The Smiley Smile Message Board

Smiley Smile Stuff => General On Topic Discussions => Topic started by: Cristian Kiper on July 23, 2018, 01:50:59 PM



Title: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Cristian Kiper on July 23, 2018, 01:50:59 PM
https://www.stereogum.com/2006749/kokomo-beach-boys-story/franchises/sounding-board/

“Kokomo” Is 30: The Strange Backstory To The Beach Boys’ Last Cultural Gasp

by Brad Shoup


We’ll start with the most obvious thing: there is no Kokomo. Not off the Florida Keys, anyway. Sure, a couple places staked claims, but only after the occurence of the least obvious thing: a has-been pop act, minus their lead singer and creative engine, scoring a #1 hit off the soundtrack to a forgettable film about bartending. “Kokomo” — released 30 years ago this month — was the Beach Boys’ first original Top 20 single in 20 years, and their first chart-topper in 22.


With or without their erstwhile captain Brian Wilson, the Beach Boys never came close to replicating their early success, but no matter: Every time a quizmaster asks what the seven locations are in the song’s chorus, every Gen-X hand in the bar lunges for the pen. “Kokomo” was a peculiar last cultural gasp for everyone involved: not just the performers, but also their collaborators. Together, they formed a coastal coterie, an assemblage of connections both fortuitous and tragic.

The state of the Beach Boys in 1988 was, in a word, shitty. Their last record, 1985’s digitally crispy The Beach Boys, performed middlingly despite contributions from Culture Club, Ringo Starr, and Stevie Wonder. A couple clues to their malaise appear within the record. On the back, there’s a dedication “to the memory of our beloved brother, cousin and friend”; Dennis Wilson, the band’s drummer and only true surfer, had drowned in the water off Marina Del Rey in December of 1983. And on the label, there are three songwriting credits for E. E. Landy.

That would be Dr. Eugene Landy, Brian’s personal therapist, business manager, and professional ghoul. At one point, Wilson’s family had to sell some of his publishing rights in order to afford Landy’s $430,000-a-year fee. Landy’s role as confidant, coupled with Brian’s reluctance to tour, kept him largely away from his bandmates, though they had the right to perform and record as the Beach Boys. And so, when director Roger Donaldson sought the band to pad out the soundtrack to his film Cocktail, they turned the assignment over to their producer, Terry Melcher.


Though Melcher had only been been producing the group for a few years, his relationship with the band was a couple decades old at that point. In the mid-’60s, he and future Beach Boy Bruce Johnston made surf-pop as Bruce & Terry, and then as the Rip Chords. Melcher moved behind the boards, becoming a major architect of the West Coast folk-rock sound. At one of his house parties, he re-introduced Brian Wilson to Van Dyke Parks, who tried to help Wilson through the aborted Smile sessions. Parks continued to provide lyrical and instrumental daubs to Beach Boys tracks in the years afterward. In a twisted return of favor, Dennis introduced Melcher to a guy he first met trashing his house: Charlie Manson.

The aspiring megalomaniac also aspired to be a songwriter, and both Dennis and Melcher were impressed with his embryonic sketches. But Manson’s psychotic behavior scotched his chance at a record deal; incensed, he dispatched some of his followers to Melcher’s old house, where they murdered five people, including the actress Sharon Tate. The Manson Family’s spree killings blew a hole in the psyche of America’s counterculture, and sent Melcher into something of a tailspin. He took on fewer projects, eventually signing on to produce a couple television shows for his mother, the actress and singer Doris Day. By the mid-’80s, he was back in the Beach Boys’ orbit. When he was tabbed to find a song for Cocktail, he reached out to an old friend: John Phillips of the Mamas And The Papas, whose hit “California Dreamin'” the Beach Boys had recently covered.

Phillips had spent the decade juggling different Mamas And Papas lineups. He and Denny Doherty were the only returning members; Cass Elliot died in 1974, and Michelle Phillips divorced John in 1970. Their roles were filled by former Spanky & Our Gang leader Elaine McFarlane and Phillips’ daughter Mackenzie, respectively. The group toured and did the requisite casino residencies, but legit success was hard to come by. (The entire time, according to Mackenzie Phillips, she and her father were involved in what was termed an “incestuous relationship.” She made the accusation in her 2009 memoir, as well as on The Oprah Winfrey Show. Immediately afterward, various relatives and family friends issued statements attesting to their belief or disbelief in her account.) By 1986, John was demoing tracks with Scott McKenzie, best known for his Phillips-written 1967 smash “San Francisco (Be Sure To Wear Flowers In Your Hair).” One of those tracks was “Kokomo.”

You can hear Phillips’ version on the 2010 collection Many Mamas, Many Papas. (The set also contains the racist ditty “Chinaman,” as well as a song called, simply, “Yachts.”) His “Kokomo” is stately and wistful. Other than Florida, Kokomo is the only place mentioned, making the composition a sort of paean to a lost paradise of the mind. It’s been suggested that he was thinking of Mustique, an island in the Grenadines purchased in the ‘50s by Phillips’ friend, the British aristocrat Colin Tennant, 3rd Baron Glenconner. Tennant nearly went broke maintaining the damn thing, eventually transferring ownership to the islands’ wealthy homeowners (a group which has, at one time or another, included Bryan Adams, David Bowie, and Mick Jagger). Regardless of origin, the “Kokomo” demo was missing a chorus. And that’s where Mike Love enters.


If Brian Wilson was like Paul McCartney, pushing his bandmates to precisely render his sonic fancies, Mike Love was like … well, Paul McCartney, desperately trying to keep all the stakeholders happy and productive. He’s rarely given his due as a songwriter: He sued Brian in 1992 more or less for this reason, eventually winning co-writing credit for 35 Beach Boys tunes. The occasional “Good Vibrations” aside (a lyric written with McKenzie’s “San Francisco” in mind), his gift is punch-ups: tweaking phrases and adding earworms. He scrapped Phillips’ past tense. It sounded like regret, which is not Love’s bag. All he’s ever wanted to do is provide escape. So when it came time to write the chorus, Love sang Melcher a map.

The result was ruthlessly catchy: a combination of dreaminess and insistence, like a tank disguised as a cloud. The “Aruba, Jamaica” bit was bumped to the beginning for maximum effect; Love managed to work in a reference to cocktails, and possibly (in the line “that Montserrat mystique”) a reference to Baron Tennant’s island folly. Van Dyke Parks parachuted in to arrange the steel pans and play accordion, despite (allegedly) being stiffed by Love on plane fare. Studio saxophonist Joel Peskin (whose professional relationship with the Boys stretched back to 1979’s L.A.) contributed the oddly poignant solo. One name was notably absent: Brian was unable to attend the sessions, possibly due to his doctor’s interference. When he first heard the song on the radio, he didn’t even recognize it as a Beach Boys tune. His solo record had just dropped — deliciously, the opening lines are “I was sittin’ in a crummy movie/With my hands on my chin.”


Released 7/18/88 in advance of Cocktail — with Little Richard’s soundtrack closer “Tutti Frutti” as the B-side — “Kokomo” didn’t get any traction. It was only after moviegoers heard the tune scoring Tom Cruise’s move from New York to Jamaica that it caught on. Despite critical indifference (the movie is Cruise’s worst film on Rotten Tomatoes) both Cocktail and “Kokomo” became #1 hits: the former for two weeks, the latter for one. In November, “Kokomo” supplanted Phil Collins’ “Groovy Kind Of Love” at the summit. (Collins, however, got the last laugh when “Two Hearts” beat “Kokomo” for Best Original Song at the 46th annual Golden Globes.)

A couple weeks after “Kokomo” hit #1, the Beach Boys (with Brian) guest-starred in an episode of the sitcom Full House. The climax of “Beach Boys Bingo” features the Tanner clan rockin’ out to a stadium performance of “Kokomo,” then climbing onstage to do “Barbara Ann.” The whole thing was old hat for Full House star John Stamos, who had been the Beach Boys’ ancillary percussionist for a few years by then. (He played steel drums in the “Kokomo” video, but not on the record.) If you watch the scene carefully, you’ll see Brian sporting a “Californians For Dukakis” shirt; Mike, infamously, is a Trump supporter and a contributor to Tipper Gore’s pro-censorship Parent’s Music Resource Center.



Having scored an improbable hit, the Beach Boys pivoted to movie soundtracks for a time. They landed “Still Cruisin'” in Lethal Weapon 2 and the Melcher-written title track for Problem Child; neither went anywhere, and the band returned to the state-fair circuit. “Kokomo” was, it turns out, irreplicable. Its lightweight arrangement and hermetic vibe have proven resistant to imitators: You won’t find many notable covers beyond, say, the Muppets. Its real legacy was in lending its name to a host of bars and resorts across the Caribbean Sea. The Orlando Sentinel found a few in a December ’88 investigation, with Key Largo’s Chamber of Commerce noting that “[w]e are flooded with calls, absolutely flooded. We had six calls on the answering machine this morning and several calls during the day.” Sandals renamed their Montego Bay resort “Kokomo Island” for a while, which must have been a nice two-for-one for the song’s fans.

In time, though, “Kokomo” fever faded, and the men responsible for it are starting to pass on. Carl Wilson died in 1998, John Phillips in 2001, Terry Melcher in 2004, Scott McKenzie in 2012. Mike Love, who has long enjoyed the exclusive rights to tour under the Beach Boys name, is the sole living writer. Last fall, he released a double album, with the second half devoted to re-recordings of Beach Boys classics. “Kokomo” is nowhere to be found. Presumably, he decided not to mess with perfection.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 23, 2018, 11:00:23 PM
"They returned to the state fair circuit"...they never left it! And I was glad they were on it, cause I got to see the guys at our state fair every year from 1984-88; and again in 91.
I have very fond memories of this time, and it was nice that my favorite band was on everybody's radios, with a current #1 song.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on July 24, 2018, 07:06:42 AM
I'm curious if the "Cocktail" director actively sought out the BBs, or if instead it was a case of Terry Melcher brokering another movie soundtrack deal as he had already done with "Happy Endings" and would go on to do with "Make It Big", "Still Cruisin'", "Problem Child", etc.

There was a discussion recently in another thread that touched on Melcher's (on the surface) peculiar ongoing association with the band in the mid 80s through to the early 90s, and it was Howie Edelson that pointed out that one of the main draws was that Melcher was regularly getting BB songs into films (which is a relatively lucrative deal even when the movies underperform at the box office).

It's interesting to read the McParland book on Gary Usher and how, circa 1986, Usher and Melcher were both jockeying to produce the "next" Beach Boys album. Ultimately, one didn't materialize in that time frame. Instead, it was the hodge podge "Still Cruisin" that made it out on the back of the success of "Kokomo" (with Melcher involved in many of the tracks) several years later, and then of course the essentially "Mike and Terry" album "Summer in Paradise" in 1992.

Interestingly, by the time of "SIP", for whatever reason BB songs weren't making into movies anymore (the best they did was "Summer of Love" being in a "Baywatch" episode three years after its initial release, and I'm not even sure that had anything to do with Melcher).


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: CenturyDeprived on July 24, 2018, 12:56:27 PM
Has anyone ever sought out an interview with Cocktail director Roger Donaldson?  I bet he'd have some bits of trivia we don't know about yet.

I quite like Kokomo, cheesy as it is. Mike makes people like it less by bragging about it too much.
That said, it's one of his best lead vocals in terms of delivery and a solid vocal performance without a hint of over-nasality.

Some people may not like some (or all) of the lyrics, but I'd be surprised if anyone would say that his vocal delivery (not talking about lyrics) was anything less than really good.

And of course Carl elevates the song exponentially.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 24, 2018, 06:30:29 PM
I'm curious if the "Cocktail" director actively sought out the BBs, or if instead it was a case of Terry Melcher brokering another movie soundtrack deal as he had already done with "Happy Endings" and would go on to do with "Make It Big", "Still Cruisin'", "Problem Child", etc.

There was a discussion recently in another thread that touched on Melcher's (on the surface) peculiar ongoing association with the band in the mid 80s through to the early 90s, and it was Howie Edelson that pointed out that one of the main draws was that Melcher was regularly getting BB songs into films (which is a relatively lucrative deal even when the movies underperform at the box office).

It's interesting to read the McParland book on Gary Usher and how, circa 1986, Usher and Melcher were both jockeying to produce the "next" Beach Boys album. Ultimately, one didn't materialize in that time frame. Instead, it was the hodge podge "Still Cruisin" that made it out on the back of the success of "Kokomo" (with Melcher involved in many of the tracks) several years later, and then of course the essentially "Mike and Terry" album "Summer in Paradise" in 1992.

Interestingly, by the time of "SIP", for whatever reason BB songs weren't making into movies anymore (the best they did was "Summer of Love" being in a "Baywatch" episode three years after its initial release, and I'm not even sure that had anything to do with Melcher).
I lived through that time, and my memory is that the Boys didn't want to put out an album at the same time as Brian's solo album, didn't want to detract from it. So it's funny that they did just one song in the studio that year, and it ends up completely overshadowing Brian's album. A lot of us were psyched for Brian's album, and with all the stops being pulled out for promotion, expected it to be a big comeback commercially. Instead, we got an album that the Brian fans loved, but nobody else heard.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: guitarfool2002 on July 24, 2018, 07:10:02 PM
I'm curious if the "Cocktail" director actively sought out the BBs, or if instead it was a case of Terry Melcher brokering another movie soundtrack deal as he had already done with "Happy Endings" and would go on to do with "Make It Big", "Still Cruisin'", "Problem Child", etc.

