Pictures from "Love and Mercy" biopic

[Andrew G. Doe]

But... is it "iconic" to anyone but us ?

Yeah, wrong truck but the pants and shirts are spot on and a little poetic license here isn't such a bad thing. These are The Beach Boys, that's a woodie. I've a sneaky feeling we'll find much more - and much worse - to weep and wail over than this.

[Ebb and Flow]

But... is it "iconic" to anyone but us ?

It's safe to say that the "Surfin' Safari" cover is known to more people than all but two of the songs on that album.  It's the cover of their first album, I think maybe you underestimate its significance to their overall image.

Yeah, wrong truck but the pants and shirts are spot on and a little poetic license here isn't such a bad thing. These are The Beach Boys, that's a woodie. I've a sneaky feeling we'll find much more - and much worse - to weep and wail over than this.

I'm not "weeping and wailing" but I do think that some of the audience will probably see and recognize what they're referencing and notice something is slightly off about it.  It doesn't even look like they're even trying to pose the guys in the same way which makes me wonder what the point of it in the film is.  I will give them props for getting the wardrobe right, but that's about all that is right about it.

All I'm saying is, if they're not concerned with recreating aspects of visual iconography associated with the group they may not care about other, more important things and I think you're right, there will be worse things to complain about. 

Good news for the filmmakers, "Summer Dreams" will always be the worst Beach Boys bio flick.

[rab2591]

But... is it "iconic" to anyone but us ?

It's safe to say that the "Surfin' Safari" cover is known to more people than all but two of the songs on that album.  It's the cover of their first album, I think maybe you underestimate its significance to their overall image.

Yeah, wrong truck but the pants and shirts are spot on and a little poetic license here isn't such a bad thing. These are The Beach Boys, that's a woodie. I've a sneaky feeling we'll find much more - and much worse - to weep and wail over than this.

I'm not "weeping and wailing" but I do think that some of the audience will probably see and recognize what they're referencing and notice something is slightly off about it.  It doesn't even look like they're even trying to pose the guys in the same way which makes me wonder what the point of it in the film is.  I will give them props for getting the wardrobe right, but that's about all that is right about it.

All I'm saying is, if they're not concerned with recreating aspects of visual iconography associated with the group they may not care about other, more important things and I think you're right, there will be worse things to complain about. 

Good news for the filmmakers, "Summer Dreams" will always be the worst Beach Boys bio flick.

Perhaps, given their budget, they couldn't find the exact car used on the album cover. Perhaps the scene will revolve around the women and the guys/car will be out of focus in the background (so accuracy won't even matter). Perhaps the reason the guys aren't in the exact position on the car is because it's a scene about the photo shoot where I'm sure many different poses were used.

My point being I think it's kinda pointless to judge aspects of this film based off of a 17 second cell phone video. The Carol Kaye Fire sessions picture gave me great hope that they are shooting for detailed historical accuracy.

[KittyKat]

It looks like a cheesy TV movie. The women's hairstyles are sort of ridiculous looking, too. I know women wore bouffant hairstyles back then, but those look like cheap wigs.

[Kurosawa]

It looks like that scene is attempting to replicate the photoshoot for the Surfin' Safari album cover, yet the woodie there looks nothing like the yellow truck seen on the cover.  I normally wouldn't care about something like this, but it does kind of bother me that they'd play fast and loose with the details of such an iconic image (possibly to suit what may be considered a more audience-friendly, stereotypical interpretation of that period).

Well, they don't even have the right guys in that scene from what I understand, as it is Al and not David who is in that scene. So not getting the band members right makes not getting the woodie right less of an issue.

[Pretty Funky]

Just wondering if the actual original image is licensed and can not be replicated. Not unheard of given the 119th St Landmark was not permitted to use the original album picture, hence, 6 unrecognizable BB's holding the surf board.

[acedecade75]

It looks like that scene is attempting to replicate the photoshoot for the Surfin' Safari album cover, yet the woodie there looks nothing like the yellow truck seen on the cover.  I normally wouldn't care about something like this, but it does kind of bother me that they'd play fast and loose with the details of such an iconic image (possibly to suit what may be considered a more audience-friendly, stereotypical interpretation of that period).

