gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680598 Posts in 27600 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 28, 2024, 08:31:37 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 Go Down Print
Author Topic: New Mike interview...  (Read 43801 times)
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #100 on: July 31, 2014, 09:22:58 AM »

Also worth mentioning is that when Mike is feeling feisty and the interviewer is willing to go to specific places, Mike can give an entertaining (if also sometimes disagreeable) interview. The best example I can think of is the 1992 Goldmine interview. He seems really agitated and feisty. Some of the answers seem ridiculous and don’t paint him in a very positive light, but at least they seem to be honest and passionate, and sometimes awesomely hilarious:  http://troun.tripod.com/mikelove.html

Thanks a lot for posting that, that was important! Smiley

In one of the threads earlier this year I tried to place that specific interview into context, and if it's been forgotten since I'll try to sum it up!  Smiley

That interview has everything to do with both *timing* and *context*. This was a classic case of catching Mike - well, possibly anyone - at one of the worst times for an interview about the Beach Boys.

When he did this interview, Brian had just won his lawsuit awarding him millions in back payments from the Murry-led Sea Of Tunes sale debacle. It was an amazing amount of money.

Trace the backstory of what happened, I won't recap that here, but Mike at this specific time felt that he was due money from Brian via that deal and the legal teams involved, and that he was also unable to reach or contact Brian directly to discuss it. It was all going through "have my lawyer call your lawyer" for specific legal reasons.

So in that Goldmine piece, you get Mike at perhaps his most angry, most bitter, most confrontational, and most unguarded. Read what he says: He's basically unloading years of baggage and perhaps pent-up anger on the Goldmine interviewer, and throwing darts wildly around all sorts of topics.

It's pure frustration, and again consider this was at one of the worst times they could have had Mike sit down for an "extensive" interview about the Beach Boys and specifically Brian. He was as angry in the interview as you'll see in any of his history of interviews.

Perhaps for PR reasons someone should have cancelled it in light of the timing.  Smiley

The interview does indeed seem to be fueled by that songwriting issue/case being a fresh issue at the time.

But it is rather interesting that Mike *still* brings it up in an interview in 2014, after it has been resolved resoundingly in his favor. Yes, he's less fired up about it now. But he still seems just as annoyed that it happened in the first place. I just find that funny in light of the same 1992 interview referencing Al getting hung up on old issues and not being to get over stuff.

The songwriting stuff in that 1992 interview isn't nearly as interesting as the fact that his being all worked up about that issue seemed to lead to offering more unvarnished opinions on other stuff having nothing to do with the songwriting lawsuit. We're unlikely to see Mike saying this about a Brian album in 2014:

In reference to the '88 album:

What didn't you like about it?

First of all the lyrics. Second of all the arrangements weren't commercial enough. Third of all it sounded like sh*t compared to what he could sound like.


If that's how Mike really feels about something, I do truly want to know it. It's extremely refreshing. And yes, it's also fun to read this commentary from the guy who, in the same year, spearheaded the "Summer in Paradise" album. We can then weigh the opinions on lyrics, arrangements, and commerciality accordingly.


This is an interesting observation, and consider tying it in to a more recent interview (which has been posted on the board and discussed, if anyone could find it and copy-paste for reference) where Mike seems to be talking down "That's Why God Made The Radio". Without reading it directly, if I remember the interviewer in that case even pushed back a little bit at Mike and suggested it had made the charts at #3 or something.

I mention that because my feelings at the time were surprise and disappointment to read what felt like Mike downing the album which had actually been successful if we judge it by a top-5 chart appearance when a new Beach Boys album probably wouldn't be expected to go beyond the niche market!

But consider Mike in that interview is saying similar things, or giving similar "reasons" or even validations for his opinions on why and how the album could have been more successful.

And there is a common theme or themes at work, from this 1992 commentary on the solo BW album to his thoughts on TWGMTR and its commercial viability.

He may not say exactly the same words, but the sentiment is basically the same from 1992 to 2012-2013, right? If...then... regarding commercial viability and the like, that kind of thing. Interesting.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
Nicko1234
Guest
« Reply #101 on: July 31, 2014, 09:41:01 AM »


This is an interesting observation, and consider tying it in to a more recent interview (which has been posted on the board and discussed, if anyone could find it and copy-paste for reference) where Mike seems to be talking down "That's Why God Made The Radio". Without reading it directly, if I remember the interviewer in that case even pushed back a little bit at Mike and suggested it had made the charts at #3 or something.

