The Smiley Smile Message Board

Smiley Smile Stuff => General On Topic Discussions => Topic started by: the captain on June 20, 2009, 07:14:05 PM



Title: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 20, 2009, 07:14:05 PM
There are lots of Mike Love haters (and a few staunch defenders). There are plenty of Brian Wilson lovers (and a few antagonists). We're not lacking those incessantly praising Dennis Wilson's syrup/genius. People love Blondie/Ricky/Flame stuff. And if I may speak entirely seriously and certainly without a hint of sarcasm, if I so much as think about Al Jardine I break out in hives and have vivid hallucinations about beating him up to "The Tijuana Jail" and "M.T.A."

So ... John Stamos. Not to over-simplify, but let's over-simplify. Love him or hate him, and why?

And if anyone cares to be slightly more nuanced than a Jerry Springer show, I'd be really curious to hear any insight into how he got connected to the band in the first place. I know his pre-Full House show included him trying out for a gig with them, so he was obviously connected at that point. Was it a matter of an increasingly successful and attractive actor-fan just wanting to meet them? Was he masterminding a cheesefest trample over Dennis's grave?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on June 20, 2009, 07:22:29 PM
I wouldn't say I love him, but I like him - for two reasons. First, he is the biggest "celebrity" fan of The Beach Boys that I can think of. And he's been one for a long time, through many changes. He's given the band publicity and exposure and I appreciate that. Second, the guy can play. Oh, he's no virtuoso, but whether it's the drums, rhythym guitar, vocals, or just percussion, he gets the job done. I mean, he's not a liability. So, I hope he sticks around and continues to show up occasionally.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 20, 2009, 07:29:52 PM
Didn't I say we were looking to over-simplify? LOVE OR HATE!?

I'll (lie and) say this: I love him.

Because I can't possibly have anything against him. What, his biggest sin is taking a job in the band that most of us consider the (or at least a) favorite of all time? I won't fault him there.

Note, I'm not blaming him for "Forever." I'm going to blame the horrible, horrible times through which he came of age, and the musical climate of pop at the time. Ugh. Shudder.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 20, 2009, 07:35:59 PM


   STAMOS = BEACH BOY BOOSTER SHOT

  1000 Words , take a look:

  http://www.flickr.com/photos/mpdehaan/3641850675/sizes/l/in/set-72157594372334773/


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on June 20, 2009, 07:38:20 PM
Note, I'm not blaming him for "Forever."

You better not BLAME him! He should be given credit. For years, "Forever" was a dark horse, rarely mentioned in the same company as Brian's ballads, at least among casual BB fans. But, Stamos picked that song out and gave it exposure to millions of viewers/listeners who might not have found it - unless they bought the Surf's Up/Sunflower 2fer or the boxed set. And, the Summer In Paradise version isn't THAT bad; it's OK.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Chris Brown on June 20, 2009, 07:48:17 PM
Note, I'm not blaming him for "Forever."

You better not BLAME him! He should be given credit. For years, "Forever" was a dark horse, rarely mentioned in the same company as Brian's ballads, at least among casual BB fans. But, Stamos picked that song out and gave it exposure to millions of viewers/listeners who might not have found it - unless they bought the Surf's Up/Sunflower 2fer or the boxed set. And, the Summer In Paradise version isn't THAT bad; it's OK.

I agree Sheriff, I'm certainly glad that he brought that song and the Beach Boys back into public view in the early 90s.  It's difficult to hate a guy who got to live his dream and play drums with his favorite band. 


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 20, 2009, 07:51:17 PM
And, the Summer In Paradise version isn't THAT bad; it's OK.

I would have agreed with you up to this. That version is really bad.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 20, 2009, 07:52:03 PM
Evolution :

 Deja Vu band -  Habib, Philip Bardowell and John Stamos - Join Jan & Dean, join The Beach Boys........


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on June 20, 2009, 08:01:08 PM
And, the Summer In Paradise version isn't THAT bad; it's OK.

I would have agreed with you up to this. That version is really bad.

I know I'm never gonna change your mind because you hate the production, but I'm gonna defend it anyway....Somebody (Melcher? Stamos?) made the decision to turn it into a semi-power ballad. I can live with that, and the guitar work is pretty good. I think they intentionally tried to avoid simply copying Dennis' version, and amped it up a bit. Around that time, Chicago was very successful doing this, and I always felt the Beach Boys were trying their hand at it. Stamos' vocal is passable, the harmonies are fine, and Carl is magnificent. This isn't just another attempt to defend SIP; "Forever" isn't my favorite song on the album, but I can enjoy it. I think younger fans could, too.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 20, 2009, 08:06:37 PM
I think younger fans could, too.

I don't know. Keep in mind, I'm of the age that those intended "younger fans" fell into. When was it, '91 or '92? I've have been 15 or so. Power ballads were THE thing for the previous four or five years (at least), no doubt about it. But I can't imagine having liked a power ballad from a bunch of old guys (remember, this is a 15-year-old talking), much less one that is being hawked on a TV show. I'd guess it was most successful among the really young: tween girls, maybe. And gods bless, I hope it worked. I hope there are right now a bunch of 26-year-old Dennis Wilson-loving women.

Wait, haven't there probably been a similar bunch of women each and every year since, oh, 1958 or so?  ;) :smokin


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 20, 2009, 08:08:34 PM
The Great Carl Wilson
told me he was 100%
behind the remake of
Forever.

Gary Griffin had a big part
in it too......


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 20, 2009, 08:13:09 PM
I'm sure the great Carl Wilson was also 100% behind the release of his two solo albums, both of which are sh*t. I'd imagine he was after a hit with "Forever," which is nothing to be ashamed of. But it's worth keeping in mind.

Are you writing in verse, Outie? What's with the line breaks?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: grillo on June 20, 2009, 08:13:33 PM
I choose love


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 20, 2009, 08:15:22 PM
Now we're talking.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 20, 2009, 08:31:50 PM
   
   Just for You:

   http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=57451


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 20, 2009, 08:38:07 PM
Who doesn't like a shirtless Stamos getting out of bed?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 20, 2009, 08:42:01 PM
 

 Speaking of bed, it's time to hit it.

  11:41 EST

 Sweet Dreams

 


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Mahalo on June 20, 2009, 08:59:22 PM
John Stamos can come to one of my parties anytime.... just as long as he sings Forever.  :rock Seriously.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Wrightfan on June 20, 2009, 09:01:17 PM
Can't stand him...


STAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOS!


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: TdHabib on June 20, 2009, 09:04:25 PM
Evolution :

 Deja Vu band -  Habib, Philip Bardowell and John Stamos - Join Jan & Dean, join The Beach Boys........
What the hell am I doing there?! ;D


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: tpesky on June 20, 2009, 09:13:48 PM
does nothing to enhance Beach Boy fandom at all, or add anything. They don't need a B- (at best) celebrity on stage. It just produces more cringe worthy moments. I am sure he's a talented musician and all and his version of Forever is fine, but he serves no purpose in the Beach Boys.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Wilsonista on June 20, 2009, 09:15:25 PM
There are lots of Mike Love haters (and a few staunch defenders). There are plenty of Brian Wilson lovers (and a few antagonists). We're not lacking those incessantly praising Dennis Wilson's syrup/genius. People love Blondie/Ricky/Flame stuff. And if I may speak entirely seriously and certainly without a hint of sarcasm, if I so much as think about Al Jardine I break out in hives and have vivid hallucinations about beating him up to "The Tijuana Jail" and "M.T.A."

So ... John Stamos. Not to over-simplify, but let's over-simplify. Love him or hate him, and why?

And if anyone cares to be slightly more nuanced than a Jerry Springer show, I'd be really curious to hear any insight into how he got connected to the band in the first place. I know his pre-Full House show included him trying out for a gig with them, so he was obviously connected at that point. Was it a matter of an increasingly successful and attractive actor-fan just wanting to meet them? Was he masterminding a cheesefest trample over Dennis's grave?

What's your beef with AL Jardine? OK, he's  not the greatest songwriter in the world, but as a singer, he's easily the most underrated member.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Wilsonista on June 20, 2009, 09:26:47 PM
OK, I feel like I grew up with Stamos. My mom was a huge General Hospital fan and became a fan of JS ("Blackie" looked like my older brother). He's a fine actor (I actually enjoyed seeing him in the final seasons of ER).

Back in the 90's, I wasn't a fan of his remake of Forever (I have a near-fatal allergy to power ballads). I'm softened my stance, For what it was, it's OK and what it was is something made specifically for a TV show. Remember, this was Uncle Jesse's cover and had to sound like something the charcater would have done as opposed to how the actor would have done it. The Stamos/Full House version I really liked the the first one he did which was done for his character's wedding.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fdFA4QSE2I

It's worth noting that when he performs the song with Mike and Bruce, they stay true to Dennis' arrangement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkW8fIrJmb0


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Magic Transistor Radio on June 20, 2009, 10:48:10 PM
I would have to say HATE if I had to choose one. Full House and the 90s BBs was a gigantic cheese fest. I am sure that a lot of people that saw that have accociated the BBs with that and have hated them ever since.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: CarCrazyCutie on June 21, 2009, 12:38:41 AM
I'd say strongly dislike. I've noticed alot of people my age are only associating the Beach Boys with Full House, and because of that not taking them as seriously as they would, say, the Beatles or the Rolling Stones. I loved Full House, especially "Uncle Jesse", and I really loved the BBs. I knew them as two completely separate entities that happened to join forces (which at the time totally blew my apparently easily impressed mind), but I'm guessing many of my peers hadn't been so BB enlightened prior to seeing them on FH and just saw them as some older surfer dudes that sang with "Uncle Jesse" (& had a super cheesy lead singer). This unfortunately seems to be a presumption that has stuck with them. Strike 1 against Stamos :( When I was younger all I knew about them was that I loved the music rather than stuff about individual members, and I definitely didn't know Forever was a BB song. So when I found out it was Dennis', how great he was, and how amazing the original was (I never liked Stamos' version) and that JS was filling in as drummer occasionally I was royally ticked at him. Strike 2 >:( And honestly, he's just way to friendly with Dr. Love (his words, not mine) for my liking. Strike 3. I'm becoming totally convinced that in real life he wants to be Dennis..........or Elvis ::)..............or the fat kid from Stand By Me :lol


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Aegir on June 21, 2009, 01:13:00 AM
There's only two things I don't like about John Stamos, the way he sings the low part on "Summertime Blues", and the way everyone freaks out whenever he's on stage with the Beach Boys, as if he's the star of the show. He is at best the fourth best thing there, 1) the music, 2) Mike, 3) Bruce


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Mahalo on June 21, 2009, 01:56:40 AM
If Stamos showed up to any one of our crib's and asked for a beer, I'm sure we'd all oblige.... Stamos rules. He loved Dennis and his music. He's alright in my book.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 21, 2009, 04:01:37 AM

 The kids dig Stamos!:

 http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=9768958


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: A Million Units In Jan! on June 21, 2009, 04:23:30 AM
However, are we looking at it all wrong? When Stamos first joined, he was hot stuff because of Full House. If you were the BB's at that time, trying to be hip and cool, why wouldn't you want someone like John Stamos playing with you and taking an interest in your music? Hell, I don't like John Stamos all that much, but all he did was play music with a band that he loved-who wouldn't do that? If anything, the BB's took advantage of Stamos, trying to use his star power to their advantage.

 I can't believe I just typed that last sentence.  :o


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 21, 2009, 06:27:08 AM

What's your beef with AL Jardine? OK, he's  not the greatest songwriter in the world, but as a singer, he's easily the most underrated member.

Too short.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Wilsonista on June 21, 2009, 08:55:57 AM

What's your beef with AL Jardine? OK, he's  not the greatest songwriter in the world, but as a singer, he's easily the most underrated member.

Too short.

Oh. I guess you want to beat up Davy Jones, Paul Simon and Prince too?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 21, 2009, 09:10:36 AM

What's your beef with AL Jardine? OK, he's  not the greatest songwriter in the world, but as a singer, he's easily the most underrated member.
Too short.

Oh. I guess you want to beat up Davy Jones, Paul Simon and Prince too?

Yeah, sure, what the hell. And Too Short, too, for that matter. And Billy Barty. And Tom Cruise. And in case you haven't figured it out, I have no beef with Al Jardine, dull and slippery oldies remakes aside. I actually like most of his early 70s stuff, as well as his voice.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Shane on June 21, 2009, 09:57:12 AM
My opinion on Stamos?  Let me set this up. 

I'm 30 years old, and a huge Beach Boys fan.  My best friend is 31 and is not a huge Beach Boys fan.  A month ago, we went to a CD store, where I was shocked to find a copy of SIP in the used bin.  I bought it, and put it on in the car on the way home.  I had never heard the album before.

I knew I was testing the bounds of friendship while subjecting my friend not only to my Beach Boys obsession, but to one of the worst albums they made. 

The song "Forever" came up on the CD player.  My friend immediately said, "HEY!  I remember this!  John Stamos sang this song on Full House.  Good song!"

I figure that anyone who can expose Mr. Joe Average to a song like "Forever" is all right in my book.  Its great to have someone of notoriety in our corner as a fan.
 


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: variable2 on June 21, 2009, 10:11:43 AM

What's your beef with AL Jardine? OK, he's  not the greatest songwriter in the world, but as a singer, he's easily the most underrated member.
Too short.

Oh. I guess you want to beat up Davy Jones, Paul Simon and Prince too?

Yeah, sure, what the hell. And Too Short, too, for that matter. And Billy Barty. And Tom Cruise. And in case you haven't figured it out, I have no beef with Al Jardine, dull and slippery oldies remakes aside. I actually like most of his early 70s stuff, as well as his voice.

I like everything about Al Jardine except for his writing, his musical taste, his singing, his height and his teeth.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Shady on June 21, 2009, 10:17:21 AM

What's your beef with AL Jardine? OK, he's  not the greatest songwriter in the world, but as a singer, he's easily the most underrated member.
Too short.

Oh. I guess you want to beat up Davy Jones, Paul Simon and Prince too?

Yeah, sure, what the hell. And Too Short, too, for that matter. And Billy Barty. And Tom Cruise. And in case you haven't figured it out, I have no beef with Al Jardine, dull and slippery oldies remakes aside. I actually like most of his early 70s stuff, as well as his voice.

I like everything about Al Jardine except for his writing, his musical taste, his singing, his height and his teeth.

You serious? that's insane

He does not resinate with me, my Beach Boys obsession begins in 1964 and ends in 1985.

He came after that so I have no time for him.

