpeggio that is actually being played on the guitar. It's a neat trick of playing with the perception of hearing the chord as something different based on the root note played underneath. Hendrix did a similar thing later with All Along The Watchtower where what had been a straightforward A major chord in the song suddenly sounds like an F#minor7 because he played that F# root in the bass under the guitar's A chord. Simple but a very, very cool effect.

If you take the lyrics into account during this section (starts around 1:05), it could be seen as a sort of musical daydream. Like you're thinking about a special someone, and you're not quite paying fully attention to the outside world. A little off, but everything is still magically together. The background vocals in this part kinda sound like a thousand thoughts going on in your head at once, and I wonder if it was this middle section is what Brian obsessed over in the studio with the rest of the band vocally to get just right.

I don't know if that was the intended effect when it was written, but it struck me today as I was listening in the car.


Title: Re: \
Post by: ontor pertawst on November 11, 2015, 01:03:37 AM
Nice piece in Indiewire:

http://www.indiewire.com/article/how-the-love-mercy-team-is-using-their-awards-season-platform-for-good-20151110


Title: Re: \
Post by: Komera on November 12, 2015, 07:12:31 AM
I should mention that I did finally get to see Love and Mercy.  I had absolutey no problems with both Dano and Cusack's performance... except for Dano's singing.  He's not remotely the singer that Brian is.

My biggest problem with the movie was the Sloop John B recreation.  I know a lot of people say it was spot on, but to me it felt mechanical.  "Look left now.  Look right now.  Look happy now.  Take a swig from the bottle now.  I said NOW!"  And Davern does not look enough like Carl for the switch between Brian and Carl joke to work.

I haven't seen it again yet, though.  I'm one of those people who need ample time to process emotions, so when I watch movies, it tends to be in block of about 5 minutes.  And the movie was definitely an emotional roller coaster ride.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Emily on November 12, 2015, 07:24:35 AM
I LOVED this movie... saw it several times in the theater and now a few more at home.
Sloop John B recreation seemed kind of pointless. It would've been better, I think, to make that a fun DVD extra and leave in something else that was cut out.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Emily on November 12, 2015, 07:26:09 AM
Why is it that a thread sometimes loses its title?
// edit: the title's back. Forget it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lumen on November 12, 2015, 08:11:18 AM
Couple of cool interviews, one with Elizabeth Banks and another with Paul Dano.

Elizabeth Banks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_fuZ4_RqWk

Paul Dano:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5rvY2ZPROo

Also, another really cool video with both actors. An interview with the SAG-AFTRA Foundation.

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


Title: Re: \
Post by: CenturyDeprived on November 12, 2015, 08:11:28 AM
Why is it that a thread sometimes loses its title?
// edit: the title's back. Forget it.

It's some sort of glitch in the programming, and it happens when the OP who starts the thread has a quotation mark somewhere in the title of the thread. The OP is the only one who can fix the issue.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Emily on November 12, 2015, 08:22:43 AM
Why is it that a thread sometimes loses its title?
// edit: the title's back. Forget it.

It's some sort of glitch in the programming, and it happens when the OP who starts the thread has a quotation mark somewhere in the title of the thread. The OP is the only one who can fix the issue.
merci!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paul J B on November 12, 2015, 10:52:54 AM
Concerning the Sloop John B sequence.

Yes it was spot on. Freakishly spot on. That fact that it was so spot on is a testament to the detail that went into this film. It was not a typical attempt by a film crew to mimic an old piece of film. Just like the whole opening montage....its a true recreation.

Also, the inclusion, if you think it through made a lot of sense. The film is dark. It's a fun moment between the group when there was a lot of friction. It tells the viewer that even though Mike and Brian did not see eye to eye, there were good times.




Title: Re: \
Post by: Komera on November 12, 2015, 04:45:27 PM
Concerning the Sloop John B sequence.

Yes it was spot on. Freakishly spot on. That fact that it was so spot on is a testament to the detail that went into this film. It was not a typical attempt by a film crew to mimic an old piece of film. Just like the whole opening montage....its a true recreation.