I mention that because my feelings at the time were surprise and disappointment to read what felt like Mike downing the album which had actually been successful if we judge it by a top-5 chart appearance when a new Beach Boys album probably wouldn't be expected to go beyond the niche market!

But consider Mike in that interview is saying similar things, or giving similar "reasons" or even validations for his opinions on why and how the album could have been more successful.

And there is a common theme or themes at work, from this 1992 commentary on the solo BW album to his thoughts on TWGMTR and its commercial viability.

He may not say exactly the same words, but the sentiment is basically the same from 1992 to 2012-2013, right? If...then... regarding commercial viability and the like, that kind of thing. Interesting.

I think it was Mike who mentioned it getting to number 3. Something like, `It got to number 3 which isn`t bad but to have an album that stays on the charts you need a hit single.`

Obviously having a hit single at that point in their career was never a likely possibility.

Does anyone have any idea roughly how many TWGMTR has sold though btw?
« Last Edit: July 31, 2014, 09:48:12 AM by Nicko1234 » Logged
clack
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 537


View Profile
« Reply #102 on: July 31, 2014, 10:51:07 AM »

Mike does want to discuss his writing credits, but no one ever seems to ask him how, at the time,  it all went down.

Things I'd like to know :

1) While writing the lyrics to 'California Girls', did he know that he might not receive a credit?
2) Did someone take him aside and tell him he wouldn't be getting a credit before the song was released, or did he find out when he 1st looked at the record label?
3) Did he complain? Why, after not receiving credit for 'I Get Around', did he not insure that  his 'California Girls' contribution would be acknowledged?
4) Why did he get co-writing credit on some songs and not on others?

It's a fascinating subject, and one Mike does not seem reluctant to talk about.  Why the lack of details?
Logged
Ron
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5086


View Profile
« Reply #103 on: July 31, 2014, 11:52:47 PM »

Had to laugh, every Beach Boy was mentioned in the article, except for Al. Not even mentioned in the TM portion of the article.

There was a time, somewhere along the line, that Al must have Realllllllllllllllllly gotten under Mike's skin.  To the point where he cannot stand that motherfucker.  Dennis screwed Mike's daughter and he STILL can find 1 or 2 halfway decent things to say about Dennis.  He won't even mention Al's name! 

BTW, by commenting on how Dave was fired, unfairly, by Murray... he's KIND OF talking sh*t about Al.  LOL

It's amazing. 
Logged
Ron
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5086


View Profile
« Reply #104 on: August 01, 2014, 12:00:03 AM »

I also think it's kind of weird that he lumped Carl's smoking in with drug and alcohol abuse. Don't get me wrong, smoking is horrendous for one's health. But in the context of discussing things that adversely impacted the group, that's kind of weird to mention.

I also think it's kind of funny that he completely misses the point of the question about the public domain-related releases.  LOL

Carl had his own issues with alcohol/drugs but of course it wasn't on the level of his brothers... to Mike who views himself as really straight edge, he sees all 3 of them as druggies, at least in the late 60's. 

I think people get way too worked up over what Mike says.  It's just his opinion, he could be completely wrong.  He's not saying he didn't like his cousins, he's just saying he didn't like that they did drugs.  Your opinion may be different, that's just his.  I think he loves all 3 of them as much as he possibly can, what else do people want from him?  He's 74, he's not going to change, that's the best he's got.  He didn't like that they took drugs, and if an interviewer says "Tell me something bad" he's going to go to "My cousins did drugs" over and over again.  He thinks that's really bad and they hurt the band by doing it.... and he's pretty much right.  It just sounds like sh*t to say it out loud, over and over again. 
Logged
Ron
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5086


View Profile
« Reply #105 on: August 01, 2014, 12:05:39 AM »


Wait a cotton pickin minute here. Wasn't somebody bitching that he doesn't do it, then when I prove that he does, now someone else bitches that he does. Which is it? See, this is the problem, Mike can never please anyone with what he says. This place frustrates me at times. I just want to be a fan of the band, yet I am always having to defend band members and take sides. This place drives me crazy sometimes. Oh, am I allowed to call myself driven crazy?

I found it really interesting how Mike gave Brian a pass on the songwriting stuff.  He said something to the effect of, at the time Brian was pretty incapable of standing up to his father. 

