gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680601 Posts in 27601 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 29, 2024, 09:23:19 AM
*
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 ... 13 Go Down Print
Author Topic: new article with some interesting tidbits  (Read 51977 times)
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #125 on: March 09, 2016, 03:05:58 PM »

Melinda and Gloria heroically started the wheels in motion but Carl, Audree and the others involved had to finish it.  And it took 19 months.  

Where does Mike give any credit to Melinda and Gloria for heroically starting the wheels in motion?
*crickets*
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #126 on: March 09, 2016, 03:09:43 PM »

Believe me folks, there's a whole subtext in the BB universe to the "Love & Mercy" film. For something so much more innocuous than the clusterfudge that was the Mike-endorsed "An American Family" movie, it seems to have elicited a very strong reaction from Mike. There's a lot we still don't know about the political machinations involved in the aftermath of that movie; the "screenings", the soundtrack delays. There's a nice story there I'll bet that we don't know.

The goal, in my opinion, going back to last year, appears to be to scrape together anything that puts the film in a bad light and throw it against the wall and see if it sticks. Mike can't be bothered to take the time to rent "Love & Mercy" (you can rent it on Amazon and watch it on your phone for fudge's sake!), but he clearly meticulously read Evan Landy's piece refuting the film. Same with the Stan/Carl thing. How many times has Mike publicly patted Stan Love on the back for his role in the Landy case? (Wasn't most of the rest of the family/organization notoriously silent on the Stan Love issue when it hit the media?) It seems like it only comes up when Melinda needs to be minimized.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2016, 03:11:40 PM by HeyJude » 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/
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #127 on: March 09, 2016, 03:10:12 PM »

It seems incredible that people are questioning some of what was done in good faith.  

Then why is it so easy to so indignantly and incredulously speak to people in this thread, but not repudiate or renounce that Mike most certainly was questioning the good faith actions of Melinda?
Hey Jude - I guess finding the article with the bare details of the court matter that went on for 19 months tells me that there likely was first Melinda/Gloria battle that led to an all-out war for 19 months.   And, a "sealed" case.  That is not unimportant info that should be dismissed out of hand.  

And, yes, I get a little indignant when Carl and Audree become attacked for their inaction.

They are not here to defend themselves.  
Logged
Emily
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2022


View Profile
« Reply #128 on: March 09, 2016, 03:13:04 PM »



Nothing was happening to pull him off the case or revoke the license of the prescribing doc that Landy used?  That is on the state.

The family needed to provide evidence of self-dealing and the will provided that door.  I understood that Carl worked with Peter to surreptitiously observe Brian for drugging effects and Brian's "affect."

We don't know all the details because that case is sealed.  That is what is behind the door.

The 1984 timeline I am not familiar with.  I saw Brian first, in 1987 and 1990.

It seems incredible that people are questioning some of what was done in good faith.  There is a lot we don't know.  
The state did act. A few years before the family bothered to. We don't need details to know that.
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #129 on: March 09, 2016, 03:17:18 PM »

It seems incredible that people are questioning some of what was done in good faith.  

Then why is it so easy to so indignantly and incredulously speak to people in this thread, but not repudiate or renounce that Mike most certainly was questioning the good faith actions of Melinda?
Hey Jude - I guess finding the article with the bare details of the court matter that went on for 19 months tells me that there likely was first Melinda/Gloria battle that led to an all-out war for 19 months.   And, a "sealed" case.  That is not unimportant info that should be dismissed out of hand.  

And, yes, I get a little indignant when Carl and Audree become attacked for their inaction.

They are not here to defend themselves.  

Nobody is attacking Carl or Audree, and frankly if we want to talk about "personal attacks", it veers much closer to a personal attack against any or all of the folks posting in this thread to imply anyone is attacking them.

You've invented these "attacks." I've seen none. Another way to obfuscate and avoid the actual discussion.