Well, they don't even have the right guys in that scene from what I understand, as it is Al and not David who is in that scene. So not getting the band members right makes not getting the woodie right less of an issue.

This type of mistake is unacceptable.  Do they not even try to make things acurate?

[KittyKat]

I don't think David Marks is in the movie. I looked at the cast list, and unless I missed something in the long list, there's no actor listing for a David Marks character. So, I'm sure Al will be portrayed as being in the band continually. It's probably for the sake of time. They're showing over fifty years of Brian's life. It's not a Beach Boys biopic.

[Lowbacca]

I don't think David Marks is in the movie. I looked at the cast list, and unless I missed something in the long list, there's no actor listing for a David Marks character. So, I'm sure Al will be portrayed as being in the band continually. It's probably for the sake of time. They're showing over fifty years of Brian's life. It's not a Beach Boys biopic.

Yup. The David Marks years will probably take up a couple of scenes, maximum. It might confuse the general audience to show Al being in the band, than Dave being a member, than both of them being Beach Boys and than David having left for good and (kind of) being replaced by Al. That's a storytelling nightmare, especially if those character versions of the '62/'63 timeframe only appear in a fraction of the narrative. And even if they wouldn't go explicitly into that, it would still mean an unnecessarily rotating line-up of people standing in the background, so to speak. It may be unfortunate for us die-hards (and for David of course, if he cares) but the film will attempt to "capture the essence" of what happened. The Jardine-Marks-Jardine carousel is largely irrelevant to the "Brian Wilson story".

[The Shift]

Agree with that interpretation though the ousting of Dave is surely a good means of demonstrating how manipulative and bullying Murry could be…

[Lowbacca]

Agree with that interpretation though the ousting of Dave is surely a good means of demonstrating how manipulative and bullying Murry could be…

I agree.

I guess they will take the more direct approach (again, to streamline the plot) in showing how Brian was personally abused by Murry - on an emotional and professional level. That's what has entered the canon of rock 'n' roll history, anyway. I gotta say, I'm psyched to see what they do with the overall narrative style (probably some sort of framing) and how the '62 footage segues into it all. Dazed memories, perhaps?

[RiC]

I agree.

I guess they will take the more direct approach (again, to streamline the plot) in showing how Brian was personally abused by Murry - on an emotional and professional level. That's what has entered the canon of rock 'n' roll history, anyway. I gotta say, I'm psyched to see what they do with the overall narrative style (probably some sort of framing) and how the '62 footage segues into it all. Dazed memories, perhaps?

Exactly.
I have a pretty good feeling that this film is gonna be epic. Don't make judgements of some set photos. Hey, look at raw set pics from, let's say, Lord of the Rings-trilogy with elves and orcs and fake decorations. It looks like nightmare. The final picture is the only thing that matters. I'm sure that the whole cover shoot-scene is just a tiny fragment of the whole picture. It could indeed be some kind of flashback or memory kind of thing. Hell, it can be anything. So don't judge it yet.

What the movie is definetely not gonna be is a list of beach boys facts in a movie-format to satisfy some of the hardcore fans. It's gonna be a character study, and it's about Brian, not David Marks or Alan Jardine. Paul Dano, John Cusack and Paul Giamatti are all top-notch actors. It's gonna be awesome. Trust me 

[Lowbacca]

I agree.

I guess they will take the more direct approach (again, to streamline the plot) in showing how Brian was personally abused by Murry - on an emotional and professional level. That's what has entered the canon of rock 'n' roll history, anyway. I gotta say, I'm psyched to see what they do with the overall narrative style (probably some sort of framing) and how the '62 footage segues into it all. Dazed memories, perhaps?

Exactly.
I have a pretty good feeling that this film is gonna be epic. Don't make judgements of some set photos. Hey, look at raw set pics from, let's say, Lord of the Rings-trilogy with elves and orcs and fake decorations. It looks like nightmare. The final picture is the only thing that matters. I'm sure that the whole cover shoot-scene is just a tiny fragment of the whole picture. It could indeed be some kind of flashback or memory kind of thing. Hell, it can be anything. So don't judge it yet.