There was a discussion recently in another thread that touched on Melcher's (on the surface) peculiar ongoing association with the band in the mid 80s through to the early 90s, and it was Howie Edelson that pointed out that one of the main draws was that Melcher was regularly getting BB songs into films (which is a relatively lucrative deal even when the movies underperform at the box office).

It's interesting to read the McParland book on Gary Usher and how, circa 1986, Usher and Melcher were both jockeying to produce the "next" Beach Boys album. Ultimately, one didn't materialize in that time frame. Instead, it was the hodge podge "Still Cruisin" that made it out on the back of the success of "Kokomo" (with Melcher involved in many of the tracks) several years later, and then of course the essentially "Mike and Terry" album "Summer in Paradise" in 1992.

Interestingly, by the time of "SIP", for whatever reason BB songs weren't making into movies anymore (the best they did was "Summer of Love" being in a "Baywatch" episode three years after its initial release, and I'm not even sure that had anything to do with Melcher).
I lived through that time, and my memory is that the Boys didn't want to put out an album at the same time as Brian's solo album, didn't want to detract from it. So it's funny that they did just one song in the studio that year, and it ends up completely overshadowing Brian's album. A lot of us were psyched for Brian's album, and with all the stops being pulled out for promotion, expected it to be a big comeback commercially. Instead, we got an album that the Brian fans loved, but nobody else heard.


Just a correction, that is not entirely true. The Beach Boys did not have a record deal at the time "Kokomo" came out, they had no label on which to release an album if they did want to put an album out. Kokomo was released solely as a part of the Cocktail soundtrack on the Elektra label, which handled "Cocktail". Kokomo in the US came out as a single a few days after Brian's solo album was released, July 1988. The movie and soundtrack drove the release, in other words without Cocktail and Elektra putting it on the soundtrack (and putting out the MTV video featuring Tom Cruise and scenes from Cocktail intercut with  The Beach Boys playing on the beach) there would be no Kokomo.

Bobby McFerrin got the same kind of bump with his single "Don't Worry Be Happy", *that* was also on Cocktail's soundtrack, rereleased as a single like Kokomo, and it became a smash hit too. Without the movie, it just did OK. With the movie, it became a massive success.

The success of Kokomo led to interest from Capitol, which was not there when Elektra released the soundtrack.

So it wasn't a case of not wanting to overshadow Brian's album, it was more the BBs had no label deal but hit the lottery in terms of getting Kokomo in a film that became a major summer blockbuster with all associated attention and promotion (and money to promote it).



Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: guitarfool2002 on July 24, 2018, 07:32:32 PM
I'm curious if the "Cocktail" director actively sought out the BBs, or if instead it was a case of Terry Melcher brokering another movie soundtrack deal as he had already done with "Happy Endings" and would go on to do with "Make It Big", "Still Cruisin'", "Problem Child", etc.

There was a discussion recently in another thread that touched on Melcher's (on the surface) peculiar ongoing association with the band in the mid 80s through to the early 90s, and it was Howie Edelson that pointed out that one of the main draws was that Melcher was regularly getting BB songs into films (which is a relatively lucrative deal even when the movies underperform at the box office).

It's interesting to read the McParland book on Gary Usher and how, circa 1986, Usher and Melcher were both jockeying to produce the "next" Beach Boys album. Ultimately, one didn't materialize in that time frame. Instead, it was the hodge podge "Still Cruisin" that made it out on the back of the success of "Kokomo" (with Melcher involved in many of the tracks) several years later, and then of course the essentially "Mike and Terry" album "Summer in Paradise" in 1992.

Interestingly, by the time of "SIP", for whatever reason BB songs weren't making into movies anymore (the best they did was "Summer of Love" being in a "Baywatch" episode three years after its initial release, and I'm not even sure that had anything to do with Melcher).


According to an interview Mike gave in November 1988 after Kokomo hit #1, the filmmakers were asking for a song from the group to fit the film. It suggests the song as reworked by Love and Melcher did not exist prior to the Cocktail team requesting one, so it's hard to imagine Melcher actively plugging something that had not yet been recorded, other than John Phillips' original recording of it.

Love acknowledged in an interview this week that it felt a bit strange singing about places like Bermuda and Key Largo after years of celebrating "California Girls" and the Southland.

"When we recorded the song, I said to myself: 'We're cutting into Jimmy Buffet territory this time,' " said Love, who co-wrote the song that is featured on the "Cocktail" sound-track album.

"But in a way, it's good that we're singing about (somewhere other than Southern California) because the Beach Boys' music was really more about a state of mind than a particular place.

"We've just transferred that state of mind to the Caribbean this time because that's what the scene in the movie called for. Tom Cruise is this bartender who flies to Jamaica to tend bar for the season, and we were asked to write a song to fit that scene."


If anything, perhaps Melcher was acting as the point-man or go-between in connecting the Cocktail producers to The Beach Boys. But as far as him plugging the song itself, again there was no song to plug unless the original Phillips take was involved. Melcher in the same interview is quoted as saying Phillips came up with the name "because it sounded good", yet makes no mention of the fact Phillips had recorded it on solo effort and the hit version was basically a reworked cover.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 25, 2018, 05:58:31 PM
I'm curious if the "Cocktail" director actively sought out the BBs, or if instead it was a case of Terry Melcher brokering another movie soundtrack deal as he had already done with "Happy Endings" and would go on to do with "Make It Big", "Still Cruisin'", "Problem Child", etc.

There was a discussion recently in another thread that touched on Melcher's (on the surface) peculiar ongoing association with the band in the mid 80s through to the early 90s, and it was Howie Edelson that pointed out that one of the main draws was that Melcher was regularly getting BB songs into films (which is a relatively lucrative deal even when the movies underperform at the box office).

It's interesting to read the McParland book on Gary Usher and how, circa 1986, Usher and Melcher were both jockeying to produce the "next" Beach Boys album. Ultimately, one didn't materialize in that time frame. Instead, it was the hodge podge "Still Cruisin" that made it out on the back of the success of "Kokomo" (with Melcher involved in many of the tracks) several years later, and then of course the essentially "Mike and Terry" album "Summer in Paradise" in 1992.

Interestingly, by the time of "SIP", for whatever reason BB songs weren't making into movies anymore (the best they did was "Summer of Love" being in a "Baywatch" episode three years after its initial release, and I'm not even sure that had anything to do with Melcher).
I lived through that time, and my memory is that the Boys didn't want to put out an album at the same time as Brian's solo album, didn't want to detract from it. So it's funny that they did just one song in the studio that year, and it ends up completely overshadowing Brian's album. A lot of us were psyched for Brian's album, and with all the stops being pulled out for promotion, expected it to be a big comeback commercially. Instead, we got an album that the Brian fans loved, but nobody else heard.


Just a correction, that is not entirely true. The Beach Boys did not have a record deal at the time "Kokomo" came out, they had no label on which to release an album if they did want to put an album out. Kokomo was released solely as a part of the Cocktail soundtrack on the Elektra label, which handled "Cocktail". Kokomo in the US came out as a single a few days after Brian's solo album was released, July 1988. The movie and soundtrack drove the release, in other words without Cocktail and Elektra putting it on the soundtrack (and putting out the MTV video featuring Tom Cruise and scenes from Cocktail intercut with  The Beach Boys playing on the beach) there would be no Kokomo.

Bobby McFerrin got the same kind of bump with his single "Don't Worry Be Happy", *that* was also on Cocktail's soundtrack, rereleased as a single like Kokomo, and it became a smash hit too. Without the movie, it just did OK. With the movie, it became a massive success.

The success of Kokomo led to interest from Capitol, which was not there when Elektra released the soundtrack.

So it wasn't a case of not wanting to overshadow Brian's album, it was more the BBs had no label deal but hit the lottery in terms of getting Kokomo in a film that became a major summer blockbuster with all associated attention and promotion (and money to promote it).


I recall some comments from Bruce back in 1987, that they had considered a couple record deals, but decided against them "because we don't want to record". I remember how disappointed I was when I read that. They were happy just to do a couple singles every year. There were also rumours at the time about Carl working on another solo project, but nothing ever came of that.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: guitarfool2002 on July 26, 2018, 10:28:58 AM
LS - Interesting to note as soon as Kokomo caught on via Cocktail and climbed the charts and MTV playlists, *both* Mike and Bruce were giving interviews saying they wanted to get more into recording, writing, and perhaps spend less time on the road to devote that time to getting back to cutting new records.

Their opinions and quotes on the studio recording-versus-live touring issue seemed to change with the direction of the wind at that time.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on July 26, 2018, 12:15:15 PM
Also, regarding the band's attitude towards Brian's '88 album, it was "mixed" to put it diplomatically. They all didn't like the Landy aspect, understandably. Carl said some nice things about the *music* on the BW '88 album in a 1989 interview.

But read Mike's 1992 Goldmine interview. He doesn't mince words about what he thinks about the BW '88 album (or the prospect of an album called "Sweet Insanity"). While it would have been unlikely for the band to go out of their way to like put an album out the same day as Brian's '88 album, had a huge record deal fallen into Mike's lap in, say, late 1987 for a 1988 BB album with a firm deadline, I doubt they would have foregone the deal so as not to compete with Brian. Here are Mike's comments on BW '88:

Q: Have you heard Brian's unreleased second solo album, Sweet Insanity?

A: No, I haven't. Have you?

Q: Yeah.

A: What do you think?

Q: I like it a lot but it would be much better with the rest of the Beach Boys singing on it.

Q: Did it come out with a record company?

A: No. But anyhow, I still love Brian.

Q: Hey, there's nobody more talented at arranging and writing.

Q: Did you like his first solo album?

A: No.

Q: You didn't like it?

A: Fu ck no.

Q: What didn't you like about it?

A: First of all the lyrics. Second of all the arrangements weren't commercial enough. Third of all it sounded like sh*t compared to what he could sound like.


Also interesting that Mike was so out of the loop in 1992 that he didn't even know whether "Sweet Insanity" had been commercially released or not. (Not pertinent to this discussion, just interesting).

Also, here's Bruce briefly commenting on BW '88 in a 1990 Record Collector interview:

Q: What did you think of his solo album?

A: I think he can do better. I think it was as good as mine, and I don't like mine. I think that it wasn't close to anything he did in the past. No solo album from anyone matters after 30 years. I don't know - we've been talking about Brian for twenty years. It's like he had this five-year career, and we've been talking about it ever since. It's like a great composer or conductor, walking of the stage for twenty years, but the orchestra can still play the parts - and make the charts.



Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on July 26, 2018, 12:37:02 PM
I wouldn't immediately buy on its face a comment from a Beach Boy in 1987 that the sole/main reason they didn't have a new album out was by choice. As guitarfool said, they didn't have a record deal.

Now, it *does* seem that Bruce, for instance, seemed to be more interested in having a hit and getting "on the radio" than making an artistic statement with a full album. This would probably explain the spate of one-off singles in the 80s.

Here's Bruce from a 1989 LA Times article:

Explained Johnston, who joined the Beach Boys in 1965 after Brian Wilson gave up full-time touring: "I don't want the Beach Boys to be the futile endless road show of 'The King and I' or 'I Love Lucy' reruns. I live, eat and breathe getting on the radio. I just think, 'How can we get back on the radio?' "

Johnston didn't pause before answering himself: "With great songs, that's how!"


and later in the article:

"Just because you've had a No. 1 doesn't mean you're automatic," Johnston said during a rehearsal break, acknowledging that the Beach Boys could go on forever recreating the endless summer with its stockpile of old hits. But that isn't good enough for him.

"It's records that matter," he said. "There's no point in touring without new records. It's just huge payments to me. We've got to be better than that."


Though, again, I think they would have taken an album deal had one been offered. And indeed, they took the deal from Capitol in 1988/89 for what became the "Still Crusin'" album.

I'll avoid honing in too much on the irony of Bruce saying there's no point in touring without new records, considering what he's doing now and has been doing for decades.

Also worth noting concerning "Still Cruisin'" is what Capitol expected of them. Interestingly, much like Bruce's attitude, Capitol was also more fixated on *hit singles* than solid album sales apparently. Al, from that same LA Times article (the "Berman" is David Berman, then-president of Capitol):

It's clear to the Beach Boys what Capitol expects from them.

"Three hit singles, to tell you the truth," Jardine said. "That's what they told us."

"That's fair," Berman said. "That's what I would hope for."


Meanwhile, Mike Love felt the "Still Cruisin'" album had been watered down. But unlike fans, who felt it was watered down with oldies, Mike apparently felt (though he somewhat contradicted himself) that the *new*, non-soundtrack songs were what watered the album concept down. From Mike's 1992 Goldmine interview:

But the problem with a major is that just as recently as the Still Cruisin' album, the same week that we went to radio with a song called "Somewhere Near Japan," which was getting really good airplay, Capitol Records went to CHR radio stations with eight singles. That was just one label in the same week. They'd also just done a deal with Duran Duran. They had paid a lot of money for Duran Duran, whereas we did an album of half new and half older songs. The theme of that album was to have been songs that have been in movies. It was basically a repackage.