That you continue to refuse to even refer to Mike's interview (and specifically Mike's interview, NOT the Landy case as a whole), the interview where he's the one who doesn't even MENTION Audree Wilson at all, and most certainly denigrates Melinda's role in helping Brian is, well, I'll just say unfortunate.
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/
Emily
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2022


View Profile
« Reply #130 on: March 09, 2016, 03:20:20 PM »

I'm pretty critical.
Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #131 on: March 09, 2016, 03:23:16 PM »

there likely was first Melinda/Gloria battle that led to an all-out war for 19 months.   And, a "sealed" case.  That is not unimportant info that should be dismissed out of hand.  

And, yes, I get a little indignant when Carl and Audree become attacked for their inaction.

They are not here to defend themselves.  

1. Again. Where's the Melinda/Gloria battle mentioned in Mike's interview?

2. Does Melinda's role deserve a hint of acknowledgement by Mike? 

3. Doesn't Mike not mentioning their role whatsoever amount to inaction on his part, which should at the very least a hint of displeasure from someone like you, who is able - without pulling teeth, apparently - to actually actively acknowledge the role of Melinda and Gloria?

I know you can address these questions.
I know crickets aren't an inevitability.
I believe in you, FDP.  
« Last Edit: March 09, 2016, 03:28:07 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #132 on: March 09, 2016, 03:23:28 PM »

Being critical isn't a "personal attack" in my mind, though. The bigger issue is that accusations that anyone is attacking them are being used to avoid addressing the repudiation of Mike's comments.

Opening the question up for discussion of what the family didn't do or could have done is not a personal attack. Especially in this case, as it's all speculation and hypotheticals.
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/
Juice Brohnston
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 627



View Profile
« Reply #133 on: March 09, 2016, 03:27:19 PM »

"Same with the Stan/Carl thing. How many times has Mike publicly patted Stan Love on the back for his role in the Landy case? (Wasn't most of the rest of the family/organization notoriously silent on the Stan Love issue when it hit the media?) It seems like "

What was up with that whole Stan debacle. Was this an attempt by Mike to wrestle control? Was he working on behalf of BRI? On his own?
Logged
Emily
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2022


View Profile
« Reply #134 on: March 09, 2016, 03:29:11 PM »

"Same with the Stan/Carl thing. How many times has Mike publicly patted Stan Love on the back for his role in the Landy case? (Wasn't most of the rest of the family/organization notoriously silent on the Stan Love issue when it hit the media?) It seems like "

What was up with that whole Stan debacle. Was this an attempt by Mike to wrestle control? Was he working on behalf of BRI? On his own?
I'd never had the impression that Mike was involved at all in that. But I certainly have no inside information.
Logged
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #135 on: March 09, 2016, 03:32:09 PM »

It seems incredible that people are questioning some of what was done in good faith.  

Then why is it so easy to so indignantly and incredulously speak to people in this thread, but not repudiate or renounce that Mike most certainly was questioning the good faith actions of Melinda?
Excuse me - as soon as I posted there were no fewer than three or four who jumped in to disagree.  

Maybe it is time to look at that whole 19 months and inquire as to that missing section of time?

And I will always get indignant when those who are not alive are questioned as to their motives.  I never questioned Melinda.

You should maybe ask Mike what he meant or what you took away from what was said.  Don't allege that I did. Or contort want I said.  That time suggests to me that a lot went on.  
Logged
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #136 on: March 09, 2016, 03:42:10 PM »

there likely was first Melinda/Gloria battle that led to an all-out war for 19 months.   And, a "sealed" case.  That is not unimportant info that should be dismissed out of hand.  

And, yes, I get a little indignant when Carl and Audree become attacked for their inaction.

They are not here to defend themselves.  

1. Again. Where's the Melinda/Gloria battle mentioned in Mike's interview?

2. Does Melinda's role deserve a hint of acknowledgement by Mike? 

3. Doesn't Mike not mentioning their role whatsoever amount to inaction on his part, which should at the very least a hint of displeasure from someone like you, who is able - without pulling teeth, apparently - to actually actively acknowledge the role of Melinda and Gloria?

I know you can address these questions.
I know crickets aren't an inevitability.
I believe in you, FDP.  
Whatever Mike says is on him.  Not me.  Ask him.