By the by, how can John Stamos be the the biggest celebrity BB fan, he's not more popular than Megan Fox  ;D


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: shelter on June 21, 2009, 10:39:14 AM
John Stamos is a BB fan who got the chance to sing on a BB album and perform with them on stage - and he took that chance. Can't really blame him, right? I sure would've done the same thing...


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: The infamous Baldwin Organ on June 21, 2009, 11:01:57 AM
I think John Stamos does a great job, and having him involved adds plenty for younger people in the audience. Don't underestimate his popularity with people who aren't hard-core fans.

I saw him sing another song besides Forever, I think 'Good Timin', and he had a great voice for it. As long as he's still willing to do it, they should keep him.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: variable2 on June 21, 2009, 11:11:12 AM

What's your beef with AL Jardine? OK, he's  not the greatest songwriter in the world, but as a singer, he's easily the most underrated member.
Too short.

Oh. I guess you want to beat up Davy Jones, Paul Simon and Prince too?

Yeah, sure, what the hell. And Too Short, too, for that matter. And Billy Barty. And Tom Cruise. And in case you haven't figured it out, I have no beef with Al Jardine, dull and slippery oldies remakes aside. I actually like most of his early 70s stuff, as well as his voice.

I like everything about Al Jardine except for his writing, his musical taste, his singing, his height and his teeth.

You serious?

nope


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: SG7 on June 21, 2009, 11:14:31 AM
He's okay. The made for TV thing he did though kind of sucked.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Aegir on June 21, 2009, 11:23:02 AM
However, are we looking at it all wrong? When Stamos first joined, he was hot stuff because of Full House. If you were the BB's at that time, trying to be hip and cool, why wouldn't you want someone like John Stamos playing with you and taking an interest in your music?
Stamos had a connection with the Beach Boys before he was in Full House, so this theory doesn't work.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 21, 2009, 12:46:03 PM
However, are we looking at it all wrong? When Stamos first joined, he was hot stuff because of Full House. If you were the BB's at that time, trying to be hip and cool, why wouldn't you want someone like John Stamos playing with you and taking an interest in your music?
Stamos had a connection with the Beach Boys before he was in Full House, so this theory doesn't work.

A Million Units may have his/her facts wrong, but it doesn't change the point of adding youth and sex appeal for a younger generation.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on June 21, 2009, 01:43:30 PM
I would have to say HATE if I had to choose one. Full House and the 90s BBs was a gigantic cheese fest. I am sure that a lot of people that saw that have accociated the BBs with that and have hated them ever since.

Bingo. :P


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: oldsurferdude on June 21, 2009, 01:56:06 PM
does nothing to enhance Beach Boy fandom at all, or add anything. They don't need a B- (at best) celebrity on stage. It just produces more cringe worthy moments. I am sure he's a talented musician and all and his version of Forever is fine, but he serves no purpose in the Beach Boys.
. :smokin


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Pretty Funky on June 21, 2009, 02:17:26 PM
He is good looking, has a full head of hair, great teeth and sings with the band that keeps us here posting and seems to be friends with ex group members. While we as fans speculate on who said what 40 years ago to who, he can ask in person. Face it. We are jealous. We want to be Stamos!

Onstage he is to the girls what the cheerleaders were to the guys. Eye-candy. I wish I could be that no talent bum Stamos!


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Aegir on June 21, 2009, 03:27:40 PM
Onstage he is to the girls what the cheerleaders were to the guys.
An annoying cringe-inducing distraction?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Pretty Funky on June 21, 2009, 03:41:26 PM
Yes!

I am qualified and ready for that gig. While not eye-candy, I fit the no-talent bill fine ;D


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on June 21, 2009, 08:14:46 PM
no talent bum Stamos!

Competent guitarist, drummer, singer and actor? Yeah, no-talent bum. I'm sure you've got him beat.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: MBE on June 21, 2009, 08:41:18 PM
does nothing to enhance Beach Boy fandom at all, or add anything. They don't need a B- (at best) celebrity on stage. It just produces more cringe worthy moments. I am sure he's a talented musician and all and his version of Forever is fine, but he serves no purpose in the Beach Boys.

I have to agree. Hey I don't blame him, but he's part of what made the post Dennis Beach Boys dorky.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Pretty Funky on June 22, 2009, 02:44:27 AM
no talent bum Stamos!

Competent guitarist, drummer, singer and actor? Yeah, no-talent bum. I'm sure you've got him beat.

Tongue firmly in cheek I assure you Luther.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: shelter on June 22, 2009, 03:13:57 AM
Stamos had a connection with the Beach Boys before he was in Full House, so this theory doesn't work.

He sang on the Papa Doo Run Run album and that was years before Full House.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: phirnis on June 22, 2009, 04:50:18 AM
I couldn't care less about John Stamos. As I seriously don't remember catching even one single episode of Full House on German TV, I don't have any memory whatsoever of the Beach Boys' appearances on that show. Did he fit their image at that particular point in time from what I can tell? Probably yes. If he's a competent musician indeed I don't see why he shouldn't be in the band the Beach Boys had by then become.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Alex on June 22, 2009, 07:42:08 AM
Stamos, and that whole era of the BBs, represents everything this SMiLE-o-phile despises about the BBs. Now if Stamos sang Do You Like Worms, Cabin Essence, or Surf's Up onstage I might have a different opinion.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 23, 2009, 04:44:44 AM
 Alex -
 Mike & Bruce did  Heroes & Villains  in concert recently.......


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 23, 2009, 06:08:32 AM
 Smile, enough for ya?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: LittleSurferGirl on June 23, 2009, 01:31:46 PM
Well I cant say love or hate. Sorry...

I like him, I used to love Full House when I was little [keep in mind I'm only 21 so that show was hugely popular] & I've been a BB fan since about the age of 5. Endless Summer along with an Elvis greatest hits was my first album I ever got. So its been love ever since...

Anyway, I remember seeing re-runs of Full House when I was about 7 or 8 probably and the one where The Beach Boys made an appearance on it. That made me think they were the coolest band EVER. Lol, anyway...John Stamos, I think its cool he's a big BB fan & tours with them, he's been a fan now for how long? Forever it seems...

Though he may amp up the cheese factor a bit  ;D


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on June 23, 2009, 01:38:46 PM
Well I cant say love or hate. Sorry...

I like him, I used to love Full House when I was little [keep in mind I'm only 21 so that show was hugely popular] & I've been a BB fan since about the age of 5. Endless Summer along with an Elvis greatest hits was my first album I ever got. So its been love ever since...

Anyway, I remember seeing re-runs of Full House when I was about 7 or 8 probably and the one where The Beach Boys made an appearance on it. That made me think they were the coolest band EVER. Lol, anyway...John Stamos, I think its cool he's a big BB fan & tours with them, he's been a fan now for how long? Forever it seems...

Though he may amp up the cheese factor a bit  ;D


As Robert De Niro (Alec Baldwin) used to say on the "Joe Pesci Show" on SNL, "just a little bit".
No offense, Brittany. Different strokes for different folks (Oops, just accidentally referenced another old sitcom!) ;D


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 23, 2009, 02:21:11 PM

 John Stamos @ The Mike & Bruce Pool Party  6/18/09! :

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xM7oN2WEN8


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: tpesky on June 23, 2009, 03:24:36 PM
That's the BEST I have heard Mike Love sound in a long, long time., probably since the early 80's.
He sounded good last year when I saw him, but better on this


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 23, 2009, 03:31:18 PM
Mohegan Sun Arena ?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Lisa Bonahue on June 23, 2009, 07:52:51 PM
I met John Stamos awhile back when I was backstage at one of the Beach Boys shows and he was a really nice guy, he made you feel like you had been his friend forever and he just sat there and talked about a bunch of different things while also eating his dinner at the same time.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: melissalynn on June 23, 2009, 08:00:35 PM
I don't mind him. I wouldn't say I greatly like or adore him in any way, but he's a genuine Beach Boys fan, and I don't think anyone can dispute that fact. He's talented in his own way, even though I'm not terribly a big fan of his. He's a decent actor. I enjoyed 'Full House' as a kid.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Shady on June 23, 2009, 08:16:59 PM
I don't mind him. I wouldn't say I greatly like or adore him in any way, but he's a genuine Beach Boys fan, and I don't think anyone can dispute that fact. He's talented in his own way, even though I'm not terribly a big fan of his. He's a decent actor. I enjoyed 'Full House' as a kid.

Great roast master too, check out the Bob saget roast, too funny.

One guy get's him good for 'wearing a pink tank top in a beach boys video'  ;D


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Alex on June 24, 2009, 08:12:16 AM
Alex -
 Mike & Bruce did  Heroes & Villains  in concert recently.......

I wasn't talking about the current Mike and Bruce shows, I was talking about the Kokomo era...
Now I don't mind Stamos as an actor, as bad as Full House was (can't believe I actually liked it as a kid...it's still fun to watch for a good laugh every now and then, kind of like SIP.). I loved him on the Bob Saget roast.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 24, 2009, 08:16:05 AM
I got a few laughs from Full House too!


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: tpesky on June 24, 2009, 12:18:36 PM
Mohegan Sun Arena ?

Yup Mohegan Sun Arena! He had the Mike Love voice that night. John Cowsill did an awesome Darlin as well


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Outie 315 on June 24, 2009, 02:06:47 PM
 
   David Marks was in da house!!!!

   3 Boys that nite.

   Did you go to the after show party
   @ Tuscany's ???

   I enjoyed the big screens and
   all the plants on stage!

   Very good show that nite.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: melissalynn on June 24, 2009, 02:12:12 PM
I did enjoy him at the Bob Sagat roast...hilarious!


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: LittleSurferGirl on June 24, 2009, 03:39:01 PM
Havent got a chance to catch that! Hmm I'll have to catch a rerun if they have one on comedy central.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on August 23, 2009, 03:27:29 PM
WHY WAS I NOT MADE AWARE OF THIS?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd20fK0lQlo&feature=related


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: hypehat on August 23, 2009, 03:30:57 PM
WHY WAS I NOT MADE AWARE OF THIS?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd20fK0lQlo&feature=related

I wish i hadn't been made aware of it  :o


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on August 23, 2009, 03:31:34 PM
You, sir, are in error. Your life is better now, whether you know it or not. Oh yeah. Better. STAMOS!


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: hypehat on August 23, 2009, 04:19:03 PM
I have a sudden urge to track down Summer In Paradise....  :-D


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Chris Brown on August 23, 2009, 05:14:50 PM
WHY WAS I NOT MADE AWARE OF THIS?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd20fK0lQlo&feature=related

I wish i hadn't been made aware of it  :o

Oh God, I actually remember watching that as a kid.  I don't think I appreciated how disturbing it was back then.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Alex on August 23, 2009, 05:28:33 PM
I looove Stamos so much that I'll make sweet lovin' with him until the sun goes down and we'll even do more when his mama's not around!!! Oh wait, that's what I'd do to Dennis! Maybe I'm bisexual and didn't even know it!!  :lol :lol :lol Just kidding!!! But if I were gay or a woman, I'd definitely do what I just said I'd do!!


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on August 23, 2009, 05:32:29 PM
I liked that post more than I oughta.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Alex on August 23, 2009, 06:14:58 PM
I liked that post more than I oughta.

That's what a couple beers will do to someone!


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Aegir on August 24, 2009, 01:36:26 AM
Well oh my oh gosh oh gee.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: phirnis on August 24, 2009, 04:36:45 AM
WHY WAS I NOT MADE AWARE OF THIS?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd20fK0lQlo&feature=related

That clip reminds me of watching Wayne's World.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Eric Aniversario on August 26, 2009, 12:36:16 AM
I have never seen that.  Was that from Full House?  I thought I had seen every episode of that show.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Mahalo on August 26, 2009, 01:01:57 AM
Why I love S.S. Message Board.....

a) We can discuss the virtues of John Stamos as a Beach Boy.... Stamos Rules.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Chris Brown on August 26, 2009, 12:28:09 PM
I have never seen that.  Was that from Full House?  I thought I had seen every episode of that show.

Yeah that was from Full House.  Uncle Jesse goes to Japan to tour (after having a hit there with his version of "Forever") and ultimately discovers that he doesn't like it and comes back home.

It's utterly sad that I remember that entire episode like I just saw it yesterday.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again on August 26, 2009, 02:23:41 PM
I've told this story before and someone actually called the Moderators on me!!!!!  :P

I met Stamos at some work related party and I told him I was a huge huge, Beach Boys (and Kokomo lovin) fan and he instantly went from friendly celebrity remove to my best friend in the world. We talked Beach Boys for a few minutes and he gave me his card and number and wanted to be "Beach Boys friends" So, the guy's actually the coolest Beach Boys fan I've ever met!!! (In person, that is! No offense Luther! >:D)


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Chris Brown on August 26, 2009, 09:35:46 PM
I've told this story before and someone actually called the Moderators on me!!!!!  :P

I met Stamos at some work related party and I told him I was a huge huge, Beach Boys (and Kokomo lovin) fan and he instantly went from friendly celebrity remove to my best friend in the world. We talked Beach Boys for a few minutes and he gave me his card and number and wanted to be "Beach Boys friends" So, the guy's actually the coolest Beach Boys fan I've ever met!!! (In person, that is! No offense Luther! >:D)

Wow, that sounds incredibly awesome.  Nice to know that John is really just a Beach Boys geek like the rest of us. 


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Jay on August 26, 2009, 10:04:35 PM
John Stamos is the pimple on the ass of the Beach Boys's career in the 1980's and early 1990's.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on August 27, 2009, 02:42:24 PM
John Stamos is the pimple on the ass of the Beach Boys's career in the 1980's and early 1990's.

The rosy bright spot that stands out? Agreed.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Jay on August 27, 2009, 07:25:07 PM
John Stamos is the pimple on the ass of the Beach Boys's career in the 1980's and early 1990's.

The rosy bright spot that stands out? Agreed.
No, the kind that bleeds. The kind that won't go away untill you seek professional help. The kind that scabs over, and turns yellow and green.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: the captain on August 28, 2009, 01:39:27 PM
John Stamos is the pimple on the ass of the Beach Boys's career in the 1980's and early 1990's.

The rosy bright spot that stands out? Agreed.
No, the kind that bleeds. The kind that won't go away untill you seek professional help. The kind that scabs over, and turns yellow and green.

Oh. Gross.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Jay on August 28, 2009, 11:37:54 PM
John Stamos is the pimple on the ass of the Beach Boys's career in the 1980's and early 1990's.