But then in got watered down with politics, meaning Brian's Dr. Landy forcing a song called "In My Car," which was never in a movie, and a song by Jardine, which ultimately ended up on the album, called "Island Girl," which was never in a movie either. So to me the concept was a little bit diluted there politically.

So what happened in this instance was I was not happy that the album was half repackage and half politics. What happens when you do things politically just to accommodate the fact that if you're in a group and you divide it by five members, and you got two songs each, it may be a nice thing to do but everybody has their own point of view that isn't taken into consideration objectively.


On the one hand, he agrees with many fans that the album was diluted a bit. But he feels it was diluted by the "non movie" songs, like Brian's and Al's songs. But then, at the same time, he seems to trumpet "Somewhere Near Japan" a bit, even though it was also one of the "non movie" songs (perhaps not coincidentally, one *he* co-wrote).

Relating back to "Kokomo", I think the things that developed in the next several years with Capitol, and "Still Cruisin'", and "Summer in Paradise", all help to indicate that "Kokomo" was a fluke, a happy accident. If only Mike were content to contextualize it properly, as folks like Al Jardine have, as a catchy single that was a good shot in the arm for the band, instead of the EVENT that Mike characterizes as. I've mentioned in the past that the way Mike talks about the song in the "Endless Harmony" documentary is telling. He mentions that Brian was called and asked "to be a part of Kokomo." Maybe I'm over-analyzing, but his verbiage indicates he sees the song (and everything attached to it, including the recording sessions) as an EVENT. So Brian wasn't called to "sing at the session", he was asked to "be a part of" the event.

I think it's on SiriusXM where they've been playing an Al interview where he (correctly) points out that not only did the band NOT know the song was going to be a hit, but that it didn't *immediately* become a hit. I think for a while they thought it was just another "Chasin' the Sky" or "Happy Endings."


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 27, 2018, 07:21:56 PM
I wouldn't immediately buy on its face a comment from a Beach Boy in 1987 that the sole/main reason they didn't have a new album out was by choice. As guitarfool said, they didn't have a record deal.

Now, it *does* seem that Bruce, for instance, seemed to be more interested in having a hit and getting "on the radio" than making an artistic statement with a full album. This would probably explain the spate of one-off singles in the 80s.

Here's Bruce from a 1989 LA Times article:

Explained Johnston, who joined the Beach Boys in 1965 after Brian Wilson gave up full-time touring: "I don't want the Beach Boys to be the futile endless road show of 'The King and I' or 'I Love Lucy' reruns. I live, eat and breathe getting on the radio. I just think, 'How can we get back on the radio?' "

Johnston didn't pause before answering himself: "With great songs, that's how!"


and later in the article:

"Just because you've had a No. 1 doesn't mean you're automatic," Johnston said during a rehearsal break, acknowledging that the Beach Boys could go on forever recreating the endless summer with its stockpile of old hits. But that isn't good enough for him.

"It's records that matter," he said. "There's no point in touring without new records. It's just huge payments to me. We've got to be better than that."


Though, again, I think they would have taken an album deal had one been offered. And indeed, they took the deal from Capitol in 1988/89 for what became the "Still Crusin'" album.

I'll avoid honing in too much on the irony of Bruce saying there's no point in touring without new records, considering what he's doing now and has been doing for decades.

Also worth noting concerning "Still Cruisin'" is what Capitol expected of them. Interestingly, much like Bruce's attitude, Capitol was also more fixated on *hit singles* than solid album sales apparently. Al, from that same LA Times article (the "Berman" is David Berman, then-president of Capitol):

It's clear to the Beach Boys what Capitol expects from them.

"Three hit singles, to tell you the truth," Jardine said. "That's what they told us."

"That's fair," Berman said. "That's what I would hope for."


Meanwhile, Mike Love felt the "Still Cruisin'" album had been watered down. But unlike fans, who felt it was watered down with oldies, Mike apparently felt (though he somewhat contradicted himself) that the *new*, non-soundtrack songs were what watered the album concept down. From Mike's 1992 Goldmine interview:

But the problem with a major is that just as recently as the Still Cruisin' album, the same week that we went to radio with a song called "Somewhere Near Japan," which was getting really good airplay, Capitol Records went to CHR radio stations with eight singles. That was just one label in the same week. They'd also just done a deal with Duran Duran. They had paid a lot of money for Duran Duran, whereas we did an album of half new and half older songs. The theme of that album was to have been songs that have been in movies. It was basically a repackage.

But then in got watered down with politics, meaning Brian's Dr. Landy forcing a song called "In My Car," which was never in a movie, and a song by Jardine, which ultimately ended up on the album, called "Island Girl," which was never in a movie either. So to me the concept was a little bit diluted there politically.

So what happened in this instance was I was not happy that the album was half repackage and half politics. What happens when you do things politically just to accommodate the fact that if you're in a group and you divide it by five members, and you got two songs each, it may be a nice thing to do but everybody has their own point of view that isn't taken into consideration objectively.


On the one hand, he agrees with many fans that the album was diluted a bit. But he feels it was diluted by the "non movie" songs, like Brian's and Al's songs. But then, at the same time, he seems to trumpet "Somewhere Near Japan" a bit, even though it was also one of the "non movie" songs (perhaps not coincidentally, one *he* co-wrote).

Relating back to "Kokomo", I think the things that developed in the next several years with Capitol, and "Still Cruisin'", and "Summer in Paradise", all help to indicate that "Kokomo" was a fluke, a happy accident. If only Mike were content to contextualize it properly, as folks like Al Jardine have, as a catchy single that was a good shot in the arm for the band, instead of the EVENT that Mike characterizes as. I've mentioned in the past that the way Mike talks about the song in the "Endless Harmony" documentary is telling. He mentions that Brian was called and asked "to be a part of Kokomo." Maybe I'm over-analyzing, but his verbiage indicates he sees the song (and everything attached to it, including the recording sessions) as an EVENT. So Brian wasn't called to "sing at the session", he was asked to "be a part of" the event.

I think it's on SiriusXM where they've been playing an Al interview where he (correctly) points out that not only did the band NOT know the song was going to be a hit, but that it didn't *immediately* become a hit. I think for a while they thought it was just another "Chasin' the Sky" or "Happy Endings."
Exactly - it was just another single, under the plan that they would do 1 or 2 singles a year in an effort to get on the radio. "Rock 'N' Roll to the Rescue" and "California Dreamin" fulfilled that function in 1986, and neither one was a massive hit (although California Dreamin' went top 10 on the AC chart); "Wipe Out" and "Happy Endings" did the job in 1987 - one being a good size hit, and the other a flop. So, at the most, I wouldn't expected Kokomo to do what California Dreamin' or Wipe Out did; never would have I imagined they'd be back in the #1 spot on the Hot 100, alongside Bobby Brown, Inxs, Cheap Trick, and Whitney Houston!
If it was a formula that Mike Love had turned into a science, he certainly would have done it again with Still Cruisin', or Problem Child, or whatever. But, as with most of the music biz, it's about being in the right place at the right time with the right song (and in this case, having that song in a hit movie), and all the pieces falling into the right place.
So they did a few new songs for Capitol, and failed to knock it out of the park again, so it was back to 1 or 2 new songs a year, in a movie (Problem Child) or on a tribute album (Crocodile Rock), until the Genius, Mike Love, came up with the idea for an album that would be the ultimate soundtrack to summer: Endless Summer.
 ::)
Oops! I was off there by a couple decades!
I meant to say, Summer in Paradise.
And you'll notice the Genius has barely a word to say about that Classic of Summer in his autobio.
But i'm sure it was someone else's fault the album didn't sell.
Let's blame it on Al Jardine. It was his piss poor attitude that killed that album.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on July 27, 2018, 10:10:37 PM
 “Kokomo” is featured on the new season of Orange is the New Black.  Used somewhat ironically (the show takes place in a prison) but effectively.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Awesoman on July 29, 2018, 06:13:06 PM
For all the flack that song gets, it was crazy popular back when it came out.  I was just a kid, and this was long before I gave a crap about the Beach Boys, and loved that song at the time.  I remember some teenage pop group performed at my elementary school, and when they played that song, everyone erupted into song and sang along.  And to this day, people I've met that know next to nothing about the Beach Boys are at least familiar with that song.  It may be lightweight in its execution but I give it a pass due to fond memories.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 29, 2018, 08:53:55 PM
For all the flack that song gets, it was crazy popular back when it came out.  I was just a kid, and this was long before I gave a crap about the Beach Boys, and loved that song at the time.  I remember some teenage pop group performed at my elementary school, and when they played that song, everyone erupted into song and sang along.  And to this day, people I've met that know next to nothing about the Beach Boys are at least familiar with that song.  It may be lightweight in its execution but I give it a pass due to fond memories.
It's hip to diss it because it's Mike's Beach Boys, and Brian isn't on it. i'm sure all the Brianistas would celebrate the idea of the group having a late career hit if Brian had sung on it - and produced and co-written it.
So how do 4 Seasons fans feel about December 1963 (Oh What a Night)? Who Loves You?


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on July 30, 2018, 05:42:03 AM
Say sth. new. Zzzzzzz.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on July 30, 2018, 07:24:19 AM
For all the flack that song gets, it was crazy popular back when it came out.  I was just a kid, and this was long before I gave a crap about the Beach Boys, and loved that song at the time.  I remember some teenage pop group performed at my elementary school, and when they played that song, everyone erupted into song and sang along.  And to this day, people I've met that know next to nothing about the Beach Boys are at least familiar with that song.  It may be lightweight in its execution but I give it a pass due to fond memories.
It's hip to diss it because it's Mike's Beach Boys, and Brian isn't on it. i'm sure all the Brianistas would celebrate the idea of the group having a late career hit if Brian had sung on it - and produced and co-written it.
So how do 4 Seasons fans feel about December 1963 (Oh What a Night)? Who Loves You?

Nah, the reason most of the fans who grumble or groan about "Kokomo" do so is not because Brian isn't on it. There are other BB tracks that Brian had little or nothing to do with that are great. No, the problem with "Kokomo" (beyond being oversaturated back in 1988/89 and to a lesser degree subsequently) is that Mike Love overemphasizes the track's quality, importance, and popularity.

If Mike wasn't insistent on putting it in the same league/category (if not *above*) better tracks like "Good Vibrations", then it would be easier for fans to just view the song for what it is, which is a catchy song that was a good shot in the arm for the band, as I've said before.

A comparison I've often made: You don't see Paul McCartney regularly stating in interviews that "Pipes of Peace" (#1 in the UK) is as good or better than anything else in the Beatles or his solo catalog. I'm sure he's happy/proud it hit #1. But he has perspective as well. For that matter, his "Mull of Kintyre" *literally* outsold any Beatles single, yet you didn't see him pointing this out in every interview, and he actually relatively rarely even performs the song live.

In comparison, I don't believe a single full-length Beach Boys concert has left out "Kokomo" since it became a hit in 1988.

A "Four Seasons" comparison with their mid-70s hits is difficult to make; they essentially completely revamped the band by 1975, keeping on only Valli (and Gaudio as writer), with an eye towards actually spinning off the new "Four Seasons" guys into their own band. Those hits like "Who Loves You" and "December 1963" were essentially a case of the "New Four Seasons" cutting records with Frankie Valli guest starring.

As it is, I don't think Four Seasons fans have epic vitriol for those songs. They're very much like "Kokomo" in my mind; catchy songs that gave the band a shot in the arm. Frankie Valli kept performing those songs (though not always; "December 1963" left the setlist for a while until he found guys to start handing that lead off to), but I don't think he nor Gaudio for the subsequent decades kept saying those two songs were the best they ever did. Indeed, much like "Kokomo", the "Four Seasons" pretty much went limp after that quick shot of hit singles.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on July 30, 2018, 07:27:16 AM
Also, lest anyone think Mike doesn't have a complex about Brian's reputation versus his own, and has continually tried to use "Kokomo" to deal with that complex, here's a bit from Mike from his short but epic 1993 Bill Holdship interview:

Who wants to hear about Brian's mental problems anyway? I mean, to call a record "Sweet Insanity", imagine that. A whole album of Brian's madness that no one wants to release and still everyone says he's a genius! I make "Kokomo", it goes to number one in the charts and I'm still the dumb, know-nothing, talentless Mike Love.

https://www.surfermoon.com/interviews/mike693.html


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on July 30, 2018, 07:30:20 AM
For all the flack that song gets, it was crazy popular back when it came out.  I was just a kid, and this was long before I gave a crap about the Beach Boys, and loved that song at the time.  I remember some teenage pop group performed at my elementary school, and when they played that song, everyone erupted into song and sang along.  And to this day, people I've met that know next to nothing about the Beach Boys are at least familiar with that song.  It may be lightweight in its execution but I give it a pass due to fond memories.

There's the rub. When Mike talks about the song, he doesn't say anything along the lines of "it may be lightweight, but it was a cool catchy song", or whatever. He talks about the song as if it's "Sgt. Pepper" or "Good Vibrations."