That audio interview is a career once-over.  I have it on now.  I noticed you defended Carl. I appreciate that.  There is a lot we do not know and should not assume.  Or attempt to put words in another's mouth. 

What I am assuming is that there is an element of MYOB with the court sealing the case, but much was left out for any number of reasons. 

It does not detract from Gloria/Melinda's involvement but is a large hint that there was a lot that we, as fans, are not privy to.  I feel strongly that we should not second-guess the band members or the family because we did not walk-the-walk. 

Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #137 on: March 09, 2016, 03:55:07 PM »


Whatever Mike says is on him.  Not me.  Ask him.

That audio interview is a career once-over.  I have it on now.  I noticed you defended Carl. I appreciate that.  There is a lot we do not know and should not assume.  Or attempt to put words in another's mouth.  
 

I'm not putting words in Mike's mouth. I'm pointing out what he DIDN'T say, and that's one single thing which acknowledges Melinda's role.

And yeah, about asking Mike? Mike will answer random fans' questions about clarifying his feelings on Melinda the day Mike answers random fans' questions about Shawn. That'll be the day.




It does not detract from Gloria/Melinda's involvement



So what you're saying is that Mike NOT acknowledging Gloria/Melinda's involvement somehow actually helps people be aware of their involvement? Is that how FDP logic works?

When somebody goes out of their way NOT to mention someone's part in something, it usually doesn't signify they have any burning desire for people to actually know about that person's part.

You do realize that it is possible for Stan/Carl/whoever's involvement to be mentioned by Mike and for him to still, in the same sentence, acknowledge Gloria/Melinda's involvement too, right? You realize that's possible, right?
« Last Edit: March 09, 2016, 04:11:26 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #138 on: March 09, 2016, 04:08:56 PM »

In other words CD, you're not going to get an answer and several of us are, even if unwittingly, essentially being trolled here.

You're never going to get certain people to ever, ever, ever say "Ooh, that's an unfortunate comment from Mike." Ever.

EVER. 

Yeah. Fans like that must be like manna from heaven to Mike. All both of them.
Logged
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #139 on: March 09, 2016, 04:13:49 PM »


Whatever Mike says is on him.  Not me.  Ask him.

That audio interview is a career once-over.  I have it on now.  I noticed you defended Carl. I appreciate that.  There is a lot we do not know and should not assume.  Or attempt to put words in another's mouth.  
 

I'm not putting words in Mike's mouth. I'm pointing out what he DIDN'T say, and that's one single thing which acknowledges Melinda's role.

And yeah, about asking Mike? Mike will answer random fans' questions about clarifying his feelings on Melinda the day Mike answers random fans' questions about Shawn.




It does not detract from Gloria/Melinda's involvement



So what you're saying is that Mike NOT acknowledging Gloria/Melinda's involvement somehow actually helps people be aware of their involvement? Is that how FDP logic works?

When somebody goes out of their way NOT to mention someone's part in something, it usually doesn't signify they have any burning desire for people to actually know about that person's part.

You do realize that it is possible for Stan/Carl/whoever's involvement to be mentioned by Mike and for him to still, in the same sentence, acknowledge Gloria/Melinda's involvement too, right? You realize that's possible, right?
CD - not words in Mike's mouth. My mouth.  I know little about Stan.  

Logic I am not using.  This all defies logic.  I am looking at timelines taking it the step beyond where the movie covered, and the time it took from the May, lawsuit 1990 filing, the fact it was "sealed" and just finishing up in 19 months.  I think the court or the parties covered a lot of issues, in 19 months.  We don't know that. A lot is none-of-our business.  Wink
Logged
Debbie KL
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 817


View Profile
« Reply #140 on: March 09, 2016, 04:22:13 PM »


Whatever Mike says is on him.  Not me.  Ask him.

That audio interview is a career once-over.  I have it on now.  I noticed you defended Carl. I appreciate that.  There is a lot we do not know and should not assume.  Or attempt to put words in another's mouth.  
 