The rosy bright spot that stands out? Agreed.
No, the kind that bleeds. The kind that won't go away untill you seek professional help. The kind that scabs over, and turns yellow and green.

Oh. Gross.
:lol


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: bluesno1fann on January 21, 2014, 12:45:23 AM
Neither. I don't mind him, and I wouldn't mind giving Full House a try.

But I am glad he didn't become a official Beach Boy!


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on January 21, 2014, 04:49:17 AM
This thread is kinda entertaining, but I mostly enjoyed the next fan stories:

My opinion on Stamos?  Let me set this up. 

I'm 30 years old, and a huge Beach Boys fan.  My best friend is 31 and is not a huge Beach Boys fan.  A month ago, we went to a CD store, where I was shocked to find a copy of SIP in the used bin.  I bought it, and put it on in the car on the way home.  I had never heard the album before.

I knew I was testing the bounds of friendship while subjecting my friend not only to my Beach Boys obsession, but to one of the worst albums they made. 

The song "Forever" came up on the CD player.  My friend immediately said, "HEY!  I remember this!  John Stamos sang this song on Full House.  Good song!"

I figure that anyone who can expose Mr. Joe Average to a song like "Forever" is all right in my book.  Its great to have someone of notoriety in our corner as a fan.

I met John Stamos awhile back when I was backstage at one of the Beach Boys shows and he was a really nice guy, he made you feel like you had been his friend forever and he just sat there and talked about a bunch of different things while also eating his dinner at the same time.

I met Stamos at some work-related party and I told him I was a huge huge, Beach Boys (and Kokomo-lovin') fan and he instantly went from friendly celebrity remove to my best friend in the world. We talked Beach Boys for a few minutes and he gave me his card and number and wanted to be "Beach Boys friends". So, the guy's actually the coolest Beach Boys fan I've ever met!!!
Thank you, Shane, Lisa & Erik! I knew that John is kind towards casual people, I respect him for that. However, I strongly dislike his version of "Forever", it's godawful. And frankly, I think he has average looks (not to mention he's old by now).


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: runnersdialzero on January 21, 2014, 12:43:15 PM
I had a dream a few days ago that I was going to get my picture taken with Mike, Bruce and John Stamos before a Beach Boys show (I've never been to a Baech Boys show). Mike and Bruce were decent but kind of (understandably) rushed and short, and I think I did something to piss Mike off. Sorry Mike. Stamos, on the other hand, was super nice and took the time to talk to me about the band. His late 80s mullet was inexplicably intact and I think he was wearing a whit tux. So yeah, in dreams, he was a super nice guy.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Cabinessenceking on January 21, 2014, 02:30:34 PM
He's not a Beach Boy.

Otherwise I have nothing against him playing his kongas or whatever in Mike's band.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: retrokid67 on January 21, 2014, 10:25:01 PM
I'd say strongly dislike. I've noticed alot of people my age are only associating the Beach Boys with Full House, and because of that not taking them as seriously as they would, say, the Beatles or the Rolling Stones. I loved Full House, especially "Uncle Jesse", and I really loved the BBs. I knew them as two completely separate entities that happened to join forces (which at the time totally blew my apparently easily impressed mind), but I'm guessing many of my peers hadn't been so BB enlightened prior to seeing them on FH and just saw them as some older surfer dudes that sang with "Uncle Jesse" (& had a super cheesy lead singer). This unfortunately seems to be a presumption that has stuck with them. Strike 1 against Stamos :( When I was younger all I knew about them was that I loved the music rather than stuff about individual members, and I definitely didn't know Forever was a BB song. So when I found out it was Dennis', how great he was, and how amazing the original was (I never liked Stamos' version) and that JS was filling in as drummer occasionally I was royally ticked at him. Strike 2 >:( And honestly, he's just way to friendly with Dr. Love (his words, not mine) for my liking. Strike 3. I'm becoming totally convinced that in real life he wants to be Dennis..........or Elvis ::)..............or the fat kid from Stand By Me :lol

Couldn't agree with you more  :-D. Speaking of which, was Dennis his favorite member or is Mike?  There was so much conflict between the two of them that I don't see, well....is he just neutral to the fact that Denny and Mike became enemies at the end or? and if Dennis had been still alive, would the guys be more reluctant to bring "Forever" back out?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on January 23, 2014, 01:58:06 AM
So yeah, in dreams, he was a super nice guy.
I don't see what's your point there. Does it mean you take it skeptically when folks tell the real meeting stories that John was nice to them? I for one don't think someone would make up this kinda stuff. It'd be absolutely absurd. Also, John is no Mike or Bruce, his ego is smaller.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Rick5150 on July 30, 2017, 05:19:33 AM
I have always liked John Stamos. While I cannot say that I loved his version of Forever on Summer In Paradise, I did like the 'duet' part with Carl after the solo. When it was on Full House (the first time) I thought it was great. It is unfortunate that Full House became a bit of a stigmata for him. He is a talented musician who can sing and play multiple instruments. I doubt he will ever be a virtuoso with any of them. He can act in campy roles quite well, and I actually enjoyed his portrayal of Dr. Brock Holt in Scream Queens. For the Beach Boys curious, he puts a recognizable face to the band. Leave his past out of it, and he is just fine in the band from time to time. The girls had eye-candy with Dennis and John helped bring that back. It sure ain't Mike or Bruce or Foskett or ...you get my drift. ;D


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: SMiLE Brian on July 30, 2017, 05:26:29 AM
Filleplage could write novels on Stamos here..... ;)


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Lee Marshall on July 30, 2017, 05:41:07 PM
I don't think about Stamos.  Never have.  Never will.  I don't have any feelings for him except for maybe disrespect.  Off ya go fan boy and leave Dennis Wilson's legacy alone is about all I can muster other than when he occasionally shows up and fetches in some honeys for Mikey to oogle.  THAT I find just plain CREEPY...and I just wish he'd go away.  He adds NOTHING of value or worth to the performance or to the show.

To me...John Stamos is...generally speaking...a non entity.  A nothing.  Nobody of note.  As for his TV show?  Might have watched the first one once.  Poop.  And the new one?  5 minutes.  OLD  poop.

He's pretty much just a card-board cut-out.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: SMiLE Brian on July 30, 2017, 05:45:05 PM
Well said Addsome, jingles at 11:00?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Lee Marshall on July 30, 2017, 05:54:43 PM
The Great Carl Wilson
told me he was 100%
behind the remake of
Forever.

Gary Griffin had a big part
in it too......

Really.  Carl had ever so little to do with the making of that album.  Yes he participated... ... ...a little.  [pretty darned close to unwillingly.   He didn''t PLAY a note.]   Odd that he'd have a such strong opinion about Forever recorded by the 'man of the minute' here.

I don't blame Stamos for it.  I just wish he hadn't.  The guy who encouraged it though?  He's at fault.  It was a a one-haired wart on a BOMB.  Thank goodness for Good Vibrations: 30 Years of the Beach Boys which saved them from the embarrassment of Slumber in Pair of Dice.

Otherwise...Carl was busy at this time trying to extract Brian from the clutches of that Landy clown...so I don't see where he'd have been too terribly interested in 'Forever'.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Love Thang on July 30, 2017, 09:02:26 PM
I don't hate him. I just wish he wasn't involved with The Lovester's traveling circus carnies.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on July 30, 2017, 11:44:59 PM
Hi is an obsequious, sycophantic irritant, a perfect representative of the most unabashedly commercial and superficial side of the band's dual identity. The living antithesis of the more artistic direction that the BBs (Dennis & Carl especially) were pursuing in the early to mid '70s. A toadying embodiment of cloying , generic superficiality who is indeed at best a pimple on the ass of what the group should be all about, and at worst, if Nelson Bragg's interpretation of his disingenuous concert shenanigans re: Forever a few years back are accurate, a dissembling, manipulative prick. In short, I don't care for him.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: CenturyDeprived on July 31, 2017, 01:54:49 AM
Mike Love: "Why do many people not like me? Why am I not considered to be the Paul McCartney to my cousin Brian's John Lennon? Why, oh why am I not taken seriously by the rock community and critics at large?

(continues to use and whore out a mediocre sitcom star's celebrity, good looks, and good hair - for those assets only - to "promote" a once highly-prestigious brand name, and probably mainly to increase female head count at shows... for *decades* on end. *Decades*. Stamos has now been touring with The BBs for more countable years than Carl or Denny, and possibly even Brian and Al).

Shrug

I don't hate Stamos, because he doesn't seem like a jerk; I hate how he has been comically overused to a point of utter absurdity by Mike for perceived short-term gains. Mike is sadly maybe the biggest laughing stock in the history of the industry (relative to the fame of band) in part because of so many decisions like this, firmly associating the brand with shameless, crass ONGOING mediocrity, that makes it seem like he doesn't feel the music or live show can stand on its own sans sitcom star gimmicks.  

Even if Mike just plain likes having his buddy John around, and that there's no more to it than that, the fact that he wouldn't understand that this is the impression an ongoing association like that would make on the public is mindblowing, yet unsurprising for someone lacking self-awareness.  Having Stamos around for this many years could lead someone to believe that the sole purpose of Mike continuing to tour is to get the aforementioned demographic shift. Isn't there more to touring than more younger females at shows?  Or is that too irresistible a temptation?  I really feel like this gets to the core of why Stamos never goes away.  To me, he's more or less benign because I expect that from Mike at this point. I expect Mike's show to be drenched in tacky decisions, despite the best efforts of his able backing musicians to up the game in other ways.

Is Mike vicariously trying to live through John by John being there, and John being a completely willing, always agreeing fanboy?  It almost feels like maybe John reminds Mike of Denny being around, but in this case, there's no competition or conflict to get in the way of Mike reigning supreme.  Sort of a revisionist history wet dream where young Mike could robotically control Denny into helping Mike get chicks at shows. When you start to think about the psychology of it all, it kind of makes your head explode.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: marcella27 on July 31, 2017, 10:04:19 AM
I feel like Stamos is living my life, or at least the life I wish I could lead.  There's the association with the Beach Boys, first of all.  Second, he's apparently big into Disney World and Disneyland and goes there all time (I am huge Disney lover).  Then he showed up on my favorite (contemporary) TV show, Scream Queens.  I'm waiting to go into my favorite restaurant one day and find him there, eating my favorite order. 

I used to hate him, but I have grudgingly come to think that he might be an okay-ish guy.  However, that does NOT mean that I want to see him in BB videos/concerts/etc...  He is NOT a beach boy and never will be.  I resent the association between the Beach Boys and Full House, etc...I would be extremely ticked if he were onstage at any M&B show I was at, and I probably would have walked out if he'd been at any of the C50 shows I went to.  He does not belong on that stage.  Period. 

I also doubt that the reason Mike keeps bringing him in is to attract girls/women to the show.  Sure, Stamos is well-known as a heartthrob, but to an older generation of women.  I would be extremely surprised if any women younger than 35 (maybe even 40) were going to BB shows on the off-chance that Stamos might be there.  I think it's more likely that Mike thinks Stamos is cool and that he gets off on Stamos' adulation of the band.       



Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: CenturyDeprived on July 31, 2017, 10:20:28 AM


I also doubt that the reason Mike keeps bringing him in is to attract girls/women to the show.  Sure, Stamos is well-known as a heartthrob, but to an older generation of women.  I would be extremely surprised if any women younger than 35 (maybe even 40) were going to BB shows on the off-chance that Stamos might be there.  I think it's more likely that Mike thinks Stamos is cool and that he gets off on Stamos' adulation of the band.      


Even if your generational observation is accurate (I think it's only maybe half-accurate), I don't for a moment think that Mike is exactly unhappy at the prospect that Stamos likely brings in more 35/40-ish year old women at his shows, either. Do you dispute this? I think that's certainly *part* of why.

I agree with your second comment though.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: KDS on July 31, 2017, 10:32:28 AM
He's no Dave Coulier, but really, who is? 


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: marcella27 on July 31, 2017, 11:00:55 AM


I also doubt that the reason Mike keeps bringing him in is to attract girls/women to the show.  Sure, Stamos is well-known as a heartthrob, but to an older generation of women.  I would be extremely surprised if any women younger than 35 (maybe even 40) were going to BB shows on the off-chance that Stamos might be there.  I think it's more likely that Mike thinks Stamos is cool and that he gets off on Stamos' adulation of the band.      


Even if your generational observation is accurate (I think it's only maybe half-accurate), I don't for a moment think that Mike is exactly unhappy at the prospect that Stamos likely brings in more 35/40-ish year old women at his shows, either. Do you dispute this? I think that's certainly *part* of why.

I agree with your second comment though.

No, I imagine you're right that Mike would be pleased at the possibility of having more 35-40 year old women at the concerts.  Having said that, the recent Do It Again debacle has convinced me not to try to figure out how Mike's brain works.  Honestly.   

What I meant to get at is that I don't think Stamos is actually that much of a draw.  Yes, he might be popular with a certain demographic, but I don't think that anyone is buying tickets because they might see Stamos at a show.  However, I could be wrong.  Despite being part of the afore-mentioned demographic, Stamos never really did it for me, so perhaps I underestimate his popularity. 


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: KDS on July 31, 2017, 11:08:29 AM


I also doubt that the reason Mike keeps bringing him in is to attract girls/women to the show.  Sure, Stamos is well-known as a heartthrob, but to an older generation of women.  I would be extremely surprised if any women younger than 35 (maybe even 40) were going to BB shows on the off-chance that Stamos might be there.  I think it's more likely that Mike thinks Stamos is cool and that he gets off on Stamos' adulation of the band.      


Even if your generational observation is accurate (I think it's only maybe half-accurate), I don't for a moment think that Mike is exactly unhappy at the prospect that Stamos likely brings in more 35/40-ish year old women at his shows, either. Do you dispute this? I think that's certainly *part* of why.

I agree with your second comment though.

No, I imagine you're right that Mike would be pleased at the possibility of having more 35-40 year old women at the concerts.  Having said that, the recent Do It Again debacle has convinced me not to try to figure out how Mike's brain works.  Honestly.   

What I meant to get at is that I don't think Stamos is actually that much of a draw.  Yes, he might be popular with a certain demographic, but I don't think that anyone is buying tickets because they might see Stamos at a show.  However, I could be wrong.  Despite being part of the afore-mentioned demographic, Stamos never really did it for me, so perhaps I underestimate his popularity. 

I'm when it's already announced that Stamos is going to be as a show, it probably helps sell a few tickets, but I highly doubt the numbers are that high. 

