Awesome New Mike Love Article!!

[KDS]

That Beach Boys project that didn't materialize was a musical which Stamos was trying to make happen which would have been produced by the same Zadan-Meron-Stamos production team that was responsible for the 2000 TV movie.

Edit: The project is/was titled "All Summer Long" and actually got bought by Fox 2000 back in 2010. Edit #2: As of this month, the film musical project is still in development according to reports.

With any luck this will never see the light of day.  The last thing I want is for some watered down Glee / Rock of Ages versions of Beach Boys classics out there. 

**Shudder**

[CenturyDeprived]

Understand some fans joined this forum or similar forums in recent years and may have missed previous discussions going back 10 years or more, but there have been discussions on certain points from this thread in the past and which still exist in the archives. And for fans who remember those discussions, and recall who was involved and providing information on points like the American Family TV movie, it can be frustrating to see some in this discussion seemingly posting things like none of that info was ever revealed.

Want comments from people involved directly in that film, as in producers? We had that. It's in the archives. And beyond that, they're included in discussions that Cam Mott for one participated in, and also offered the "contact Kirk Ellis" comment going back roughly 9 years.

More info needed? Articles published in early 2000 when the film was coming out and a few years after wrote that Mike was a "technical adviser" on the film. In a July 2002 interview Mike said this about the film:



Two years after the fact, Mike seems to think the main issue most people who criticized the film, the way the characters were portrayed particularly Brian Wilson, was well done.

From this board's previous discussions, I'm also going by what board members like Andrew Doe had been saying here, that Mike did have an influence on the film. And there was info that the early versions of the script had been changed significantly by the time that "part 2" was broadcast, and that Brian Wilson (who had contributed a new vocal recording with Gary Griffin to the soundtrack) had not seen part 2 until just before it was broadcast and was not happy with the portrayal. It goes on and on. Quotes like this:

Going back to AAF, Mike himself said certain things in the movie bothered him. He didn't write or make it himself.

His name's not on it, granted, but that doesn't mean he didn't have a huge influence over what appeared onscreen.

And previous discussions like this:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,2371.0.html

They tend to add up and stick in readers' minds especially when points previously made are dismissed or ignored as they have been in this discussion, in some cases by readers who know all of this has been available to read for years.

The frustration is there are people currently reading (and posting) that know the details beyond speculations or at least take the word of people who were providing the info from either direct or close sources, and those of us who have been doing this stuff for years if not decades prior to joining up in 2012 or whenever...yet the issues are being dodged and deflected while the main issues are allowed to be answered by either non-answers, sidetrack issues like punctuation, or the decade-old "ask Kirk Ellis" type of reply.

It's in the board's archives, for one, if getting the facts is the goal. So far, getting the facts doesn't seem to be as much of a goal as derailing the thread with non-issues or declaring it dead and allowing non-issues to stand in place of what was said years ago by people who would know.

So are we interested in getting the facts out there? I'd hope so.

And as far as connecting the 2000 film to the 2005 lawsuit, the issue there is the similarity between the portrayal of people and events in 2000 from the film and portrayals of the same people and events in a 2005 legal filing. For everyone from participants to the real people being portrayed to the fans watching to the critics who reviewed the film in 2000 and beyond, the characterizations in "Part 2" were some of the main reasons why the film lost its credibility. Yet 2 years after the fact, Mike points them out as a positive in an interview, then in 2005 similar portrayals appear in a lawsuit with his name as the plaintiff filing the suit.

It's all there, from the text of the various cases to the previous discussions and comments on this board, including those of one of the people involved in making the film. Maybe those should be considered for historical purposes if nothing else, unless the priority is punctuation and finding contact info for Kirk Ellis.

There it is. Mike not saying a peep about Brian's awful depiction... Even when directly given the chance to.

Is anyone supposed to believe that Mike had some heinous objection to Brian's portrayal, but just kept mum about it and complained about some minor, insignificant items?

Let's face it - the film was made during an era where relations between the camps were sh*t. Brian was just starting his solo career and getting lots of attention, Mike was jealous, still bitter about the decades-old crediting snafu, no giant newsflash there. He let his resentment get in the way of better judgement. Even if he magically had no influence on the picture despite his good, indebted buddy as a producer, Mike had a chance to dispell Brian's poor depiction and did no such thing. In fact he did the opposite.

But of course that is to be discounted and is a negligible observation in the eyes of some. Baffling.