I'm not putting words in Mike's mouth. I'm pointing out what he DIDN'T say, and that's one single thing which acknowledges Melinda's role.

And yeah, about asking Mike? Mike will answer random fans' questions about clarifying his feelings on Melinda the day Mike answers random fans' questions about Shawn. That'll be the day.




It does not detract from Gloria/Melinda's involvement



So what you're saying is that Mike NOT acknowledging Gloria/Melinda's involvement somehow actually helps people be aware of their involvement? Is that how FDP logic works?

When somebody goes out of their way NOT to mention someone's part in something, it usually doesn't signify they have any burning desire for people to actually know about that person's part.

You do realize that it is possible for Stan/Carl/whoever's involvement to be mentioned by Mike and for him to still, in the same sentence, acknowledge Gloria/Melinda's involvement too, right? You realize that's possible, right?

And there is that pesky issue of..."Asked for the film’s worst inaccuracies, Love responded, “That Melinda (played by Elizabeth Banks) saved Brian from Dr. Landy (played by Paul Giamatti). That was my brother (Stan Love) and Carl (Wilson) who stepped in. Landy was, in fact, over-reaching.”

So essentially Mike dismissed Melinda's efforts at the outset in the interview.  But the dance is to address anything but this issue.
Logged
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #141 on: March 09, 2016, 04:50:00 PM »


Whatever Mike says is on him.  Not me.  Ask him.

That audio interview is a career once-over.  I have it on now.  I noticed you defended Carl. I appreciate that.  There is a lot we do not know and should not assume.  Or attempt to put words in another's mouth.  
 

I'm not putting words in Mike's mouth. I'm pointing out what he DIDN'T say, and that's one single thing which acknowledges Melinda's role.

And yeah, about asking Mike? Mike will answer random fans' questions about clarifying his feelings on Melinda the day Mike answers random fans' questions about Shawn. That'll be the day.




It does not detract from Gloria/Melinda's involvement



So what you're saying is that Mike NOT acknowledging Gloria/Melinda's involvement somehow actually helps people be aware of their involvement? Is that how FDP logic works?

When somebody goes out of their way NOT to mention someone's part in something, it usually doesn't signify they have any burning desire for people to actually know about that person's part.

You do realize that it is possible for Stan/Carl/whoever's involvement to be mentioned by Mike and for him to still, in the same sentence, acknowledge Gloria/Melinda's involvement too, right? You realize that's possible, right?

And there is that pesky issue of..."Asked for the film’s worst inaccuracies, Love responded, “That Melinda (played by Elizabeth Banks) saved Brian from Dr. Landy (played by Paul Giamatti). That was my brother (Stan Love) and Carl (Wilson) who stepped in. Landy was, in fact, over-reaching.”

So essentially Mike dismissed Melinda's efforts at the outset in the interview.  But the dance is to address anything but this issue.
Debbie - L + M was told through a lens that has a time-window that is not the same as some others whether family or band members. 

Others have a lens with a different perspective and time-line.  I think they should be respected.  I don't dismiss Melinda's lens because she had a unique perch during her involvement that is different from Carl's lens or Audree's or Wendy/Carnie, Marilyn or Mike.  It is their vantage point from a different point in time under different circumstances.   

What I find pesky is that time-line of the May, 1990 lawsuit filing and the long interim to resolution in December of 1991, that is "sealed."  And, the outright dismissal that others don't have a different perspective.  It does not detract from the enormous task that the movie and all the followup to benefit others.  Few films have a follow-up component with such impact.  That is to both Brian and Melinda for outreach. 

As far as this window is concerned, I have more questions than answers but a "sealed case" won't resolve that for me.  It won't make me "turn on" an individual band member, whether living or dead.   Or, denounce them. 


Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #142 on: March 09, 2016, 05:19:04 PM »

Melinda and Gloria heroically started the wheels in motion but Carl, Audree and the others involved had to finish it.  And it took 19 months.  