Weirdly, he talks about "Kokomo" the way some one-hit wonder singer would talk about their one 1988 hit. The same way he namedrops as if he's not in one of the greatest groups of all time.

It's like, dude, you sang on "Pet Sounds" and all those 60s hits, you were the lead singer in the Beach Boys. You don't need to overhype one additional hit single you had in 1988, and you don't need to namedrop that you know John Stamos. You're truly *better* than that.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: MyDrKnowsItKeepsMeCalm on July 30, 2018, 07:50:00 AM
A comparison I've often made: You don't see Paul McCartney regularly stating in interviews that "Pipes of Peace" (#1 in the UK) is as good or better than anything else in the Beatles or his solo catalog. I'm sure he's happy/proud it hit #1. But he has perspective as well.

If Sir Paul were a bit smarter he'd be setting up a business selling actual "Pipes of Peace" branded with gold McCartney signatures. Investment opportunity! ;)



Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 30, 2018, 08:16:55 AM
It's hip to diss it because it's Mike's Beach Boys, and Brian isn't on it. i'm sure all the Brianistas would celebrate the idea of the group having a late career hit if Brian had sung on it - and produced and co-written it.

There are a staggering amount of people who I have met in my life who talk about how terrible this song is and have absolutely no idea who any of the members are. So I'm unconvinced by your assessment.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Jay on July 30, 2018, 08:37:15 AM
No offense HeyJude, but I think you're over analyzing things. Simply put, people grumble about Kokomo because it's just not the type of material a middle aged band should have been doing. I think people also hate the song because of what it represents, the cheese factor.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on July 30, 2018, 08:50:18 AM
No offense HeyJude, but I think you're over analyzing things. Simply put, people grumble about Kokomo because it's just not the type of material a middle aged band should have been doing. I think people also hate the song because of what it represents, the cheese factor.

Depends on who the "people" are. Casual fans or non-fans? It's just cheese, sure (and some people like it). I think the "Full House" connection contributes to the cheese perception.

But the assertion earlier was that presumably *hardcore* Beach Boys/Brian fans have some deep hatred of the song because Brian's not on it. I think that's not really the case. The song *is* emblematic of a lot of things to do with the band, both during that late 80s era, and also speaking to some more broad issues (ego, "ownership" of the brand, etc.). But as I said, it's Mike's attitude regarding the song that grates and causes ire both towards the song and Mike himself.

I think "Kokomo" was fine as a nice bump for the band in 1988. I don't have any problem with it musically. I rate it appropriately. It's not A-list material, but it's fine, it's catchy. They've had worse songs score relative hit status ("Beach Boys Medley"), and better songs tank or go unnoticed.

I think a sympathetic, dry remix of the song would actually be quite nice. Sort of like the recent RPO album version minus the orchestra.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: guitarfool2002 on July 30, 2018, 09:56:20 AM
I think HeyJude's post earlier was pretty much correct. A lot of the points and reasons why some offer to explain why fans aren't fans of Kokomo are often leaning toward trying to justify why Mike "should" be more respected when he is not, and also trying to dismiss any legit criticism of Mike. Offering up "Brian Wilson isn't on the record" as a reason doesn't hold water.

I'll add to HeyJude's thoughts and say some of it is and has been Mike's attitude toward the song and the success. With all of the main players who were prominent in the song's creation and performance now deceased, Mike can say whatever he chooses about the song. And that includes not only inflating his role in the creation and success of that song beyond reality, but it also has culminated in Mike's "Kokomo Brands" literature now almost giving ownership to Mike as an individual versus the reality of it being a "Beach Boys" song. It's just not accurate, and it smacks of more revisionism that can easily be countered by 1. Listening to the song (and hearing Carl sharing the lead, for one) 2. Knowing the song's history (and listening to John Phillips' original cut) and 3. Considering things like this:

The reason why it is thirteen pages is because Mike has proclaimed himself the savoir of the Beach Boys at the expense of the other members.



What interview or press release are you referring to where Mike "proclaimed himself the savior of the Beach Boys"?


"Proclamation" might be a poor word choice but we need go no further than "The Beach Boys: An American Family" or the quote from the Capital bio: "In 1974 Mike Love’s concept album Endless Summer ignited a second generation of Beach Boys fans and stirred a tempest that rocked the music world."
Everyone knows that Endles Summer is a compilation of Brian Wilson tunes, with several lyricists.

Does it also bother you when it's said that Mike wrote the lyrics to teh Beach Boys' biggest single? People will still know that Brian wrote the tune.

Brian had exactly nothing to do with any aspect of "the Beach Boys biggest single"... and Mike wrote very little of the lyric.

"the Beach Boys biggest single" being, as Mike said too, Kokomo.



Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: B.E. on July 30, 2018, 10:41:54 AM
No offense HeyJude, but I think you're over analyzing things. Simply put, people grumble about Kokomo because it's just not the type of material a middle aged band should have been doing. I think people also hate the song because of what it represents, the cheese factor.

I'm not sure what you mean. It always seemed very middle-aged to me. A rather natural progression from singing about teenagers spending their summer days and nights at the beach to adults wanting to "get away from it all" on a romantic, tropical vacation. It's not like it's a rewrite of 'Be True To Your School'.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on July 30, 2018, 12:28:19 PM

Lonely Summer, you are off base. The cheese factor is what turned me off to The Beach Boys growing up. With Kokomo and the Full House guest stint, I was so turned off that I didn’t give them a chance for years. Obviously that changed but it took until 1995 for that to happen. Funny part is, i actually like Kokomo these days apart from that cringe inducing sax solo . I’m with Jay and Chocolate Shake in this. Has nothing to do with being a Brianista .


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: The LEGENDARY OSD on July 30, 2018, 12:32:29 PM

Lonely Summer, you are off base. The cheese factor is what turned me off to The Beach Boys growing up. With Kokomo and the Full House guest stint, I was so turned off that I didn’t give them a chance for years. Obviously that changed but it took until 1995 for that to happen. Funny part is, i actually like Kokomo these days apart from that cringe inducing sax solo . I’m with Jay and Chocolate Shake in this. Has nothing to do with being a Brianista .

Oh, Billy, that's just Lonely Summer being Lonely Summer.  ;)


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: SMiLE Brian on July 30, 2018, 12:43:49 PM
Mike’s history rewrite has entered a new phase.... :hat


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 30, 2018, 04:03:08 PM
For all the flack that song gets, it was crazy popular back when it came out.  I was just a kid, and this was long before I gave a crap about the Beach Boys, and loved that song at the time.  I remember some teenage pop group performed at my elementary school, and when they played that song, everyone erupted into song and sang along.  And to this day, people I've met that know next to nothing about the Beach Boys are at least familiar with that song.  It may be lightweight in its execution but I give it a pass due to fond memories.
It's hip to diss it because it's Mike's Beach Boys, and Brian isn't on it. i'm sure all the Brianistas would celebrate the idea of the group having a late career hit if Brian had sung on it - and produced and co-written it.
So how do 4 Seasons fans feel about December 1963 (Oh What a Night)? Who Loves You?

Nah, the reason most of the fans who grumble or groan about "Kokomo" do so is not because Brian isn't on it. There are other BB tracks that Brian had little or nothing to do with that are great. No, the problem with "Kokomo" (beyond being oversaturated back in 1988/89 and to a lesser degree subsequently) is that Mike Love overemphasizes the track's quality, importance, and popularity.

If Mike wasn't insistent on putting it in the same league/category (if not *above*) better tracks like "Good Vibrations", then it would be easier for fans to just view the song for what it is, which is a catchy song that was a good shot in the arm for the band, as I've said before.

A comparison I've often made: You don't see Paul McCartney regularly stating in interviews that "Pipes of Peace" (#1 in the UK) is as good or better than anything else in the Beatles or his solo catalog. I'm sure he's happy/proud it hit #1. But he has perspective as well. For that matter, his "Mull of Kintyre" *literally* outsold any Beatles single, yet you didn't see him pointing this out in every interview, and he actually relatively rarely even performs the song live.

In comparison, I don't believe a single full-length Beach Boys concert has left out "Kokomo" since it became a hit in 1988.

A "Four Seasons" comparison with their mid-70s hits is difficult to make; they essentially completely revamped the band by 1975, keeping on only Valli (and Gaudio as writer), with an eye towards actually spinning off the new "Four Seasons" guys into their own band. Those hits like "Who Loves You" and "December 1963" were essentially a case of the "New Four Seasons" cutting records with Frankie Valli guest starring.

As it is, I don't think Four Seasons fans have epic vitriol for those songs. They're very much like "Kokomo" in my mind; catchy songs that gave the band a shot in the arm. Frankie Valli kept performing those songs (though not always; "December 1963" left the setlist for a while until he found guys to start handing that lead off to), but I don't think he nor Gaudio for the subsequent decades kept saying those two songs were the best they ever did. Indeed, much like "Kokomo", the "Four Seasons" pretty much went limp after that quick shot of hit singles.
In Mike's mind, Kokomo is right up there with Good Vibrations, Help Me Rhonda, I Get Around and the other biggies because it was worldwide hit. Mike's always been interested in being commercially successful.
A better example with McCartney might be Ebony and Ivory. It was #1 here in the US, yet everybody hated it, despite the presence of Stevie Wonder. And I guess that's why Macca rarely played it live -what's the point in doing it if Stevie is not onstage to sing his part?
Pipes of Peace was relegated to b-side status in the US. But I don't see Paul bragging much about his solo career; his obsessions since Lennon died has been to point out "I did this and I did that" on the Beatles records, because, somehow he got the impression that everyone thought John was the genius in the Beatles, and all Paul did was book the studio.
Sadly, the 2 best known Seasons songs these days are those 2 70's hits. They're not bad records, but I really don't ever need to hear them again.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Awesoman on July 30, 2018, 04:04:49 PM
For all the flack that song gets, it was crazy popular back when it came out.  I was just a kid, and this was long before I gave a crap about the Beach Boys, and loved that song at the time.  I remember some teenage pop group performed at my elementary school, and when they played that song, everyone erupted into song and sang along.  And to this day, people I've met that know next to nothing about the Beach Boys are at least familiar with that song.  It may be lightweight in its execution but I give it a pass due to fond memories.

There's the rub. When Mike talks about the song, he doesn't say anything along the lines of "it may be lightweight, but it was a cool catchy song", or whatever. He talks about the song as if it's "Sgt. Pepper" or "Good Vibrations."

Weirdly, he talks about "Kokomo" the way some one-hit wonder singer would talk about their one 1988 hit. The same way he namedrops as if he's not in one of the greatest groups of all time.

It's like, dude, you sang on "Pet Sounds" and all those 60s hits, you were the lead singer in the Beach Boys. You don't need to overhype one additional hit single you had in 1988, and you don't need to namedrop that you know John Stamos. You're truly *better* than that.

Perhaps you're taking it a little too personally?  "Kokomo" was Mike Love's sole #1 hit without Brian; of course he's proud of it.  Why would he suggest it be lightweight?  The song may lack the integrity of their past hits, but it certainly put them back on the charts and gave them a mega-hit out of nowhere.  Mike is allowed at least some bragging rights for it.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 30, 2018, 07:09:46 PM
For all the flack that song gets, it was crazy popular back when it came out.  I was just a kid, and this was long before I gave a crap about the Beach Boys, and loved that song at the time.  I remember some teenage pop group performed at my elementary school, and when they played that song, everyone erupted into song and sang along.  And to this day, people I've met that know next to nothing about the Beach Boys are at least familiar with that song.  It may be lightweight in its execution but I give it a pass due to fond memories.

There's the rub. When Mike talks about the song, he doesn't say anything along the lines of "it may be lightweight, but it was a cool catchy song", or whatever. He talks about the song as if it's "Sgt. Pepper" or "Good Vibrations."

Weirdly, he talks about "Kokomo" the way some one-hit wonder singer would talk about their one 1988 hit. The same way he namedrops as if he's not in one of the greatest groups of all time.

It's like, dude, you sang on "Pet Sounds" and all those 60s hits, you were the lead singer in the Beach Boys. You don't need to overhype one additional hit single you had in 1988, and you don't need to namedrop that you know John Stamos. You're truly *better* than that.

Perhaps you're taking it a little too personally?  "Kokomo" was Mike Love's sole #1 hit without Brian; of course he's proud of it.  Why would he suggest it be lightweight?  The song may lack the integrity of their past hits, but it certainly put them back on the charts and gave them a mega-hit out of nowhere.  Mike is allowed at least some bragging rights for it.
8) 8)


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on July 31, 2018, 08:00:43 AM
For all the flack that song gets, it was crazy popular back when it came out.  I was just a kid, and this was long before I gave a crap about the Beach Boys, and loved that song at the time.  I remember some teenage pop group performed at my elementary school, and when they played that song, everyone erupted into song and sang along.  And to this day, people I've met that know next to nothing about the Beach Boys are at least familiar with that song.  It may be lightweight in its execution but I give it a pass due to fond memories.

There's the rub. When Mike talks about the song, he doesn't say anything along the lines of "it may be lightweight, but it was a cool catchy song", or whatever. He talks about the song as if it's "Sgt. Pepper" or "Good Vibrations."