What the movie is definetely not gonna be is a list of beach boys facts in a movie-format to satisfy some of the hardcore fans. It's gonna be a character study, and it's about Brian, not David Marks or Alan Jardine. Paul Dano, John Cusack and Paul Giamatti are all top-notch actors. It's gonna be awesome. Trust me 

... and capturing the (or an) essence of a story or a person in a piece of art (a feature film, in this case) doesn't presuppose an attempt to reproduce physical reality, or 'facts' (if there is such a thing, especially in historiography). It may deal with a variety of other perceptual concepts. That's basically what most of non-mainstream forms* of feature films do, to some extent. If (the fictionalised) Brian recalls the clarinet guy having green skin that's going to be part of that reality (and the film as a whole wouldn't be any less 'correct' because of it).




*It remains to be seen what kind of movie Love and Mercy will be. There is certainly enough Hollywood power behind it, and an interest in generating commercial success.

[chrs_mrgn]

I guarantee that 98% of people will not notice that it is the wrong vehicle, wrong pants, shirts or whatever else people have pointed out here.

That is one of the classic images of the beach boys and I know its hard for some die hard BB fans to realize but surf boards and basically everything in that shot is what people think of when they hear the beach boys.

Not trying to be harsh at all but i just think it's being a bit overanalyzed (which can be fun don't get me wrong I'm a big fan as well). Yet I think this shot was done very well and hardly anyone is going to notice any discrepancies from the original image.

[jeffcdo]

The previous credits of the writer and the director are not encouraging.

[Pretty Funky]

My only concern is that at this stage in his life Brian has a "f*ck it...tell it all!" attitude, which I would love and could make a great movie however other parties and the lawyers will neuter the soul out of the thing.

[Ebb and Flow]

I guarantee that 98% of people will not notice that it is the wrong vehicle, wrong pants, shirts or whatever else people have pointed out here.

I guess I have higher standards than most, but honestly, how many movies about the Beach Boys are going to get made in our lifetimes?  It seems like a miscalculation to me to have a "good enough" attitude when it comes to a movie like this.

It's not something that will affect the quality of the movie in any direct way and I do feel bad derailing the thread with it.  But I do think with something like recreating the photoshoot for an album cover for a movie, you have a certain responsibility as a director/set designer/prop guy to make it somewhat match reality.  Almost everything else in the film not directly tied to a photograph or recorded performance they have some leeway with.  Imagine if recreating the Pet Sounds photoshoot they replaced the llamas and goats with dogs and cats.  They're still animals, so good enough!  Llamas are too expensive to rent!

If they didn't have permission to recreate the cover exactly I guess that they did what they could.  I don't know.  But it does seem to me like maybe someone thought a woodie would better match what the image of the Beach Boys is "supposed to be" and not what it actually was.

[ThyRavenAscend]

I agree.

I guess they will take the more direct approach (again, to streamline the plot) in showing how Brian was personally abused by Murry - on an emotional and professional level. That's what has entered the canon of rock 'n' roll history, anyway. I gotta say, I'm psyched to see what they do with the overall narrative style (probably some sort of framing) and how the '62 footage segues into it all. Dazed memories, perhaps?

Exactly.
I have a pretty good feeling that this film is gonna be epic. Don't make judgements of some set photos. Hey, look at raw set pics from, let's say, Lord of the Rings-trilogy with elves and orcs and fake decorations. It looks like nightmare. The final picture is the only thing that matters. I'm sure that the whole cover shoot-scene is just a tiny fragment of the whole picture. It could indeed be some kind of flashback or memory kind of thing. Hell, it can be anything. So don't judge it yet.

What the movie is definetely not gonna be is a list of beach boys facts in a movie-format to satisfy some of the hardcore fans. It's gonna be a character study, and it's about Brian, not David Marks or Alan Jardine. Paul Dano, John Cusack and Paul Giamatti are all top-notch actors. It's gonna be awesome. Trust me 

... and capturing the (or an) essence of a story or a person in a piece of art (a feature film, in this case) doesn't presuppose an attempt to reproduce physical reality, or 'facts' (if there is such a thing, especially in historiography). It may deal with a variety of other perceptual concepts. That's basically what most of non-mainstream forms* of feature films do, to some extent. If (the fictionalised) Brian recalls the clarinet guy having green skin that's going to be part of that reality (and the film as a whole wouldn't be any less 'correct' because of it).