Also, the inclusion, if you think it through made a lot of sense. The film is dark. It's a fun moment between the group when there was a lot of friction. It tells the viewer that even though Mike and Brian did not see eye to eye, there were good times.




To me it felt too stiff.  Dano looks this way and that way only because Brian looked this way and that way.  Brian looked this way and that way because he wanted to.  Dano was recreating a nervous Brian, and for the rest of the movie it's fantastic and I'm lost in the feel... it just doesn't work in the recreation since Brian was relaxed and jovial that day.  Same goes for just about everyone else in the recreation:  They're going through the motions, but they're doing it stiffly, and just because someone else did it fifty years ago.  It's like watching an elementary school play.  They're hitting their marks when they're supposed to just because they're supposed to, and not able to act off of each other.


Title: Re:
Post by: 37!ws on November 12, 2015, 05:53:34 PM
Concerning the Sloop John B sequence.

Yes it was spot on. Freakishly spot on. That fact that it was so spot on is a testament to the detail that went into this film. It was not a typical attempt by a film crew to mimic an old piece of film. Just like the whole opening montage....its a true recreation.

....except that they included Dennis.


Title: Re: \
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on October 06, 2016, 04:56:46 AM
OK, re-watched this. I'll be short, can't do reviews as easily as many of you. 1stly, would like to say the jump from 60s to 80s, then back was a little inconvenient for eyes but I got used to it halfway. As others, I liked the Dano scenes the best. Crafty shots of the Pet Sounds sessions, some quick showcase of the early BBs, the "California Girls" colored video etc. It was good to see familiar faces, f.ex. Gary Griffin, Mark Linett. It helped that Paul looked a bit like Brian. The 80s were boring. John Cusack & Elizabeth Banks don't look as their respective roles. She isn't good actress imo. Of course, I'm glad that Melinda got her due, she deserved. John is rather good but he was miscast. Some of you don't care if the actor/-ess looks like the character they play - I do. Same issue with the rest of the Boys. Though "Carl" & "Mike" did the best to copy mannerisms. "Landy" & "Murry" were good, esp. Murry. Too bad he featured for short screen time. The score was OK.
Regarding the "Sloop John B" clip, it's clear as a day that it's not identical or as Paul J B said, "freakishly spot on". As 37!ws said, there is Dennis. The BBs vid features Brian, Carl, Al, Bruce, Mike. Where is Al piggybacking Carl? etc. Brian's facial expression was suspicious when he looked around & Dano did it cheerful. Still good it was included in the script as it's historic event for the band. Bottom line: 60s - 5; 80s - 2 (for Landy, "L&M" at the piano, Melinda teaming with Gloria against Landy).


Title: Re: \
Post by: GoofyJeff on October 06, 2016, 05:25:18 AM
Since this thread got bumped back up, now is as good a time as any to invite you to watch my review of Love and Mercy over on my YouTube channel. Stick around and watch my other reviews if you're so inclined too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnvFA1ERCvs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnvFA1ERCvs)

It is still one of my favorite movies.


Title: Re: \
Post by: leetwall97 on October 06, 2016, 05:55:38 AM
I enjoyed it when I first saw. Looking back on it now, I do agree that it focusses a bit too much on the negative aspects in Brian's life. It breezes over his exciting musical career and heads straight for the Smile collapse and his recluse period in the 70s, which I don't find to be entertaining. We love the guy for his music, not just because he came over depression. I would much rather enjoy seeing him an Van work on the lost symphony.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Scaroline No on October 06, 2016, 06:43:01 AM
LOVE the film. Have seen it several times now, and I don't ever get tired of it. I had no problems with any of the casting, and I thought everyone did a great job in their roles. I was already a Paul Dano fan when I saw it - it's actually the reason I saw the film to begin with. I didn't know much about Brian and the Beach Boys going in - and the film opened up that world to me, and it's why I'm here now. I think despite some of the historical inaccuracies, it did a brilliant job of telling the story to people who didn't already know.

