Mike Love Do It Again 2017 Promo FIlm

[SMiLE Brian]

I mean, did we even watch the video?

Ahh, the phrase also reminds me of that old chestnut which pops up often. Page 3, paragraph 2 of the playbook, unless there is a new revision. When something Mike Love releases or does gets lambasted and criticized, immediately ask "did you even HEAR the song?", "did you even WATCH the concert?", "did you even READ the book?".

etc, etc, etc.

Implying of course that the "usual suspects" don't bother actually listening, reading, or watching any of these things which they criticize, because it's all about Mike bashing. Then, the criticisms can be dismissed because they're coming from toxic people and toxic non-fans rather than the real fans.

Then when that fails, just say "All this will be forgotten soon, Mike just wants to give the fans a fun project, it's no big deal, time to move on, nothing to see here, make sure to check Ticketmaster for the upcoming tour dates..."

Check the Facebook official BB page for what the public is saying about this. So much for toxicity and usual suspects.

Reminds me of page one, paragraph one from that same rulebook: when defending Mike and you've backed yourself into a corner (and you always will), just post "we're just here for the music! Just listen to the music!".

Page two and three involves "background research" on the opposition by a "historian".....  

[HeyJude]

I know I'm barking up the wrong tree here but.....

If Mike (and Bruce) are content with that they're doing and Brian (and Al) are content with what they're doing (granted Brian does seem a tad bored with Pet Sounds at this point), then what's the harm?

Mike and Bruce (sometimes with David Marks) get to put on really good concerts, and about once a year Mike releases a download only single that's quickly forgotten.  

Brian and Al (with Blondie Chaplin) get to put on really good concerts, and Brian still gets to release music on his own terms without having token Mike songs or giving his questionable producer credits.  

2012 was great, but it's painfully obvious that it wasn't sustainable.  At this point, I just hope Mike and Brian reconnect as people before its too late.  

If Mike was out there touring as "Mike Love", then this would pretty much make sense. But his use of the name is a huge asterisk.

All of this is dependent on the context/framework of the conversation.

That is, if we're just talking about what fans have to digest at this moment in time, or what is realistic and plausible in terms of group relationships, then of course the current status quo is kind of by default the best we can have.

If we're talking about the group's legacy, and if we're parsing out the attitudes and motives of various band members and how those attitudes will impact each individual's legacy and the group's legacy, then there most definitely *is* harm in how things have gone in recent years. In this scenario, there *is* a downside to the "hey, 27 different Beach Boys groups out there tourin' just means more awesomeness for us fans!" mentality.

Further muddying the waters is that despite *all* members doing their best to just use the standard "that guy is doing his thing and we're doing our thing" line, there is not quite parity between the two (or more, depending on how attached Al remains to Brian) camps. Mike uses the "Beach Boys" name; nobody else does. So that is an important element of the "public perception" and "legacy" issue. In other words, if Mike went out as "Mike Love", then probably 90% of the gripes about all of his professional actions would go away. He'd be just doing his own thing, end of story. If he really *only* used his own name, then he truly *would* be largely ignored the way people claim he is now despite booking major nationally televised gigs under the "Beach Boys" name and booking 175 gigs per year, etc.

But not only does Mike use the "Beach Boys" name, he left other founding members holding the bag five years ago when they wanted to keep the whole band together. Again, in terms of pragmatism, they can't be forced to work together. But in terms of legacy, and value of the brand and trademark, Mike has sunk his own reputation and to varying degrees drags the Beach Boys name and brand and trademark down with him. Not to the point of professional death. But it's a drag on it nonetheless.

So this brings us back to where the discussion/debate gets hung up on occasion. Simply put, while it is indeed the *same* set of arguments being used to criticize Mike over and over, it's because Mike keeps doing the same thing over and over. So long as he uses the "Beach Boys" name, the "Mike's doing his thing, Brian's doing his thing" reasoning will never wash.