Weirdly, he talks about "Kokomo" the way some one-hit wonder singer would talk about their one 1988 hit. The same way he namedrops as if he's not in one of the greatest groups of all time.

It's like, dude, you sang on "Pet Sounds" and all those 60s hits, you were the lead singer in the Beach Boys. You don't need to overhype one additional hit single you had in 1988, and you don't need to namedrop that you know John Stamos. You're truly *better* than that.

Perhaps you're taking it a little too personally?  "Kokomo" was Mike Love's sole #1 hit without Brian; of course he's proud of it.  Why would he suggest it be lightweight?  The song may lack the integrity of their past hits, but it certainly put them back on the charts and gave them a mega-hit out of nowhere.  Mike is allowed at least some bragging rights for it.

There's nothing personal about it. And I specifically said a more balanced approach to characterizing the song would be to point out that it was a good shot in the arm for the band and got them back on the charts. That's *not* how Mike characterizes the song.

I'm not big on "bragging" at all, but even the slightly measured characterization of "well, he's allowed *some* bragging rights" is far more measured than the tact that Mike actually takes in discussing the song.

I'm not even sure I'd characterize it as a "mega hit." Wasn't it #1 for *one* week? It's certainly a hit single, the band's biggest in eons. But Mike overplays even the song's commercial/cultural impact, and *certainly* overplays the status/quality of the song compared to the band's actual critically acclaimed work.

You think the song "lacks the integrity of their past hits", but seem incredulous about calling the song "lightweight?"

Mike said Brian's '88 album sounded like "sh*t", so it's not like he's above "tellin' it like it is."

But again, I'm saying that's it's fine to point out the song was catchy (I don't even think the pejorative "lightweight" needs to be used) and was a nice bump for the band, and I mean that genuinely in a 100% effusive, positive way. You seem to feel similarly. But this is NOT how Mike characterizes the song.

Al has never given interviews holding "Lady Lynda" up there with the band's top tier of work. Nobody "brags" about the "Beach Boys Medley", or "Come Go With Me", or even really "Rock and Roll Music." They don't say bad stuff about the songs either (usually anyway). They point out some positive things maybe, and that the songs were hits (to varying degrees).

Mike thinks "Kokomo" is *right up there* alongside "Good Vibrations."

Do most Yes fans think "Owner of a Lonely Heart" was the pinnacle of their acheivements? Do Billy Joel fans (or Joel himself) think "We Didn't Start the Fire" is as good or better than "The Stranger" or "52nd Street" or "Glass Houses?" Do George Harrison fans (or Harrison himself) think "Got My Mind Set On You" was as good quality-wise as anything he ever did? No. These were all cases of older artists getting a nice shot in the arm from a catchy, commercial late-era single. I think they were all happy to see those singles become hits. But Harrison never said "Got My Mind Set On You" was as good as "Something" or "Here Comes the Sun", or even "All Things Must Pass" or "Give Me Love." Billy Joel actively seems to dislike "We Didn't Start the Fire" at this stage, going so far as to specifically point out why the song musically is simplistic bordering on boring, but still sometimes does it because he knows some fans want to hear it.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on July 31, 2018, 08:19:00 AM
For all the flack that song gets, it was crazy popular back when it came out.  I was just a kid, and this was long before I gave a crap about the Beach Boys, and loved that song at the time.  I remember some teenage pop group performed at my elementary school, and when they played that song, everyone erupted into song and sang along.  And to this day, people I've met that know next to nothing about the Beach Boys are at least familiar with that song.  It may be lightweight in its execution but I give it a pass due to fond memories.
It's hip to diss it because it's Mike's Beach Boys, and Brian isn't on it. i'm sure all the Brianistas would celebrate the idea of the group having a late career hit if Brian had sung on it - and produced and co-written it.
So how do 4 Seasons fans feel about December 1963 (Oh What a Night)? Who Loves You?

Nah, the reason most of the fans who grumble or groan about "Kokomo" do so is not because Brian isn't on it. There are other BB tracks that Brian had little or nothing to do with that are great. No, the problem with "Kokomo" (beyond being oversaturated back in 1988/89 and to a lesser degree subsequently) is that Mike Love overemphasizes the track's quality, importance, and popularity.

If Mike wasn't insistent on putting it in the same league/category (if not *above*) better tracks like "Good Vibrations", then it would be easier for fans to just view the song for what it is, which is a catchy song that was a good shot in the arm for the band, as I've said before.

A comparison I've often made: You don't see Paul McCartney regularly stating in interviews that "Pipes of Peace" (#1 in the UK) is as good or better than anything else in the Beatles or his solo catalog. I'm sure he's happy/proud it hit #1. But he has perspective as well. For that matter, his "Mull of Kintyre" *literally* outsold any Beatles single, yet you didn't see him pointing this out in every interview, and he actually relatively rarely even performs the song live.

In comparison, I don't believe a single full-length Beach Boys concert has left out "Kokomo" since it became a hit in 1988.

A "Four Seasons" comparison with their mid-70s hits is difficult to make; they essentially completely revamped the band by 1975, keeping on only Valli (and Gaudio as writer), with an eye towards actually spinning off the new "Four Seasons" guys into their own band. Those hits like "Who Loves You" and "December 1963" were essentially a case of the "New Four Seasons" cutting records with Frankie Valli guest starring.

As it is, I don't think Four Seasons fans have epic vitriol for those songs. They're very much like "Kokomo" in my mind; catchy songs that gave the band a shot in the arm. Frankie Valli kept performing those songs (though not always; "December 1963" left the setlist for a while until he found guys to start handing that lead off to), but I don't think he nor Gaudio for the subsequent decades kept saying those two songs were the best they ever did. Indeed, much like "Kokomo", the "Four Seasons" pretty much went limp after that quick shot of hit singles.
In Mike's mind, Kokomo is right up there with Good Vibrations, Help Me Rhonda, I Get Around and the other biggies because it was worldwide hit. Mike's always been interested in being commercially successful.
A better example with McCartney might be Ebony and Ivory. It was #1 here in the US, yet everybody hated it, despite the presence of Stevie Wonder. And I guess that's why Macca rarely played it live -what's the point in doing it if Stevie is not onstage to sing his part?
Pipes of Peace was relegated to b-side status in the US. But I don't see Paul bragging much about his solo career; his obsessions since Lennon died has been to point out "I did this and I did that" on the Beatles records, because, somehow he got the impression that everyone thought John was the genius in the Beatles, and all Paul did was book the studio.
Sadly, the 2 best known Seasons songs these days are those 2 70's hits. They're not bad records, but I really don't ever need to hear them again.

Regarding a McCartney comparison, there is no precise perfect comparison, as McCartney had way more #1 singles with the Beatles than the BBs ever had, and didn't have the drop-off in chart success/popularity than the BBs had at various points between the 60s and "Kokomo" in 1988.

But the basic point was/is, McCartney indeed *barely even discusses* his solo career, let alone trumpets it as up on the same level as classic Beatles tracks. He has numerous #1 hits and Top 10/20, etc. hits, and as I mentioned, even scored a Wings single in 1977 that *outsold any Beatles single*, yet I don't recall him ever even *slightly implying* "Mull of Kintyre" was as important or as good as key, classic #1 Beatles singles. He had ample opportunities to point out how successful he was *without* Lennon, yet rarely belabored that point and in fact probably more often than not pined to have Lennon back to work with again.

The only mitigating factor regarding "Kokomo" where I cut Mike (and Al and Carl, and I guess Bruce to some degree) some slack is that they were in a weird proxy fight with Landy via Brian (or Brian via Landy depending on how you want to look at it), and both during and before/after the Landy period, there were times where the other guys were tired of being relegated to "not Brian" status. But really, the songs to hold up as "great Beach Boys-related songs with little or no Brian input" would be things like "All This is That", or "Pacific Ocean Blue", etc. And even then, it would be more about building up the people who made those things than s**tting on Brian in order to pump themselves up.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: guitarfool2002 on July 31, 2018, 08:53:23 AM
Perhaps it can be summed up by saying no one begrudges Mike or any of the Beach Boys (and those involved in writing and recording the song when they were still alive) for being proud of scoring a #1 record. And a little bragging can go along with that too, sure. It's an accomplishment in the music business no matter how the chart systems have changed.

But I think what rubs people the wrong way is how the level of Mike's bragging and constant citing of that song to the point where he is now launching an entire brand and product line hinging on people buying into his direct involvement in the song doesn't add up with how involved Mike really was.

I'd say if Mike's role in the process and the song were along the lines of Terry Melcher, who was the one who actually asked John Phillips for material when the film people came calling, then produced, arranged, recorded and performed on the demo, polished up the music itself, and basically served in a similar role as Brian had done for the band in the 60's and pulled it together, it would be more justified.

But as it stands, Mike was one part of a larger team, and when he singles out his role directly or by implication, it goes against what he has said about his days on the high school track team and how he learned teamwork, and building up his teammates, etc. It's a contradiction.

If Mike were really the catalyst behind the song, if his role was greater than the others involved, namely a guy like Melcher who actually was the one who got the song for the band to record and then produced it, or if Mike himself was the driving force and reason why it became a hit, maybe it would be less of a bee in the bonnet in terms of opinion. But it wasn't the case.

And ultimately, the opinions of music fans are what they are, good and bad - But I doubt everyone who has put the song in various "worst of all time" lists for years has done so because Brian Wilson was not on the track.

It was a fluke hit, a catchy #1 single that people love or hate. It wasn't a mandate, it wasn't a game-changer, and it falls in line with any number of big hits that come and go. It's a mark of pride to score a #1 hit, but some reality in telling the story of the song is what I think fans might appreciate more than the boasting and bragging.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Don Malcolm on July 31, 2018, 10:46:50 AM
Here's a question for you GF (and anyone else who might want to weigh in from a purely speculative point of view)...

Do you think "Kokomo" would have gone #1 if some other band had done a reasonably close version of it with the same placement in the Cruise movie, etc.? Do you think it would have charted at all under such a scenario? What "sold" the song to listeners in '88? The chorus? The fact that the chorus actually gets to maybe the sixtieth percentile of the BBs' signature sound (thanks to Carl's falsetto)? Was it the cumulative effect of the Reagan years coming home to roost in a wash of perfectly-timed nostalgia? The same could be said for TWGMTR twenty-give years later: a song that somehow taps into a reservoir of the BBs sound (or remnant/facsimile thereof) can still command people's attention.

It's not surprising to any of us that Mike clings to the song--what else has he got to counter the fact that Brian was the prime mover of their commercial and aesthetic success? What really should be noted is that having a #1 hit in 1988 isn't even in the same hemisphere with having one in 1966. And that without that prior success, "Kokomo" would never have seen the light of day, as the original tune as written by John Phillips is nothing short of dire.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: guitarfool2002 on July 31, 2018, 10:55:27 AM
Here's a question for you GF (and anyone else who might want to weigh in from a purely speculative point of view)...

Do you think "Kokomo" would have gone #1 if some other band had done a reasonably close version of it with the same placement in the Cruise movie, etc.? Do you think it would have charted at all under such a scenario? What "sold" the song to listeners in '88? The chorus? The fact that the chorus actually gets to maybe the sixtieth percentile of the BBs' signature sound (thanks to Carl's falsetto)? Was it the cumulative effect of the Reagan years coming home to roost in a wash of perfectly-timed nostalgia? The same could be said for TWGMTR twenty-give years later: a song that somehow taps into a reservoir of the BBs sound (or remnant/facsimile thereof) can still command people's attention.

It's not surprising to any of us that Mike clings to the song--what else has he got to counter the fact that Brian was the prime mover of their commercial and aesthetic success? What really should be noted is that having a #1 hit in 1988 isn't even in the same hemisphere with having one in 1966. And that without that prior success, "Kokomo" would never have seen the light of day, as the original tune as written by John Phillips is nothing short of dire.

The film studio got a recording from Terry that had the voices of Terry Melcher, Mike, Jeff Foskett, and Bruce singing the parts. They demanded that the Beach Boys' vocals be on it, thus it was rerecorded where Carl and Al were singing, and the parts by Terry and Jeff were discarded.

So the film folks knew they wanted "The Beach Boys" on the track, because that's the golden sound. Basically the notion you've described, Don. "The Beach Boys Sound" did help sell that record, it was a hook built in.

But the issue is how Mike has taken credit for the song when he was simply a member of the team, and others should get credit too. Now Mike co-opts the song as his own to brand a "lifestyle" product line?

If he had more to do with it, if Mike were the catalyst in the capacity of what Terry Melcher did for making the song happen, if he had written as much as John Phillips, Mike's level of credit-taking might be justifiable.

As the facts stand, it's not justifiable.

And if someone tries to argue about the lead vocal issue, Carl shared lead vocal duties with Mike, and Carl's high voice is (as you said Don) one of the key elements to give that recording that "Beach Boys Sound". As is the blend featuring Al in the middle register.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: CenturyDeprived on July 31, 2018, 11:33:30 AM

The film studio got a recording from Terry that had the voices of Terry Melcher, Mike, Jeff Foskett, and Bruce singing the parts. They demanded that the Beach Boys' vocals be on it, thus it was rerecorded where Carl and Al were singing, and the parts by Terry and Jeff were discarded.
 