Does there exist an example of Mike publicly sticking up for Brian and defending Brian, if Brian gets any kind of bad press/severely warped depiction? I don't believe so, though I stand to be corrected. We do have selfless examples of Brian calling Mike a genius and not a jerk, surely brought on by Mike's reputation. 

Is someone supposed to read Mike's new RS article and somehow think that Mike's admitted deep resentments haven't manifested outwardly in all sorts of ways? Or is he secretly seeking to fess up to acting like a tool, but give a legit reason for being upset that he hopes people will empathize with?

[CenturyDeprived]

Cam and filledthepage(withdeflectionsandquotationmarks):



Number one at never giving an inch! And not answering your darned questions, 'CAUSE I'M AN AMERICAN AND I DON'T HAVE TO, YOU BULLY!

Cruz has proven himself not inflexible.  He just fired his spokesperson, for falsely attacking Marco Rubio. 

Oh ok. So Cruz has then actually been proven to be *more* flexible than the defend-Mike-at-all-costs contingent.

[Emily]

Also just some extra context from a 2000 LA Times article concerning "An American Family":

Sahanaja remembers a rehearsal last summer when Wilson's wife and comanager, Melinda, was on the phone with a copy of the script in front of her, yelling at one of Love's representatives over certain questionable content. Brian was so upset that he asked for the keys to the car and sat in the parking lot until the incident was over. "It was so sad," says Sahanaja, "because Brian's happier now, trying to move on -- and yet this stuff from the past keeps popping up to haunt him. My theory is that Brian and Melinda were most disturbed, apart from all the Mike Love propaganda at Brian's expense, by a scene that depicted Dennis Wilson screaming, 'You never supported me as an artist,' at his older brother. From everything I've read and everyone I've ever talked to, Dennis was the one guy -- perhaps the only guy -- who always stood by Brian."

OT, but I didn't know Sahanaja was working with them that early - or at least I would've thought their relationship was too new for this sort of intimacy. When did they start working together?

[KDS]

Also just some extra context from a 2000 LA Times article concerning "An American Family":

Sahanaja remembers a rehearsal last summer when Wilson's wife and comanager, Melinda, was on the phone with a copy of the script in front of her, yelling at one of Love's representatives over certain questionable content. Brian was so upset that he asked for the keys to the car and sat in the parking lot until the incident was over. "It was so sad," says Sahanaja, "because Brian's happier now, trying to move on -- and yet this stuff from the past keeps popping up to haunt him. My theory is that Brian and Melinda were most disturbed, apart from all the Mike Love propaganda at Brian's expense, by a scene that depicted Dennis Wilson screaming, 'You never supported me as an artist,' at his older brother. From everything I've read and everyone I've ever talked to, Dennis was the one guy -- perhaps the only guy -- who always stood by Brian."

OT, but I didn't know Sahanaja was working with them that early - or at least I would've thought their relationship was too new for this sort of intimacy. When did they start working together?

When Brian went back on the road in 1999.

[Jim V.]

Cam and filledthepage(withdeflectionsandquotationmarks):



Number one at never giving an inch! And not answering your darned questions, 'CAUSE I'M AN AMERICAN AND I DON'T HAVE TO, YOU BULLY!

Cruz has proven himself not inflexible.  He just fired his spokesperson, for falsely attacking Marco Rubio. 

This is hilarious. So because he fired his spokesperson he is willing to give an inch? Not quite. He fired his spokesperson because his campaign has been tagged for being unbelievable sleazy (including lying about Ben Carson dropping out of the race). Also Cruz has ran the last few years on "not giving in" to the other side. So don't try to make it look like he gives a damn about the other side's concerns. Just as you have no interest in the points the other side is making on this board.

So please, cut the sh*t, immediately.

[Lee Marshall]

Scenario 2 – His lawyers are to blame for the wording and concealed it from Mike.  Mike apparently did nothing when he found out about it, didn’t issue an apology or retraction nor did he bring a suit against them and is still using them.   He may not have been aware or responsible initially but his later actions mean he has tacitly absorbed responsibility for the words used.

The first rule of Mike Club: ****never publicly apologize**** and never back down. Apologies are for chickenshits.

Don't back down from that wave...of fact and honest criticism...

