What in the flying f*** does that have to do with the topic being discussed? Take your predictable hate speech somewhere else.

Some of us who have been pushed over the edge by his latest outrage i.e. the ill-timed, solo(!) McGrath-blemished DIA, right on the heels of the glorious Sunshine Tomorrow, are reacting to this equally ill-timed thread with a NIMBY attitude. Yes, we could just refrain from comment and let you ML deniers pat him and each other on the back ad nauseum, or we can express a dissenting opinion. That is what some of us are choosing to do, here and now. If you don't like it, lump it.

More than just Mike. Between 83 and 84 the whole band changed. Dennis died. They dropped the tempos, the arrangements became slathered in keyboards , and everything just slowed down. The polished, sleek, trimmed down package shows of the 80s and 90s began.   Carl was more the cause than Mike. Carl was amazing but like all the BB made some mistakes. Changing the arrangements was one.  Not doing more in the late 90s was another with the cheerleaders.

Why are we even wasting time with this thread? Aside from his vocal and lyrical contributions up until the mid-'70s or so, which I am very appreciative of and thankful for, the guy is just a totally worthless, annoying dick. End of story IMO.

Yeccch, yeccch, a thousand times yeccch.

[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.]

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.

Probably written in '66 but just never recorded, or maybe it was included in lost vocal sessions.

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 about the 2012 reunion.

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.

Also never been clear (to me at least) whether this was an unrecorded Smile-era lyric from Van Dyke or a '71 addition.

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.

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.

"And yes, by all means, nothing anyone does should be above criticism. I personally find some PS songs to be a bit of a slog. Different strokes!"

Sacrilege!! Ban worthy.

What is the alternative that is being suggested otherwise?

When Brian returned to the road in the late 90's, should he have taken the name "The Beach Boys" with him...despite being known through music history and pop culture for not touring?

Mike Love has a long list of unscrupulous deeds that he has willingly attached to the name "The Beach Boys" over the last twenty years, but can any of us imagine a "The Beach Boys" concert without him? Songs like "Surfin' USA", "All Summer Long", "Fun, Fun, Fun", "Barbara Ann"...they all lose their nostalgic, cornball, schmaltz without Michael Edward Love at the helm of the concert stage.

Fast forward back to the present...I think the demand is just fine. Sure, the venues that either "The Beach Boys" or "Brian Wilson" play don't exceed say approx. 3,000 people BUT, I have never been to a poorly attended concert by either group. Both names have an easy time filling middle-low end professional venues such as theatres, smaller arenas, and amphitheaters.

Agreed.  It's the way it's been for 20 years now (with the exception of C50).   I highly doubt the other parties at BRI are in such a huff over the DIA single.

Maybe they're not, but they should be.

I'm sure BRI realizes that it's a non event. 

I'd rather they focus their efforts on releasing a full BW PS Concert (not the album only sampler we got in 2002) on DVD/BluRay. 

It's NOT a "non-event" as you so casually contradict me by putting it. Yes, quality new releases are of more import, but BRI should care more than they obviously do.

Glad to see Ray return with a great post!

+1

Brian really has been put through so, so much unnecessary turmoil and heartache due to being blood related to a couple of narcissistic egomaniacs. The way that it can f*** with a person to have people show them actual love... then sh*t on them... then show them love again... then sh*t on them again... repeat, repeat, repeat... is unquantifiable.

Those who coddle, nurture, and enable narcissists' behavior should be ashamed of themselves.

Right on, all of the above.

That's an amazing snippet.

The timing for this thread is not good, Nate.

Mike has really pushed the BBs fans' willingness to forgive to the limit.....

Past the limit IMO.

The difference between missteps of the past (especially the 60s/70s/80s) and now is that now, in 2017, and for the last five years if not longer, there has been a *clear* path towards resuscitating and rehabilitating the "brand."

Essentially, the formula to do it was C50. As Howie Edelson said, the Beach Boys were getting *huge* press, and *good* press, and were doing so with no presence on classic rock radio. Mike indeed went from Frankie Valli to Mick Jagger overnight. They *did* take what Mike had steered into an AARP brand and turned it into an arena rock band.

When they biffed things in the 70s and 80s, they were often at a low ebb and there wasn't a clear path that they *should* have taken instead (other than to just keep making albums and try to stay relevant).

But in 2012 or 2017, there's a clear path to accolades and good reviews and building a good rep with critics that matter. To build on the indie/nerd fan cred and all of that. And it's C50, and "Smile". It's *not* John Stamos and Full House and Mark McGrath. You can call it "snobbery" or "elitism" all you want, but that's the deal. And it's better for *everyone*, including the band and the brand and the legacy and hardcore fans and casual fans, for the band to dispense with the "Stamos/Full House" path which garners snickers and laughs and eye rolls among plenty of fans, and go for the reunion band getting rave reviews in Rolling Stone and getting a good review in the New York Times for a gig at Madison Square Garden.