Does this mean that if the studio had said "great", then it would have been released in that form, with Terry and Jeff singing on it?

And would it still have been released as a "BBs" song?


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on July 31, 2018, 01:50:34 PM

The film studio got a recording from Terry that had the voices of Terry Melcher, Mike, Jeff Foskett, and Bruce singing the parts. They demanded that the Beach Boys' vocals be on it, thus it was rerecorded where Carl and Al were singing, and the parts by Terry and Jeff were discarded.
 

Does this mean that if the studio had said "great", then it would have been released in that form, with Terry and Jeff singing on it?

And would it still have been released as a "BBs" song?

I think Mike would have needed Carl and Al to sign off on it to release it as the Beach Boys. So I guess the question is, would Carl and Al have thought little of the song to the point where they would have said "sure, whatever" due to the lucrative nature of getting songs in movies (even when the movie and song aren't hits).

Had the BBs name being on the song *not* led to the song being a hit, it would have been more lucrative at the initial deal stage for Mike to release the song under his own name.

But it's strange, because they had put *numerous* songs into films at that stage, and Howie Edelson even mentioned that one of the main reasons they kept working with Terry Melcher, who was not otherwise exactly an A-list producer, was because Melcher was able to score deals to get their songs into films. They had put (pre-Melcher) "It's a Beautiful Day" into a film in 1979 and "Chasin' the Sky" in 1984, and then Melcher was involved with getting "Happy Endings" into a movie in 1986 (I think?) and "Make It Big" into "Troop Beverly Hills" in 1987. All of those tracks were "Beach Boys" tracks, with usually at least Carl and Al joining Mike and Bruce (Brian's on "Make It Big" at least).

But it would be interesting if Mike initially considered putting "Kokomo" out solo. I'm also curious how much the label wanted the Beach Boys "voices" versus simply wanting the BB *name* on the track. But I can't imagine the Beach Boys in 1988 putting out a track with Foskett singing part of the lead and without Carl and Al involved *at all*.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: guitarfool2002 on July 31, 2018, 06:22:51 PM

The film studio got a recording from Terry that had the voices of Terry Melcher, Mike, Jeff Foskett, and Bruce singing the parts. They demanded that the Beach Boys' vocals be on it, thus it was rerecorded where Carl and Al were singing, and the parts by Terry and Jeff were discarded.
 

Does this mean that if the studio had said "great", then it would have been released in that form, with Terry and Jeff singing on it?

And would it still have been released as a "BBs" song?

I think Mike would have needed Carl and Al to sign off on it to release it as the Beach Boys. So I guess the question is, would Carl and Al have thought little of the song to the point where they would have said "sure, whatever" due to the lucrative nature of getting songs in movies (even when the movie and song aren't hits).

Had the BBs name being on the song *not* led to the song being a hit, it would have been more lucrative at the initial deal stage for Mike to release the song under his own name.

But it's strange, because they had put *numerous* songs into films at that stage, and Howie Edelson even mentioned that one of the main reasons they kept working with Terry Melcher, who was not otherwise exactly an A-list producer, was because Melcher was able to score deals to get their songs into films. They had put (pre-Melcher) "It's a Beautiful Day" into a film in 1979 and "Chasin' the Sky" in 1984, and then Melcher was involved with getting "Happy Endings" into a movie in 1986 (I think?) and "Make It Big" into "Troop Beverly Hills" in 1987. All of those tracks were "Beach Boys" tracks, with usually at least Carl and Al joining Mike and Bruce (Brian's on "Make It Big" at least).

But it would be interesting if Mike initially considered putting "Kokomo" out solo. I'm also curious how much the label wanted the Beach Boys "voices" versus simply wanting the BB *name* on the track. But I can't imagine the Beach Boys in 1988 putting out a track with Foskett singing part of the lead and without Carl and Al involved *at all*.

One of the main reasons why they were working with Terry Melcher is also the fact that he not only scored them a hit (bigger on the AC charts) with their California Dreamin cover, but Terry had connections that he would bring into the Beach Boys' activities with people like John Phillips appearing in the California Dreamin video, and Roger McGuinn playing guitar on the sessions.

But more importantly, Terry could get a call from a film team for a song, and then call his pal John Phillips to see if he had any songs that would fit. And that pal John Phillips sent "Kokomo" and "Somewhere Near Japan", both of which would fill the need for new songs that the Beach Boys could record.

Biggest point? I don't think it was Terry Melcher placing songs on soundtracks. I think it was the fact that he actually found songs for them to record and people to bring in to make those recordings even better. Best shown by Kokomo.

They needed songs to put in films before they could put songs in films. Like Kokomo.

The band members themselves were woefully short of good original songs, and they didn't seem to be able to sustain or follow up any success they did have with a solid original release. But they had a guy who could call Phillips, McGuinn, Jim Keltner, etc and at least get some original songs and some tracks cut.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 31, 2018, 06:53:22 PM
Here's a question for you GF (and anyone else who might want to weigh in from a purely speculative point of view)...

Do you think "Kokomo" would have gone #1 if some other band had done a reasonably close version of it with the same placement in the Cruise movie, etc.? Do you think it would have charted at all under such a scenario? What "sold" the song to listeners in '88? The chorus? The fact that the chorus actually gets to maybe the sixtieth percentile of the BBs' signature sound (thanks to Carl's falsetto)? Was it the cumulative effect of the Reagan years coming home to roost in a wash of perfectly-timed nostalgia? The same could be said for TWGMTR twenty-give years later: a song that somehow taps into a reservoir of the BBs sound (or remnant/facsimile thereof) can still command people's attention.

It's not surprising to any of us that Mike clings to the song--what else has he got to counter the fact that Brian was the prime mover of their commercial and aesthetic success? What really should be noted is that having a #1 hit in 1988 isn't even in the same hemisphere with having one in 1966. And that without that prior success, "Kokomo" would never have seen the light of day, as the original tune as written by John Phillips is nothing short of dire.
I agree that the Beach Boys having a #1 hit in 1966 is not the same as them having one in 1988. Who on earth would have expected the BB's to hit #1 in 1988? In 1966, it was expected. "Okay, guys, you hit the top spot with Help Me, Rhonda and I Get Around. Let's see you do it again!"


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Awesoman on July 31, 2018, 09:34:46 PM
For all the flack that song gets, it was crazy popular back when it came out.  I was just a kid, and this was long before I gave a crap about the Beach Boys, and loved that song at the time.  I remember some teenage pop group performed at my elementary school, and when they played that song, everyone erupted into song and sang along.  And to this day, people I've met that know next to nothing about the Beach Boys are at least familiar with that song.  It may be lightweight in its execution but I give it a pass due to fond memories.

There's the rub. When Mike talks about the song, he doesn't say anything along the lines of "it may be lightweight, but it was a cool catchy song", or whatever. He talks about the song as if it's "Sgt. Pepper" or "Good Vibrations."

Weirdly, he talks about "Kokomo" the way some one-hit wonder singer would talk about their one 1988 hit. The same way he namedrops as if he's not in one of the greatest groups of all time.

It's like, dude, you sang on "Pet Sounds" and all those 60s hits, you were the lead singer in the Beach Boys. You don't need to overhype one additional hit single you had in 1988, and you don't need to namedrop that you know John Stamos. You're truly *better* than that.

Perhaps you're taking it a little too personally?  "Kokomo" was Mike Love's sole #1 hit without Brian; of course he's proud of it.  Why would he suggest it be lightweight?  The song may lack the integrity of their past hits, but it certainly put them back on the charts and gave them a mega-hit out of nowhere.  Mike is allowed at least some bragging rights for it.

There's nothing personal about it. And I specifically said a more balanced approach to characterizing the song would be to point out that it was a good shot in the arm for the band and got them back on the charts. That's *not* how Mike characterizes the song.

I'm not big on "bragging" at all, but even the slightly measured characterization of "well, he's allowed *some* bragging rights" is far more measured than the tact that Mike actually takes in discussing the song.

I'm not even sure I'd characterize it as a "mega hit." Wasn't it #1 for *one* week? It's certainly a hit single, the band's biggest in eons. But Mike overplays even the song's commercial/cultural impact, and *certainly* overplays the status/quality of the song compared to the band's actual critically acclaimed work.

You think the song "lacks the integrity of their past hits", but seem incredulous about calling the song "lightweight?"

Mike said Brian's '88 album sounded like "sh*t", so it's not like he's above "tellin' it like it is."

But again, I'm saying that's it's fine to point out the song was catchy (I don't even think the pejorative "lightweight" needs to be used) and was a nice bump for the band, and I mean that genuinely in a 100% effusive, positive way. You seem to feel similarly. But this is NOT how Mike characterizes the song.

Al has never given interviews holding "Lady Lynda" up there with the band's top tier of work. Nobody "brags" about the "Beach Boys Medley", or "Come Go With Me", or even really "Rock and Roll Music." They don't say bad stuff about the songs either (usually anyway). They point out some positive things maybe, and that the songs were hits (to varying degrees).

Mike thinks "Kokomo" is *right up there* alongside "Good Vibrations."

Do most Yes fans think "Owner of a Lonely Heart" was the pinnacle of their acheivements? Do Billy Joel fans (or Joel himself) think "We Didn't Start the Fire" is as good or better than "The Stranger" or "52nd Street" or "Glass Houses?" Do George Harrison fans (or Harrison himself) think "Got My Mind Set On You" was as good quality-wise as anything he ever did? No. These were all cases of older artists getting a nice shot in the arm from a catchy, commercial late-era single. I think they were all happy to see those singles become hits. But Harrison never said "Got My Mind Set On You" was as good as "Something" or "Here Comes the Sun", or even "All Things Must Pass" or "Give Me Love." Billy Joel actively seems to dislike "We Didn't Start the Fire" at this stage, going so far as to specifically point out why the song musically is simplistic bordering on boring, but still sometimes does it because he knows some fans want to hear it.

Thank you for proving your butthurtedness.   ;D  Just kidding.

Seriously though, consider this: "Kokomo" is the only song by a Beach Boy that went to #1 in the last 50 years.  During the 70's and most of the 80's, the band could not produce any real hit material, even with numerous much-maligned attempts to get Brian involved.  So out of nowhere comes "Kokomo" which not only went to number 1, but was crazy-popular especially with folks that couldn't even name a Wilson brother if you held them at gunpoint.  Irregardless to our personal views of the song itself, this is a good thing.  It brought much-needed attention to the band and kept them a successful touring franchise.  Quite a remarkable feat.  

Is "Kokomo" a masterpiece?  No.  Is Mike Love a little overzealous about its success?  Of course.  Does it even matter though?  No.  Mike Love having a hit of his own and thinking highly of it does not somehow invalidate the band's previous hit material and artistic integrity.  It's a totally cheeseball song, but so are so many other songs from this era that we all love as guilty pleasures.  


You think the song "lacks the integrity of their past hits", but seem incredulous about calling the song "lightweight?"


No, I'm incredulous to Mike Love himself calling the song lightweight.  Why would the man, whom we know has an enlarged ego, downplay the success of his lone #1 hit he co-wrote without the help of Brian, and the sole #1 hit the band enjoyed since the 1960's? 


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on August 01, 2018, 06:30:31 AM
No, I'm incredulous to Mike Love himself calling the song lightweight.  Why would the man, whom we know has an enlarged ego, downplay the success of his lone #1 hit he co-wrote without the help of Brian, and the sole #1 hit the band enjoyed since the 1960's?  


The main crux of everything I wrote on this topic is specifically that Mike overplays the quality and success of the song, *not* that the song is insignificant vis-à-vis the history of the band. Everything I've written indicates I'm well aware that Mike won't downplay the song, and never has. That's the whole point. You seem to agree with all of this. So what are you arguing?

The only thing we disagree on, I guess, is whether Mike overblowing the song is a problem. My position isn't even that it's a HUGE problem. But when the topic, which seems to come up NUMEROUS times, comes up regarding "perception" of the song from fans, casual fans, and the band itself, *that's* when I think it's more than appropriate to point out how Mike overblowing the song is emblematic of some overriding issues with the band over the years. Indeed, the fact that Brian never does the song, and probably even more so Al specifically during his solo touring years seeming to avoid doing the song unless absolutely necessary, speaks to a divide *within the band* as to the merits of the song.

As I've said, I think Al Jardine has the spot-on correct attitude about the song. He doesn't go out of his way to trash the song. He *appropriately* characterizes the song. A nice shot in the arm for the band.

Separate but related is what guitarfool has spoken to, which is that Mike is probably taking *too much credit* for the song in reference to the *other* creative forces who helped to write/mold the song.