It's a tiring and age-old waste of time and board space to argue with people who do what they do and they do it ONLY to piss people off.  Yes ... I say that's exactly what's being done here and what has been done in LOADS of other threads since I arrived at this site.  One side in the never ending war has stopped their tom-foolery.  The other side remains steadfast in their cemented stance.  I guess it matches their noggins.  All cement...All the time.

[AndrewHickey]

Also just some extra context from a 2000 LA Times article concerning "An American Family":

Sahanaja remembers a rehearsal last summer when Wilson's wife and comanager, Melinda, was on the phone with a copy of the script in front of her, yelling at one of Love's representatives over certain questionable content. Brian was so upset that he asked for the keys to the car and sat in the parking lot until the incident was over. "It was so sad," says Sahanaja, "because Brian's happier now, trying to move on -- and yet this stuff from the past keeps popping up to haunt him. My theory is that Brian and Melinda were most disturbed, apart from all the Mike Love propaganda at Brian's expense, by a scene that depicted Dennis Wilson screaming, 'You never supported me as an artist,' at his older brother. From everything I've read and everyone I've ever talked to, Dennis was the one guy -- perhaps the only guy -- who always stood by Brian."

OT, but I didn't know Sahanaja was working with them that early - or at least I would've thought their relationship was too new for this sort of intimacy. When did they start working together?

Darian became part of Brian's band in 1999, and musical director soon after that. The Wondermints had done the odd thing with Brian earlier than that, though, in around 1995.

[Debbie KL]

That Beach Boys project that didn't materialize was a musical which Stamos was trying to make happen which would have been produced by the same Zadan-Meron-Stamos production team that was responsible for the 2000 TV movie.

Edit: The project is/was titled "All Summer Long" and actually got bought by Fox 2000 back in 2010. Edit #2: As of this month, the film musical project is still in development according to reports.

This is one of the worst ideas I could imagine - that production team doing a BBs musical?  I am so creeped out, I am going for a walk to get some fresh air.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Also just some extra context from a 2000 LA Times article concerning "An American Family":

Sahanaja remembers a rehearsal last summer when Wilson's wife and comanager, Melinda, was on the phone with a copy of the script in front of her, yelling at one of Love's representatives over certain questionable content. Brian was so upset that he asked for the keys to the car and sat in the parking lot until the incident was over. "It was so sad," says Sahanaja, "because Brian's happier now, trying to move on -- and yet this stuff from the past keeps popping up to haunt him. My theory is that Brian and Melinda were most disturbed, apart from all the Mike Love propaganda at Brian's expense, by a scene that depicted Dennis Wilson screaming, 'You never supported me as an artist,' at his older brother. From everything I've read and everyone I've ever talked to, Dennis was the one guy -- perhaps the only guy -- who always stood by Brian."

OT, but I didn't know Sahanaja was working with them that early - or at least I would've thought their relationship was too new for this sort of intimacy. When did they start working together?

Darian became part of Brian's band in 1999, and musical director soon after that. The Wondermints had done the odd thing with Brian earlier than that, though, in around 1995.

November 4th 1994, at the Morgan-Wixon Theater in Santa Monica, during a BW tribute show at which BW himself plays.

[18thofMay]

That Beach Boys project that didn't materialize was a musical which Stamos was trying to make happen which would have been produced by the same Zadan-Meron-Stamos production team that was responsible for the 2000 TV movie.

Edit: The project is/was titled "All Summer Long" and actually got bought by Fox 2000 back in 2010. Edit #2: As of this month, the film musical project is still in development according to reports.

This is one of the worst ideas I could imagine - that production team doing a BBs musical?  I am so creeped out, I am going for a walk to get some fresh air.

How was the walk?

[Debbie KL]

That Beach Boys project that didn't materialize was a musical which Stamos was trying to make happen which would have been produced by the same Zadan-Meron-Stamos production team that was responsible for the 2000 TV movie.

Edit: The project is/was titled "All Summer Long" and actually got bought by Fox 2000 back in 2010. Edit #2: As of this month, the film musical project is still in development according to reports.

This is one of the worst ideas I could imagine - that production team doing a BBs musical?  I am so creeped out, I am going for a walk to get some fresh air.

How was the walk?

I feel a lot better after the fresh air - thanks, unless I think about the possibility of that film musical project. Then my flu symptoms come back in a huge way!  Tonight, no doubt, it will be nightmares. 

