Why are the interviews so uninteresting?

[Cabinessenceking]

Of all the interview of the band over the last 9 months they have hardly talked about anything in their numerous interviews. The questions that have been asked are the tamest, cuddliest things that could ever be asked to mankind. It seems almost like the band had its 1962-66 period and since then it's all been joys and fun. They don't talk at all about their material. They don't talk about Wild Honey, Smiley Smile or even SMiLE which even just came out. Albeit they had some 'mini-episodes' on Smile, but they hardly said anythign there either. Just how amazing it was and the harmonies yet they dont play a <a class="inlineAdmedialink" href="#">single[/url] track from it.

Everything 1968-1985 is also ignored. Nothing is ever mentioned about Sunflower and what ambitions they had for its release. Love You is never discussed. Never. Are they really just paranoid of facing their history? Maybe because at any period except the 1962-1966 period someone has not been happy or their commercial fortune has been dysmal. It's all just cuddly talk about the harmonies and how it's all coming back to them like back in the days when they cut Little Deuce Coupe etc. <a class="inlineAdmedialink" href="#">Very[/url] dissapointing. I know they are sensitive about the conflicts, mental state of Brian and the conflicts they had with Carl & Dennis which may not be appropriate to mention. But can they not even talk about their material and what it all meant to them. I think they are trying to sell the "America's #1 patriotic Reagen-hugging band of surf, cars, girls, harmony, and nostalgic endless summer ca 1965 (+Kokomo" image too hard. As if nothing else even happened. Brian seems to be happy with this.

[Lowbacca]

Why are the interviews so uninteresting?

Because interviewers are usually told what not to ask, and in many cases given a list of possible topics to enquire about. It's a management thing.

[Autotune]

I think important questions have been asked, and candid answers were given. The RS article, the Sunday Morning show on 4-29, the Newsweek article are examples.

Nevertheless, above all this reunion event, there's an aura of gratitude and celebration that leaks everywhere, including e interviews. In fact, for me, and for many others, the best thing about the inerviews that show up is what a great time they seem to be having, how grateful the world is for their music -and the BBs for thei lives-, and how supportive and loving of each other they are.

[KittyKat]

It's customary to ask bands about their latest release when they're out promoting a new recording, as well as ask about the latest tour they're on.  No one asks a bunch of questions about albums released years ago that aren't even known by most of the general public.  Media outlets don't really cater to hardcore fans of any musical act because they want to reach the biggest audience possible.   I don't think Ronald Reagan even enters into it except in that one article by George Will because those types of people read George Will and he wants to reach his fan base more than the Beach Boys fan base.

[pixletwin]

You mean you're not interested in Dave living across the street from the Wilson bros./ being a defacto member of the Beach Boys, Al praising Brian as Gershwin's equal, Brian jokingly saying that they have been practicing for 50 years, Bruce playing the coy one, and Mike talking about California Girls over and over and over?

[Justin]

Of all the interview of the band over the last 9 months they have hardly talked about anything in their numerous interviews. The questions that have been asked are the tamest, cuddliest things that could ever be asked to mankind. It seems almost like the band had its 1962-66 period and since then it's all been joys and fun. They don't talk at all about their material. They don't talk about Wild Honey, Smiley Smile or even SMiLE which even just came out. Albeit they had some 'mini-episodes' on Smile, but they hardly said anythign there either. Just how amazing it was and the harmonies yet they dont play a <a class="inlineAdmedialink" href="#">single[/url] track from it.

Everything 1968-1985 is also ignored. Nothing is ever mentioned about Sunflower and what ambitions they had for its release. Love You is never discussed. Never. Are they really just paranoid of facing their history? Maybe because at any period except the 1962-1966 period someone has not been happy or their commercial fortune has been dysmal. It's all just cuddly talk about the harmonies and how it's all coming back to them like back in the days when they cut Little Deuce Coupe etc. <a class="inlineAdmedialink" href="#">Very[/url] dissapointing. I know they are sensitive about the conflicts, mental state of Brian and the conflicts they had with Carl & Dennis which may not be appropriate to mention. But can they not even talk about their material and what it all meant to them. I think they are trying to sell the "America's #1 patriotic Reagen-hugging band of surf, cars, girls, harmony, and nostalgic endless summer ca 1965 (+Kokomo" image too hard. As if nothing else even happened. Brian seems to be happy with this.

You are asking way too much.  The big story here is that they've reunited.  That's the story.  Nothing else really matters.  Their mind frame isn't about discussing SMiLE or Wild Honey, they're there to promote the new album and the current tour.  You're looking for an indepth several volume interview with the band to review their entire career, album by album.  None of the interviews they've done (or will continue to do) will call for such a direction to be taken.

None of these guys strike me as the type to talk about the past in such great detail.  They did it; it's over..move on.  Not sure you'd get a lot out of them anyway.

[Pretty Funky]

Its the here and now. Theres already 50 years of interviews and books to answer the rest.

[Sheriff John Stone]

The reason they are not open to discussing the past isn't because of the new album and tour, and it isn't because of the been there/done perspective and it's time to stay in the present.