Oddly enough, whenever The Beach Boys play with Stamos in my area, it's billed as "The Beach Boys featuring John Stamos."  Yet David Marks's playing with them in August 2015 wasn't advertised at all (though it was a very pleasant surprise).


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: marcella27 on August 01, 2017, 07:21:11 AM


I also doubt that the reason Mike keeps bringing him in is to attract girls/women to the show.  Sure, Stamos is well-known as a heartthrob, but to an older generation of women.  I would be extremely surprised if any women younger than 35 (maybe even 40) were going to BB shows on the off-chance that Stamos might be there.  I think it's more likely that Mike thinks Stamos is cool and that he gets off on Stamos' adulation of the band.      


Even if your generational observation is accurate (I think it's only maybe half-accurate), I don't for a moment think that Mike is exactly unhappy at the prospect that Stamos likely brings in more 35/40-ish year old women at his shows, either. Do you dispute this? I think that's certainly *part* of why.

I agree with your second comment though.

No, I imagine you're right that Mike would be pleased at the possibility of having more 35-40 year old women at the concerts.  Having said that, the recent Do It Again debacle has convinced me not to try to figure out how Mike's brain works.  Honestly.   

What I meant to get at is that I don't think Stamos is actually that much of a draw.  Yes, he might be popular with a certain demographic, but I don't think that anyone is buying tickets because they might see Stamos at a show.  However, I could be wrong.  Despite being part of the afore-mentioned demographic, Stamos never really did it for me, so perhaps I underestimate his popularity. 

I'm when it's already announced that Stamos is going to be as a show, it probably helps sell a few tickets, but I highly doubt the numbers are that high. 

Oddly enough, whenever The Beach Boys play with Stamos in my area, it's billed as "The Beach Boys featuring John Stamos."  Yet David Marks's playing with them in August 2015 wasn't advertised at all (though it was a very pleasant surprise).

Wow.  I didn't know they actually advertised Stamos.  I thought it was just sort of random and that he would pop up at shows here and there without any notice.  How depressing that he gets billing and David Marks doesn't.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: KDS on August 01, 2017, 07:22:29 AM


I also doubt that the reason Mike keeps bringing him in is to attract girls/women to the show.  Sure, Stamos is well-known as a heartthrob, but to an older generation of women.  I would be extremely surprised if any women younger than 35 (maybe even 40) were going to BB shows on the off-chance that Stamos might be there.  I think it's more likely that Mike thinks Stamos is cool and that he gets off on Stamos' adulation of the band.      


Even if your generational observation is accurate (I think it's only maybe half-accurate), I don't for a moment think that Mike is exactly unhappy at the prospect that Stamos likely brings in more 35/40-ish year old women at his shows, either. Do you dispute this? I think that's certainly *part* of why.

I agree with your second comment though.

No, I imagine you're right that Mike would be pleased at the possibility of having more 35-40 year old women at the concerts.  Having said that, the recent Do It Again debacle has convinced me not to try to figure out how Mike's brain works.  Honestly.   

What I meant to get at is that I don't think Stamos is actually that much of a draw.  Yes, he might be popular with a certain demographic, but I don't think that anyone is buying tickets because they might see Stamos at a show.  However, I could be wrong.  Despite being part of the afore-mentioned demographic, Stamos never really did it for me, so perhaps I underestimate his popularity. 

I'm when it's already announced that Stamos is going to be as a show, it probably helps sell a few tickets, but I highly doubt the numbers are that high. 

Oddly enough, whenever The Beach Boys play with Stamos in my area, it's billed as "The Beach Boys featuring John Stamos."  Yet David Marks's playing with them in August 2015 wasn't advertised at all (though it was a very pleasant surprise).

Wow.  I didn't know they actually advertised Stamos.  I thought it was just sort of random and that he would pop up at shows here and there without any notice.  How depressing that he gets billing and David Marks doesn't.

Sadly, to the casual fan, John Stamos is more well known than David Marks. 


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Emdeeh on August 01, 2017, 07:56:34 AM
The difference is that David Marks is an actual Beach Boy, not a special guest. His being at an M&B show means you get three Beach Boys, instead of the usual two.

I've met Stamos on a couple of occasions. The first time I had no clue who he was. He seems like a pretty nice guy.

On the other hand, he is not a draw for me as far as concerts go. It genuinely puzzles me when Mike brings him up in the BTTYS schtick, when Stamos isn't there. Seems pointless.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: KDS on August 01, 2017, 08:02:35 AM
The difference is that David Marks is an actual Beach Boy, not a special guest. His being at an M&B show means you get three Beach Boys, instead of the usual two.

I've met Stamos on a couple of occasions. The first time I had no clue who he was. He seems like a pretty nice guy.

On the other hand, he is not a draw for me as far as concerts go. It genuinely puzzles me when Mike brings him up in the BTTYS schtick, when Stamos isn't there. Seems pointless.

Right, when I saw them in 2015 with David, there was no fanfare about David being there.  Finally, about ten or so songs in, they did Getcha Back with David on lead vocals, and Mike said "Mr. David Lee Marks!!!!"   


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Michael Edward Osbourne on August 01, 2017, 08:50:43 AM
Stamos seems like a nice guy but I'm never extra excited just because he's there. I've seen him a few times with them but the shows would've still been a kick ass show whether he was there or not. I was never a fan of his television shows or movies so for me it's pointless.

I don't hate him or love him.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: KDS on August 01, 2017, 08:56:15 AM
Keeping Stamos on the road with the band might actually keep him from producing that All Summer Long movie he mentioned a few years ago, which was the musical movie in the vein of Mamma Mia and Rock of Ages with a story loosely based around The Beach Boys catalog.

So, for those looking for a silver lining in Stamos's presence with The Beach Boys, there it is.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: HeyJude on August 01, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
They do often prominently advertise Stamos's participation in Mike's shows. Here's an ad for a recent gig:

(http://cf-scarborough-ahjie4ch.s3.amazonaws.com/content/uploads/2017/05/john-stamos-beach-boys-2.jpg)

What I find funny is that those who dig Stamos and/or defend his participation with the Beach Boys will cite something like this as a reason why his presence is justified (e.g. "look how famous he is and how much people must like him and how he must help sell tickets?"), while those put off by his presence are trying to say ads like this are part of the reason why his participation is objectionable.

Any person as famous as the band, or any TV or movie star, could also be put on such an advertisement and potentially help sell tickets.

Having to use a b-level TV star (albeit still with plenty of mostly female fans) to sell tickets doesn't make your band look good to observers, and having an amateur (in the literal sense) musician on stage doesn't add anything to the music.

But it was clear LOOOOOONG ago that Mike doesn't care about critical laurels. It's just a big fun rich-dude laugh for Mike and Stamos. Whereas some old guys sip their whiskey while chortling in private, Mike and Stamos do it on stage and on TV an in public. 

I've said it many times; there was an interview with David Marks from around maybe 2000 or so, not too long after his mid-1999 departure from Mike's band, where Dave talked about Stamos. I'm loosely paraphrasing based on old memory, but my recollection is that Dave was trying to be as nice and polite as possible in pointing out that Stamos was a nice guy and all, but because he doesn't practice or hone his skill, his musicianship (drums and guitar mainly) is at an amateur level.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: JL on August 01, 2017, 11:17:36 AM
^ Dang, that is prominent. :lol Stamos looks good for his age, too. I like the guy, I honestly don't have a strong opinion about him either way. I do find his association with Mike Love's Beach Boys to be sorta funny, though.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: HeyJude on August 01, 2017, 11:31:38 AM
Make no mistake, my gut is that I think Foskett and Stamos would LOVE to take over the license when/if they had/have the chance when Mike retires or is otherwise no longer touring.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: rab2591 on August 01, 2017, 11:50:27 AM
Fantastic post above, HeyJude.

Those same people claim that the legacy can’t be hurt by anything. Yet look at this advert! Same sh*t with the remake of DIA that many fans didn’t even bat an eye about because we’re so used to a constant stream of bad choices and mediocre behavior when it comes to this band. The quality control seems to be nonexistent.

Here we have John Stamos bigger than anyone in the flippin band in an advertisement. Yeah yeah, it’s most likely the venue’s advert - but aren’t The Beach Boys touring group supposed to look over all that stuff to make sure it’s kosher? And therein lies the problem: no one gives a sh*t that The Beach Boys themselves aren’t the main draw but rather a yoghurt salesperson who was once famous for his role in a 90s sitcom.

I think Stamos is enjoying a great ride, and he’s making every moment count. I have no issues with him. Same that someone said in this thread or another: I don’t blame Stamos for the forever remake, or his guest spots with The Beach Boys...I blame whoever thinks this sh*t is actually a good idea for the history of the band.

Everything that happens with this band is a part of their history, be it Mike’s wonderful contributions to the C50 or his years of writing classic lyrics, be it Brian’s love for harmony and the timeless songs he created. Or be it the bad, tacky, ridiculous crap that keeps happening with this band in its latter years. It’s all part of the history of the group now.

The Beach Boys as an actual group could’ve ridden out their final years doing some amazing concerts, recording some amazing albums...but Mike couldn’t get into a room with Brian? is that the flimsy excuse for why the c50 ended? (Yes we know there’s more to it than that yet this ridiculous excuse is what Mike touts when he’s asked about it). What could’ve been and instead we get robotuned DIA ‘17 and the biggest draw for a Beach Boys concert these days is apparently John Stamos. Yeah, that legacy sure is on a high note right now ::)


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: GhostyTMRS on August 01, 2017, 02:44:52 PM
Fantastic post above, HeyJude.

Those same people claim that the legacy can’t be hurt by anything. Yet look at this advert! Same sh*t with the remake of DIA that many fans didn’t even bat an eye about because we’re so used to a constant stream of bad choices and mediocre behavior when it comes to this band. The quality control seems to be nonexistent.

Here we have John Stamos bigger than anyone in the flippin band in an advertisement. Yeah yeah, it’s most likely the venue’s advert - but aren’t The Beach Boys touring group supposed to look over all that stuff to make sure it’s kosher? And therein lies the problem: no one gives a sh*t that The Beach Boys themselves aren’t the main draw but rather a yoghurt salesperson who was once famous for his role in a 90s sitcom.

I think Stamos is enjoying a great ride, and he’s making every moment count. I have no issues with him. Same that someone said in this thread or another: I don’t blame Stamos for the forever remake, or his guest spots with The Beach Boys...I blame whoever thinks this sh*t is actually a good idea for the history of the band.

Everything that happens with this band is a part of their history, be it Mike’s wonderful contributions to the C50 or his years of writing classic lyrics, be it Brian’s love for harmony and the timeless songs he created. Or be it the bad, tacky, ridiculous crap that keeps happening with this band in its latter years. It’s all part of the history of the group now.

The Beach Boys as an actual group could’ve ridden out their final years doing some amazing concerts, recording some amazing albums...but Mike couldn’t get into a room with Brian? is that the flimsy excuse for why the c50 ended? (Yes we know there’s more to it than that yet this ridiculous excuse is what Mike touts when he’s asked about it). What could’ve been and instead we get robotuned DIA ‘17 and the biggest draw for a Beach Boys concert these days is apparently John Stamos. Yeah, that legacy sure is on a high note right now ::)

Nonsense. The Beach Boys were putting out videos like "Problem Child" and appearing on Full House which were much MUCH higher profile than some random ad for a gig and yet were undergoing a critical renaissance at the EXACT same time. More recently, there was so much talk of the legacy being in tatters after Mike posing with Trump that you would think not a single soul would've bought Sunshine Tomorrow and yet....they did, and with impressive sales figures for an archival release like that AND glowing reviews.
The music recorded by the group in the 60's and 70's is all that matters and THAT is the legacy.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on August 01, 2017, 03:38:41 PM
Fantastic post above, HeyJude.

Those same people claim that the legacy can’t be hurt by anything. Yet look at this advert! Same sh*t with the remake of DIA that many fans didn’t even bat an eye about because we’re so used to a constant stream of bad choices and mediocre behavior when it comes to this band. The quality control seems to be nonexistent.

Here we have John Stamos bigger than anyone in the flippin band in an advertisement. Yeah yeah, it’s most likely the venue’s advert - but aren’t The Beach Boys touring group supposed to look over all that stuff to make sure it’s kosher? And therein lies the problem: no one gives a sh*t that The Beach Boys themselves aren’t the main draw but rather a yoghurt salesperson who was once famous for his role in a 90s sitcom.

I think Stamos is enjoying a great ride, and he’s making every moment count. I have no issues with him. Same that someone said in this thread or another: I don’t blame Stamos for the forever remake, or his guest spots with The Beach Boys...I blame whoever thinks this sh*t is actually a good idea for the history of the band.

Everything that happens with this band is a part of their history, be it Mike’s wonderful contributions to the C50 or his years of writing classic lyrics, be it Brian’s love for harmony and the timeless songs he created. Or be it the bad, tacky, ridiculous crap that keeps happening with this band in its latter years. It’s all part of the history of the group now.

The Beach Boys as an actual group could’ve ridden out their final years doing some amazing concerts, recording some amazing albums...but Mike couldn’t get into a room with Brian? is that the flimsy excuse for why the c50 ended? (Yes we know there’s more to it than that yet this ridiculous excuse is what Mike touts when he’s asked about it). What could’ve been and instead we get robotuned DIA ‘17 and the biggest draw for a Beach Boys concert these days is apparently John Stamos. Yeah, that legacy sure is on a high note right now ::)

Nonsense. The Beach Boys were putting out videos like "Problem Child" and appearing on Full House which were much MUCH higher profile than some random ad for a gig and yet were undergoing a critical renaissance at the EXACT same time. More recently, there was so much talk of the legacy being in tatters after Mike posing with Trump that you would think not a single soul would've bought Sunshine Tomorrow and yet....they did, and with impressive sales figures for an archival release like that AND glowing reviews.
The music recorded by the group in the 60's and 70's is all that matters and THAT is the legacy.

It is indeed the heart and soul of the band's legacy, but to say that it's "all that matters" is reductionist. Mosy other truly great bands guard the basic dignity and image of their brand diligently. If course there's a fine line between uptight stuffiness (Ginger Baker, Jimmy Page) and devil-may-care fun, but any cheapening of the brand becomes part of the legacy.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: rab2591 on August 01, 2017, 03:42:41 PM
I’m just going to copy/paste a response I made in another thread to someone with the same mindset:

A few thoughts on the word “legacy” after reading continuous talk of this elsewhere.

And before anyone reads this and feels like I’m beating a dead horse, it’s just clarification of my own thoughts (mostly for my own benefit and for anyone else interested)...if anyone is tired of debate on this I totally understand: you don’t have to respond with muppet’s quotes or anything...as I said, this is mostly me thinking out loud to make sure I’m thinking about this correctly.

