gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
630692 Posts in 25258 Topics by 3596 Members - Latest Member: bbb9 April 22, 2018, 08:22:20 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 176
1  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love - Unleash the Love - Due November 17 - w/ 2nd Disc of BB Remakes on: April 06, 2018, 03:38:25 PM
Picked up the vinyl edition of UTL which came out a while after the CD. The sticker is different from the CD edition. I wonder if Mike got in trouble for using the Beach Boys logo?

Also noticing that the sticker now says *a* lyricist.



I'm sure it was changed grudgingly; I'm surprised they didn't try to hide the word "a" by shrinking it down to size 1 font.
2  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Thread for various insignificant questions that don't deserve their own thread! on: March 27, 2018, 01:14:40 PM
Why did they not ask for David Marks to return instead of hiring Bruce to replace Brian/Glen?

I know David created his own demise, but I think that him leaving was truly a huge misfortune for the Boys to lose David.

He seemed to be the earliest member to have a desire to create songs, and other than Dennis and Carl, Al and Bruce had about 3 songs in them the rest of their career. David could have helped them a lot I feel.

They needed someone who could take Brian's place (and/or mix and match with Al and Carl) in the vocal stack. Between that and the lingering old politics of his original exit, I don't find it surprising they weren't calling Dave back up in 1965.


Right. I'm guessing that since he was already a corporate member (although wasn't that sorta not properly handled, where he didn't realize he should still have been earning more money until years later?), they wanted someone they could pay less and not worry about re-introducing anyone who could thus have potential expectations of more of a slice of the pie.

But yeah, it's a bummer he wasn't around during those eras.
3  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Was \ on: March 23, 2018, 10:04:39 AM
Do you think perhaps people might have mistook the beginning of the song for Surfer Girl? Just a possibility that occurred to me.
4  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Did Landy ever realize he did anything wrong? on: March 22, 2018, 10:25:37 AM
I recently got an Ancestry.com account, and in addition to trying to figure out some personal family tree stuff, I randomly for sh*ts and giggles typed in a few non-family names. Landy was one of them. And lo and behold, I discover that when Landy moved to Hawaii after having been forcibly removed from Brian, he wound up living literally walking distance from a park called Wilson Playground.

I cannot think he was unaware of this when he chose where to live. Creep-a-delic!






5  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Happy Birthday Mike on: March 15, 2018, 11:39:43 AM
Shots fired! LOL LOL LOL

I heart VDP
6  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Vocal edits, punch-ins + copy/paste vocals in BB songs on: March 04, 2018, 10:13:49 PM
Don’t know if live albums are included but the Knebworth Concert grates for me. Not able to watch at the moment so no specific songs but double vocal tracking on California Girls from memory was bad. Also hearing Al’s voice yet on the DVD he is not even singing into the mic is pretty bad.

I cannot make it through it due to the Autotune on Cali Girls. Is that the earliest instance of Autotune on a BBs' release? (Imagination excluded, being a solo release).
7  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Vocal edits, punch-ins + copy/paste vocals in BB songs on: February 23, 2018, 10:53:07 AM
Curious to see what examples people might come up with for this topic.

I've always loved to discover new tidbits of info regarding what parts in BB songs might be vocal edits/splices... such as the previously unknown (to many fans, at least) edit where Brian comes in during Good Vibrations on the "when I look" part during the lyric "when I look (Brian)...in her eyes (Carl)".

In that GV instance, I sorta feel like Brian wanted it to seem like it was the same vocalist singing the whole line (to the listener's ears), and that it was an attempt at sleight of hand. As opposed, to say, the parts in That's Not Me, where Brian jumps in with "you needed my..." where he's very obviously just a new vocalist finishing off the lyrical idea that Mike started singing in the previous line.

Of course, the GV intent is completely subjective and debatable. Another obvious edit/splice is during the group vocals on And Your Dream Comes True.

Sometimes edits are obvious since reverb gets cut off, but other times edits are completely invisible and not known to us fans. One that I've always wondered if it's an edit or not is in the song Somewhere Near Japan, after Carl sings "old times sake", is it an edit to the next line where he sings "though I know you're gonna break my heart"?