Until Mike makes it so that when he does a sh***y TV appearance, viewers come away saying to their friends "Man, that Mike Love dude sucked" instead of "Man, the Beach Boys suck", he's always going to have this problem with the hardcore fans, and he's always going to be dragging his own rep and the band's brand down. It's in part because Mike clearly doesn't mind sinking his professional reputation (not just musically, but in terms of continuing to be on the wrong side of history by dragging Brian Wilson and Brian's name through the mud) that his actions continue to frustrate and alarm fans and spectators/critics/music historians.

[rab2591]

http://www.petsoundsforum.com/thread/1675/perspective-on-beach-boys-remakes?page=1

Take note of the "usual suspects" remark in his post. Ever notice that the usual suspects are usually correct?

It's funny, because in the list that KDS meticulously assembled there is only one song there that had been reprehensibly reimagined with a guest star from the 90s for SOLO release that was performed BY THE BEACH BOYS on live national television on a major holiday broadcast.

The issue isn't recording covers, it's recording a solo cover (mostly unanimously decided BAD cover) and then using The Beach Boys band and name to promote that same solo cover single on live television...then promising to do more covers like this in the future. So pardon that a few of us have concerns that Mike will yet again steer The Beach Boys ship into an era that people will laugh and cringe about 20 years from now.

I mean, did we even watch the video? I did from The Beach Boys official Facebook page. Can't wait for more of these videos to pop up there.

I did watch the video.  I only listening to the single and watched the Capitol Fourth Event.  And I commented both here and PS that it's pretty bad, but at the end of the day, I think it's harmless. 

I will not defend the quality of DIA 17 because, let's be honest, I can't.  It's awful.  But the argument of Mike doing another cover, because he can't do anything original, or that this solo cover somehow taints the legacy is just something that I don't agree with. 

So you're okay with Mike performing admittedly terrible solo reinterpretations of BB songs using The Beach Boys touring band on live television?

As a one time thing, I don't really care.  If Bruce or Scott starts yelling "DO IT!!!  DO IT!!! DO IT!!!" at the shows, then I'd change my opinion. 

And there's your legacy right there. We're at a point where this sh*t doesn't even phase some fans. I guess after years of Mike's Beach Boys playing rodeos, parking lots, and sweat lodge tents in New England we've come to a point where a nationally televised holiday broadcast of a horribly autotuned 'Do It Again' featuring Mark McGrath lip syncing "do it!" on repeat isn't even anything to be bothered by.

Again I'll say, The Beach Boys 60s legacy will always be cemented as a crowning achievement of music. But sh*t like Full House, SIP, etc ARE remembered and that's part of the legacy too - legacy is what people remember about something - it's the memories handed down to future generations. Of course the music will always be there and it will always be admired. But embarrassing sh*t like this, thanks to the internet, will be apart of that legacy for the whole of the future to view if they so choose.

[rab2591]

I mean, did we even watch the video?

Ahh, the phrase also reminds me of that old chestnut which pops up often. Page 3, paragraph 2 of the playbook, unless there is a new revision. When something Mike Love releases or does gets lambasted and criticized, immediately ask "did you even HEAR the song?", "did you even WATCH the concert?", "did you even READ the book?".

etc, etc, etc.

Implying of course that the "usual suspects" don't bother actually listening, reading, or watching any of these things which they criticize, because it's all about Mike bashing. Then, the criticisms can be dismissed because they're coming from toxic people and toxic non-fans rather than the real fans.

Then when that fails, just say "All this will be forgotten soon, Mike just wants to give the fans a fun project, it's no big deal, time to move on, nothing to see here, make sure to check Ticketmaster for the upcoming tour dates..."

Check the Facebook official BB page for what the public is saying about this. So much for toxicity and usual suspects.

Reminds me of page one, paragraph one from that same rulebook: when defending Mike and you've backed yourself into a corner (and you always will), just post "we're just here for the music! Just listen to the music!".

Page two and three involves "background research" on the opposition by a "historian".....  

Hey! Pipe down, Melinda!

[SMiLE Brian]

I mean, did we even watch the video?