I’d just like to clarify the definition of “legacy” as I think there are some glaring misconceptions about the word. “Legacy” does not just mean that the music will always be there and will always hold up. Legacy is also all the baggage that is carried along with the music. Legacy includes thoughts, feelings, and memories about the entity in question...when you think about The Beach Boys do you have positive thoughts? Positive feelings? Good memories?

With The Beach Boys yeah, mostly all of the above. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the 60s/70s music catalogue? Of course not, that music is solidified in time as some of the greatest ever made. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the image of the band? Yes.

You see this when a music journalist writes about this band - they usually mention the fractious history of the band in their interviews. You can see this even on the official Beach Boys Facebook page in the comments of the DIA song post that mostly everyone hates. The public reads these articles and comments and their perception of band is altered.

As KDS mentioned yesterday, the Beatles quit after a decade - they didn’t record disco, they didn’t go on sitcom shows, they didn’t have a nasty reunion breakup. They didn’t have these things so their legacy is one of the brightest stars in the sky. But therein proves my point: the actions made by The Beach Boys over the past few decades have altered how bright their star is in the sky...the disco track, the sitcom appearances, etc have all added up the tackiness that is now part of the image of this band....ie part of their legacy.

When we think of The Beatles, we also think of Yoko Ono breaking up the band. That thought will be forever cemented with their legacy. See what I’m getting at? It’s not just the great music but the events that stand out. They could be good events or bad events, but each go hand in hand with the legacy.

The music is safe, and maybe that’s all some fans care about. Others of us care about the group that Brian, Mike, Carl, Dennis, Al, David, Bruce, Blondie, Ricky, belonged to at one point or another. This band is a device that created culture, created introspection, gave people dreams. The music of course is what we listen to and love, but the culture of this band goes right along with the music. And when the image of that band is tarnished time and time again, people remember that when they think of the music (like the Axl Rose example someone made above).

These embarrassing antics don’t effect our enjoyment of the past music, they effect our perception on the vessel that gave us that music. And to some of us, that part of the legacy is almost as important as the music itself.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: GhostyTMRS on August 01, 2017, 03:59:05 PM
I’m just going to copy/paste a response I made in another thread to someone with the same mindset:

A few thoughts on the word “legacy” after reading continuous talk of this elsewhere.

And before anyone reads this and feels like I’m beating a dead horse, it’s just clarification of my own thoughts (mostly for my own benefit and for anyone else interested)...if anyone is tired of debate on this I totally understand: you don’t have to respond with muppet’s quotes or anything...as I said, this is mostly me thinking out loud to make sure I’m thinking about this correctly.

I’d just like to clarify the definition of “legacy” as I think there are some glaring misconceptions about the word. “Legacy” does not just mean that the music will always be there and will always hold up. Legacy is also all the baggage that is carried along with the music. Legacy includes thoughts, feelings, and memories about the entity in question...when you think about The Beach Boys do you have positive thoughts? Positive feelings? Good memories?

With The Beach Boys yeah, mostly all of the above. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the 60s/70s music catalogue? Of course not, that music is solidified in time as some of the greatest ever made. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the image of the band? Yes.

You see this when a music journalist writes about this band - they usually mention the fractious history of the band in their interviews. You can see this even on the official Beach Boys Facebook page in the comments of the DIA song post that mostly everyone hates. The public reads these articles and comments and their perception of band is altered.

As KDS mentioned yesterday, the Beatles quit after a decade - they didn’t record disco, they didn’t go on sitcom shows, they didn’t have a nasty reunion breakup. They didn’t have these things so their legacy is one of the brightest stars in the sky. But therein proves my point: the actions made by The Beach Boys over the past few decades have altered how bright their star is in the sky...the disco track, the sitcom appearances, etc have all added up the tackiness that is now part of the image of this band....ie part of their legacy.

When we think of The Beatles, we also think of Yoko Ono breaking up the band. That thought will be forever cemented with their legacy. See what I’m getting at? It’s not just the great music but the events that stand out. They could be good events or bad events, but each go hand in hand with the legacy.

The music is safe, and maybe that’s all some fans care about. Others of us care about the group that Brian, Mike, Carl, Dennis, Al, David, Bruce, Blondie, Ricky, belonged to at one point or another. This band is a device that created culture, created introspection, gave people dreams. The music of course is what we listen to and love, but the culture of this band goes right along with the music. And when the image of that band is tarnished time and time again, people remember that when they think of the music (like the Axl Rose example someone made above).

These embarrassing antics don’t effect our enjoyment of the past music, they effect our perception on the vessel that gave us that music. And to some of us, that part of the legacy is almost as important as the music itself.

I have to disagree with this. When all is said and done I believe the group will largely be remembered for the first 10 years of its existence. Everything else will be a footnote at best.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 01, 2017, 04:08:36 PM
I’m just going to copy/paste a response I made in another thread to someone with the same mindset:

A few thoughts on the word “legacy” after reading continuous talk of this elsewhere.

And before anyone reads this and feels like I’m beating a dead horse, it’s just clarification of my own thoughts (mostly for my own benefit and for anyone else interested)...if anyone is tired of debate on this I totally understand: you don’t have to respond with muppet’s quotes or anything...as I said, this is mostly me thinking out loud to make sure I’m thinking about this correctly.

I’d just like to clarify the definition of “legacy” as I think there are some glaring misconceptions about the word. “Legacy” does not just mean that the music will always be there and will always hold up. Legacy is also all the baggage that is carried along with the music. Legacy includes thoughts, feelings, and memories about the entity in question...when you think about The Beach Boys do you have positive thoughts? Positive feelings? Good memories?

With The Beach Boys yeah, mostly all of the above. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the 60s/70s music catalogue? Of course not, that music is solidified in time as some of the greatest ever made. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the image of the band? Yes.

You see this when a music journalist writes about this band - they usually mention the fractious history of the band in their interviews. You can see this even on the official Beach Boys Facebook page in the comments of the DIA song post that mostly everyone hates. The public reads these articles and comments and their perception of band is altered.

As KDS mentioned yesterday, the Beatles quit after a decade - they didn’t record disco, they didn’t go on sitcom shows, they didn’t have a nasty reunion breakup. They didn’t have these things so their legacy is one of the brightest stars in the sky. But therein proves my point: the actions made by The Beach Boys over the past few decades have altered how bright their star is in the sky...the disco track, the sitcom appearances, etc have all added up the tackiness that is now part of the image of this band....ie part of their legacy.

When we think of The Beatles, we also think of Yoko Ono breaking up the band. That thought will be forever cemented with their legacy. See what I’m getting at? It’s not just the great music but the events that stand out. They could be good events or bad events, but each go hand in hand with the legacy.

The music is safe, and maybe that’s all some fans care about. Others of us care about the group that Brian, Mike, Carl, Dennis, Al, David, Bruce, Blondie, Ricky, belonged to at one point or another. This band is a device that created culture, created introspection, gave people dreams. The music of course is what we listen to and love, but the culture of this band goes right along with the music. And when the image of that band is tarnished time and time again, people remember that when they think of the music (like the Axl Rose example someone made above).

These embarrassing antics don’t effect our enjoyment of the past music, they effect our perception on the vessel that gave us that music. And to some of us, that part of the legacy is almost as important as the music itself.

I have to disagree with this. When all is said and done I believe the group will largely be remembered for the first 10 years of its existence. Everything else will be a footnote at best.

Is that the case with Phil Spector? Or Ted Nugent? I'm not saying that the band (fortunately) has ever done anything on the level that Phil did, but the point is that legacies can be tarnished, and there is a spectrum for this ranging from "just a little bit" ---> all the way to "severely". This band, whose music I love and cherish, is on that spectrum *somewhere*, and due to just way, way, way, way too many boneheaded decisions which continue to occur mainly at the hands of one member, the brand name unfortunately doesn't quite reside in the "just a little bit" section when it comes to tarnishment.

The brand sadly is a joke to far too many people (perhaps you haven't encountered this viewpoint enough in person); just because there are plenty of people who don't care and don't mind, there are ALSO plenty of people who don't take the band seriously, in part because of the neverending stream of Stamos/Love nonsense (just for starters).

It's a cumulative thing. And it's unfortunate and makes me sad, because I'm frankly sick of having to defend this band when their great music is SO great.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: SMiLE Brian on August 01, 2017, 04:11:10 PM
From Mike using the name for quick cash for too long a time....


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: GhostyTMRS on August 01, 2017, 04:22:42 PM
I’m just going to copy/paste a response I made in another thread to someone with the same mindset:

A few thoughts on the word “legacy” after reading continuous talk of this elsewhere.

And before anyone reads this and feels like I’m beating a dead horse, it’s just clarification of my own thoughts (mostly for my own benefit and for anyone else interested)...if anyone is tired of debate on this I totally understand: you don’t have to respond with muppet’s quotes or anything...as I said, this is mostly me thinking out loud to make sure I’m thinking about this correctly.

I’d just like to clarify the definition of “legacy” as I think there are some glaring misconceptions about the word. “Legacy” does not just mean that the music will always be there and will always hold up. Legacy is also all the baggage that is carried along with the music. Legacy includes thoughts, feelings, and memories about the entity in question...when you think about The Beach Boys do you have positive thoughts? Positive feelings? Good memories?

With The Beach Boys yeah, mostly all of the above. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the 60s/70s music catalogue? Of course not, that music is solidified in time as some of the greatest ever made. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the image of the band? Yes.

You see this when a music journalist writes about this band - they usually mention the fractious history of the band in their interviews. You can see this even on the official Beach Boys Facebook page in the comments of the DIA song post that mostly everyone hates. The public reads these articles and comments and their perception of band is altered.

As KDS mentioned yesterday, the Beatles quit after a decade - they didn’t record disco, they didn’t go on sitcom shows, they didn’t have a nasty reunion breakup. They didn’t have these things so their legacy is one of the brightest stars in the sky. But therein proves my point: the actions made by The Beach Boys over the past few decades have altered how bright their star is in the sky...the disco track, the sitcom appearances, etc have all added up the tackiness that is now part of the image of this band....ie part of their legacy.

When we think of The Beatles, we also think of Yoko Ono breaking up the band. That thought will be forever cemented with their legacy. See what I’m getting at? It’s not just the great music but the events that stand out. They could be good events or bad events, but each go hand in hand with the legacy.

The music is safe, and maybe that’s all some fans care about. Others of us care about the group that Brian, Mike, Carl, Dennis, Al, David, Bruce, Blondie, Ricky, belonged to at one point or another. This band is a device that created culture, created introspection, gave people dreams. The music of course is what we listen to and love, but the culture of this band goes right along with the music. And when the image of that band is tarnished time and time again, people remember that when they think of the music (like the Axl Rose example someone made above).

These embarrassing antics don’t effect our enjoyment of the past music, they effect our perception on the vessel that gave us that music. And to some of us, that part of the legacy is almost as important as the music itself.

I have to disagree with this. When all is said and done I believe the group will largely be remembered for the first 10 years of its existence. Everything else will be a footnote at best.

Is that the case with Phil Spector? Or Ted Nugent? I'm not saying that the band (fortunately) has ever done anything on the level that Phil did, but the point is that legacies can be tarnished, and there is a spectrum for this ranging from "just a little bit" ---> all the way to "severely". This band, whose music I love and cherish, is on that spectrum *somewhere*, and due to just way, way, way, way too many boneheaded decisions which continue to occur mainly at the hands of one member, the brand name unfortunately doesn't quite reside in the "just a little bit" section when it comes to tarnishment.

The brand sadly is a joke to far too many people (perhaps you haven't encountered this viewpoint enough in person); just because there are plenty of people who don't care and don't mind, there are ALSO plenty of people who don't take the band seriously, in part because of the neverending stream of Stamos/Love nonsense (just for starters).

It's a cumulative thing.

No, I haven't encountered that perception in ages. Generally when I speak to people about the Beach Boys they mention Brian, Pet Sounds, etc. In other words all of the usual bullet points...except they will sometimes bring up Charlie Manson.
 
Which leads me to wonder....Dennis was buddies with Charlie Manson and even THAT couldn't damage the group's legacy. They even recorded one of Manson's songs and it's ALWAYS getting written about in those "Did you know?" articles online and and yet you guys think Stamos hurts the brand?

I also think that most serious music fans are not completely stupid and realize that the Beach Boys no longer exist.  


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: rab2591 on August 01, 2017, 04:34:26 PM
I’m just going to copy/paste a response I made in another thread to someone with the same mindset:

A few thoughts on the word “legacy” after reading continuous talk of this elsewhere.

And before anyone reads this and feels like I’m beating a dead horse, it’s just clarification of my own thoughts (mostly for my own benefit and for anyone else interested)...if anyone is tired of debate on this I totally understand: you don’t have to respond with muppet’s quotes or anything...as I said, this is mostly me thinking out loud to make sure I’m thinking about this correctly.

I’d just like to clarify the definition of “legacy” as I think there are some glaring misconceptions about the word. “Legacy” does not just mean that the music will always be there and will always hold up. Legacy is also all the baggage that is carried along with the music. Legacy includes thoughts, feelings, and memories about the entity in question...when you think about The Beach Boys do you have positive thoughts? Positive feelings? Good memories?

With The Beach Boys yeah, mostly all of the above. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the 60s/70s music catalogue? Of course not, that music is solidified in time as some of the greatest ever made. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the image of the band? Yes.

You see this when a music journalist writes about this band - they usually mention the fractious history of the band in their interviews. You can see this even on the official Beach Boys Facebook page in the comments of the DIA song post that mostly everyone hates. The public reads these articles and comments and their perception of band is altered.

As KDS mentioned yesterday, the Beatles quit after a decade - they didn’t record disco, they didn’t go on sitcom shows, they didn’t have a nasty reunion breakup. They didn’t have these things so their legacy is one of the brightest stars in the sky. But therein proves my point: the actions made by The Beach Boys over the past few decades have altered how bright their star is in the sky...the disco track, the sitcom appearances, etc have all added up the tackiness that is now part of the image of this band....ie part of their legacy.

When we think of The Beatles, we also think of Yoko Ono breaking up the band. That thought will be forever cemented with their legacy. See what I’m getting at? It’s not just the great music but the events that stand out. They could be good events or bad events, but each go hand in hand with the legacy.