*It remains to be seen what kind of movie Love and Mercy will be. There is certainly enough Hollywood power behind it, and an interest in generating commercial success.

Bingo.  We also have to realize that the people who make the film have more than historiographal (?) and artistic constraints: they also have budgetary constraints!  Maybe they got a really good deal on the Woodie.

Too many complainers.  Sadly, a number of people on here will probably be too critical going into the theater to really allow themselves to be immersed in the film because they are so fixated on the "what really happened".  Pity.

[Pretty Funky]

Exactly. I enjoyed the Ray Charles, Johnny Cash films for what they were without delving into the model of piano, keyboard or guitar the actors were playing. The Brian film plus the slated Hendrix and James Brown movies will be for pure entertainment.

[Lowbacca]

Exactly. I enjoyed the Ray Charles, Johnny Cash films for what they were without delving into the model of piano, keyboard or guitar the actors were playing. The Brian film plus the slated Hendrix and James Brown movies will be for pure entertainment.

... don't forget Eastwood's Jersey Boys.

[acedecade75]

The omission of David Marks is starting to remind me of the horrific "Summer Dreams" so called biopic.  I know the film is mainly about Brian, but leaving David out all together is still terrible.

[catsaregrey]

Speaking of accuracy, I know I've read at least one interview where Carol Kaye said she never wore a fire helmet, and that only Brian, Hal Blaine, and (I think) Lyle Ritz put them on. The issue of Mojo that came out around the 50th anniversary had a small sidebar with Carol in it where she said that, at least. Not that it's a big deal; this doesn't look like an actual still from the film anyway, and I'm not about to judge, but I did find it a bit funny in a nerdy sort of way.

In terms of the film overall, I would agree with some of the others here and say that the hardcore fans (us, I suppose) will probably find plenty that'll tighten their sphincters once everything is said and done. It's just unavoidable whenever you're adapting something from existing material, whether the source is fiction (Blade Runner comes immediately to mind) or not. It's extremely hard to make a 90-120 minute movie about anybody, especially Brian Wilson/the Beach Boys, without glossing over or flat-out ignoring certain parts. It doesn't "excuse" the difference in what car they use in what scene, so to speak, but it does make sense if they cut David out. Some of us probably feel like he already gets ignored enough as it is, but that's Hollywood. They've got to keep it "accessible." If anything, it'll give us all an excuse to sneak a flask into the picture for an impromptu error-spotting drinking game.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Yup, she said that and she'll probably bitch about it when the movie comes out, and that she never wore that dress for the "Fire" session (true btw - the pic they based it on dates from 1974).

General observation: this movie isn't being made and marketed for the likes of us (all... what, 400, 500 of us hard-core obsessives ?), it's being made to MAKE MONEY. Thus far, from the little I've seen, it's looking pretty good (but then, so did An American Family...): the little I've heard is probably best described as equivocal. We'll see.

Actually, I'm much more concerned about Brian's book next year. For reasons I don't need to explain to anyone here, that has the considerable potential for true and complete catastrophe. Just like the last one.

[Pretty Funky]

Exactly. I enjoyed the Ray Charles, Johnny Cash films for what they were without delving into the model of piano, keyboard or guitar the actors were playing. The Brian film plus the slated Hendrix and James Brown movies will be for pure entertainment.

... don't forget Eastwood's Jersey Boys.

Of course! Trailer looks great but its based on the show, which I have seen, and that implies it was the same group. Guess the Seasons obsessives are having a field day right now. 

http://www.deadline.com/2014/04/hot-trailer-clint-eastwoods-jersey-boys/

[VanDykeParksAndRec]

Actually, I'm much more concerned about Brian's book next year. For reasons I don't need to explain to anyone here, that has the considerable potential for true and complete catastrophe. Just like the last one.

This part was my favorite part.