Obviously as the years have worn on, we've gotten many more edits/splices, copy/paste jobs, etc as the band members have aged, and their vocal chops have declined (not to mention their patience in the studio most likely). I sorta feel like the chorus vocals on Someone to Love from Sweet Insanity are copy/pasted over and over again on each chorus, but of course I could be wrong.

Side question: are there any studio vocal leads on BB songs have no (or virtually no) edits/punch-ins? Where it's essentially a live studio vocal?
8  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: WIBN in final (?) Nancy comic strip on: February 21, 2018, 10:03:49 AM
If you're trying to insinuate that I hijacked the thread, and not the string of 5 immediately preceding your original post that is ridiculous.

But isn't the fact that a brand new publication, the comic printed in 2018, went out of its way to list "Wilson/Asher"... which contradicts the "new" revised credits? That is a topic worthy of discussion, which then led to a topic of the whole issue with the credits having been revised in the 1st place, which naturally pisses some people off because Mike's name on the credits is still (and will always be) a source of debate/contention to most fans who are knowledgeable about the history.

But it's not like there's zero relation to the original topic.  Conversations (either in real life, or on message boards) will often lend themselves to other topics that are related.

If the original comic had not been a panel with WIBN, but instead had been a panel with a topic about Al Jardine's preferred brand of t-shirts, I somehow doubt it would have led his line of messages into the discussion topic of Mike Love and his crediting overreaching.

But the comic went out of its way to show a now-outdated WIBN credit. So why is it "hijacking" for that comic to lend itself naturally to a discussion about the credits for that song?  We are nerds. We know the history of that song, and the revised credit, and that is only natural to become a topic of discussion as a result.

It's not rocket science why it went there; Mike himself, via so, so many of his actions over the years, has done stuff that many fans find in poor taste, crass (even Al Jardine publicly stated such - imagine what he must say/think privately!) ... essentially Mike has spread his own tentacles over so much of the story of the band, that when those things he has done - which many think are bad, egocentric, narcissistic decisions - are innumerable, it's only natural that perhaps a larger percentage of topics (when compared to other members) might eventually go down that road of discussing Mike critically, even if the original topic wasn't specifically about that, but tangentially might naturally lead there.

In a nutshell, basically, you can't act the way Mike has for so many years without many things indirectly leading back to a discussion of him/his actions. It's not gonna happen every time of course. Mike has nobody to thank but himself for that unique distinction. I'm also certain that if Mike had long ago completely ceased with stoking the flames of smack-talking other members while comically trying to build himself up - people would be somewhat a little less inclined to naturally have topics veer in this direction.

I never said it was zero relation, I always maintained it as "little relation".  A writing credit whose revision most casual fans don't know about on a drawing of a 50 year old record in a frame of a comic strip that is ending.  That is "little relation".

If you step outside of this bubble for a minute, here are the most likely reasons for that cover:
1- Guy googled the WIBN single cover and drew it.
2- This was the record he had as a kid, with Wilson/Asher on it, or it's one that he picked up at a used record store as an adult.
46- He is expressing a subversive hatred of Mike by recognising that the credits were amended and going against the court decision in his drawing

What you're trying to defend isn't some sort of academic discussion about why the record appeared as it did, you're trying to defend your friends' immediate replies of "Mike is a litigous POS" or "He's gonna sue the comic strip".  You're trying to characterise that after the fact as some sort of Superfan Discourse that logically resulted from the OP.  What is telling is that in your own words here you use the reasoning of Mike being crass/in poor taste with his public behavior as grounds for these replies.  You show here, that the direction is merely "the guy sucks so obviously people will freely stick it to him whenever possible".  

Sure, and I really don't think many people on here really think/thought, truly, that there was any remote "good chance" that there was an underhanded "stick it to Mike" intent by the cartoonist. But being as Mike seems to have a history of finding ways to sue or get offended/feel slighted over things that many other people view as unwarranted (he can get upset over anything he wants of course, just as we can roll our eyes if he does), I don't see how people need to get upset over posters jokingly tying in Mike's history of actions into a conceivable (though unlikely) hypothetical Mike/Mike lawyer reaction.