I never made it thru that hideous tv series.  These were people I knew and loved during that time period portrayed.  To see the grotesque caricatures of real people whom I cared about wasn't bearable beyond 5-10 minute increments.  There was this hideous humorous aspect to these cartoon characters if I stepped back, but when I thought about the people supposedly on the screen, it was a mix of rage and horror - kind of like my reaction to the details of that 2005 lawsuit.

[18thofMay]

That Beach Boys project that didn't materialize was a musical which Stamos was trying to make happen which would have been produced by the same Zadan-Meron-Stamos production team that was responsible for the 2000 TV movie.

Edit: The project is/was titled "All Summer Long" and actually got bought by Fox 2000 back in 2010. Edit #2: As of this month, the film musical project is still in development according to reports.

This is one of the worst ideas I could imagine - that production team doing a BBs musical?  I am so creeped out, I am going for a walk to get some fresh air.

How was the walk?

I feel a lot better after the fresh air - thanks, unless I think about the possibility of that film musical project. Then my flu symptoms come back in a huge way!  Tonight, no doubt, it will be nightmares. 

I never made it thru that hideous tv series.  These were people I knew and loved during that time period portrayed.  To see the grotesque caricatures of real people whom I cared about wasn't bearable beyond 5-10 minute increments.  There was this hideous humorous aspect to these cartoon characters if I stepped back, but when I thought about the people supposedly on the screen, it was a mix of rage and horror - kind of like my reaction to the details of that 2005 lawsuit.

I have discussed this at times with various people and the human being element of this, at times sad adventure, seems to be lost on some. These are not fictional characters in some badly written book.

[Cam Mott]

Instead of insulting each other, we could agree to disagree about our elevated opinion of our opinions.

If anyone gets some real info from the people involved please share it.

I’d say the court documentation on the 2005 case is actually a trove of “real info.” If someone just said “Remember when Mike did that lawsuit dealie about Smile in 2005?”, I certainly wouldn’t feel comfortable getting into a detailed discussion. But we actually have the 2005 filing with oodles of “background” information, as well as a 2010 appeals court ruling that explains the history of the case itself.

This nonsense about haranguing the actual lawyers and asking, I guess, what they were thinking back five or ten years ago, is unrealistic and unneeded. The evidence is right there in those 2005/2010 documents.

I think that’s maybe what’s throwing people off. A couple people who won’t budge an inch in characterizing anything about Mike’s 2005 lawsuit as unfortunate or lamentable, who countless times have previously cited court documents and law to defend Mike against others.

Good lord, 16 or 17 years of reading about how the Al/BRI lawsuits proved what an a**hole Al Jardine is, yet when it comes to this 2005 Mike lawsuit, we just get a shoulder shrug and a “I’m waiting for “real info” comment?

Which comes back around to the first point, which is, has it just devolved into insulting each other? Well, I don’t think there have been much of any direct insults. But certainly, when it comes to a very small group of folks who won’t budge at all on this 2005 lawsuit issue, it does then become more about their motivations and potential inconsistency in discussing things related to the band. Is it okay to call another poster’s motivations into question, or to point out inconsistencies in their reasoning or apparent sense of fairness (or lack thereof)? I’d say it can be done respectfully. I’ve had it done to me, as most others have. But it does make things even more circular, and more a case of “debating about the debate.”

So it’s probably worth just dropping. But it’s a bummer, because much like Mike himself, I think if a few folks would just acknowledge one iota that Mike comes off badly in that 2005 lawsuit, it would help their credibility immensely, not to mention keep discussions from going off the rails.

Sure, that nonsense of asking the actual people involved instead of relying on opinions and speculations, and people, and journalists not involved.  By all means let's keep echo chambering those opinions and insinuations rather than going to the source.

[SMiLE Brian]

That Beach Boys project that didn't materialize was a musical which Stamos was trying to make happen which would have been produced by the same Zadan-Meron-Stamos production team that was responsible for the 2000 TV movie.

Edit: The project is/was titled "All Summer Long" and actually got bought by Fox 2000 back in 2010. Edit #2: As of this month, the film musical project is still in development according to reports.

This is one of the worst ideas I could imagine - that production team doing a BBs musical?  I am so creeped out, I am going for a walk to get some fresh air.

How was the walk?

I feel a lot better after the fresh air - thanks, unless I think about the possibility of that film musical project. Then my flu symptoms come back in a huge way!  Tonight, no doubt, it will be nightmares. 