The music is safe, and maybe that’s all some fans care about. Others of us care about the group that Brian, Mike, Carl, Dennis, Al, David, Bruce, Blondie, Ricky, belonged to at one point or another. This band is a device that created culture, created introspection, gave people dreams. The music of course is what we listen to and love, but the culture of this band goes right along with the music. And when the image of that band is tarnished time and time again, people remember that when they think of the music (like the Axl Rose example someone made above).

These embarrassing antics don’t effect our enjoyment of the past music, they effect our perception on the vessel that gave us that music. And to some of us, that part of the legacy is almost as important as the music itself.

I have to disagree with this. When all is said and done I believe the group will largely be remembered for the first 10 years of its existence. Everything else will be a footnote at best.

I mean, that doesn’t really disagree with what I’m saying. They will be largely remembered for their first 10 years of music of course, but especially in the age of the internet where you can search for anything, their entire history will follow them around. As an example, take Van Gogh for instance. His artwork is celebrated and known by most everybody in the western world and he is mostly remembered for that art, but whenever you think of Van Gogh you usually think of some nut cutting his ear off.

And like CD, I’m not comparing these events to what The Beach Boys have done, but merely pointing out that anything stupidly embarrassing will follow any legacy around...no matter how great that legacy is.

A little over a year ago I was at a county festival where part of it was held in an elementary school. I was walking through the music room where they were selling some milkshakes or something, and on the wall was this timeline of the music greats (it was one of those timelines you order from a teachers catalogue). From Beethoven to Mozart, Bach, Copland, up to The Beatles etc. At the tail end of the timeline was the name Brian Wilson. It wasn’t The Beach Boys, it was just Brian Wilson. I truly wonder if The Beach Boys had centered more around the art they could’ve created instead of pandering to commercial interests if that timeline would’ve read the band name instead. The Beatles were up there on that same timeline, not the names John and Paul. Yet The Beach Boys were left out and Brian’s name was there. Makes you wonder.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: rab2591 on August 01, 2017, 04:39:54 PM
I’m just going to copy/paste a response I made in another thread to someone with the same mindset:

A few thoughts on the word “legacy” after reading continuous talk of this elsewhere.

And before anyone reads this and feels like I’m beating a dead horse, it’s just clarification of my own thoughts (mostly for my own benefit and for anyone else interested)...if anyone is tired of debate on this I totally understand: you don’t have to respond with muppet’s quotes or anything...as I said, this is mostly me thinking out loud to make sure I’m thinking about this correctly.

I’d just like to clarify the definition of “legacy” as I think there are some glaring misconceptions about the word. “Legacy” does not just mean that the music will always be there and will always hold up. Legacy is also all the baggage that is carried along with the music. Legacy includes thoughts, feelings, and memories about the entity in question...when you think about The Beach Boys do you have positive thoughts? Positive feelings? Good memories?

With The Beach Boys yeah, mostly all of the above. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the 60s/70s music catalogue? Of course not, that music is solidified in time as some of the greatest ever made. Do the last three decades of embarrassing antics hurt the image of the band? Yes.

You see this when a music journalist writes about this band - they usually mention the fractious history of the band in their interviews. You can see this even on the official Beach Boys Facebook page in the comments of the DIA song post that mostly everyone hates. The public reads these articles and comments and their perception of band is altered.

As KDS mentioned yesterday, the Beatles quit after a decade - they didn’t record disco, they didn’t go on sitcom shows, they didn’t have a nasty reunion breakup. They didn’t have these things so their legacy is one of the brightest stars in the sky. But therein proves my point: the actions made by The Beach Boys over the past few decades have altered how bright their star is in the sky...the disco track, the sitcom appearances, etc have all added up the tackiness that is now part of the image of this band....ie part of their legacy.

When we think of The Beatles, we also think of Yoko Ono breaking up the band. That thought will be forever cemented with their legacy. See what I’m getting at? It’s not just the great music but the events that stand out. They could be good events or bad events, but each go hand in hand with the legacy.

The music is safe, and maybe that’s all some fans care about. Others of us care about the group that Brian, Mike, Carl, Dennis, Al, David, Bruce, Blondie, Ricky, belonged to at one point or another. This band is a device that created culture, created introspection, gave people dreams. The music of course is what we listen to and love, but the culture of this band goes right along with the music. And when the image of that band is tarnished time and time again, people remember that when they think of the music (like the Axl Rose example someone made above).

These embarrassing antics don’t effect our enjoyment of the past music, they effect our perception on the vessel that gave us that music. And to some of us, that part of the legacy is almost as important as the music itself.

I have to disagree with this. When all is said and done I believe the group will largely be remembered for the first 10 years of its existence. Everything else will be a footnote at best.

Is that the case with Phil Spector? Or Ted Nugent? I'm not saying that the band (fortunately) has ever done anything on the level that Phil did, but the point is that legacies can be tarnished, and there is a spectrum for this ranging from "just a little bit" ---> all the way to "severely". This band, whose music I love and cherish, is on that spectrum *somewhere*, and due to just way, way, way, way too many boneheaded decisions which continue to occur mainly at the hands of one member, the brand name unfortunately doesn't quite reside in the "just a little bit" section when it comes to tarnishment.

The brand sadly is a joke to far too many people (perhaps you haven't encountered this viewpoint enough in person); just because there are plenty of people who don't care and don't mind, there are ALSO plenty of people who don't take the band seriously, in part because of the neverending stream of Stamos/Love nonsense (just for starters).

It's a cumulative thing.

No, I haven't encountered that perception in ages. Generally when I speak to people about the Beach Boys they mention Brian, Pet Sounds, etc. In other words all of the usual bullet points...except they will sometimes bring up Charlie Manson.
 
Which leads me to wonder....Dennis was buddies with Charlie Manson and even THAT couldn't damage the group's legacy. They even recorded one of Manson's songs and it's ALWAYS getting written about in those "Did you know?" articles online and and yet you guys think Stamos hurts the brand?

I also think that most serious music fans are not completely stupid and realize that the Beach Boys no longer exist.  

Funny, because people my age (late 20s) that I talk to seem to usually bring up Full House and Stamos when I bring up The Beach Boys. And I wish I was exaggerating. In the past, any girl I talked to about this band would giggle and talk about ‘Forever’ being played in an episode (edit; wanted to clarify it was when I played the song forever would this be brought up).


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: guitarfool2002 on August 01, 2017, 04:40:23 PM
I also think that most serious music fans are not completely stupid and realize that the Beach Boys no longer exist.  

Surprised to see this comment. I'm glad I didn't write it.

But I have to ask a follow up - If this is the case, in your opinion then why not retire the name and be done with it, and why is there such a shitstorm about people arguing the license and all those related issues? If it's done, it's done...right?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: rab2591 on August 01, 2017, 04:46:05 PM
And the not-completely-stupid serious music fans were in for a shock when they were flipping through the stations on July 4th and saw Do It Again being butchered by the band that apparently no longer exists.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: SMiLE Brian on August 01, 2017, 04:47:10 PM
Yeah, that is real brand management... ::)


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: guitarfool2002 on August 01, 2017, 04:48:48 PM
And the not-completely-stupid serious music fans were in for a shock when they were flipping through the stations on July 4th and saw Do It Again being butchered by the band that apparently no longer exists.

Just like they did a few years ago when they tuned into the Hollywood Christmas Parade and saw The Beach Boys performing/promoting a Mike Love solo Christmas single instead of a Beach Boys song.

Confusion? Nahh...not much. Just fun, fun, fun!


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: GhostyTMRS on August 01, 2017, 04:58:48 PM
I also think that most serious music fans are not completely stupid and realize that the Beach Boys no longer exist.  

Surprised to see this comment. I'm glad I didn't write it.

But I have to ask a follow up - If this is the case, in your opinion then why not retire the name and be done with it, and why is there such a shitstorm about people arguing the license and all those related issues? If it's done, it's done...right?

I've made that comment several times here and each time you respond the same way like you're surprised. Can you explain why you keep doing that?  

I'm all for retiring the name but it doesn't bother me that Mike and Bruce use it. Why would it? It didn't seem to bother Brian when he went to see The Four Freshmen and of course he knew it wasn't actually the REAL Four Freshmen but a sanctioned touring group and Bri said he just closed his eyes and pretended it was the Freshman and enjoyed it (as he wrote about in his book). I imagine fans who see Mike and Bruce do the same thing.  


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: guitarfool2002 on August 01, 2017, 05:10:27 PM
I also think that most serious music fans are not completely stupid and realize that the Beach Boys no longer exist.  

Surprised to see this comment. I'm glad I didn't write it.

But I have to ask a follow up - If this is the case, in your opinion then why not retire the name and be done with it, and why is there such a shitstorm about people arguing the license and all those related issues? If it's done, it's done...right?

I've made that comment several times here and each time you respond the same way like you're surprised. Can you explain why you keep doing that?  

I'm all for retiring the name but it doesn't bother me that Mike and Bruce use it. Why would it? It didn't seem to bother Brian when he went to see The Four Freshmen and of course he knew it wasn't actually the REAL Four Freshmen but a sanctioned touring group and Bri said he just closed his eyes and pretended it was the Freshman and enjoyed it (as he wrote about in his book). I imagine fans who see Mike and Bruce do the same thing.  

I am surprised because most times the license and name issues get mentioned in this way, the usual response includes calls of "Mike bashing" and a general sense of rushing to defend Mike's live shows, it's been happening since late 2012 and even before like clockwork.

Your logic and opinion might be exactly what those other serious music fans who are not stupid share as well, agreeing with your statement "The Beach Boys no longer exist".

I'd also flip the question back again and say if that is the case, then why have there been so many mentions of Mike "carrying the torch" for the legacy or "upholding the legacy"...carrying the torch for what if in your words The Beach Boys no longer exist?

The difference is also that the Freshmen were a name nostalgia band licensing the name and the book of arrangements playing shows just like the Glenn Miller Orchestra - There are no original members, and it's a different level of bookings and expectations too.

I'll also bet if one of the new touring Freshmen decided to write an original tune or remake "Day By Day" with hip-hop beats and a guest artist, and have The Four Freshmen perform it for ticket buyers, his ass would be canned and they'd have to make the case for keeping the license to use it for bookings.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 01, 2017, 05:17:48 PM

Which leads me to wonder....Dennis was buddies with Charlie Manson and even THAT couldn't damage the group's legacy. They even recorded one of Manson's songs and it's ALWAYS getting written about in those "Did you know?" articles online and and yet you guys think Stamos hurts the brand?
 

Denny and Manson's association was:

a) accidental and inadvertent (Denny had completely zero knowledge he was associating with a guy who was capable of what we all later learned Manson was capable of)

b) Denny obviously regretted it and felt awful about such a connection/association in hindsight

c) it was a one-off freak occurrence

Mike continually does all sorts of stuff, which certainly not on the level of associating with Charles Manson, never shows an ounce of realization or regret (aside from the fake embarrassment he displayed when Brian mentioned Mike's solo album on their campfire TV appearance). And these "gifts" that Mike gives the world, be it a 30+ year neverending connection with Stamos, etc, just go on and on and are cumulative.

It's apples and oranges, but the point is that Stamos definitely hurts the brands in certain circles. Many. And understandably so. And Mike's answer to this is not to finally cease with the Stamos antics, but to disable Youtube comments.

Mike would rather be on stage with John Stamos than Brian Wilson. That fact in and of itself is perhaps the most laughable, yet sadly completely accurate statement in rock music history.

Maybe you're not associating with the crowds and circles that feel that way. Believe me: I know tons of musicians who love The BBs. And like clockwork, if you mention Mike Love's name to them, they'll almost universally scoff or make an eye rolling motion. Because he continues to poison the brand with garbage crapola. You know it, I know it. The Sunshine Tomorrow release was JUST the thing to finally get people like that to finally give Love an ounce of credit where credit was due. And DIA '17 followed it immediately afterwards. Like getting a Wolfgang Puck feast for dinner and immediately served a rotten poo emoji-shaped brownie afterwards.

And for just as many people I know like that (who actually know the band's music, love it, and just dislike Love), there are just as many other people who won't even give the music much of a chance in a deep, profound way, because the stale stench of Stamos-esque antics FOR DECADES has taken its toll. Their loss, I suppose. But it's not an imagined thing. It's a straight-up thing that occurs, regularly.  

Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos

Sunshine Tomorrow

Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos Stamos White Bedsheets Blacklight 


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: GhostyTMRS on August 01, 2017, 05:29:33 PM

I'd also flip the question back again and say if that is the case, then why have there been so many mentions of Mike "carrying the torch" for the legacy or "upholding the legacy"...carrying the torch for what if in your words The Beach Boys no longer exist?


That's not up to me to answer. I don't go to those shows so I can't relate to whatever emotional response a Mike & Bruce concert evokes in people, but obviously those performances DO move audiences in some way so why begrudge them? What can be gained from doing that?

And yes, I'm well aware that Brian has gone back and forth on this but recently said that he liked the idea of Mike "keeping the name out there", etc. What does that mean? Who knows? He likes seeing the name on a marquee as he rides past it on a bus? Doesn't really matter to me. I saw the group while Carl was alive and even then I felt like I wasn't truly seeing the proper "Beach Boys" because Dennis wasn't there. We make adjustments based on what we enjoy. For some people Mike & Bruce are enough. More power to those folks. I'm not losing any sleep over what other people enjoy.    

As for non-original members touring under the name The Beach Boys...we know that's coming (although Jason Brewer has an excellent tribute band called Sail On that will be tough to beat. Might as well give them the license).  


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: guitarfool2002 on August 01, 2017, 05:41:59 PM
Why can't all of what you described be done without billing these shows as "The Beach Boys" if in your own opinion (shared by similar serious music fans) The Beach Boys no longer exist? Does the right to use the name outweigh the concert experience itself, would people who bought tickets and had those emotional experiences have them any less if it weren't The Beach Boys on the marquee?

I'd also raise the issue again about performing songs under the band name that are not Beach Boys releases - especially on national television. There has to be a separation, and there simply is not.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 01, 2017, 05:45:13 PM
Why can't all of what you described be done without billing these shows as "The Beach Boys" if in your own opinion (shared by similar serious music fans) The Beach Boys no longer exist? Does the right to use the name outweigh the concert experience itself, would people who bought tickets and had those emotional experiences have them any less if it weren't The Beach Boys on the marquee?

I'd also raise the issue again about performing songs under the band name that are not Beach Boys releases - especially on national television. There has to be a separation, and there simply is not.