They are reluctant to talk about the past because there are still fresh wounds and hard feelings that have not healed yet, and each Beach Boy is afraid to say something that could blow the roof off of their delicate house. I don't blame them and I'm glad they're taking the high road. That's the only way this thing could work, and it's working well IMO.

[Rocker]

None of these guys strike me as the type to talk about the past in such great detail.  They did it;

I don't recall any of them ever talking in detail about anything.

I guess the Beach Boys are just not very interesting people to interview. Their story is one of the most interesting and complex of any in rock'n'roll. But the individuals as they appear nowadays are either not interested in doing interviews (Brian) or just have their two-three sentences they repeat (word for word) in every interview (all the others plus Brian). Maybe it's for the better. I don't want any of the boys to say something which might offend another one which would result in another lawsuit. The next one probably will happen sooner or later anyway....
I guess we have some people who will be able to shed some light about things that happened. I think of Jon Stebbins, Mike Eder, Andrew G. Doe, etc. (please excuse me for not name-checking each one)

[Newguy562]

when they ask brian questions they are extremely cautious and brian can say anything and everybody is "like right brian..you are right brian!"
it reminds me of that twilight zone and everybody is kissing little anthony's ass because they are afraid of him...

[Justin]

None of these guys strike me as the type to talk about the past in such great detail.  They did it;

I don't recall any of them ever talking in detail about anything.

Well I meant they lived their life...they did what they did ("they did it") and they move on.  They don't seem like types who just casually dip into the past to re-examine why they did what they did (i.e. private life stuff, feuds etc).  

The last time they had all purposely looked back and dissected the past was for the "Endless Harmony" documentary.   I think what the OP wants is a newer/updated version of that documentary.  Point is, none of these interviews they're doing today really are appropriate for any of those types of talks.

[Heysaboda]

JEEZ Peebles!

Has ANYONE here heard the interview with Jiam Ghomeshi?

A complete riot!  A wonderful, wunnerful session with the Boys, cracking each other up.  They ARE a family, and they are enjoying it.  Finally, the Guys get to enjoy the ride.  Do you REALLY, I MEAN REALLY want rehashed, re-warmed stories of something that happened 30 years ago?

C'mon.  Enough is enough.

JEEZ

[JanBerryFarm]

  Do you REALLY, I MEAN REALLY want rehashed, re-warmed stories of something that happened 30 years ago?

Of course not. I want rehashed, re-warmed stories of something that happened 50 years ago.

[Cabinessenceking]

I guess they are very dull boring people who involunteerely lived the ultimate roller coaster ride of life. I hope I woulda made a more interesting star to interview had I been in one of their shoes.

[Justin]

It just goes to show just how passed it they all are today.  It's not even sitting on the surface as a topic of conversation.  I doubt they themselves sit around privately and talk about this, that or the other regarding the past.  Dredging up old wounds (that may or may not have healed) is so trivial now.  They're all in a different place today and their indifference on mulling over stuff that happened decades ago is a sign that it is of no interest to any of them.

[Autotune]

Interviews are usually less interesting for the hardcore fan because:
A) we read/watch them all
B) they repeat themselves

Other than that, the guys are pretty interesting people I say, and have given plenty of interview meat over the years. It's not their job to do fan-oriented research. They just live their lives.

[urbanite]

I would like to hear some questions about what it's been like to be a rock star for the past 50 years, the highs and lows.  They can talk about some of their challenges without getting into drug use and divorces.

[Howie Edelson]

I've been interviewing ALL of the Beach Boys for a decade. I've talked to them, hours on end in some cases , about all of the topics Cabinessenceking mentioned -- with each of them. Regarding what Lowbacca said -- that couldn't be further from the truth. I have never been prompted as to what not to talk about. Obviously the project at hand would be among the most obvious, but I've gone deep with them about every facet of their career every time -- and they were thrilled to do so. Except Bruce. He couldn't figure out whether he wanted to impress me by talking about being there or putting me down for wanting to know.

The bottom line, they're dealing with broad, major outlets hawking a tour and new LP, so the opportunity to answer Fox News' questions regarding the sessions at I.D. Sound, writing "That Special Feeling," and who should be properly credited for "Out In The Country" don't really come into play.

But I've got sound on it ALL.

[Jim V.]

I've been interviewing ALL of the Beach Boys for a decade. I've talked to them, hours on end in some cases , about all of the topics Cabinessenceking mentioned -- with each of them. Regarding what Lowbacca said -- that couldn't be further from the truth. I have never been prompted as to what not to talk about. Obviously the project at hand would be among the most obvious, but I've gone deep with them about every facet of their career every time -- and they were thrilled to do so. Except Bruce. He couldn't figure out whether he wanted to impress me by talking about being there or putting me down for wanting to know.

The bottom line, they're dealing with broad, major outlets hawking a tour and new LP, so the opportunity to answer Fox News' questions regarding the sessions at I.D. Sound, writing "That Special Feeling," and who should be properly credited for "Out In The Country" don't really come into play.