Ahh, the phrase also reminds me of that old chestnut which pops up often. Page 3, paragraph 2 of the playbook, unless there is a new revision. When something Mike Love releases or does gets lambasted and criticized, immediately ask "did you even HEAR the song?", "did you even WATCH the concert?", "did you even READ the book?".

etc, etc, etc.

Implying of course that the "usual suspects" don't bother actually listening, reading, or watching any of these things which they criticize, because it's all about Mike bashing. Then, the criticisms can be dismissed because they're coming from toxic people and toxic non-fans rather than the real fans.

Then when that fails, just say "All this will be forgotten soon, Mike just wants to give the fans a fun project, it's no big deal, time to move on, nothing to see here, make sure to check Ticketmaster for the upcoming tour dates..."

Check the Facebook official BB page for what the public is saying about this. So much for toxicity and usual suspects.

Reminds me of page one, paragraph one from that same rulebook: when defending Mike and you've backed yourself into a corner (and you always will), just post "we're just here for the music! Just listen to the music!".

Page two and three involves "background research" on the opposition by a "historian".....  

Hey! Pipe down, Melinda!

shhhhh....

[HeyJude]

Another thing that often seems to happen is that those that tend to defend (or downplay) what Mike does don't seem to care much about how history will view the group when we're all dead and gone. It seems to be a lot of "This one song didn't bother *me* personally, so whatever..." sort of reasoning.

But if you care about the "long game" so to speak, and if you care about how legit music critics and historians are viewing the band's legacy even *right now*, then you gotta listen to people like Howie Edelson who pointed out how much Mike *sunk* the band's standing in the industry at the end of C50.

Five years later, in *those* circles (meaning outside of the "20 thumbs up" and "five splintered Beach Boys tours means more music for us all!" circles), the band's brand is irreparably damaged. Even if they *did* try another reunion it would probably be an uphill battle to some degree.

"Sunshine Tomorrow" and new BRI management are huge steps to help fix and heal some of those problems. But you an understand how some fans might be frustrated when days later Mike is out using the Beach Boys name and essentially doing a 2017 version of the Fat Boys single. Arguably, the Fat Boys single was slightly more substantive since the band hadn't released a version of the song "Wipe Out" up to that point.

[BBs Footage Saga]

WHERE IS THE "LOVE" GOIN ON

[KDS]

http://www.petsoundsforum.com/thread/1675/perspective-on-beach-boys-remakes?page=1

Take note of the "usual suspects" remark in his post. Ever notice that the usual suspects are usually correct?

It's funny, because in the list that KDS meticulously assembled there is only one song there that had been reprehensibly reimagined with a guest star from the 90s for SOLO release that was performed BY THE BEACH BOYS on live national television on a major holiday broadcast.

The issue isn't recording covers, it's recording a solo cover (mostly unanimously decided BAD cover) and then using The Beach Boys band and name to promote that same solo cover single on live television...then promising to do more covers like this in the future. So pardon that a few of us have concerns that Mike will yet again steer The Beach Boys ship into an era that people will laugh and cringe about 20 years from now.

I mean, did we even watch the video? I did from The Beach Boys official Facebook page. Can't wait for more of these videos to pop up there.

I did watch the video.  I only listening to the single and watched the Capitol Fourth Event.  And I commented both here and PS that it's pretty bad, but at the end of the day, I think it's harmless. 

I will not defend the quality of DIA 17 because, let's be honest, I can't.  It's awful.  But the argument of Mike doing another cover, because he can't do anything original, or that this solo cover somehow taints the legacy is just something that I don't agree with. 

So you're okay with Mike performing admittedly terrible solo reinterpretations of BB songs using The Beach Boys touring band on live television?

As a one time thing, I don't really care.  If Bruce or Scott starts yelling "DO IT!!!  DO IT!!! DO IT!!!" at the shows, then I'd change my opinion. 