Also interesting is that Mike has said in interviews that he weighs heavily the chart success/sales of a song, in my opinion more so than critical acclaim. So it makes sense, beyond obvious ego reasons, why he would think so highly of "Kokomo." *However*, we also have very pointed evidence that his ego/pride overrides even that unfortunate commercial mindset. Namely, ""That's Why God Made the Radio" hitting #3 in 2012 (which I think is frankly *more* impressive than "Kokomo" hitting #1 given the commercial climate in 2012 and how stagnant the Beach Boys "brand" was prior to 2012), and how Mike *downplayed* that success, which I think was *clearly* because he had soured on the reunion and the Brian/Joe Thomas team, etc. He also, not surprisingly, avoids discussing how *every* attempt he made after "Kokomo" to repeat that success *EPICALLY FAILED*, providing *more* evidence that "Kokomo" was a fluke. He downplays a #3 chart placement for TWGMTR, but *ignores* "Summer in Paradise" failing to make the *TOP 200* album chart.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on August 01, 2018, 06:45:18 AM
Biggest point? I don't think it was Terry Melcher placing songs on soundtracks. I think it was the fact that he actually found songs for them to record and people to bring in to make those recordings even better. Best shown by Kokomo.

They needed songs to put in films before they could put songs in films. Like Kokomo.

The band members themselves were woefully short of good original songs, and they didn't seem to be able to sustain or follow up any success they did have with a solid original release. But they had a guy who could call Phillips, McGuinn, Jim Keltner, etc and at least get some original songs and some tracks cut.

They definitely needed both from Melcher, the songs themselves *and* getting them into films. But there were and are about a gazillion "outside" hired gun writers they could have gone to for songs if they had decided they were open to shopping around to outside writers (or collaborating with them).

They didn't have a lucrative record deal post-BB'85. You can see in the Gary Usher book that both Usher and Melcher were vying to produce "the next Beach Boys album", yet neither was really getting much traction due to band atrophy/disinterest and also the band having no record deal.

Mike was obviously writing with Melcher outside of Melcher helming projects (e.g. "Getcha Back"), so that may have continued regardless.

But I do think, and I strongly trust Howie on this who is probably the only guy in the BB orb who would do something like ask David Crosby why Mike Love and Terry Melcher were so tight working together, that the reason they followed through on continually having Melcher so closely involved not just in writing but also production was because Melcher had connections to score deals for getting songs into movies. Again, this was a best case scenario for the band during that era. It didn't require them to have an ironclad, long term lucrative album deal with a major label, and I can't over emphasize how *lucrative* it is to cut a deal to get a song in a movie even when the song and movie aren't hits. Middling-performing movies with *no* soundtrack release at all still can get a ton of money to someone who gets their song in the movie, both the song's copyright holder as well as the owner of the recording. If they actually get the song on a released soundtrack, even better. If the movie is a hit, even better. If the song itself becomes a hit (which really only happened once for the BBs), *even better yet.*


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: guitarfool2002 on August 01, 2018, 09:35:44 AM
No doubt Melcher's getting songs placed in films, or more accurately his connections which could make that happen, was a factor. But I don't see it as the main factor. There are people whose main job it is to scout, acquire, and place songs in film and TV, not to mention the various agents and attorneys. It's usually not the person who writes and produces the actual songs who then works for the film company to make that happen, especially on the Hollywood level beyond indie musicians. And consider another former BB associate at this same time was making a killing producing film soundtracks and pulling all that together for some major blockbusters: David Anderle.

I do think Melcher's main draw beyond the film placement opportunities was the fact he could fill the "Brian" role and wear several hats in terms of cutting the records: Producer, writer, arranger, and sometime performer if needed. And he was not only part of the BB's circle back in the 60's, but even without a record deal on the table for the band he could at least pull things together and get some actual recordings to shop, which is something no one else in the band could seem to do at this time.

The right guy at the right time for the band who needed a "Brian" type to get records made. Unfortunately after Kokomo, we know what happened inside the band and some egos ran amok to the point where chasing Kokomo as a mandate rather than a winning lottery ticket of a hit produced some forgettable music.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 01, 2018, 10:58:05 AM
Unfortunately after Kokomo, we know what happened inside the band and some egos ran amok to the point where chasing Kokomo as a mandate rather than a winning lottery ticket of a hit produced some forgettable music.

I feel like "Chasing Kokomo" needs to be a scripted movie title, the plot for which centers around the 1989-1992 era where the band tried to rewrite Kokomo over and over again (and I suppose this continued well into the 2000s also, with stuff like "Santa Goes to Kokomo").

Kokomo Better Blues indeed.

Side note: are the animal sounds at the beginning of Kokomo clone "Island Fever" (original version) simply canned sounds from a sound effects library? I wonder if these animal sounds can also be heard in various movies, etc, thus making them the Beach Boys equivalent of the Wilhelm Scream.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_k71UbSJwk


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on August 01, 2018, 12:52:22 PM
Interestingly, it appears at least some form of "Island Fever" pre-dated the "Summer in Paradise" sessions, as Bruce talked about the song in a 1990 interview (I've included in the excerpt below some interesting comments from Bruce about "Problem Child" and "East Meets West" as well):

Q: When can we expect a new Beach Boys record?

AL There's a single called "Problem Child" about to come out on RCA, which we did for a movie. It's very light.

Q: And I hear you've also recorded a song called "Island Fever"?

A: I don't know where that's gonna go - probably to another film. You'll like that. That's the poppy side of the Beach Boys. People forget when they listen to Pet Sounds and "Good Vibrations" that the Beach Boys started out as a little pop band.

Q: A record that I thought got that across really well was the collaboration you did with the Four Seasons - "East Meets West".

A: I hated that. Oh my God, I don't know why we ever did that. Those guys never understood harmony. It was like World Cup beer-drinking harmony compared to ours.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 01, 2018, 01:11:11 PM
Interestingly, it appears at least some form of "Island Fever" pre-dated the "Summer in Paradise" sessions, as Bruce talked about the song in a 1990 interview (I've included in the excerpt below some interesting comments from Bruce about "Problem Child" and "East Meets West" as well):

Q: When can we expect a new Beach Boys record?

AL There's a single called "Problem Child" about to come out on RCA, which we did for a movie. It's very light.

Q: And I hear you've also recorded a song called "Island Fever"?

A: I don't know where that's gonna go - probably to another film. You'll like that. That's the poppy side of the Beach Boys. People forget when they listen to Pet Sounds and "Good Vibrations" that the Beach Boys started out as a little pop band.

Q: A record that I thought got that across really well was the collaboration you did with the Four Seasons - "East Meets West".

A: I hated that. Oh my God, I don't know why we ever did that. Those guys never understood harmony. It was like World Cup beer-drinking harmony compared to ours.


Wow, that's interesting. They must've wrote Island Fever quickly in the wake of Kokomo's success. And Bruce hating EMW is pretty funny. I'm not crazy about it either.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on August 01, 2018, 05:17:12 PM
I trace the beginning of the "Kokomo sound" to their 1986 version of "California Dreamin'". That one had been around for awhile, appeared on a Radio Shack album in 1983, kind of a demo version. The drum sound on the "Made In USA" version, the sax, it's pointing towards "Kokomo". And it was a good sound for those 2 songs - I don't totally hate 80's pop sounds - but then they beat it into the ground with every Melcher/Love collaboration after that. Imagine if they "Getcha Back" had been a worldwide #1, the band continued to work with Steve Levine for the next 5 years, trying to recapture that sound.
Of course, Mike made no mention at all in his book of "Summer in Paradise".


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on August 02, 2018, 07:24:21 AM
I suppose I hear a few germs of “Kokomo” production-wise in the ’86 version of “California Dreamin’”, but I’ve never strongly connected them. Most of the elements of “California Dreamin’” come from the 1982 sessions. The main overdubs were the jangly 12-string guitar, a bit of additional background vocals, and some drum/percussion overdubs. But the song still sounds more organic than “Kokomo” ended up. It sounds like the partially or fully re-recorded and/or remixed drums on the ’86 version might still be real drums, whereas apparently Keltner sequenced drums for “Kokomo”, and they certainly sound very fake/programmed.

I’d say the *other* ’86 single Melcher produced, “Rock and Roll to the Rescue”, is much more Kokomo-ish, which makes sense since Melcher wrote the track (by himself if I recall correctly), and while there has been some talk that Brian initially “produced” the session for that song, Melcher took the song over and also produced (similar to “California Dreamin’”).

What *does* sound a lot like “Kokomo” are indeed the subsequent Melcher productions. “Still Cruisin’” might be one of the thinnest-sounding records they ever cut. No bottom end on anything, certainly not the “drums”, and the whole thing is thin and shrill. The other Melcher stuff on the “Still Cruisin” album isn’t *as* bad in terms of sonics, but still not great. Sounds like real drums on “Somewhere Near Japan”, so that’s a little better. “Make It Big” actually pre-dates “Kokomo”, and it’s very 80s and programmed. *That* track might be better blueprint for what “Kokomo” ended up like.

The Melcher-helmed singles during all this time are largely similar sonically. “Problem Child” for sure.

And then with “Summer in Paradise” it’s sonically (and often thematically and sometimes even musically) a case of using “Kokomo” as the blueprint for everything. That album sounds like someone recorded one single snare sample and they used that for *everything*.

To be clear, it’s possible to still give a recording some warmth and bottom end even with fake drums and digital recording. Listen to BB ’85. That has a *ton* more warmth than the shrill, thin sound of almost everything Melcher did with the band from 1986 or so until 1992/93-ish.

And again, for those interested in the Melcher “era”, the Gary Usher book has some good insights into the circa 1986 dealings with the band. Usher was “producing” Brian via demos they were cutting together. Usher was trying to angle at producing a Beach Boys record. He even got Mike Love to come in and record on the Usher/Brian production of “Just Say No.” Then, when the late 1986 “25 Years Together” TV special was being put together, it was Terry Melcher helming the studio production side of things (most of the stuff on that special was prepped ahead of time in the studio). But the Landy camp wanted to push “The Spirit of Rock and Roll” on the TV producers, and thus Usher came along with Brian to Hawaii to basically switch roles with Terry Melcher in the studio for just that one song. Interesting stuff, especially considering the politics going on at that time (Al having his old hilarious grudge against Usher, Carl and Al refusing to sing on the Brian song out of protest against Landy) and the “meh” nature of the stuff the band was recording at that time.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on August 02, 2018, 08:22:30 AM
When I got the news that the BB's were recording "Hot Fun in the Summertime", I thought that was a good idea. Then I heard it on the radio, and yeah, no bottom end, almost no midrange, either. The perfect Sly song for them to cover, but naw, had to make it sound like "Kokomo".


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on August 02, 2018, 08:28:52 AM
And, recording with a very early Beta version of ProTools probably didn't help the thing, shrill sound of the SIP album. I can't imagine it was a "high rez" situation; ProTools probably didn't the capability in 1991/92 to record at 24-bit, 88.1, etc.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: guitarfool2002 on August 02, 2018, 08:42:30 AM
And, recording with a very early Beta version of ProTools probably didn't help the thing, shrill sound of the SIP album. I can't imagine it was a "high rez" situation; ProTools probably didn't the capability in 1991/92 to record at 24-bit, 88.1, etc.

I'm not intending this to be personal, but this notion of blaming early versions of ProTools is something I went into pretty deep detail about in previous discussions, and it might be worth revisiting some of those before hanging the blame on a DAW/sequencing/recording software.

To sum up - When Matthew Sweet's "Girlfriend" album came out, with songs like the title cut and "Divine Intervention", a lot of musicians including those in my small circle at Berklee were loving the pure, analog, throwback, "Revolver" sonic qualities that Sweet had captured on the album. "Finally!" we were saying, "someone gets it!". Some of us with pretty strong views on the lack of those pure analog sonic qualities on the radio, MTV, and most albums of the time were over the moon when we heard guitar tracks, bass tracks, and drum sounds which sounded closer to "She Said She Said" than Skid Row or Poison.

Then we come to find out later that Sweet recorded "Girlfriend" using an even earlier version of ProTools than was used on Summer In Paradise. Yet the results were lightyears apart, sonically.

So while those early ProTools versions were wonky, and took a ton of time to load and process even the most basic moves during a session...It wasn't to blame for the overall sonic sheen of the music, especially when others were using earlier, more wonky versions and getting great sounds from it. And others after SIP used similar early versions and also got better sounds.

Was it to blame in part? Maybe. But at the same time, it wasn't. Words of wisdom: "You can't turn chicken sh*t into chicken salad".


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on August 02, 2018, 08:51:10 AM
Obviously, ProTools didn't make production or arrangement decisions on the SIP album.

All I said was that ProTools was unlikely to *help* the thing sound better considering Melcher was *already* into that thin, shrill, digital sound. I'm sure a myriad of outboard gear choices and musical decisions were major factors.

Some of the issues with Melcher productions were issues endemic to the sound of that era. In the late 80s, many producers were going for snappy, thin-sounding drums (whether real or programmed).

Perhaps the strangest thing about Melcher's production is that the same guy produced both "Still Cruisin'" and "Somewhere Near Japan", apparently around the same time, and yet the latter sounds much less shrill and has more warmth.

"Summer in Paradise" would have sounded very similar had it been done in the analog realm; that was Melcher's "sound" apparently. But the lack of high-rez sampling and the likely limitation of interfaces/gear to run everything into that Macintosh Quadra in 1991/1992 certainly was not going to *add* warmth to the proceedings.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 02, 2018, 10:06:11 AM


“Make It Big” actually pre-dates “Kokomo”, and it’s very 80s and programmed. *That* track might be better blueprint for what “Kokomo” ended up like.