Basically it comes down to fans venting. Many fans are frustrated to know that Mike has been so litigious - especially the 2005 nonsense lawsuit - and it's because of actions like that,  compounded by the omission of mentioning said lawsuit/ not expressing an iota of regret about it in his autobio (thus insulting the intelligence of fans, making it seem like simply omitting it will make negative sentiment over the issue magically "go away") has caused many people to half-jokingly (though understandably) want to make light of the sue-happy band member in order to bust the tough guy notion he's tried to create by puffing himself up all the time. It helps to laugh about it. Yes, it's gonna be at his expense, but again, there's a reason for that. Terrible actions, no public expression of regret, repeat, for decades will do that to a fanbase.

The flipside is that people like myself will also talk about the things I actually like and appreciate about Mike's contributions to the band. I think things only get toxic when people somehow cannot bring themselves to say/acknowledge Mike's good contributions. I cannot understand how disliking his behavior can translate to a frustrated fan saying that good lyrics/vocals are somehow not good. That refusal, I can agree, is toxic and nonsensical IMHO.
9  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: WIBN in final (?) Nancy comic strip on: February 20, 2018, 03:33:34 PM
Just for the hell of it I typed ‘wouldn’t it be nice’ into google images. Nothing else, just as the cartoonist probably did. The single disc, as depicted, comes up. Forget credits as the artist probably knows nothing about the songs history.

I think some are reading too much into this.

Probably right. I think 98.5% likelihood of what you said being accurate.

But one never fully knows who is a hardcore BBs fan out there, even cartoonists. Slim chance but who knows. I doubt anyone on here *really* thinks it was an intentional Mike Love dig by the cartoonist, but stranger things have happened.

And also, it is funny to speculate that Mike might get pissed about it, regardless of the cartoonist's intent. Yes, this is a famous cartoon, but it's super long in the tooth, and not all that well-known in 2018... but if, say, on a national famous TV show or commercial in 2018, we saw a similar Wilson/Asher credit on a prominently-featured piece of art, I could honestly see Mike's legal team at least privately having a discussion to see if there's any way Mike can sue or badger the content creator into changing it to Wilson/Asher/Love. The fact that this hypothetical legal discussion isn't *completely* farfetched and could actually happen is hilarious and discussion-worthy, I think at least.
10  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: WIBN in final (?) Nancy comic strip on: February 20, 2018, 02:51:57 PM
If you're trying to insinuate that I hijacked the thread, and not the string of 5 immediately preceding your original post that is ridiculous.

But isn't the fact that a brand new publication, the comic printed in 2018, went out of its way to list "Wilson/Asher"... which contradicts the "new" revised credits? That is a topic worthy of discussion, which then led to a topic of the whole issue with the credits having been revised in the 1st place, which naturally pisses some people off because Mike's name on the credits is still (and will always be) a source of debate/contention to most fans who are knowledgeable about the history.

But it's not like there's zero relation to the original topic.  Conversations (either in real life, or on message boards) will often lend themselves to other topics that are related.

If the original comic had not been a panel with WIBN, but instead had been a panel with a topic about Al Jardine's preferred brand of t-shirts, I somehow doubt it would have led his line of messages into the discussion topic of Mike Love and his crediting overreaching.

But the comic went out of its way to show a now-outdated WIBN credit. So why is it "hijacking" for that comic to lend itself naturally to a discussion about the credits for that song?  We are nerds. We know the history of that song, and the revised credit, and that is only natural to become a topic of discussion as a result.

It's not rocket science why it went there; Mike himself, via so, so many of his actions over the years, has done stuff that many fans find in poor taste, crass (even Al Jardine publicly stated such - imagine what he must say/think privately!) ... essentially Mike has spread his own tentacles over so much of the story of the band, that when those things he has done - which many think are bad, egocentric, narcissistic decisions - are innumerable, it's only natural that perhaps a larger percentage of topics (when compared to other members) might eventually go down that road of discussing Mike critically, even if the original topic wasn't specifically about that, but tangentially might naturally lead there.