I didn't have a problem with Carl singing Heaven with The BBs backing him at the 25th anniversary show in Hawaii. But of course, at the time, there wasn't a clearcut line set to avoid brand confusion, nor was the person singing the song lawsuit-happy to sue other band members claiming brand confusion - as opposed to wild ego issues - as the reason.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: guitarfool2002 on August 01, 2017, 05:50:14 PM
Why can't all of what you described be done without billing these shows as "The Beach Boys" if in your own opinion (shared by similar serious music fans) The Beach Boys no longer exist? Does the right to use the name outweigh the concert experience itself, would people who bought tickets and had those emotional experiences have them any less if it weren't The Beach Boys on the marquee?

I'd also raise the issue again about performing songs under the band name that are not Beach Boys releases - especially on national television. There has to be a separation, and there simply is not.

I didn't have a problem with Carl singing Heaven with The BBs backing him at the 25th anniversary show in Hawaii. But of course, at the time, there wasn't a clearcut line set to avoid brand confusion, nor was the person singing the song lawsuit-happy to sue other band members claiming brand confusion - as opposed to wild ego issues - as the reason.

When Carl was in the band there was no license to use the name because The Beach Boys were The Beach Boys and could play any song they wanted on stage.

That's the issue too - It's common sense as outlined in multiple posts above, but there is a separation, a brick wall is more like it, between then and now. Some do not think there is such a separation, and it also leads to watching The Beach Boys on July 4th promoting Mike's new single like they did a few Christmases ago. It's not a Beach Boys product, period.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 01, 2017, 05:51:17 PM
Why can't all of what you described be done without billing these shows as "The Beach Boys" if in your own opinion (shared by similar serious music fans) The Beach Boys no longer exist? Does the right to use the name outweigh the concert experience itself, would people who bought tickets and had those emotional experiences have them any less if it weren't The Beach Boys on the marquee?

I'd also raise the issue again about performing songs under the band name that are not Beach Boys releases - especially on national television. There has to be a separation, and there simply is not.

I didn't have a problem with Carl singing Heaven with The BBs backing him at the 25th anniversary show in Hawaii. But of course, at the time, there wasn't a clearcut line set to avoid brand confusion, nor was the person singing the song lawsuit-happy to sue other band members claiming brand confusion - as opposed to wild ego issues - as the reason.

When Carl was in the band there was no license to use the name because The Beach Boys were The Beach Boys and could play any song they wanted on stage.

That's the issue too - It's common sense as outlined in multiple posts above, but there is a separation, a brick wall is more like it, between then and now. Some do not think there is such a separation, and it also leads to watching The Beach Boys on July 4th promoting Mike's new single like they did a few Christmases ago. It's not a Beach Boys product, period.

Totally.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 01, 2017, 05:53:38 PM
One reason I definitely don't hate Stamos (just begrudge his needless insertion at the expense of folks like, oh, I dunno... Brian Wilson and Al Jardine) is that Stamos, as I recall, said something to the effect in some interview that if he were just a fan - and not John Stamos - that he'd be irked at the presence of some fanboy who got to be in the band for no particular reason. At least Stamos has self-awareness and humbleness, it would certainly seem.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: GhostyTMRS on August 01, 2017, 06:02:19 PM
Why can't all of what you described be done without billing these shows as "The Beach Boys" if in your own opinion (shared by similar serious music fans) The Beach Boys no longer exist? Does the right to use the name outweigh the concert experience itself, would people who bought tickets and had those emotional experiences have them any less if it weren't The Beach Boys on the marquee?

I'd also raise the issue again about performing songs under the band name that are not Beach Boys releases - especially on national television. There has to be a separation, and there simply is not.


It definitely could be done that way but BRI didn't do a survey of hardcore fans and ask their permission for what they think is acceptable. I mean, you're asking me the question as if we, as fans, have any authority over how they run their business. Heck, even Al couldn't get that authority.

Truth be told, when all this went down nearly 20 years ago I was enraged about it but I've long since made my peace with it because all that nerd rage was a waste of energy and in the end it doesn't really matter. The touring entity does what it does and to me, The Beach Boys are a recording act first and foremost. When they ceased to make records, they ceased to be IMO.   


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: CenturyDeprived on August 01, 2017, 06:25:15 PM
(https://image.ibb.co/miNdc5/Famous_Amos_e1464320052859.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: rab2591 on August 01, 2017, 06:28:54 PM
:lol :lol :lol


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: guitarfool2002 on August 01, 2017, 06:38:07 PM
Why can't all of what you described be done without billing these shows as "The Beach Boys" if in your own opinion (shared by similar serious music fans) The Beach Boys no longer exist? Does the right to use the name outweigh the concert experience itself, would people who bought tickets and had those emotional experiences have them any less if it weren't The Beach Boys on the marquee?

I'd also raise the issue again about performing songs under the band name that are not Beach Boys releases - especially on national television. There has to be a separation, and there simply is not.


It definitely could be done that way but BRI didn't do a survey of hardcore fans and ask their permission for what they think is acceptable. I mean, you're asking me the question as if we, as fans, have any authority over how they run their business. Heck, even Al couldn't get that authority.

Truth be told, when all this went down nearly 20 years ago I was enraged about it but I've long since made my peace with it because all that nerd rage was a waste of energy and in the end it doesn't really matter. The touring entity does what it does and to me, The Beach Boys are a recording act first and foremost. When they ceased to make records, they ceased to be IMO.   

The points you stated are more or less what has gotten other fans who care about this music deeply labeled as trolls or "haters" in the past, especially since late 2012.

I agree 100% about making records. The last time they did that was TWGMTR in 2012 when all surviving members were on board, and released what I thought was a pretty damned good album that sounded like The Beach Boys as much as that is possible considering those who are no longer with us. It's too bad Mike didn't share the same enthusiasm about the project, maybe we would have gotten more studio recordings featuring the Beach Boys making original music in the studio with all surviving members on board.

Consider that these same notions are what fans having this same kind of emotional attachment and bond with the music and the records share, and bristle at if not get outright pissed off at Mike when they see The Beach Boys on television on July 4th 2017 promoting a Mike Love solo release with no attempt to draw a line between then and now for those casual fans watching and hearing The Beach Boys mime to a Mike Love remake with Mark McGrath instead of a real Beach Boys recording.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: bonnevillemariner on August 01, 2017, 06:51:07 PM
Speaking of things/connections/events that may or may not hurt the Beach Boys legacy, while I was reading this thread-- the very page with the Manson comments, no less-- the latest episode of The Way I Heard It, Mike Rowe's podcast came up on my podcast playlist.  I won't spoil it, but the title of the episode is "Charlie's Big Break," and it's not necessarily too kind to Melcher and Dennis.  Funny coincidence.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on August 01, 2017, 11:45:17 PM
One reason I definitely don't hate Stamos (just begrudge his needless insertion at the expense of folks like, oh, I dunno... Brian Wilson and Al Jardine) is that Stamos, as I recall, said something to the effect in some interview that if he were just a fan - and not John Stamos - that he'd be irked at the presence of some fanboy who got to be in the band for no particular reason. At least Stamos has self-awareness and humbleness, it would certainly seem.

Exactly.  I don't hate him, although he annoys the hell out of  me at times


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on August 01, 2017, 11:54:48 PM
Why can't all of what you described be done without billing these shows as "The Beach Boys" if in your own opinion (shared by similar serious music fans) The Beach Boys no longer exist? Does the right to use the name outweigh the concert experience itself, would people who bought tickets and had those emotional experiences have them any less if it weren't The Beach Boys on the marquee?

I'd also raise the issue again about performing songs under the band name that are not Beach Boys releases - especially on national television. There has to be a separation, and there simply is not.


It definitely could be done that way but BRI didn't do a survey of hardcore fans and ask their permission for what they think is acceptable. I mean, you're asking me the question as if we, as fans, have any authority over how they run their business. Heck, even Al couldn't get that authority.

Truth be told, when all this went down nearly 20 years ago I was enraged about it but I've long since made my peace with it because all that nerd rage was a waste of energy and in the end it doesn't really matter. The touring entity does what it does and to me, The Beach Boys are a recording act first and foremost. When they ceased to make records, they ceased to be IMO.   

But see, that's us. Unfortunately,  for many various reasons , to the general public the Beach Boys are a novelty nostalgia act at best, and a guilty pleasure. I'd even prefer the attitude that they're washed up, because at least that'd give validity to their peak (s). This is a band that should be looked at as the same level as  the Beatles, but aren't.  The 90s and beyond,  with the exception of 2012, have been brutal. The timing of the new DIA couldn't be worse  with Sunshine Tomorrow coming out.



And how can Mike use the BB name on something like this? Doesn't thst violate the license? And doesn't Brian have a right to sue in a case much stronger than the bullshit Mike pulled in 2005? At the very least I'm hearing quite a bit of the 2012 track on this one, right down to the backup vocals.  Doesnt that seem a bit questionable to anyone else?


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on August 02, 2017, 12:49:11 AM
While it seems like a minor detail now in the grand scheme of their career, Stamos did appear in the Kokomo video.  I imagine that video got some major MTV airplay and a lot of people were probably hearing of the Beach Boys for the first time when Kokomo came out.  So in that context, his appearances with the band isn't that strange to a certain audience, an audience whose first memories of the band involve him.  But it's just the cheap gimmick of it all that bothers me.  Stamos doesn't appear at these shows because he's a great musician or even for his history with the band.  He's asked to appear because he's a good looking C-list celebrity who starred on a bad sitcom in the 90s and people get nostalgic for that sort of thing and supposedly that sells tickets.  It's part of what differentiates Mike Love's interpretation of what the Beach Boys is from the ambitious group that made Pet Sounds.  Here's an interesting quote from a Rolling Stone article (http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/the-beach-boys-last-wave-20120621) about the 2012 reunion.

Quote from: The Beach Boys' Last Wave by Jason Fine
So, the first night at the Beacon, no new songs are added. To make matters worse, at least to those who want the Beach Boys reunion tour to differentiate itself from Mike Love's tour using the Beach Boys name, John Stamos is in the house and jumps onstage for several songs – including one awkward moment when he pulls a petrified-looking little girl from the audience and dances with her on his shoulders. Later, several band members mull around glumly at the afterparty. One calls the show a "travesty." He says, "If they want theater, we can do theater. But I thought this was a rock & roll show."


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on August 02, 2017, 01:22:48 AM
That about sums it up


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: JK on August 02, 2017, 03:30:22 AM
CenturyDeprived!  :lol


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: KDS on August 02, 2017, 05:29:45 AM
Why can't all of what you described be done without billing these shows as "The Beach Boys" if in your own opinion (shared by similar serious music fans) The Beach Boys no longer exist? Does the right to use the name outweigh the concert experience itself, would people who bought tickets and had those emotional experiences have them any less if it weren't The Beach Boys on the marquee?

I'd also raise the issue again about performing songs under the band name that are not Beach Boys releases - especially on national television. There has to be a separation, and there simply is not.


It definitely could be done that way but BRI didn't do a survey of hardcore fans and ask their permission for what they think is acceptable. I mean, you're asking me the question as if we, as fans, have any authority over how they run their business. Heck, even Al couldn't get that authority.

Truth be told, when all this went down nearly 20 years ago I was enraged about it but I've long since made my peace with it because all that nerd rage was a waste of energy and in the end it doesn't really matter. The touring entity does what it does and to me, The Beach Boys are a recording act first and foremost. When they ceased to make records, they ceased to be IMO.   

I tend to agree.  Like many other legacy artists on tour with minimal original members, it's a touring only nostalgia band. 




Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: SMiLE Brian on August 02, 2017, 05:35:23 AM
CenturyDeprived!  :lol
I want some famous Stamos! :hat


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: HeyJude on August 02, 2017, 06:37:51 AM
And how can Mike use the BB name on something like this? Doesn't thst violate the license? And doesn't Brian have a right to sue in a case much stronger than the bullshit Mike pulled in 2005? At the very least I'm hearing quite a bit of the 2012 track on this one, right down to the backup vocals.  Doesnt that seem a bit questionable to anyone else?

I can't speak to the issue of what is on the actual DIA remake recording (I would tend to think Mike wouldn't be crazy enough to use elements of the BB 2011/2012 track in any way).

But as far as using the BB name, this has always been the rub with Mike having the "touring" license. He can't release recordings under the BB name, but he can perform any song "live" (even if he's actually miming to a recording) as "The Beach Boys."

So when Mike releases a new song, whether a "new" composition or a re-recorded old BB song, or if Mike records a full album, he can simultaneously perform it live as "The Beach Boys." So he can go out on tour and on TV shows and they can say "Here are the Beach Boys performing Mike Love's brand new single 'Santa's Havin' a Summer in Paradise'."

And I do think when Mike uses the BB name to perform live and promote his brand-new solo material, the line is blurred to the point of being problematic. The line is even more blurred when he's doing a "solo" re-recording of an old Beach Boys songs. So on PBS last month you had "The Beach Boys performing Mike Love's new solo recording of a Beach Boys classic." Few other bands, certainly of the "legacy" variety of the BB's general era, have had this weird anomaly. Plenty of bands have fought over band names and have seen weird contingents of members go out using a "classic" name, but they usually tend to either completely stick to touring, or they have the *full* rights to the name and record *and* tour under the name.

Why hasn't this been a big deal in the now over 19 years that Mike has toured on his own? Because he has rarely released solo material. He still hasn't put an album out, and only in more recent years has made serious strides to release digital singles. I think eventually he probably will get his album out, and he'll have the benefit of being able to use the *Beach Boys* name to promote his solo album, which is something that even Brian or Al aren't able to do.

I think ideally BRI would put some sort of restriction on this, but it's difficult to do, because a given band should generally be able to perform whatever song they want. Mike tours essentially "solo" and licenses the BB name, and he can theoretically do nothing but BB songs, or nothing but Starland Vocal Band songs, or nothing but "Mike Love" solo songs. BRI would have to amend the license and either outline specific songs (or artists) Mike can't cover in concert, and/or put a restriction on promoting (especially on TV, etc.) his solo material under the BB name.

I've always felt the touring band license should be restricted solely to ticketed, live concerts and should exclude any media appearances (TV, internet, radio, etc.), including standard concerts that happen to be televised, because I think doing a TV show is very different from doing a live gig at the Westbury Music Fair or the Cleveland Rib Cook-Off.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: guitarfool2002 on August 02, 2017, 08:18:56 AM
Simple and basic logic at work here. Mike or anyone licensing the "Beach Boys" name cannot play whatever songs they want and use the brand name to sell tickets to those shows any more than an McDonald's franchise owner in Dubuque can decide to change the Big Mac recipe at that restaurant because he or she doesn't like the original recipe.