Now that I've immersed myself into the BW/BB realm, my most recent viewing of the film gave me the opportunity to look at it a little more critically, as seems to be happening with some of you as well. And I really still have no complaints. I think my favourite aspect of it is the "fly on the wall" video scenes from inside the studio in the 60's. The way Dennis repeatedly "breaks the fourth wall" to look directly into the camera, acknowledging the presence of an outside viewer, the way he does in the GV studio footage. It's genius. All of the scenes from inside the studio are shot as if it's the actual person who shot the GV studio footage - peaking out from behind corners, etc. Really, really clever.

Regarding the Sloop John B. recreation... I enjoyed it, even if it wasn't replicated to 100% accuracy. It's a fun comparison. But if I do have a tiny complaint after all, it's that we didn't learn anything new from that scene. We can go on youtube and see the real thing any time we want. What I think would have been REALLY cool would be to recreate the Pet Sounds photo shoot at the zoo. Hear the conversations that might have happened while the photos were being taken with the animals.

The last time I watched it I caught a few things during the montage near the end, where Dennis is now missing from scenes where he was present earlier in the film, and the moment where 60's Brian and 80's Brian are holding hands, walking on the beach, away from the camera. There is so much in that extremely brief moment, easily missed. Making peace with the past, and acknowledging that there will be a future. The joining of two parts of a person into a whole. I realized I was holding my breath for a good while after that.

Oh, and the deleted scenes... so good. I see why they were cut, but really worth watching.

Damn, now I gotta watch it again, lol.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on October 06, 2016, 11:11:06 AM
I think I've watched it about five times now, and I still cry through much of it, especially the burger scene.  sh*t, I tear up every time I think of that part,  including right now


Title: Re: \
Post by: hideyotsuburaya on October 06, 2016, 11:29:23 AM
the deleted scenes are good, if dispensable - brian deliberately bumping into phil spector on the street, casual introduction of tony asher, etc


Title: Re: \
Post by: Scaroline No on October 06, 2016, 12:34:31 PM
the deleted scenes are good, if dispensable - brian deliberately bumping into phil spector on the street, casual introduction of tony asher, etc

What was cool about the deleted Phil Spector scene, had it made the final film cut, is that it sets up the fact that Brian has a history -- at least within the film's universe -- of deliberately bumping into people, which makes the scene with him stepping out in front of Melinda's car a "character" thing rather than just a random impulse. Having said that, stepping out in front of the car works as an impulse too, since the impulsive quality was established early on in the pool scene where he falls in backwards to swim to Marliyn. Interesting parallel there.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hideyotsuburaya on October 06, 2016, 12:43:51 PM
I'd love to agree with you wholey, it certainly makes sense from a thematic standpoint (has Brian ever owned up to his deliberately walking into somebody as if by accident?), but from a practical standpoint there's a world of unfortunate difference between 'walking into' any person you see strolling down a sidewalk, and walking into a moving car out on the street


Title: Re: \
Post by: Scaroline No on October 06, 2016, 12:58:52 PM
I'd love to agree with you wholey, it certainly makes sense from a thematic standpoint (has Brian ever owned up to his deliberately walking into somebody as if by accident?), but from a practical standpoint there's a world of unfortunate difference between 'walking into' any person you see strolling down a sidewalk, and walking into a moving car out on the street

In real life, yes, I totally agree with you. But for the purpose of storytelling in the film universe, which we know is not 100% accurate to real life, and as a film requires the use of dramatic devices to tell a story, I think they can be related. It's like bumping into Phil sets the precedent. Setting aside the walking out in front of the car bit -- in the movie, he went to that intersection at that time of day because he knew she'd drive by there. Pohlad could have had Brian yell and wave at her from the corner, like the way he yelled out her name to find her on their first date , but that might have been too comical for that moment in the movie. Walking out in front of the car is more dramatic, and does speak to the impulsive quality.

Deliberate AND impulsive is a contradiction, and yet that scene does seem to capture that duality.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hideyotsuburaya on October 06, 2016, 01:21:17 PM
"walking out in front of the car is more dramatic" - i'll say it is (try it yourself sometime), and conveys a sense of danger like it or don't


Title: Re: \
Post by: Scaroline No on October 06, 2016, 01:24:47 PM
"walking out in front of the car is more dramatic" - i'll say it is (try it yourself sometime), and conveys a sense of danger like it or don't

Oh I totally agree with you. Definitely an "oof" to the stomach, every time I watch it. I don't think I'll be trying that myself anytime soon.