In a nutshell, basically, you can't act the way Mike has for so many years without many things indirectly leading back to a discussion of him/his actions. It's not gonna happen every time of course. Mike has nobody to thank but himself for that unique distinction. I'm also certain that if Mike had long ago completely ceased with stoking the flames of smack-talking other members while comically trying to build himself up - people would be somewhat a little less inclined to naturally have topics veer in this direction.
11  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: WIBN in final (?) Nancy comic strip on: February 19, 2018, 04:03:37 PM
And like clockwork, the first 5 replies to this excellent first post were predictable SSMB toxic pollution.

Check all the coats and hats at the door for a moment, and I want to ask a few direct questions.

<<<<<<

In your opinion, what did Mike Love contribute to the song Wouldn't It Be Nice?

If as had been reported Mike's only contribution was saying "good night baby, sleep tight" during the fade, in your opinion did that justify suing for and claiming equal writing credit alongside Wilson-Asher?

>>>>>

If mentioning those issues is "toxic pollution" on display, let us know.

But I raise them as well to show how many fans still take issue with Mike's "claims" of authorship on *that specific song* to where his original claims included scenarios presented in court that were as absurd as suggesting Brian would duck into the bathroom during studio sessions and "write" secretly with Mike over the phone. If there is blowback against Mike over this song and it happens to come out when the song is discussed, it's not coming out of thin air.




Do you think that if a person contributes a lyric to a song, they should be credited/acknowledged? Is it deserving of a written credit? I'm asking as a genuine question.

What about song titles? If that were case Ringo is due a TON of money.  LOL

Right - I've used the Ringo example in many discussions of this in the past. Ringo coined the phrase "hard day's night", which became a #1 hit single AND the title of a smash hit film in 1964...and Ringo didn't get credit as a songwriter or credit for the film title. Ringo could have claimed in a lawsuit that he got screwed out of millions, but he didn't. He could also claim "Tomorrow Never Knows" and other malaprops which he was fond of throwing into conversations. Things like "eight days a week", etc. But he never took it to court. Credit to Ringo.

Jay - To your question, in this case there is no-zero-nada logic that can be argued for Mike to where he deserves 1/3 equal credit for "good night baby, sleep tight". Listen to the track. Music by Wilson, lyrics by Asher. It's as simple as that. Most of the song's structure which hooks listeners in comes 2 minutes or so prior to Mike's "contribution", and most DJ's at the time started their talk-up during the fade anyway, so if it had to be argued by a musicologist they may suggest Mike's part was inessential to the overall impression given to listeners by that recording.

It was a very bad decision that screwed Wilson and Asher both financially and conceptually...beyond the notion of what is right or fair.

Further, consider Mike filed roughly *double* the claims to various songs in that suit than what actually made it to the case, which means roughly half got thrown out of court. Consider the reasons why that many of Mike's "claims" to cowrites were dismissed, and how many of those dismissed songs Mike tried to claim credit for where he wasn't due such credit.

It's a shame WIBN slipped through as it did, because it is and was a travesty.

PS - CenturyDeprived: Spot-on. Great post.

I'd also add that Mike's attempt to shoehorn in a credit for WIBN is not unrelated to his recent interview talking about how he wishes he'd written lyrics (how he could've made the album "better" and "more commercial", or something to that effect) for the album Pet Sounds.  It's all part of his same complex. Most people wouldn't do/say either of those things, but the same guy did/said both. 

Dude cannot handle the fact that this album is so critically praised (with Brian naturally receiving the lion's share of that praise), and it became a hunt to find a way to get more credit for Mike on the album. Unfortunately, the opposite effect happened, and Mike came off looking like a petty straw-grabber, and it diminished peoples' empathy for the things Mike ACTUALLY got legit screwed out of. And if Mike were actually a modest guy, people would have empathy for him, the same way I'm sure people have empathy for Denny not getting credited (or appreciated for) "You Are So Beautiful" in his own lifetime.

I feel like Mike watched this clip of the original TV show Dallas as a pep talk, before consulting with his lawyers to try and take as much credit/power as humanly possible. Taking lessons from Jock Ewing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGdfPtW56fo
12  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: WIBN in final (?) Nancy comic strip on: February 19, 2018, 11:55:14 AM
And like clockwork, the first 5 replies to this excellent first post were predictable SSMB toxic pollution.