But I've got sound on it ALL.

And since we love you so much, Howie.....will we be able to bear the fruits of your labor sometime soon? I'd love to read/hear all these interviews.

And the Bruce thing, I really don't get it. He also insulted Peter Ames Carlin because he was apparently "way too into" The Beach Boys, and that was somehow pathetic of him, because you know, writing books on important musical figures is nonsense, but standing on stage clapping your hands in your short shorts is honorable.

[Howie Edelson]

Soon enough Sweetdude, soon enough. I promise you.

I don't get Bruce at all. He's called many of us out for being "five-percenters" -- including some of the backing band over the years for being "too into" the history and work of the band -- yet HE's the one always going on about "Sunflower." He's a conflicted guy, that's for sure. Seeing as how he was a witness to some incredible moments (Bellagio era, particularly) he should be more forthcoming, or at least friendlier about it.
Out of all the guys it really is strange how different his stage "persona" is in 2012 than it was in say, 1980. You never expected the shtick -- the "conducting," the pleading with the audience to sing, the jumping, etc. At least I didn't.

[Wirestone]

Ah, Bruce. He is an immensely talented man who has spent many years of his career not using or even acknowledging that talent.

He's also someone who, in terms of musical knowledge, understands and idolizes Brian, but in terms of his business background and straight-laced personal life gravitates toward Mike.

He has no ownership of the band or its catalog -- he's essentially a well-paid employee.

It just seems that he has two sides. Criticizing people for being too into the band, yet visiting the BBB board and talking about his BW Smile boots. Appearing with Mike over the last decade yet also seeming to try out for Brian's band in 1998.

I think it's safe to say that he, like a lot of us, has some personal conflicts about his life and choices, and is still uncertain about some things. He has a happy, healthy family life, so the BB business and concerns probably seems all very theoretical to him at certain points.

[Jim V.]

Soon enough Sweetdude, soon enough. I promise you.

I don't get Bruce at all. He's called many of us out for being "five-percenters" -- including some of the backing band over the years for being "too into" the history and work of the band -- yet HE's the one always going on about "Sunflower." He's a conflicted guy, that's for sure. Seeing as how he was a witness to some incredible moments (Bellagio era, particularly) he should be more forthcoming, or at least friendlier about it.
Out of all the guys it really is strange how different his stage "persona" is in 2012 than it was in say, 1980. You never expected the shtick -- the "conducting," the pleading with the audience to sing, the jumping, etc. At least I didn't.

Ok, really looking forward to reading your stuff!

And yeah, with Bruce, what would he prefer, that we wouldn't be so interested in the band? He does understand that we are the people who actually know what "Disney Girls" is when he plays it at a show? It's like he almost prefers the people that just buy Sounds of Summer and throw that on their CD player when they are on the way to the beach with their kids. I was angered by his comments about President Obama, but I got over it. And even besides that, lately, I've just heard quite a few things from him that really don't sit right. I don't expect the musicians I like to be perfect, but I do expect them to be somewhat gracious to their fans. I don't expect him to come over my house and talk about the Sunflower sessions over dinner, but I would like to think that if I met him after a concert and asked him about a random Beach Boys thing involving him he wouldn't make fun of me in such a rude way, as he's seemed to do.

[GhostyTMRS]

Well, generally TV and radio interviews are a little bit on the "fluff" side and print interviews dig a little deeper. I thought the Rolling Stone article was top notch (and I LOATHE that magazine). Besides, the reunion is a happy occasion and people in the media seem genuinely giddy about it.

Incidentally, here's my quickie interview with Brian from back in 2008:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-BRNg3uYz0

[jeffcdo]

Regarding Rolling Stone, in the past 5 or 6 years now it's very quietly gone back to not sucking.  It really was utter garbage in the 90s when it became a fashion magazine but nowdays the reporting is often very good on matters political, social AND musical.

And yeah, listen to the Jian interview!  He did a great job (other than maybe not bringing in Dave very much) he's not intimidated by Brian which I think is a mistake too many interviewers make.

http://www.cbc.ca/q/blog/2012/06/20/the-beach-boys-on-q/

[Sav-Man]

Yeah, the simple fact that all of the surviving members can be in the same room and on the same stage together--and, what's more, record and release a CD that, IMHO, is their best overall album since The Beach Boys Love You--is great news in itself. After all the lawsuit crapola of the last two decades (mostly on Mike's part), I figured the BBs as we know them were finished.

I remember reading some less-than-flattering things about Bruce as far back as the late 1990's (1998-99 to be exact) on the old Mike Wheeler BB message board. A fan said that he met Mike and Bruce in Las Vegas after seeing them perform at "BBs" shows there, and the gist of the posts was that both Mike and Bruce were too interested in picking up chicks at the hotel bar to have time for fans. It doesn't surprise me that Bruce is conflicted, as described here. Still, it would be cool, if there were another new BB CD in the future, for them to have Bruce sing lead on a song--I wouldn't mind hearing that.