And there's your legacy right there. We're at a point where this sh*t doesn't even phase some fans. I guess after years of Mike's Beach Boys playing rodeos, parking lots, and sweat lodge tents in New England we've come to a point where a nationally televised holiday broadcast of a horribly autotuned 'Do It Again' featuring Mark McGrath lip syncing "do it!" on repeat isn't even anything to be bothered by.

Again I'll say, The Beach Boys 60s legacy will always be cemented as a crowning achievement of music. But sh*t like Full House, SIP, etc ARE remembered and that's part of the legacy too - legacy is what people remember about something - it's the memories handed down to future generations. Of course the music will always be there and it will always be admired. But embarrassing sh*t like this, thanks to the internet, will be apart of that legacy for the whole of the future to view if they so choose.

That's why I'll agree to disagree.  Plenty of other bands have done dodgy things, appearing on sitcoms, putting out crap albums,  touring with fractured lineups, mediocre remakes, and I don't think it affects the legacy.  

Look at how many young people go to Brian Wilson and Beach Boys concerts.   Do you think they care out an appearance on a cheesy sitcom or one subpar album (let's be honest, Smiley Smile and Love You weren't exactly gems either)?  No.  

[guitarfool2002]

I have to confess, I'm interested to learn who these "usual suspects" are as referenced by KDS.

Care to list some specific names, KDS? Or is it just a blanket term that would now include the hundreds of negative comments and commenters who have been posting to the band's FB page?

[KDS]

I have to confess, I'm interested to learn who these "usual suspects" are as referenced by KDS.

Care to list some specific names, KDS? Or is it just a blanket term that would now include the hundreds of negative comments and commenters who have been posting to the band's FB page?

It's a blanket term for the legions of people who jump on Mike Love any time he makes a move deemed "offensive" to The Beach Boys legacy.   Look at the comments on The Beach Boys Facebook page.  Just plain nasty....over a song. 

[SMiLE Brian]

WHERE IS THE "LOVE" GOIN ON

I need a stamos picture and then the party starts!

[rab2591]

http://www.petsoundsforum.com/thread/1675/perspective-on-beach-boys-remakes?page=1

Take note of the "usual suspects" remark in his post. Ever notice that the usual suspects are usually correct?

It's funny, because in the list that KDS meticulously assembled there is only one song there that had been reprehensibly reimagined with a guest star from the 90s for SOLO release that was performed BY THE BEACH BOYS on live national television on a major holiday broadcast.

The issue isn't recording covers, it's recording a solo cover (mostly unanimously decided BAD cover) and then using The Beach Boys band and name to promote that same solo cover single on live television...then promising to do more covers like this in the future. So pardon that a few of us have concerns that Mike will yet again steer The Beach Boys ship into an era that people will laugh and cringe about 20 years from now.

I mean, did we even watch the video? I did from The Beach Boys official Facebook page. Can't wait for more of these videos to pop up there.

I did watch the video.  I only listening to the single and watched the Capitol Fourth Event.  And I commented both here and PS that it's pretty bad, but at the end of the day, I think it's harmless. 

I will not defend the quality of DIA 17 because, let's be honest, I can't.  It's awful.  But the argument of Mike doing another cover, because he can't do anything original, or that this solo cover somehow taints the legacy is just something that I don't agree with. 

So you're okay with Mike performing admittedly terrible solo reinterpretations of BB songs using The Beach Boys touring band on live television?

As a one time thing, I don't really care.  If Bruce or Scott starts yelling "DO IT!!!  DO IT!!! DO IT!!!" at the shows, then I'd change my opinion. 

And there's your legacy right there. We're at a point where this sh*t doesn't even phase some fans. I guess after years of Mike's Beach Boys playing rodeos, parking lots, and sweat lodge tents in New England we've come to a point where a nationally televised holiday broadcast of a horribly autotuned 'Do It Again' featuring Mark McGrath lip syncing "do it!" on repeat isn't even anything to be bothered by.