Check all the coats and hats at the door for a moment, and I want to ask a few direct questions.

<<<<<<

In your opinion, what did Mike Love contribute to the song Wouldn't It Be Nice?

If as had been reported Mike's only contribution was saying "good night baby, sleep tight" during the fade, in your opinion did that justify suing for and claiming equal writing credit alongside Wilson-Asher?

>>>>>

If mentioning those issues is "toxic pollution" on display, let us know.

But I raise them as well to show how many fans still take issue with Mike's "claims" of authorship on *that specific song* to where his original claims included scenarios presented in court that were as absurd as suggesting Brian would duck into the bathroom during studio sessions and "write" secretly with Mike over the phone. If there is blowback against Mike over this song and it happens to come out when the song is discussed, it's not coming out of thin air.




Do you think that if a person contributes a lyric to a song, they should be credited/acknowledged? Is it deserving of a written credit? I'm asking as a genuine question.

Of course in theory that is correct.

However, I think two things should ideally be agreed upon here:

- Mike very unfairly was legit screwed out of a number of song credits. No doubt about it. This situation sucked for Mike... and everyone - even people who think he sucks as a person or don't feel he has talent - should agree that it was not fair. Yes, even OSD.

- Mike became very bitter as a result of this, and definitely overreached in trying to overcorrect this crediting problem. This is pretty much exhibit A of said overreaching. If there's any doubt of this being an overreach, then consider how many songs Mike himself has lifted parts from without crediting others. The "Brian's Back" end Carl-sung wordless vocal melody lifted from "You Still Believe in Me" (which is the best part of "Brian's Back"), just for starters.

Mike's a hypocrite and his crediting on WIBN is a joke. Mike realllly wanted to be thought of by music critics as integral to Pet Sounds in some way, even though he's barely part of it, "I'm Waiting for the Day" excepted. I'm sure his jealousy over Brian getting so much attention for this one album fed into this strawgrab-esque claim that he deserves 33% (or really any) of the credit for this little throwaway part.

PS - I'll gladly praise Mike where I feel praising is due, and he has a lot to be proud of in the way of contributions to this band, but I for one am VERY glad the vocal bridge lead part of Mike's was missing (and extraction not really invented yet) at the time of the original stereo mix, because the Brian-sung bridge on that 1st stereo mix is SO SO SO SO SO much prettier and preferable to my ears.
13  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: WIBN in final (?) Nancy comic strip on: February 19, 2018, 11:49:50 AM
Agreed....this is nothing new. This has been debated for many years, long before this message board existed; the fact that the claim is the legal equivalent of erectile dysfunction certainly doesn’t help.

I think I may use “toxic pollution “ for a song title now, though

Heck, Mike himself used "toxic waste" as a lyric during the song Summer in Paradise; in true unintentional hilarious Mike form, Mike sings "toxic waste" right as a super cheesy, dated-even-by-1992-standards sax solo part kicks in  LOL
14  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love Oh! Those Girls & American Girls on: February 19, 2018, 08:44:04 AM
 'Oh! Those Girls' is kinda sort of a guilty pleasure. I like how Mike sings in a punk type of manner that he never really does on any other released song.
15  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: 7 Years Later and STILL no Barnyard with Backing Vocals on: February 16, 2018, 12:11:05 PM
With the 1966 and 1967 copy write archive releases done unfortunately it seems very unlikely we are going to get this.  But didn't this come out on some advance copy CD-r's of the Smile Sessions box set?

Somebody on the net must have ripped and/or saved it from that advance promo (it might have just been streaming). I cannot believe nobody did.
16  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love - Unleash the Love - Due November 17 - w/ 2nd Disc of BB Remakes on: February 09, 2018, 01:57:13 PM
Or a VDP picture! LOL

It's just funny because the shirt is SO 1966-1967-centric, and seems to romanticize that time period, which of course is the time period that the majority of people who take issue with Mr. Love believe he acted particularly abhorrently, or at least in a manner that perhaps most negatively impacted the band's career (arguably of course, because there are so many time periods to choose from regarding terrible actions - and yes I know he cowrote Good Vibrations in this time period too).  