HeyJude, does "Make It Big" predate "Kokomo" in terms of a pre-1988 MIB demo or something? Troop Beverly Hills came out in 1989, so I'd always assumed it was written post-Kokomo.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 02, 2018, 10:13:01 AM


I’d say the *other* ’86 single Melcher produced, “Rock and Roll to the Rescue”, is much more Kokomo-ish, which makes sense since Melcher wrote the track (by himself if I recall correctly), and while there has been some talk that Brian initially “produced” the session for that song, Melcher took the song over and also produced (similar to “California Dreamin’”).


I think “Rock and Roll to the Rescue” is rather underrated, and probably gets much less respect due to its over-the-top '80s production (which doesn't really bug me). It has a propulsive energy that very few BBs songs had at the time. Almost a bit like the energy of "Little Honda". There's a quite solid song buried in there, and some REALLY good group harmony vocals (all the "hey nows") that sound almost just like the '60s. Plus Carl's small vocal lead part is stellar. I don't mind Brian's lead either, which may be an unpopular opinion. It sounds at least like Brian was enthusiastic about it. In a way, this particular lead vocal of Brian's in unique in its delivery, and to me sounds not quite like any of his others.

It was a brave and rare choice to give Brian the lead on a BBs song during this era. In fact, it's basically the only Brian lead during the '80s (on a BBs song that wasn't a Landy-based solo track shoehorned into being a "BBs" song). I wonder what drove the decision to have Brian sing lead on this one; were they wooing him to rejoin the band on a more full-time basis or something?  Or maybe there was more label interest if Brian was more visibly attached to a BBs song?

But yeah, I also know about the really embarrassing performance of the band miming the song on some big variety show, where Brian looks suuuper out of it. I'm guessing that probably contributed to puting the kebosh to any more BBs singles with Brian lead vocals being pushed at the time. Plus the “Rock and Roll to the Rescue” official music video is the pits.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on August 02, 2018, 11:56:54 AM


“Make It Big” actually pre-dates “Kokomo”, and it’s very 80s and programmed. *That* track might be better blueprint for what “Kokomo” ended up like.



HeyJude, does "Make It Big" predate "Kokomo" in terms of a pre-1988 MIB demo or something? Troop Beverly Hills came out in 1989, so I'd always assumed it was written post-Kokomo.

Dunno why I had it in my brain that the movie was from 1987. The song as heard in the movie certainly pre-dates its release on the "Still Cruisin" album. The movie was in theaters in March 1989 and the BB album didn't come out until August. I would assume the BB recording/mix as heard in the film pre-dates that March release date by at least a few months, so I would presume it was recorded in late 1988.

I think the reason I assumed the movie was older is that the mix of the song heard during the opening credits of the film is *vastly* different from the "Still Cruisin'" album version, with parts of the song being an entirely different recording/take.

I don't have speakers at the moment, but this link *should* be the movie mix of the song:

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


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on August 02, 2018, 12:00:42 PM


I’d say the *other* ’86 single Melcher produced, “Rock and Roll to the Rescue”, is much more Kokomo-ish, which makes sense since Melcher wrote the track (by himself if I recall correctly), and while there has been some talk that Brian initially “produced” the session for that song, Melcher took the song over and also produced (similar to “California Dreamin’”).


I think “Rock and Roll to the Rescue” is rather underrated, and probably gets much less respect due to its over-the-top '80s production (which doesn't really bug me). It has a propulsive energy that very few BBs songs had at the time. Almost a bit like the energy of "Little Honda". There's a quite solid song buried in there, and some REALLY good group harmony vocals (all the "hey nows") that sound almost just like the '60s. Plus Carl's small vocal lead part is stellar. I don't mind Brian's lead either, which may be an unpopular opinion. It sounds at least like Brian was enthusiastic about it. In a way, this particular lead vocal of Brian's in unique in its delivery, and to me sounds not quite like any of his others.

It was a brave and rare choice to give Brian the lead on a BBs song during this era. In fact, it's basically the only Brian lead during the '80s (on a BBs song that wasn't a Landy-based solo track shoehorned into being a "BBs" song). I wonder what drove the decision to have Brian sing lead on this one; were they wooing him to rejoin the band on a more full-time basis or something?  Or maybe there was more label interest if Brian was more visibly attached to a BBs song?

But yeah, I also know about the really embarrassing performance of the band miming the song on some big variety show, where Brian looks suuuper out of it. I'm guessing that probably contributed to puting the kebosh to any more BBs singles with Brian lead vocals being pushed at the time. Plus the “Rock and Roll to the Rescue” official music video is the pits.

The band performed R&R to the Rescue for a short time in their live shows. They did it at Farm Aid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfwxe0W9h2A

(I could swear there used to be a pristine upload of their entire '86 Farm Aid set uploaded by Farm Aid itself, but I can't find it)

The live version sounds a little more organic, although messier and with Al (as I recall) clearly having a cold or laryngitis or something as he takes on Brian's lead lines.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 02, 2018, 12:45:46 PM


“Make It Big” actually pre-dates “Kokomo”, and it’s very 80s and programmed. *That* track might be better blueprint for what “Kokomo” ended up like.



HeyJude, does "Make It Big" predate "Kokomo" in terms of a pre-1988 MIB demo or something? Troop Beverly Hills came out in 1989, so I'd always assumed it was written post-Kokomo.

Dunno why I had it in my brain that the movie was from 1987. The song as heard in the movie certainly pre-dates its release on the "Still Cruisin" album. The movie was in theaters in March 1989 and the BB album didn't come out until August. I would assume the BB recording/mix as heard in the film pre-dates that March release date by at least a few months, so I would presume it was recorded in late 1988.

I think the reason I assumed the movie was older is that the mix of the song heard during the opening credits of the film is *vastly* different from the "Still Cruisin'" album version, with parts of the song being an entirely different recording/take.

I don't have speakers at the moment, but this link *should* be the movie mix of the song:

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

The movie mix of the song "Make it Big" is, IMO, awful and embarrassing. But somehow I completely love the Still Cruisin' album version. To me, that's the difference between horrid '80s production, and cheesy-yet-perfectly-fine-in-my-book '80s production.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 02, 2018, 12:47:08 PM


I’d say the *other* ’86 single Melcher produced, “Rock and Roll to the Rescue”, is much more Kokomo-ish, which makes sense since Melcher wrote the track (by himself if I recall correctly), and while there has been some talk that Brian initially “produced” the session for that song, Melcher took the song over and also produced (similar to “California Dreamin’”).


I think “Rock and Roll to the Rescue” is rather underrated, and probably gets much less respect due to its over-the-top '80s production (which doesn't really bug me). It has a propulsive energy that very few BBs songs had at the time. Almost a bit like the energy of "Little Honda". There's a quite solid song buried in there, and some REALLY good group harmony vocals (all the "hey nows") that sound almost just like the '60s. Plus Carl's small vocal lead part is stellar. I don't mind Brian's lead either, which may be an unpopular opinion. It sounds at least like Brian was enthusiastic about it. In a way, this particular lead vocal of Brian's in unique in its delivery, and to me sounds not quite like any of his others.

It was a brave and rare choice to give Brian the lead on a BBs song during this era. In fact, it's basically the only Brian lead during the '80s (on a BBs song that wasn't a Landy-based solo track shoehorned into being a "BBs" song). I wonder what drove the decision to have Brian sing lead on this one; were they wooing him to rejoin the band on a more full-time basis or something?  Or maybe there was more label interest if Brian was more visibly attached to a BBs song?

But yeah, I also know about the really embarrassing performance of the band miming the song on some big variety show, where Brian looks suuuper out of it. I'm guessing that probably contributed to puting the kebosh to any more BBs singles with Brian lead vocals being pushed at the time. Plus the “Rock and Roll to the Rescue” official music video is the pits.

The band performed R&R to the Rescue for a short time in their live shows. They did it at Farm Aid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfwxe0W9h2A

(I could swear there used to be a pristine upload of their entire '86 Farm Aid set uploaded by Farm Aid itself, but I can't find it)

The live version sounds a little more organic, although messier and with Al (as I recall) clearly having a cold or laryngitis or something as he takes on Brian's lead lines.

Did the band ever play it live with Brian in tow on lead?


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: Lonely Summer on August 02, 2018, 01:01:58 PM


I’d say the *other* ’86 single Melcher produced, “Rock and Roll to the Rescue”, is much more Kokomo-ish, which makes sense since Melcher wrote the track (by himself if I recall correctly), and while there has been some talk that Brian initially “produced” the session for that song, Melcher took the song over and also produced (similar to “California Dreamin’”).


I think “Rock and Roll to the Rescue” is rather underrated, and probably gets much less respect due to its over-the-top '80s production (which doesn't really bug me). It has a propulsive energy that very few BBs songs had at the time. Almost a bit like the energy of "Little Honda". There's a quite solid song buried in there, and some REALLY good group harmony vocals (all the "hey nows") that sound almost just like the '60s. Plus Carl's small vocal lead part is stellar. I don't mind Brian's lead either, which may be an unpopular opinion. It sounds at least like Brian was enthusiastic about it. In a way, this particular lead vocal of Brian's in unique in its delivery, and to me sounds not quite like any of his others.

It was a brave and rare choice to give Brian the lead on a BBs song during this era. In fact, it's basically the only Brian lead during the '80s (on a BBs song that wasn't a Landy-based solo track shoehorned into being a "BBs" song). I wonder what drove the decision to have Brian sing lead on this one; were they wooing him to rejoin the band on a more full-time basis or something?  Or maybe there was more label interest if Brian was more visibly attached to a BBs song?

But yeah, I also know about the really embarrassing performance of the band miming the song on some big variety show, where Brian looks suuuper out of it. I'm guessing that probably contributed to puting the kebosh to any more BBs singles with Brian lead vocals being pushed at the time. Plus the “Rock and Roll to the Rescue” official music video is the pits.

The band performed R&R to the Rescue for a short time in their live shows. They did it at Farm Aid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfwxe0W9h2A

(I could swear there used to be a pristine upload of their entire '86 Farm Aid set uploaded by Farm Aid itself, but I can't find it)

The live version sounds a little more organic, although messier and with Al (as I recall) clearly having a cold or laryngitis or something as he takes on Brian's lead lines.

Did the band ever play it live with Brian in tow on lead?
If they did, I've never come across a clip of it. Brian's vocal isn't bad, but the song feels like one that would be more natural for Mike to sing lead on - which he ended up doing live, anyway, so might as well have had him do it on the record, too.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 02, 2018, 01:09:11 PM


I’d say the *other* ’86 single Melcher produced, “Rock and Roll to the Rescue”, is much more Kokomo-ish, which makes sense since Melcher wrote the track (by himself if I recall correctly), and while there has been some talk that Brian initially “produced” the session for that song, Melcher took the song over and also produced (similar to “California Dreamin’”).


I think “Rock and Roll to the Rescue” is rather underrated, and probably gets much less respect due to its over-the-top '80s production (which doesn't really bug me). It has a propulsive energy that very few BBs songs had at the time. Almost a bit like the energy of "Little Honda". There's a quite solid song buried in there, and some REALLY good group harmony vocals (all the "hey nows") that sound almost just like the '60s. Plus Carl's small vocal lead part is stellar. I don't mind Brian's lead either, which may be an unpopular opinion. It sounds at least like Brian was enthusiastic about it. In a way, this particular lead vocal of Brian's in unique in its delivery, and to me sounds not quite like any of his others.

It was a brave and rare choice to give Brian the lead on a BBs song during this era. In fact, it's basically the only Brian lead during the '80s (on a BBs song that wasn't a Landy-based solo track shoehorned into being a "BBs" song). I wonder what drove the decision to have Brian sing lead on this one; were they wooing him to rejoin the band on a more full-time basis or something?  Or maybe there was more label interest if Brian was more visibly attached to a BBs song?

But yeah, I also know about the really embarrassing performance of the band miming the song on some big variety show, where Brian looks suuuper out of it. I'm guessing that probably contributed to puting the kebosh to any more BBs singles with Brian lead vocals being pushed at the time. Plus the “Rock and Roll to the Rescue” official music video is the pits.

The band performed R&R to the Rescue for a short time in their live shows. They did it at Farm Aid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfwxe0W9h2A

(I could swear there used to be a pristine upload of their entire '86 Farm Aid set uploaded by Farm Aid itself, but I can't find it)

The live version sounds a little more organic, although messier and with Al (as I recall) clearly having a cold or laryngitis or something as he takes on Brian's lead lines.

Did the band ever play it live with Brian in tow on lead?
If they did, I've never come across a clip of it. Brian's vocal isn't bad, but the song feels like one that would be more natural for Mike to sing lead on - which he ended up doing live, anyway, so might as well have had him do it on the record, too.

I agree that it's a more obvious choice for a Mike vocal; that's why I'm glad to see that expectation turned on its head with Brian singing, because it's an interesting glimpse at when they mix things up. Kind of with Mike singing lead on Meant for You; not what people would expect Mike to sing/sound like, but rad all the same.


Title: Re: Kokomo Is 30 article in Stereogum
Post by: HeyJude on August 02, 2018, 01:15:01 PM
Most of the lead for R&R to the Rescue is in the (1986) Al and Brian vocal range, which I'm sure explains why Al took over Brian's lines when they did the song live.