I never made it thru that hideous tv series.  These were people I knew and loved during that time period portrayed.  To see the grotesque caricatures of real people whom I cared about wasn't bearable beyond 5-10 minute increments.  There was this hideous humorous aspect to these cartoon characters if I stepped back, but when I thought about the people supposedly on the screen, it was a mix of rage and horror - kind of like my reaction to the details of that 2005 lawsuit.

Debbie is healthy and wise.

[Debbie KL]

That Beach Boys project that didn't materialize was a musical which Stamos was trying to make happen which would have been produced by the same Zadan-Meron-Stamos production team that was responsible for the 2000 TV movie.

Edit: The project is/was titled "All Summer Long" and actually got bought by Fox 2000 back in 2010. Edit #2: As of this month, the film musical project is still in development according to reports.

This is one of the worst ideas I could imagine - that production team doing a BBs musical?  I am so creeped out, I am going for a walk to get some fresh air.

How was the walk?

I feel a lot better after the fresh air - thanks, unless I think about the possibility of that film musical project. Then my flu symptoms come back in a huge way!  Tonight, no doubt, it will be nightmares.  

I never made it thru that hideous tv series.  These were people I knew and loved during that time period portrayed.  To see the grotesque caricatures of real people whom I cared about wasn't bearable beyond 5-10 minute increments.  There was this hideous humorous aspect to these cartoon characters if I stepped back, but when I thought about the people supposedly on the screen, it was a mix of rage and horror - kind of like my reaction to the details of that 2005 lawsuit.

Debbie is healthy and wise.

Maybe not so healthy nor too wise, but thanks.  

I see Cam is back apparently seeing no real connection between the person filing the 2005-2010 lawsuit and the fundamental claims of the lawsuit.  Your universe must be a magical place, Cam.

[SMiLE Brian]

It's a lovely place.

[Cam Mott]

Understand some fans joined this forum or similar forums in recent years and may have missed previous discussions going back 10 years or more, but there have been discussions on certain points from this thread in the past and which still exist in the archives. And for fans who remember those discussions, and recall who was involved and providing information on points like the American Family TV movie, it can be frustrating to see some in this discussion seemingly posting things like none of that info was ever revealed.

Want comments from people involved directly in that film, as in producers? We had that. It's in the archives. And beyond that, they're included in discussions that Cam Mott for one participated in, and also offered the "contact Kirk Ellis" comment going back roughly 9 years.

More info needed? Articles published in early 2000 when the film was coming out and a few years after wrote that Mike was a "technical adviser" on the film. In a July 2002 interview Mike said this about the film:



Two years after the fact, Mike seems to think the main issue most people who criticized the film, the way the characters were portrayed particularly Brian Wilson, was well done.

From this board's previous discussions, I'm also going by what board members like Andrew Doe had been saying here, that Mike did have an influence on the film. And there was info that the early versions of the script had been changed significantly by the time that "part 2" was broadcast, and that Brian Wilson (who had contributed a new vocal recording with Gary Griffin to the soundtrack) had not seen part 2 until just before it was broadcast and was not happy with the portrayal. It goes on and on. Quotes like this:

Going back to AAF, Mike himself said certain things in the movie bothered him. He didn't write or make it himself.

His name's not on it, granted, but that doesn't mean he didn't have a huge influence over what appeared onscreen.

And previous discussions like this:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,2371.0.html

They tend to add up and stick in readers' minds especially when points previously made are dismissed or ignored as they have been in this discussion, in some cases by readers who know all of this has been available to read for years.

The frustration is there are people currently reading (and posting) that know the details beyond speculations or at least take the word of people who were providing the info from either direct or close sources, and those of us who have been doing this stuff for years if not decades prior to joining up in 2012 or whenever...yet the issues are being dodged and deflected while the main issues are allowed to be answered by either non-answers, sidetrack issues like punctuation, or the decade-old "ask Kirk Ellis" type of reply.

It's in the board's archives, for one, if getting the facts is the goal. So far, getting the facts doesn't seem to be as much of a goal as derailing the thread with non-issues or declaring it dead and allowing non-issues to stand in place of what was said years ago by people who would know.

So are we interested in getting the facts out there? I'd hope so.

And as far as connecting the 2000 film to the 2005 lawsuit, the issue there is the similarity between the portrayal of people and events in 2000 from the film and portrayals of the same people and events in a 2005 legal filing. For everyone from participants to the real people being portrayed to the fans watching to the critics who reviewed the film in 2000 and beyond, the characterizations in "Part 2" were some of the main reasons why the film lost its credibility. Yet 2 years after the fact, Mike points them out as a positive in an interview, then in 2005 similar portrayals appear in a lawsuit with his name as the plaintiff filing the suit.