Other than the obvious positives that Mike contributed to the song Good Vibrations, I think that only in Mike's own mind is that era any kind of era that people would largely associate him with in any sort of "positive" way.

Time/era aside, that shirt HeyJude posted above is completely influenced by the acid culture of the 1960s in both style and reference (Haight/Ashbury street). And for a man whose biggest regret in life is the drugs that other people took, you’d think he’d be less inclined to support such a cultural style that was directly influenced by the drugs he supposedly hates.

Yep, my thoughts exactly. It's really, really weird. Mike's the last guy to be promoting an "association" with him and the Haight/Ashbury scene... and he'd also probably be literally the last person from famous bands of that era to be welcomed with open arms to the remnants of that scene today. Laughable in every way. It's like Vanilla Ice marketing a shirt today that has a bunch of hardcore Compton gangsta rap 1990s imagery.

And it makes you wonder who the hell this is marketed toward. Like Gabo said, Mike Love would wear this, and I think that’s about the only person who would wear this. Reminds me of...



“Oh, this is the worst-looking hat I ever saw. What, when you buy a hat like this I bet you get a free bowl of soup, huh?  Oh, it looks good on you though”

The only people who would wear this shirt (made "famous" by a waaaaaaaay out of touch rich old guy) are other rich old guys who are similarly waaaaay out of touch, because they'll be the only people who can afford said shirts, and also the only people who won't realize the unbelievable ironies that make for unintentional hilarity that we have spoken about.
17  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love - Unleash the Love - Due November 17 - w/ 2nd Disc of BB Remakes on: February 09, 2018, 01:34:34 PM
Or a VDP picture! LOL

It's just funny because the shirt is SO 1966-1967-centric, and seems to romanticize that time period, which of course is the time period that the majority of people who take issue with Mr. Love believe he acted particularly abhorrently, or at least in a manner that perhaps most negatively impacted the band's career (arguably of course, because there are so many time periods to choose from regarding terrible actions - and yes I know he cowrote Good Vibrations in this time period too).  

Other than the obvious positives that Mike contributed to the song Good Vibrations, I think that only in Mike's own mind is that era any kind of era that people would largely associate him with in any sort of "positive" way.

Time/era aside, that shirt HeyJude posted above is completely influenced by the acid culture of the 1960s in both style and reference (Haight/Ashbury street). And for a man whose biggest regret in life is the drugs that other people took, you’d think he’d be less inclined to support such a cultural style that was directly influenced by the drugs he supposedly hates.

Yep, my thoughts exactly. It's really, really weird. Mike's the last guy to be promoting an "association" with him and the Haight/Ashbury scene... and he'd also probably be literally the last person from famous bands of that era to be welcomed with open arms to the remnants of that scene today. Laughable in every way. It's like Vanilla Ice marketing a shirt today that has a bunch of hardcore Compton gangsta rap 1990s imagery.
18  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love - Unleash the Love - Due November 17 - w/ 2nd Disc of BB Remakes on: February 09, 2018, 12:03:08 PM
Or a VDP picture! LOL

It's just funny because the shirt is SO 1966-1967-centric, and seems to romanticize that time period, which of course is the time period that the majority of people who take issue with Mr. Love believe he acted particularly abhorrently, or at least in a manner that perhaps most negatively impacted the band's career (arguably of course, because there are so many time periods to choose from regarding terrible actions - and yes I know he cowrote Good Vibrations in this time period too).  

Other than the obvious positives that Mike contributed to the song Good Vibrations, I think that only in Mike's own mind is that era any kind of era that people would largely associate him with in any sort of "positive" way.
19  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love - Unleash the Love - Due November 17 - w/ 2nd Disc of BB Remakes on: February 09, 2018, 11:47:54 AM
Apparently Robert Graham is the company that has been making the overpriced shirts Mike has been bundling on his website with his book, etc. for some time:

I'm trying to think of something uglier than this:



Good lord Shocked

Is this from the Formal Clown Collection? Who would wear this shirt in public?