Yeah, it *does* mean that you won't get to drive five minutes to see Mike's band at your local fair or get to see Ike, Totten, and Foskett sing half the leads during the show (though you'd probably still get at least Totten for another reunion tour). Yeah, it does mean the "oooh, Uncle Jessie is on this tour?" fans might be alienated when the band skips the bit where Stamos croons on stage or Mike shows old clips on the video screen, and instead you hear Brian sing "I Just Wasn't Made for These Times."

I cut the band of decades and decades ago a little bit more slick for bad decisions because there wasn't (and still isn't always in retrospect) one clear path concerning what they *should* have done to be more successful or stay more relevant, etc.

But in 2017, it's crystal clear. And Mike rejects that. He gave up rehabilitating his own image (in addition to reinvigorating a tired brand stretched thin and devalued by Mike's incessant touring and lack of interest in creating anything new), he gave up prestigious gigs at places like Madison Square Garden, so that he could go back to his own band and play bowling alleys in Anchorage. He derided Brian's original songs in 2012 because it was more "downer music", not to mention that Brian didn't want to write alone from scratch, then ditched Brian and Al and went to releasing remakes and old outtakes (let us not forget that his two previous "new" songs prior to DIA were a decade-old solo track "Pisces Brothers", and a re-recording of a nearly 40-year-old outtake in "Alone on Christmas Day"). Mike gave up building *everybody* in the band up individually and collectively, and instead went back to trashing Melinda and Brian and bringing up decades-old drug use. Mike not only doesn't seem to "get it", he's actually regressed in many ways. Remember back in 1992 when he was all hot and bothered about the songwriting lawsuit? Then he *won* the lawsuit, and then for some random reason about 20 years later started whining and complaining about the songwriting thing *again.* It seems sometimes he not only can't help himself when it comes to being negative, he maybe somehow relishes it. The only thing he can be positive about are vapid and ill-conceived items like his new single.

He is a large, stinking turd, end of story.

Who's ready for McGrath and Stamos on a remade All I Wanna Do? Let's DO THIS!!!

That          would          make          my          head         explode.

It's time for an intervention and a regime change. Gather your pitchforks and torches and meet me at BRI.

Mike is hiding in the club Kokomo "spider hole"

Lets drag him out kicking and screaming before the magistrates, find a top pro bono attorney and begin divestiture proceedings.

What is the alternative that is being suggested otherwise?

When Brian returned to the road in the late 90's, should he have taken the name "The Beach Boys" with him...despite being known through music history and pop culture for not touring?

Mike Love has a long list of unscrupulous deeds that he has willingly attached to the name "The Beach Boys" over the last twenty years, but can any of us imagine a "The Beach Boys" concert without him? Songs like "Surfin' USA", "All Summer Long", "Fun, Fun, Fun", "Barbara Ann"...they all lose their nostalgic, cornball, schmaltz without Michael Edward Love at the helm of the concert stage.

Fast forward back to the present...I think the demand is just fine. Sure, the venues that either "The Beach Boys" or "Brian Wilson" play don't exceed say approx. 3,000 people BUT, I have never been to a poorly attended concert by either group. Both names have an easy time filling middle-low end professional venues such as theatres, smaller arenas, and amphitheaters.

Agreed.  It's the way it's been for 20 years now (with the exception of C50).   I highly doubt the other parties at BRI are in such a huff over the DIA single.

Maybe they're not, but they should be.

This whole DIA iteration in all its aspects is pathetic, disgusting, nauseating, sickening, irritating, asinine, intolerable, reprehensible, putrid, blasphemous, rancid, horrifying, disastrous, disheartening, sacreligious, untenable, outrageous, ignoble, demeaning, disillusioning, unspeakable, stultifying, catastrophic, ill-conceived, hubrisitc, insipid, dispiriting, barf-inducing, and just plain bad. Now let me tell you what I REALLY think....

The situation is that he is pushing the chutzpah envelope big-time.  With the exception of Big Sur, which does sound very good, mainly because it's just a new vocal laid down over the original backing track, and Mike also had a major hand in composing, if  Brian Wilson wants to re-record classic BB songs that's one thing but for Mike to do it, esp. under his own name, is the epitome of classlessness, even though he sang on them. No matter how many new fans a new release of a great old song brings in, again IMO.

I don't think this opinion is just grumpy purism run amok but is pretty d--n objective.

Very odd, I just had a dream that Brian and Al released an uptempo rock remake of "He Gives Speeches".

HA good one Dudd.

No need for an explanation, you're allowed to come and go as you please. 

I'm glad the internet is still free, for the time being at least.

Inglorious Basterds was historically authentic in many respects from what I hear (never saw the whole thing) and I bet he's more emotionally invested in this material, so I wouldn't be surprised if it hews fairly closely to real events rather than leaning on fictionalization. If Dennis is in the mix and the casting is good, this should be by far the best and most powerful portrayal of him and that messy situation yet. Hopefully, despite Tarantino's fascination with the sordid, Dennis's good intentions, however misguided, will emerge, with larger-than-life pathos intact.

This could actually be a case of NLNTL being used meaningfully, and adding a huge amount of atmosphere to the project. It would refresh the memory of a dark chapter in band history, but I for one would like to see it used, if it's used respectfully, terms can be reached and Tarantino plans to explore the DW angle.