Sounds silly to compare music to fast food, right? But unfortunately with licensing and branding and everything that has hung over this band's name since 1998, that's as apt a comparison as anything.

But we've all hashed that out before. Fans will either think it's just fine, and Mike can do a full 50 minute set of his own material if he can fill 50 minutes with originals because he licenses the name, or will think there should be a standard adhered to in terms of presenting the music and charging people to attend the shows with expectations of what they're paying to hear.

If Mike wants to do Pisces Brothers or Hungry Heart or Be True To Your Bud or the new Mark McGrath remake on stage, instead of actual BEACH BOYS material, maybe BRI and all related parties are at this point sick of dealing with the bullshit and will say "whatever..." instead of waving the license and contracts in his face in another board meeting with more lawyers at the table than cheese danishes and Stevia packets.

But when that name and brand is presented on television as The Beach Boys and they're not presenting a Beach Boys song to that television audience...yet there is no attempt to separate the two entities from Mike himself as several videos from July 4th pretty clearly show...is it any surprise fans who actually care about the music would take issue?

Consider that same McDonald's franchisee cannot install a brick oven at their McDonald's location and start cranking out pizzas next to the Happy Meals and fries. The pizza may be excellent, but that's not how licensing a brand works.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: B.E. on August 02, 2017, 09:59:40 AM
Simple and basic logic at work here. Mike or anyone licensing the "Beach Boys" name cannot play whatever songs they want and use the brand name to sell tickets to those shows any more than an McDonald's franchise owner in Dubuque can decide to change the Big Mac recipe at that restaurant because he or she doesn't like the original recipe.

Agreed. Without knowing the details of the licensing agreement, we shouldn't assume it's outside the norm.




Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: HeyJude on August 02, 2017, 10:30:52 AM
What Mike performs out on tour and on TV, etc. tells us either what the licensing agreement actually dictates, or at least what BRI is choosing to enforce about the licensing agreement. It's relatively safe to assume one of these possibilities:

1. The licensing agreement doesn't dictate anything regarding setlist/song selection.

2. The licensing agreement has a vague reference to "maintaining" the Beach Boys image by performing "appropriate" songs, and this is either interpreted in a way that Mike hasn't violated yet, or it hasn't been enforced, and/or it has been ignored.

3. The licensing agreement has more specific, strict guidelines regarding setlist and they've either interpreted this in favor of Mike, or it hasn't been enforced, or nobody is paying any attention.

Here's an interesting thing that came up in late 1999/early 2000 in BRI's complaint against Al Jardine:

"Much of Jardine's repertoire with Beach Boys Family & Friends include many songs that the Beach Boys do not regularly play in concert, songs [that] are about many issues that are not traditionally associated with the Beach Boys, i.e. cars, surf, girls, and fun."

So it appears when it was convenient for BRI to get Al off the touring market, they raised the issue of Al's setlist. In subsequent years, Mike's tour went FAR MORE obscure than anything Al was doing on his 1999 tour. In fact, almost every "deep cut" Al did in 1999 barring something like "Lookin' at Tomorrow" was already being played or would subsequently be played on Mike's tour.

Indeed, the Rolling Stone article from late 1999 that excerpted that bit above from the complaint against Al pointed out that Mike's band *at that time* in 1999 was doing atypical songs based on the "cars, surf, girls, fun" criteria such as "In My Room" and "God Only Knows", and was also flouting the "songs regularly played by the Beach Boys" issue by doing covers at that time like "Duke of Earl."

Long story short, BRI *can* raise the setlist issue, but they clearly don't with Mike for whatever reason.



Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: B.E. on August 02, 2017, 11:06:15 AM
Long story short, BRI *can* raise the setlist issue, but they clearly don't with Mike for whatever reason.

Right, but in your previous post (#151) you stated that Mike could play any song he wants and that it's too difficult for BRI to do anything about it. If you just meant, in the practical sense, that Mike could play any setlist he wanted because BRI apparently isn't interested in enforcing the agreement, then, OK. It just didn't read like that. But, assuming Mike's license still includes language about "maintaining the Beach Boys style" (and that's a safe bet for numerous reasons), BRI doesn't need to amend their license, just enforce it. I doubt the licensing agreement gets into specific song selection, but I bet it includes the right of the licensor to exert quality control.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: HeyJude on August 02, 2017, 11:25:51 AM
Long story short, BRI *can* raise the setlist issue, but they clearly don't with Mike for whatever reason.

Right, but in your previous post (#151) you stated that Mike could play any song he wants and that it's too difficult for BRI to do anything about it. If you just meant, in the practical sense, that Mike could play any setlist he wanted because BRI apparently isn't interested in enforcing the agreement, then, OK. It just didn't read like that. But, assuming Mike's license still includes language about "maintaining the Beach Boys style" (and that's a safe bet for numerous reasons), BRI doesn't need to amend their license, just enforce it. I doubt the licensing agreement gets into specific song selection, but I bet it includes the right of the licensor to exert quality control.

I think this is all just overcomplicating the issue, because we don't have the licensing agreement to view.

My main points were simply that:

A) Typically, any given band can perform any song they want to. The Rolling Stones can play a stadium and do nothing but Abba songs. And so on.

B) If Mike's license does have some sort of verbiage concerning song selection, it's either restrictive but unenforced, or rather liberal and general/vague and thus largely a non-issue, and/or it remains unenforced.

When a corporation issues a license for something, there aren't hard rules about whether they can either bring the issue up in support of a lawsuit, or use it as the main crux of a lawsuit, or simply ignore it. They can do any or all of those things, or none. If they do any of those things, a court may or may not agree. 

In 1999, BRI specifically mentioned in a complaint against Al Jardine that his setlist was problematic if not in violation of what the standard would be for a license to use the name. (And/or, BRI was just throwing a whole bunch of stuff against the wall that was negative towards Al). Whatever standard they were using in 1999 they *clearly* are NOT using now. I doubt it's because the license given to Mike was extensively different from the one they could or would have given to Al. Rather, it's all about enforcement.

Back in 1999, BRI wasn't alerted to rogue Al Jardine song selections only to *then* launch a lawsuit. Just like the accusations about using "female" vocalists on stage, the setlist stuff was just something to use against him. They wanted Al to stop using the BBFF name, and then came up with a bunch of stuff to support that. As Rolling Stone pointed out in 1999, the song selection citation didn't hold much water, because Mike was arguably violating those same rather vague criteria.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: B.E. on August 02, 2017, 12:06:59 PM
I think this is all just overcomplicating the issue, because we don't have the licensing agreement to view.

My main points were simply that:

A) Typically, any given band can perform any song they want to. The Rolling Stones can play a stadium and do nothing but Abba songs. And so on.

B) If Mike's license does have some sort of verbiage concerning song selection, it's either restrictive but unenforced, or rather liberal and general/vague and thus largely a non-issue, and/or it remains unenforced.

Whatever standard they were using in 1999 they *clearly* are NOT using now. I doubt it's because the license given to Mike was extensively different from the one they could or would have given to Al. Rather, it's all about enforcement.

Sorry, but I don't think I'm over-complicating the issue. Your main point (A) was probably the biggest point of contention (because you used it to explain why it's difficult for BRI to put restrictions on Mike). The touring Beach Boys aren't just any band. They license the name. They can't just play Abba songs. That was guitarfool2002's point, I believe. As for your 2nd point (B), again I (partially) disagree. If vague verbiage similar to "maintaining the Beach Boys style" or more specific language grants BRI the right to exert quality control, then that is NOT a non-issue. That opens the door to BRI contacting Mike and informing him that his decision to perform a certain song isn't acceptable. That's their right as the owner of the trademark and their responsibility to the consumer who relies on the trademark's reputation.

I completely agree with what I 'bolded' above.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: HeyJude on August 02, 2017, 12:22:04 PM
I think this is all just overcomplicating the issue, because we don't have the licensing agreement to view.

My main points were simply that:

A) Typically, any given band can perform any song they want to. The Rolling Stones can play a stadium and do nothing but Abba songs. And so on.

B) If Mike's license does have some sort of verbiage concerning song selection, it's either restrictive but unenforced, or rather liberal and general/vague and thus largely a non-issue, and/or it remains unenforced.

Whatever standard they were using in 1999 they *clearly* are NOT using now. I doubt it's because the license given to Mike was extensively different from the one they could or would have given to Al. Rather, it's all about enforcement.

Sorry, but I don't think I'm over-complicating the issue. Your main point (A) was probably the biggest point of contention (because you used it as an explanation for why it's too difficult for BRI to put restrictions on Mike). The touring Beach Boys aren't just any band. They license the name. They can't just play Abba songs. That was guitarfool2002's point, I believe. As for your 2nd point (B), again I (partially) disagree. If vague verbiage similar to "maintaining the Beach Boys style" or more specific language grants BRI the right to exert quality control, then that is NOT a non-issue. That opens the door to BRI contacting Mike and informing him that his decision to perform a certain song isn't acceptable. That's their right as the owner of the trademark and their responsibility to the consumer who relies on the trademark's reputation.

I completely agree with what I 'bolded' above.

I think this is getting overcomplicated because I don't think we're disagreeing at all. I'm not saying it's "too difficult" for BRI to put restrictions on Mike, as if the mechanism for doing so isn't possible. Rather, I'm simply saying the restrictions either aren't there or aren't being enforced, or are there and being abided by.

What we know is that BRI isn't going after Mike. Nobody is saying BRI *can't* go after Mike regarding any or every issue pertaining to the license that they might feel he's not sticking to. As with granting a license in the first place, BRI could change the terms of the license, enforce it differently, or anything and everything else.

The point here is that they don't. Why don't they? My opinion is because it's largely a "let sleeping dogs lie" sort of situation. Nothing is to be gained unless something *seriously* heinous happens. As I've said before, I would guess the only way BRI would ever actually move to strip Mike of the license (or really take any action against him whatsoever) would be something like Mike being convicted of a serious crime, or if some other epic PR scandal was happening.

As has been pointed out, I think even if all three other BRI members voted to do anything that would keep Mike from touring as "The Beach Boys", the whole mess would end up tied up in litigation for years regardless of the final outcome. THAT is why they let sleeping dogs lie.  

Back specifically to the issue of song selection, that is one of the *least likely* things BRI shareholders would ever go after Mike for, because the setlist is the most changeable, malleable thing about the presentation. If Mike permanently stopped doing BB songs and only did Abba songs, yes, BRI would probably take issue with that. If Mike did one single "Beach Boys" show where they performed nothing but cover versions, I doubt BRI would do anything about it. Again, I think something really heinous and extreme would have to happen for it to become an issue, regardless of whether doing "Pisces Brothers" *might* flout the license terms.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on August 03, 2017, 01:32:55 AM
While it seems like a minor detail now in the grand scheme of their career, Stamos did appear in the Kokomo video.  I imagine that video got some major MTV airplay and a lot of people were probably hearing of the Beach Boys for the first time when Kokomo came out.  So in that context, his appearances with the band isn't that strange to a certain audience, an audience whose first memories of the band involve him.  But it's just the cheap gimmick of it all that bothers me.  Stamos doesn't appear at these shows because he's a great musician or even for his history with the band.  He's asked to appear because he's a good looking C-list celebrity who starred on a bad sitcom in the 90s and people get nostalgic for that sort of thing and supposedly that sells tickets.  It's part of what differentiates Mike Love's interpretation of what the Beach Boys is from the ambitious group that made Pet Sounds.  Here's an interesting quote from a Rolling Stone article (http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/the-beach-boys-last-wave-20120621) about the 2012 reunion.

Quote from: The Beach Boys' Last Wave by Jason Fine
So, the first night at the Beacon, no new songs are added. To make matters worse, at least to those who want the Beach Boys reunion tour to differentiate itself from Mike Love's tour using the Beach Boys name, John Stamos is in the house and jumps onstage for several songs – including one awkward moment when he pulls a petrified-looking little girl from the audience and dances with her on his shoulders. Later, several band members mull around glumly at the afterparty. One calls the show a "travesty." He says, "If they want theater, we can do theater. But I thought this was a rock & roll show."

Great behind-the-scenes look, many good posts in this thread. I don't like our (basically) shared attitudes being marginalized as "nerd rage" or whatever the guy who doesn't believe the band still exists called it. If it still is going to exist (and it clearly does, for better or worse), it should exist in a much different form than the one it exists in now. Just because its recorded legacy is its predominant one doesn't mean that its live legacy can't be tarnished beyond all recognition, which it is and has been for years. And there IS a wonderful live legacy.  Too bad that the previously mentioned list that includes the Beatles among the greats only includes Brian and not the whole band, didn't have to be that way.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: HeyJude on August 03, 2017, 11:34:36 AM
Under the category of the new DIA single causing confusion between "The Beach Boys" and Mike solo, this article from yesterday promoting an upcoming show erroneously states that *the band* released the new single and made a new video for it:

The music never stops for the Beach Boys. The band just released a new album of archival material, 1967 – Sunshine Tomorrow, as well as a new video of the classic “Do It Again.” The video accompanies the release of a new studio version of the song, featuring Mark McGrath of Sugar Ray and John Stamos on drums. They recently performed the song live at the annual July 4th concert in Washington, DC.

http://whatsupnewp.com/whatsupri-interview-mike-love-and-beach-boys-to-open-bold-point-august-9th/


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on August 03, 2017, 10:01:01 PM
Under the category of the new DIA single causing confusion between "The Beach Boys" and Mike solo, this article from yesterday promoting an upcoming show erroneously states that *the band* released the new single and made a new video for it:

The music never stops for the Beach Boys. The band just released a new album of archival material, 1967 – Sunshine Tomorrow, as well as a new video of the classic “Do It Again.” The video accompanies the release of a new studio version of the song, featuring Mark McGrath of Sugar Ray and John Stamos on drums. They recently performed the song live at the annual July 4th concert in Washington, DC.

http://whatsupnewp.com/whatsupri-interview-mike-love-and-beach-boys-to-open-bold-point-august-9th/

Damn right it causes confusion. This is an unprecedented situation and Mike clearly feels like he IS the band now and can do whatever he wants. For all practical purposes He's right, but a classy person wouldn't.

I think the reason that it bothers me so much is that this kind of crass behavior is becoming the new normal and seems to be taking over completely. It's bad enough to see it happen in the world at large, but you like to feel that some part of one's personal world of favorite things won't inevitably succumb to cheapness, compromise and mediocrity.


Title: Re: John Stamos: Love Him or Hate Him?
Post by: Cabinessenceking on August 07, 2017, 03:26:02 AM
John Stamos is a has-been who attached himself to another has-been. Simple as that.