Wouldn't it have been great if someone at the t-shirt design factory snuck in an "Over and over the crow cries uncover the cornfield" lyric into the design somewhere as an easter egg?
20  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Brian Wilson lookalike = actor Edmund Cobb (super eerie) on: February 02, 2018, 09:21:16 PM

!!!
21  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Brian Wilson lookalike = actor Edmund Cobb (super eerie) on: February 02, 2018, 01:16:00 PM


That is Brian

Amazing, isn't it? Seriously uncanny.

Standing next to "Brian" in that pic  is the guy who later did the voice of Mr. Ed.   Can I get a horse in here indeed.
22  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Brian Wilson lookalike = actor Edmund Cobb (super eerie) on: February 02, 2018, 01:14:47 PM
I remember thinking this actor who played a police officer in The Dark Knight looked a lot like Brian.



His name is Keith Szarabajka.

 I can see it a bit as well.
23  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Brian Wilson lookalike = actor Edmund Cobb (super eerie) on: February 01, 2018, 09:56:51 PM
Mike Love lookalike spotted in the wild earlier today at Costco:




24  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love in New Issue of Mojo - on: January 26, 2018, 10:50:31 AM
This is almost as bad as the fake Fleetwood Mac that tried to tour in the 70s

It's also literally so incredibly insulting to the other members to play something THAT close in time to the UK C50 final shows. It gives the impression, whether intentional or not, that Mike thinks they don't matter one friggin' iota. It seems to very much much be cut from the same cloth of behavior which no less than Al Jardine publicly in an interview called "crass" (I'm paraphrasing) with regards to how quickly Mike replaced Carl with a surrogate and went back on the road. Yes I realize nobody passed away here, but still it's gross in my book (perhaps not equally as gross). Mike's very, very, very afraid of losing control.

I think the shows SO close to C50 were to flex his muscle and pound on his chest like a gorilla. "I AM the Beach Boys! Rawr!"



It's like breaking up with your longtime wife and then going on a rebound adventure 15 minutes later, directly after walking out the door.

I guess Brian's album title "No Pier Pressure" is sort of Brian's "You Oughta Know", where (at least to me) the implication is to remind Mike that it was a slap in the face how quickly Brian was replaced, and wondering if Mike is thinking of Brian as he (Mike) f*cks the brand name into the ground.
25  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love in New Issue of Mojo - \ on: January 26, 2018, 10:27:07 AM
Regarding Mike being required to book his own shows back after C50, it's worth actually looking at his tour schedule for the remainder of 2012 and into 2013.

From September 30, 2012 through the beginning of February 2013, Mike booked...wait for it.... NINE shows across EIGHT venues.

He dumped the reunion tour in order to play these shows:

September 30 - The Legacy Concert for the Children, The Santaluz Club, San Diego, CA
October 5 - Extraco Events Center, Waco, TX  
October 6 - The Backyard, Austin, TX  
October 12 - Beau Rivage, Biloxi, MS
October 13 - Beau Rivage, Biloxi, MS
December 21 - New Orleans Bowl Friday Night Concert, Champion's Square, New Orleans, LA (Free Show)
December 28 - Pike's Peak Center, Colorado Springs, CO  
December 31 - Mystic Lake Casino, Prior Lake, MN (2 Shows)

Nothing in November 2012, nothing in January 2013. Only FOUR shows in February 2013. Even assuming maybe he booked a few private/corporate gigs we don't know about, and even taking into account at least three canceled gigs (two in South America, plus in the infamous "Nutty Jerry's" gig), I somehow doubt BRI had a requirement that both *forced* Mike to book shows, but then also allowed for such a *light* tour schedule.

This is just my total guess/gut feeling, but it kind of smells like Mike just started booking a hand full of shows to essentially create a plausible reason to say he couldn't do more reunion shows (See? I already have my own shows booked!), and also to start getting his foot back in the door and re-establish his band as the going "Beach Boys" touring concern.

I think this is absolutely a logical explanation for what happened.

In the history of rock music, I'm sure one would never, ever find a case of a brand name being used SO quickly back to back with different configurations, literally a day or two apart, from the highest art of those UK C50 shows with super huge setlists, butted right up against the M&B show that happened right afterwards. It's insanity, with Mike trying to get people to think it's The Beach Boys so, so soon after an actual BBs show. In the words of Vanilla Ice, "it's not the same".
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 176
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.915 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!