Again I'll say, The Beach Boys 60s legacy will always be cemented as a crowning achievement of music. But sh*t like Full House, SIP, etc ARE remembered and that's part of the legacy too - legacy is what people remember about something - it's the memories handed down to future generations. Of course the music will always be there and it will always be admired. But embarrassing sh*t like this, thanks to the internet, will be apart of that legacy for the whole of the future to view if they so choose.

That's why I'll agree to disagree.  Plenty of other bands have done dodgy things, appearing on sitcoms, putting out crap albums,  touring with fractured lineups, mediocre remakes, and I don't think it affects the legacy.  

Look at how many young people go to Brian Wilson and Beach Boys concerts.   Do you think they care out an appearance on a cheesy sitcom or one subpar album (let's be honest, Smiley Smile and Love You weren't exactly gems either)?  No.  

KDS, picture a Beach Boys band that didn't do SIP, that didn't do Full House, that didn't perform a concert in the parking lot of the Lucky Strike's Lanes and Lounge in Anchorage Alaska. Picture a beach boys that actually had the maturity to not kick Brian and Al to the curb after the C50.

You realize the uproar that this single would have if The Beach Boys legacy weren't already tainted with all of this embarrassing crap? I'll go back to my Ringo Starr analogy: had he done this same thing with the Beatles name it would be a headline (negatively) in every music magazine out there. That's because their legacy is rooted in mostly tasteful acts that only benefit their legacy. Whereas Mike's Beach Boys have spent the last two decades topping each embarrassing act after the other, to the point where no one bats an eye at stuff like this...that's the effect it has had on the legacy.

Yeah, people are still going to listen to the music and go to the shows, I'm not disputing that. I'm saying clearly that the legacy (the sh*t people remember about this band) has been altered by this crap. The evidence is everywhere when you look at random YouTube videos of the Boys from the 90s, or when you have a casual conversation with someone about this band and they do laugh about the Full House appearance. Again, legacy just means what will be passed down (and what has been passed down) and remembered...that includes the good and the bad.

As for Love You and Smiley, gotta say at least those albums charted, music from both is revered by many. Polarizing? Yes. Artistic merit? Yes. Can't say the same about DIA '17 - didn't chart, it's pretty much unanimously hated, and it has zero artistic/creative merit.

[SMiLE Brian]

I think the anger on those comments is pent-up from years of Mike doing this stuff and acting like he is the BBs without the input of the other memhers. Blurring the lines between the touring band and releases is required because for good reason BRI took a stand against him releasing music under the BBs name.

[HeyJude]

I have to confess, I'm interested to learn who these "usual suspects" are as referenced by KDS.

Care to list some specific names, KDS? Or is it just a blanket term that would now include the hundreds of negative comments and commenters who have been posting to the band's FB page?

It's a blanket term for the legions of people who jump on Mike Love any time he makes a move deemed "offensive" to The Beach Boys legacy.   Look at the comments on The Beach Boys Facebook page.  Just plain nasty....over a song. 

I would say, though, that the majority of Facebook commenters are the just the standard Facebook commenters who s**t on everything all the time. Facebook and YouTube are both cesspools of faceless trolls.

The majority of the criticism of Mike *on Facebook* would be down to these two factors;

1. General Facebook trolling and snarkiness and negativity.

2. Mike's bad reputation in the music industry and the general public.

Add to this that Mark McGrath has a reputation as a huge douchebag (see this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvjD0SkoFr0 )  and that the whole Stamos/Full House/Beach Boys connection is a point of derision from many, and there you have it: A super-autotuned, artistically vapid choice of covering of an old BB song by Mike with Stamos and Mark McGrath, with a goofy (putting it kindly) video, and you have a recipe for huge swaths of people criticizing. Both invalid, personal attacks as well as on-point criticism.

But I'd say very, very few of the people commenting on Facebook (or YouTube or Instagram, etc.) are making the nuanced, cogent arguments about the band's "legacy" that are made here on this board.

Mike has in large part cultivated his awful, awful reputation. It doesn't make the truly vile, personal attacks okay. But after all this time, the guy still doesn't really seem to understand the part *he* plays in his own vilification.