I know everybody sees this stuff differently, but in his own way, I see nothing but love and respect coming from Mike, towards Brian.  He never has a bad word to say about Brian, he obviously can't stand Brian's entourage... but he puts Brian over, over and over again in every interview.  Even earlier, the guy asks him what he wrote that he's proud of, and yes he bragged about his lyrics, but made certain to mention how great Brian was and that Brian wrote the music, etc. like he always does. 

I know people can look at it, and see Mike saying negative things, but you can also look at it and see all the positive things he's saying.  It's just his way of doing it is backhanded.  Coming from him, those are HUGE compliments he pays Brian in these interviews. 
Logged
Jonathan Blum
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 659


View Profile
« Reply #106 on: August 01, 2014, 02:47:09 AM »

Does anyone have any idea roughly how many TWGMTR has sold though btw?

Round the end of that summer, Bruce told us in Sydney that it had sold about 180,000 copies.  Which compares well with Sunflower, but isn't exactly gold...

Cheers,
Jon Blum
Logged
Nicko1234
Guest
« Reply #107 on: August 01, 2014, 06:08:44 AM »

Does anyone have any idea roughly how many TWGMTR has sold though btw?

Round the end of that summer, Bruce told us in Sydney that it had sold about 180,000 copies.  Which compares well with Sunflower, but isn't exactly gold...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Nowadays this is a good selling album...

But maybe Mike is still thinking of the days when even non-hit albums sold a lot more. Didn`t BW88 shift twice as many copies back in the day?
Logged
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« Reply #108 on: August 01, 2014, 06:31:51 AM »

Does anyone have any idea roughly how many TWGMTR has sold though btw?

Round the end of that summer, Bruce told us in Sydney that it had sold about 180,000 copies.  Which compares well with Sunflower, but isn't exactly gold...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Nowadays this is a good selling album...

But maybe Mike is still thinking of the days when even non-hit albums sold a lot more. Didn`t BW88 shift twice as many copies back in the day?

I think Mike would only be truly happy with Adele like numbers these days. Or how Lorde is the thing right now. What he doesn't realize is that this doesn't happen anymore for legacy artists. Shoot, it doesn't even happen for '90s artists for the most part. Pearl Jam isn't gonna have new hit singles. Neither is Foo Fighters.

A good outing for a classic artist or band, is a top ten showing for the album in the first week, and hope to stick around for a while after that. Paul McCartney usually sneaks into the top ten still. Bob Dylan has actually managed to get to number one, which is really funny because he is about as uncommercial as it gets these days. With his croaking rasp he's definitely not appealing to the Justin Beiber market or whoever. Shoot, it probably doesn't appeal to even a lot of fans of "Like A Rolling Stone" and Blonde and Blonde. But guess what? He's Bob Dylan and he keeps making outstanding albums, and he realized around late 1965 after diminishing returns on his singles that he was an album guy and made his albums great. And it's paid off.

So really, Mike should be very, very proud that 50 years into The Beach Boys career that they had a number three album in 2012, with NEW material, and not old hits!

And let's be honest, if somehow he got to make a Beach Boys album without Brian and THAT went to number three? Or if somehow all the stars aligned and he had a solo album get in the top ten? We would never, ever hear the end of it. Mike just has sour grapes about the reunion because he's used to being the boss, and he wasn't the boss in 2012.
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #109 on: August 01, 2014, 06:35:42 AM »

I also think it's kind of weird that he lumped Carl's smoking in with drug and alcohol abuse. Don't get me wrong, smoking is horrendous for one's health. But in the context of discussing things that adversely impacted the group, that's kind of weird to mention.

I also think it's kind of funny that he completely misses the point of the question about the public domain-related releases.  LOL

Carl had his own issues with alcohol/drugs but of course it wasn't on the level of his brothers... to Mike who views himself as really straight edge, he sees all 3 of them as druggies, at least in the late 60's. 

I think people get way too worked up over what Mike says.  It's just his opinion, he could be completely wrong.  He's not saying he didn't like his cousins, he's just saying he didn't like that they did drugs.  Your opinion may be different, that's just his.  I think he loves all 3 of them as much as he possibly can, what else do people want from him?  He's 74, he's not going to change, that's the best he's got.  He didn't like that they took drugs, and if an interviewer says "Tell me something bad" he's going to go to "My cousins did drugs" over and over again.  He thinks that's really bad and they hurt the band by doing it.... and he's pretty much right.  It just sounds like sh*t to say it out loud, over and over again. 