It's all there, from the text of the various cases to the previous discussions and comments on this board, including those of one of the people involved in making the film. Maybe those should be considered for historical purposes if nothing else, unless the priority is punctuation and finding contact info for Kirk Ellis.

So we want the facts but not from the guy who wrote the script which is supposedly the source of the speculation, that would be a deflection and distraction, but connecting dots with innuendo isn't?

If anything that clipping shows Mike didn't have control of the script.  Wasn't Brian also claimed to be a technical adviser on the project?  And once again, we seem to be pretending that Mike was spared from the "propaganda" which I'm pretty sure he wasn't by my memory, so I guess we are claiming that Mike defamed himself?

Bleckner would be another to be contacted as he and Ellis presumably know the most about what did or did not happen with the script etc..  I guess Mike would know what he did or did not do, so you all could contact him.

[Cam Mott]

That Beach Boys project that didn't materialize was a musical which Stamos was trying to make happen which would have been produced by the same Zadan-Meron-Stamos production team that was responsible for the 2000 TV movie.

Edit: The project is/was titled "All Summer Long" and actually got bought by Fox 2000 back in 2010. Edit #2: As of this month, the film musical project is still in development according to reports.

This is one of the worst ideas I could imagine - that production team doing a BBs musical?  I am so creeped out, I am going for a walk to get some fresh air.

How was the walk?

I feel a lot better after the fresh air - thanks, unless I think about the possibility of that film musical project. Then my flu symptoms come back in a huge way!  Tonight, no doubt, it will be nightmares.  

I never made it thru that hideous tv series.  These were people I knew and loved during that time period portrayed.  To see the grotesque caricatures of real people whom I cared about wasn't bearable beyond 5-10 minute increments.  There was this hideous humorous aspect to these cartoon characters if I stepped back, but when I thought about the people supposedly on the screen, it was a mix of rage and horror - kind of like my reaction to the details of that 2005 lawsuit.

Debbie is healthy and wise.

Maybe not so healthy nor too wise, but thanks.  

I see Cam is back apparently seeing no real connection between the person filing the 2005-2010 lawsuit and the fundamental claims of the lawsuit.  Your universe must be a magical place, Cam.

Still here. 

It's so magical to have you calling me out and being concerned about my whereabouts.

[Empire Of Love]

Now that we are back on the topic of the lawsuit (thank you Debbie)...

It is hard for me to believe that Mike was unaware of the content of the 2005 lawsuit.  He may not have written the words, but it seems hard to deny that either the ideas communicated originated with him or, at the least, he was aware of them and chose to let them stand throughout the appeals process.  That a man of Mike's intelligence would allow a lawsuit to proceed, in particular through the appeals process, without awareness of it's contents is just too much for me to believe.  This becomes even harder to deny when one is familiar with statements he has made in interviews over the last several years, statements that sound like they are coming from the same outlook, which seems to indicate the same person.

Which brings me back my prior question: If Mike even permitted these gross misrepresentations of fact in the 2005 lawsuit, does this introduce doubt into the earlier song writing credit lawsuit? Perhaps a swing for the fences and hope for a double approach?  Consider the following:

1. If it occurred in 2005, why not in the prior lawsuit?
2. There was more at stake in the song writing credit lawsuit, and therefore greater incentive
3. It would have been well known that Brian was in no shape to defend himself making it easy to introduce embellished claims with the hope they would not be discovered

I don't know Mike and I don't know the reputation of his attorneys from either lawsuit.  I am not claiming that facts were misrepresented in the song writing credit lawsuit.  I am simply extrapolating from what we see in the 2005 lawsuit and asking the question that naturally follows:  Given what we know, are the claims regarding the song writing credits also questionable?

EoL

[Doo Dah]

Cam, we've been trying to reach Mike, but he doesn't return our calls. 

What a clown show.

[Cam Mott]

Cam, we've been trying to reach Mike, but he doesn't return our calls. 

What a clown show.

Try Facebook. 

We agree, what a clown show.

[CenturyDeprived]

Cam, we've been trying to reach Mike, but he doesn't return our calls.  

What a clown show.

Try Facebook.  

We agree, what a clown show.