Title: Re: \
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on October 06, 2016, 04:54:54 PM
Pohlad could have had Brian yell and wave at her from the corner, like the way he yelled out her name to find her on their first date , but that might have been too comical for that moment in the movie. Walking out in front of the car is more dramatic, and does speak to the impulsive quality.
Brian's friend Ray Lawlor who used to post here said sth. to effect that everything in the film is real except Melinda's dress. The director discussed the script with her. Brian said that he did indeed walk out in front of Melinda's car. So it's not "dramatic" move. But you're right that some of the movie bits weren't accurate, f.ex. chronology of events such as Murry's selling of SOT etc.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Scaroline No on October 06, 2016, 05:15:46 PM
Pohlad could have had Brian yell and wave at her from the corner, like the way he yelled out her name to find her on their first date , but that might have been too comical for that moment in the movie. Walking out in front of the car is more dramatic, and does speak to the impulsive quality.
Brian's friend Ray Lawlor who used to post here said sth. to effect that everything in the film is real except Melinda's dress. The director discussed the script with her. Brian said that he did indeed walk out in front of Melinda's car.

...and there's that "oof". Thanks for clarifying.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Bicyclerider on October 06, 2016, 06:40:57 PM
I've seen the movie twice, and despite the fact I'm a Brianista to the max, I did not like it.  Paul Dano looks the part but to me his acting was bad bad bad, the studio scenes and after when Hal is telling him how great he is - he acts so tentative, like he's uncertain about what he's doing.  We know how confident and in control Brian was in the studio during Pet Sounds, but Dano doesn't play him like that at all, he's a complete wimp, unsure of himself.  He looks this way and that, trying to look distracted or withdrawn or a little "crazy" and you can see he's "acting" it doesn't ring true it's not believable.

The jumping back and forth between the PS/Smile and Lamdy eras was a horrible idea, it only confused things and added nothing to the story - just tell it in order ferchrissake.  I thought Cusak actually did a better job than Dano, the opposite of the accepted wisdom, and Banks did a great job as well, plus Giamotti was brilliant as Landy.  This was the better half of the movie but unfortunately it was all cut up and juxtaposed with the lame cliched scenes from PS and Smile.  I know this film was made with the best intentions from all involved but for me it was obvious and cliched and poorly acted and poorly constructed and written.  I really wanted to love it but didn't.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on October 06, 2016, 06:44:33 PM
I've seen the movie twice, and despite the fact I'm a Brianista to the max, I did not like it.  Paul Dano looks the part but to me his acting was bad bad bad, the studio scenes and after when Hal is telling him how great he is - he acts so tentative, like he's uncertain about what he's doing.  We know how confident and in control Brian was in the studio during Pet Sounds, but Dano doesn't play him like that at all, he's a complete wimp, unsure of himself.  He looks this way and that, trying to look distracted or withdrawn or a little "crazy" and you can see he's "acting" it doesn't ring true it's not believable.

The jumping back and forth between the PS/Smile and Lamdy eras was a horrible idea, it only confused things and added nothing to the story - just tell it in order ferchrissake.  I thought Cusak actually did a better job than Dano, the opposite of the accepted wisdom, and Banks did a great job as well, plus Giamotti was brilliant as Landy.  This was the better half of the movie but unfortunately it was all cut up and juxtaposed with the lame cliched scenes from PS and Smile.  I know this film was made with the best intentions from all involved but for me it was obvious and cliched and poorly acted and poorly constructed and written.  I really wanted to love it but didn't.

I disagree about not liking it (hell, I love it) but I do agree that I prefer Cusack's performance...he NAILED it...from the walk, to little tics that he did, everything .


Title: Re: \
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on October 06, 2016, 07:02:29 PM
That's the fun of reading reviews - different perception by different people.