Remember, the Mike Love who just made this new single with McGrath is the same guy that *tore part* Brian's '88 album, was sort of passive-aggressively derisive about the NPP album, was openly derisive about the ending suite on TWGMTR, and so on.

Would we not perhaps criticize, say, Al if he all of a sudden launched a solo tour with cheerleaders fronting the stage?

[KDS]

http://www.petsoundsforum.com/thread/1675/perspective-on-beach-boys-remakes?page=1

Take note of the "usual suspects" remark in his post. Ever notice that the usual suspects are usually correct?

It's funny, because in the list that KDS meticulously assembled there is only one song there that had been reprehensibly reimagined with a guest star from the 90s for SOLO release that was performed BY THE BEACH BOYS on live national television on a major holiday broadcast.

The issue isn't recording covers, it's recording a solo cover (mostly unanimously decided BAD cover) and then using The Beach Boys band and name to promote that same solo cover single on live television...then promising to do more covers like this in the future. So pardon that a few of us have concerns that Mike will yet again steer The Beach Boys ship into an era that people will laugh and cringe about 20 years from now.

I mean, did we even watch the video? I did from The Beach Boys official Facebook page. Can't wait for more of these videos to pop up there.

I did watch the video.  I only listening to the single and watched the Capitol Fourth Event.  And I commented both here and PS that it's pretty bad, but at the end of the day, I think it's harmless. 

I will not defend the quality of DIA 17 because, let's be honest, I can't.  It's awful.  But the argument of Mike doing another cover, because he can't do anything original, or that this solo cover somehow taints the legacy is just something that I don't agree with. 

So you're okay with Mike performing admittedly terrible solo reinterpretations of BB songs using The Beach Boys touring band on live television?

As a one time thing, I don't really care.  If Bruce or Scott starts yelling "DO IT!!!  DO IT!!! DO IT!!!" at the shows, then I'd change my opinion. 

And there's your legacy right there. We're at a point where this sh*t doesn't even phase some fans. I guess after years of Mike's Beach Boys playing rodeos, parking lots, and sweat lodge tents in New England we've come to a point where a nationally televised holiday broadcast of a horribly autotuned 'Do It Again' featuring Mark McGrath lip syncing "do it!" on repeat isn't even anything to be bothered by.

Again I'll say, The Beach Boys 60s legacy will always be cemented as a crowning achievement of music. But sh*t like Full House, SIP, etc ARE remembered and that's part of the legacy too - legacy is what people remember about something - it's the memories handed down to future generations. Of course the music will always be there and it will always be admired. But embarrassing sh*t like this, thanks to the internet, will be apart of that legacy for the whole of the future to view if they so choose.

That's why I'll agree to disagree.  Plenty of other bands have done dodgy things, appearing on sitcoms, putting out crap albums,  touring with fractured lineups, mediocre remakes, and I don't think it affects the legacy.  

Look at how many young people go to Brian Wilson and Beach Boys concerts.   Do you think they care out an appearance on a cheesy sitcom or one subpar album (let's be honest, Smiley Smile and Love You weren't exactly gems either)?  No.  

KDS, picture a Beach Boys band that didn't do SIP, that didn't do Full House, that didn't perform a concert in the parking lot of the Lucky Strike's Lanes and Lounge in Anchorage Alaska. Picture a beach boys that actually had the maturity to not kick Brian and Al to the curb after the C50.

You realize the uproar that this single would have if The Beach Boys legacy weren't already tainted with all of this embarrassing crap? I'll go back to my Ringo Starr analogy: had he done this same thing with the Beatles name it would be a headline (negatively) in every music magazine out there. That's because their legacy is rooted in mostly tasteful acts that only benefit their legacy. Whereas Mike's Beach Boys have spent the last two decades topping each embarrassing act after the other, to the point where no one bats an eye at stuff like this...that's the effect it has had on the legacy.