Do you for one moment think that when posed with a direct question, in a public social media forum, he's going to fess up to having been in any way responsible, or to have influenced a depiction that is widely viewed as despicable and reprehensible?  Especially when he has kept mum about his contributions to the film for a decade and a half?  In particular, at a very moment in time when he is trying to drum up lots of public sympathy for his plight?   What motivation would he have to be honest about it? So that he can become the next trending topic on Twitter?

In the words of Mike Myers, "yeah, and monkeys might fly out of my butt".  That's a useless rabbit hole, and you know it. Melinda and Darian obviously think it was Mike propaganda; you must feel pretty confident that they are completely offbase, or that they made an assumption like that for some completely unknown reason.

In fact, Mike's non-invite to Brian's film makes more sense, when one thinks about it - in part - being a way of returning a favor for Mike's contributions to the 2000 film.  I don't condone backstabbing, but the pieces do line up. Mike doesn't seem to address or even remotely speculate why he wasn't invited to Brian's film. As though it's some great mystery. I'm sure he'd prefer the readers to not speculate on that reason either.

To believe your logic :

-Melinda and Darian would make such an assumption for a completely random and grossly incorrect reason

-Uncle Jesse being the producer is a complete coincidence, because there's no remotely possible way Mike would even try to influence his indebted friend

- Mike just happened to omit his "outrage" over Brian and Brian's friends' portrayals from the vintage article posted above, when directly questioned about his feelings on the film, and with full knowledge of how pissed off people such as Brian and VDP were

You must be smoking some really, really good weed which causes logic to evaporate. I want to know where you get it and why you are not sharing.

[Cam Mott]

Cam, we've been trying to reach Mike, but he doesn't return our calls.  

What a clown show.

Try Facebook.  

We agree, what a clown show.

Do you for one moment think that when posed with a direct question, in a public social media forum, he's going to fess up to having been in any way responsible, or to have influenced a depiction that is widely viewed as despicable and reprehensible?  Especially when he has kept mum about his contributions to the film for a decade and a half?  In particular, at a very moment in time when he is trying to drum up lots of public sympathy for his plight?   What motivation would he have to be honest about it? So that he can become the next trending topic on Twitter?

In the words of Mike Myers, "yeah, and monkeys might fly out of my butt".  That's a useless rabbit hole, and you know it. Melinda and Darian obviously think it was Mike propaganda; you must feel pretty confident that they are completely misguided, or that they make an assumption like that for some completely unknown reason.

In fact, Mike's non-invite to Brian's film makes more sense, when one thinks about it being a way of returning a favor for Mike's contributions to the 2000 film.  I don't condone backstabbing, but the pieces do you line up. Mike doesn't seem to address or even remotely speculate why he wasn't invited to Brian's film. As though it's some great mystery.

You won't know until you try; not that you're prejudging it or anything....

[Empire Of Love]

Cam, we've been trying to reach Mike, but he doesn't return our calls.  

What a clown show.

Try Facebook.  

We agree, what a clown show.

Do you for one moment think that when posed with a direct question, in a public social media forum, he's going to fess up to having been in any way responsible, or to have influenced a depiction that is widely viewed as despicable and reprehensible?  Especially when he has kept mum about his contributions to the film for a decade and a half?  In particular, at a very moment in time when he is trying to drum up lots of public sympathy for his plight?   What motivation would he have to be honest about it? So that he can become the next trending topic on Twitter?

In the words of Mike Myers, "yeah, and monkeys might fly out of my butt".  That's a useless rabbit hole, and you know it. Melinda and Darian obviously think it was Mike propaganda; you must feel pretty confident that they are completely misguided, or that they make an assumption like that for some completely unknown reason.

In fact, Mike's non-invite to Brian's film makes more sense, when one thinks about it being a way of returning a favor for Mike's contributions to the 2000 film.  I don't condone backstabbing, but the pieces do you line up. Mike doesn't seem to address or even remotely speculate why he wasn't invited to Brian's film. As though it's some great mystery.

You won't know until you try; not that you're prejudging it or anything....

But it isn't prejudging, it is postjudging.  Instances of Mike not accepting blame can be multiplied for all to see (and for Cam and FP to deny).  Mike does not accept blame even when he is guilty.  It is a classic case of inductive reasoning.  In fact, it's called wisdom.  Maya Angelou said it best, "When people show you who they are, believe them."

EoL