I’m very pragmatic about what Mike says and how he says it. I don’t think he should say something else. Rather, I’m perplexed by the apparent attitude that Mike and/or a small number of fans sometimes have, along the lines of “why do people think he sounds like a dick sometimes?” That’s what astonishes me. Objectively, he says a number of things that sound that way. That it comes across that way to some, or that some point this out, is simply a reaction to what Mike says. We can argue that we shouldn’t react, but that’s kind of the point of a discussion board I think.

We as fans know more of the back story than an average person, so we discuss and parse and figure out some stuff that sounds dick-ish but is actually understandable given the band’s history (e.g. frustration with and arguably judgment towards drug and alcohol abuse), and perhaps some other stuff will still sound completely devoid of logic or reasoning or just sounds disagreeable on its face (e.g. most of the stuff he has said about the demise of C50).

There is also the separate issue of the interviews being repetitive, and I think interviewers are partly to blame. I think it’s also quite clear that Mike has stock, go-to answers ready and he doesn’t seem inclined to stray for those even if the questions don’t quite fit those answers. That’s not so much objectionable or disagreeable, that’s just kind of annoying from the fan perspective of simply wanting to read something we haven’t already read.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #110 on: August 01, 2014, 06:39:54 AM »

Does anyone have any idea roughly how many TWGMTR has sold though btw?

Round the end of that summer, Bruce told us in Sydney that it had sold about 180,000 copies.  Which compares well with Sunflower, but isn't exactly gold...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Someone needs send off a fax or e-mail to those guys with sales numbers for “Summer in Paradise.”

I don’t recall a bunch of self-deprecating stuff from Mike on the massive failure of that album.

My guess is that if TWGMTR had featured writing on all the tracks from Mike and had been written and recorded the way he wanted, and if he had felt great about all the aspects of the reunion, he would have been gushing about how amazing a #3 chart placement was, how it was the best album charting they had had in decades, etc.

Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #111 on: August 01, 2014, 06:41:51 AM »

Does anyone have any idea roughly how many TWGMTR has sold though btw?

Round the end of that summer, Bruce told us in Sydney that it had sold about 180,000 copies.  Which compares well with Sunflower, but isn't exactly gold...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Nowadays this is a good selling album...

But maybe Mike is still thinking of the days when even non-hit albums sold a lot more. Didn`t BW88 shift twice as many copies back in the day?

You may be onto something. This theory is supported by Mike’s comments in the one interview about the album needing a hit single. That showed a massive lack of understanding of how the charts work these days, both functionally and in terms of what type of music and what era of bands still have “hit singles.”
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #112 on: August 01, 2014, 08:39:48 AM »

So Mike can be asked anything and he seems to answer everything so again the problem seems to be the questions.

The interviewer certainly plays a large role in how the interview goes. In most cases, the same or very similar questions are indeed being asked, and follow-up questions are not pursued. I’m not even talking about Mike Wallace-style grilling or something, but just natural follow-up questions to steer the conversation.

However, I’ve seen a pattern, particularly lately, of Mike providing near word-for-word identical responses, and not always to the same precise questions. It comes across as if he has the same half-dozen or so talking points, and he plans to run through those even if the questions don’t precisely match up. This pattern came come about for any number of reasons. Sometimes it’s simply to get through tedious interviews quickly. Sometimes it comes from defensiveness and insecurity. Sometimes it comes from deflecting the precise actual question. Sometimes it’s to convey a particular agenda. Sometimes, like McCartney, you can tell it’s simply a case of doing an interview on “autopilot.”

For instance, in that recent radio/audio interview that was posted here, Mike is asked about C50 and he immediately starts talking about his current band. It’s literally an answer to a question that wasn’t asked. That answering pattern, coupled with many of the precisely identical turns of phrase used in multiple interviews, screams “stock/scripted response” to a degree that goes beyond even classic repetitive interview subjects like Paul McCartney. The problem with McCartney interviews is about 80% the interviewers’ fault and 20% McCartney’s fault. He’ll actually answer unique and weird questions if they are posed, but he is often asked very specific repetitive questions.