Where does Mike give any credit to Melinda and Gloria for heroically starting the wheels in motion?
*crickets*

Looks like SMiLE Brian called it way back. Crickets it is. I must have smoked some realllly good weed to have thought otherwise.
Logged
Juice Brohnston
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 627



View Profile
« Reply #143 on: March 09, 2016, 05:28:24 PM »

Melinda and Gloria heroically started the wheels in motion but Carl, Audree and the others involved had to finish it.  And it took 19 months.  

Where does Mike give any credit to Melinda and Gloria for heroically starting the wheels in motion?
*crickets*
But I don't think FDP is saying Mike gave credit. That's her statement, not Mikes. At least that is how I read it.
Looks like SMiLE Brian called it way back. Crickets it is. I must have smoked some realllly good weed to have thought otherwise.
Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #144 on: March 09, 2016, 06:27:15 PM »


But I don't think FDP is saying Mike gave credit. That's her statement, not Mikes. At least that is how I read it.
 


Juice Brohnston, I think you may have misread my post. I'm under no impression that FDP is saying Mike gave Melinda credit in the interview. Mike obviously doesn't give Melinda or Gloria credit in the interview, and obviously FDP knows that too - FDP, if you're reading this post, before you chime in, it's not a matter of "interpretation"... Mike simply does not give her credit based on his words in the interview.

My question "Where does Mike give any credit to Melinda and Gloria for heroically starting the wheels in motion?" was a rhetorical one to point out the blatant LACK of credit that Mike bestows upon them... which is in direct contradiction to FDP's correct assertion that Melinda and Gloria deserve credit (and that god must be thanked for Melinda's actions - not a minor thanks by any stretch, FDP means it!)... and to highlight the bizarre disconnect/contradiction in FDP having a viewpoint in direct opposition to what Mike has stated, yet FDP being unable to either admit to the differences in viewpoints between her statement and Mike's interview... or to heaven forbid do the unthinkable and criticize Mike.

Whether or not Mike gives Melinda *some* credit privately is up for debate, but in the interview none is given. Nobody but nobody can walk away from that interview believing that Mike gives Melinda and Gloria any credit whatsoever based on what he said, because of the very simple fact that he said no such thing, despite going out of his way to directly give credit to others.

Giving credit to others where credit is due is fine, of course. But doing that AND simultaneously snubbing Melinda/Gloria ain't cool. And this is the guy who complains ad naseum about being snubbed of credits. I don't really believe that Mike truly privately feels Melinda had no role in getting Brian out of that situation. He just can't bring himself to publicly positively credit a person he seems to detest.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2016, 07:41:42 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #145 on: March 09, 2016, 07:58:49 PM »

Is anything shown in L&M about the Landy period inaccurate?
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
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #146 on: March 09, 2016, 08:06:49 PM »

Is anything shown in L&M about the Landy period inaccurate?

I think the scene where Brian happily jumped off the boat and swam away was called into question.  As far as I recall from reading on this board, not much else from that era was considered inaccurate.
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #147 on: March 09, 2016, 08:13:43 PM »

Is anything shown in L&M about the Landy period inaccurate?

I think the scene where Brian happily jumped off the boat and swam away was called into question.  As far as I recall from reading on this board, not much else from that era was considered inaccurate.

That actually happened.
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
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #148 on: March 09, 2016, 08:23:18 PM »

Is anything shown in L&M about the Landy period inaccurate?

I think the scene where Brian happily jumped off the boat and swam away was called into question.  As far as I recall from reading on this board, not much else from that era was considered inaccurate.

That actually happened.

Right on, I was unaware of that.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2016, 08:24:26 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
Debbie KL
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 817


View Profile
« Reply #149 on: March 10, 2016, 12:59:16 AM »

Is anything shown in L&M about the Landy period inaccurate?

No.  I would say that the only support people involved with Melinda during the Landy period who weren't portrayed in the film had requested that it be that way - so not an inaccuracy, simply honoring a request for privacy.  I was really impressed with the accuracy and honesty of the portrayal of that period.  That took guts on everyone's part involved with the film.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2016, 01:02:09 AM by Debbie KL » Logged
gfx
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 13 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.602 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!