I feel like with Mike, it’s about 50/50 or maybe 60% the interviewers fault, 40% his. Mike, especially lately, has a pattern of going into very stock responses, talking points essentially. Set end date, “there was a term”, “the reunion was for good for the fans”, “we’re doing what we’ve been doing”, “I was screwed on songwriting credits”, “Uncle Murry took advantage”, “the Wilsons abused drugs and alcohol”, “I meditate every day”, “We’re doing about 130 shows this year”, “I hung out with the Beatles in India in 1968”, etc. The interviewers are most definitely feeding into this pattern. But some of the stuff isn’t getting specifically asked, yet we’re getting the same answers. It’s too bad, because like McCartney, Mike has shown that he can under some circumstances do a good interview with non-stock responses. Listen to that Howard Stern interview from the 90’s. Stern did the same thing with McCartney when he finally got McCartney for an interview. Stern did the same interviewing Brian in 1998. One of the skills Stern had/has that he didn’t utilize nearly enough was to get guys like this out of their rut of answering the same questions with the same answers.

Howie Edelson has gotten some unique stuff out of these guys as well, no doubt because he’s a knowledgeable fan who also knows how to write and how to conduct interviews. Who else has been able to interview Mike and ask about their corporate set-up, suggest they use a Neil Aspinall-type to run their business and even float Jerry Schilling’s name?

Also, briefly addressing the issues surrounding how interviewers are or aren’t told what to ask or not to ask, Edelson has mentioned in the past that he has never been told what to ask or not to ask when interviewing these guys. Certainly, whatever is an artist’s new project will be a focus point. But I sense in most cases, especially with the BB’s, it’s interviewers just being either lazy or non-confrontational. It is true, if you grill someone and ask them stuff they don’t want to discuss, your chances of getting another interview could decrease.


To me it just proves my point. Howie knows how to do it: same ol' for the wide base, new for the micro base. The same answers to the same questions are always going to be the same and sound the same. The questions are the thing.
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
ESQ Editor
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 541


View Profile
« Reply #113 on: August 02, 2014, 10:44:41 AM »

Here are some "different" q&a's with Mike.

http://www.examiner.com/article/what-you-should-know-about-mike-love

http://www.examiner.com/article/mike-love-remembers-the-beatles

http://www.examiner.com/article/mike-love-and-alan-jardine-discuss-holland-esq-s-100th-edition

Logged
bgas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6372


Oh for the good old days


View Profile
« Reply #114 on: August 02, 2014, 11:15:10 AM »


They're almost like "zing" one-liners. Seems there's no more meat there than any of the others we've seen. 
Logged

Nothing I post is my opinion, it's all a message from God
ESQ Editor
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 541


View Profile
« Reply #115 on: August 02, 2014, 11:20:04 AM »

Well, there was no promise of meat…not even potatoes.
Logged
bgas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6372


Oh for the good old days


View Profile
« Reply #116 on: August 02, 2014, 11:37:56 AM »

Well, there was no promise of meat…not even potatoes.

Tru dat.  and I guess you didn't promise interviews either.
What they seem to be is single questions taken from one lengthy interview and parsed out over a period of time, to make them each seem fresh
Logged

Nothing I post is my opinion, it's all a message from God
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #117 on: August 02, 2014, 11:40:04 AM »

Well, there was no promise of meat…not even potatoes.
David, serious question here as you know the guys pretty well. Do you think any of them would seriously sit down and answer the questions that refer to the 1998 fracture and what has been going down between them since the end of C73? I mean the nitty gritty stuff, not the short answer stuff that we have gotten over the years.
Logged

The Brianista Prayer

Oh Brian
Thou Art In Hawthorne,
Harmonied Be Thy name
Your Kingdom Come,
Your Steak Well Done,
On Stage As It Is In Studio,
Give Us This Day, Our Shortenin' Bread
And Forgive Us Our Bootlegs,
As We Also Have Forgiven Our Wife And Managers,
And Lead Us Not Into Kokomo,
But Deliver Us From Mike Love.
Amen.  ---hypehat
♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇
Pissing off drunks since 1978
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11844


🍦🍦 Pet Demon for Sale - $5 or best offer ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #118 on: August 02, 2014, 12:05:24 PM »

C73?!
Im gonna go out on a limb and guarantee there will be no C73 tour...
Logged

Need your song mixed/mastered? Contact me at fear2stop@yahoo.com. Serious inquiries only, please!
ESQ Editor
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 541


View Profile
« Reply #119 on: August 02, 2014, 12:11:49 PM »

Well, there was no promise of meat…not even potatoes.
David, serious question here as you know the guys pretty well. Do you think any of them would seriously sit down and answer the questions that refer to the 1998 fracture and what has been going down between them since the end of C73? I mean the nitty gritty stuff, not the short answer stuff that we have gotten over the years.

You're talking about a period when Carl died…and that is something I personally don't like to revisit. 
Logged
Mikie
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5887



View Profile
« Reply #120 on: August 02, 2014, 12:14:43 PM »

David, I believe he's referring to the period after Carl died in 1998. The year Mike essentially kicked Al out of the band.
Logged

I, I love the colorful clothes she wears, and she's already working on my brain. I only looked in her eyes, but I picked up something I just can't explain. I, I bet I know what she’s like, and I can feel how right she’d be for me. It’s weird how she comes in so strong, and I wonder what she’s picking up from me. I hope it’s good, good, good, good vibrations, yeah!!
ESQ Editor
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 541


View Profile
« Reply #121 on: August 02, 2014, 12:21:30 PM »

Well, there was no promise of meat…not even potatoes.

Tru dat.  and I guess you didn't promise interviews either.
What they seem to be is single questions taken from one lengthy interview and parsed out over a period of time, to make them each seem fresh

All that stuff appears in the pages of ESQ. 
Logged
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #122 on: August 02, 2014, 12:28:33 PM »

Well, there was no promise of meat…not even potatoes.
David, serious question here as you know the guys pretty well. Do you think any of them would seriously sit down and answer the questions that refer to the 1998 fracture and what has been going down between them since the end of C73? I mean the nitty gritty stuff, not the short answer stuff that we have gotten over the years.

You're talking about a period when Carl died…and that is something I personally don't like to revisit. 
David, I believe he's referring to the period after Carl died in 1998. The year Mike essentially kicked Al out of the band.
Exactly, thanks Mikie. And also after C50 or C73 since Mike says they did 73 reunion shows in 2012.
Logged

The Brianista Prayer

Oh Brian
Thou Art In Hawthorne,
Harmonied Be Thy name
Your Kingdom Come,
Your Steak Well Done,
On Stage As It Is In Studio,
Give Us This Day, Our Shortenin' Bread
And Forgive Us Our Bootlegs,
As We Also Have Forgiven Our Wife And Managers,
And Lead Us Not Into Kokomo,
But Deliver Us From Mike Love.
Amen.  ---hypehat
ESQ Editor
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 541


View Profile
« Reply #123 on: August 02, 2014, 12:59:42 PM »

Well, there was no promise of meat…not even potatoes.
David, serious question here as you know the guys pretty well. Do you think any of them would seriously sit down and answer the questions that refer to the 1998 fracture and what has been going down between them since the end of C73? I mean the nitty gritty stuff, not the short answer stuff that we have gotten over the years.

You're talking about a period when Carl died…and that is something I personally don't like to revisit. 
David, I believe he's referring to the period after Carl died in 1998. The year Mike essentially kicked Al out of the band.
Exactly, thanks Mikie. And also after C50 or C73 since Mike says they did 73 reunion shows in 2012.


When I look back to 1998 in terms of music, I enjoy the "Endless Harmony" DVD / CD, and even moments on Bruce's "Symphonic Sounds" disc.   

I know I'm a broken record here, but it is about the music for me.
Logged
♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇
Pissing off drunks since 1978
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11844


🍦🍦 Pet Demon for Sale - $5 or best offer ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #124 on: August 02, 2014, 03:34:01 PM »

Well, there was no promise of meat…not even potatoes.
David, serious question here as you know the guys pretty well. Do you think any of them would seriously sit down and answer the questions that refer to the 1998 fracture and what has been going down between them since the end of C73? I mean the nitty gritty stuff, not the short answer stuff that we have gotten over the years.

You're talking about a period when Carl died…and that is something I personally don't like to revisit.  
David, I believe he's referring to the period after Carl died in 1998. The year Mike essentially kicked Al out of the band.
Exactly, thanks Mikie. And also after C50 or C73 since Mike says they did 73 reunion shows in 2012.

I was thinking C73 meant 73 years of the Beach.Boys, and i cant picture them on stage in their 90s. 'Uh let's take an intermission while the nurse changes Bruce'
« Last Edit: August 02, 2014, 06:02:37 PM by I'm Billy, Not Jarhead » Logged

Need your song mixed/mastered? Contact me at fear2stop@yahoo.com. Serious inquiries only, please!
gfx
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.495 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!