Yeah, people are still going to listen to the music and go to the shows, I'm not disputing that. I'm saying clearly that the legacy (the sh*t people remember about this band) has been altered by this crap. The evidence is everywhere when you look at random YouTube videos of the Boys from the 90s, or when you have a casual conversation with someone about this band and they do laugh about the Full House appearance. Again, legacy just means what will be passed down (and what has been passed down) and remembered...that includes the good and the bad.

As for Love You and Smiley, gotta say at least those albums charted, music from both is revered by many. Polarizing? Yes. Artistic merit? Yes. Can't say the same about DIA '17 - didn't chart, it's pretty much unanimously hated, and it has zero artistic/creative merit.

I still don't see how an appearance on Full House can hurt them in any way.  If brought younger fans to the band.  That's how I was introduced to them when I was 8.  Who cares if people chuckle about an appearance on a cheesy sitcom?  

Sure, the Beach Boys might be a tad more respected had they packed it in before Endless Summer?  But, The Who might be as revered as Zeppelin if they retired after Moon died.   Plenty of bands / artists have made questionable decisions late in their careers.  It doesn't change anything.  With the possible exception of The Beatles, name me a band that hasn't some something to questionable to cost them some cool points.  

[rab2591]

I have to confess, I'm interested to learn who these "usual suspects" are as referenced by KDS.

Care to list some specific names, KDS? Or is it just a blanket term that would now include the hundreds of negative comments and commenters who have been posting to the band's FB page?

It's a blanket term for the legions of people who jump on Mike Love any time he makes a move deemed "offensive" to The Beach Boys legacy.   Look at the comments on The Beach Boys Facebook page.  Just plain nasty....over a song. 

It's just a song. It's just one statement about Brian. It's just one lawsuit. It's just one nationally televised nightmare. It's just one accusation about Brian being controlled. It's just one time he blew off listening to his cousin's solo single. It's just one time he berated his cousin's solo album. It's just one time he waited to sign off on a major motion picture soundtrack. It's just one time Brian felt like he was fired from his own band. Its just one comment about Brian's drug use. It's just one comment about Brian's mental illness. It's just another lawsuit. It's just....

You see where I'm going? It's not just over a song. It's over a pattern of bullshit that has gone on for decades now. People didn't just wake up one day and decide to dislike Mike Love.

[KDS]

I have to confess, I'm interested to learn who these "usual suspects" are as referenced by KDS.

Care to list some specific names, KDS? Or is it just a blanket term that would now include the hundreds of negative comments and commenters who have been posting to the band's FB page?

It's a blanket term for the legions of people who jump on Mike Love any time he makes a move deemed "offensive" to The Beach Boys legacy.   Look at the comments on The Beach Boys Facebook page.  Just plain nasty....over a song. 

I would say, though, that the majority of Facebook commenters are the just the standard Facebook commenters who s**t on everything all the time. Facebook and YouTube are both cesspools of faceless trolls.

The majority of the criticism of Mike *on Facebook* would be down to these two factors;

1. General Facebook trolling and snarkiness and negativity.

2. Mike's bad reputation in the music industry and the general public.

Add to this that Mark McGrath has a reputation as a huge douchebag (see this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvjD0SkoFr0 )  and that the whole Stamos/Full House/Beach Boys connection is a point of derision from many, and there you have it: A super-autotuned, artistically vapid choice of covering of an old BB song by Mike with Stamos and Mark McGrath, with a goofy (putting it kindly) video, and you have a recipe for huge swaths of people criticizing. Both invalid, personal attacks as well as on-point criticism.

But I'd say very, very few of the people commenting on Facebook (or YouTube or Instagram, etc.) are making the nuanced, cogent arguments about the band's "legacy" that are made here on this board.

Mike has in large part cultivated his awful, awful reputation. It doesn't make the truly vile, personal attacks okay. But after all this time, the guy still doesn't really seem to understand the part *he* plays in his own vilification.

Remember, the Mike Love who just made this new single with McGrath is the same guy that *tore part* Brian's '88 album, was sort of passive-aggressively derisive about the NPP album, was openly derisive about the ending suite on TWGMTR, and so on.

Would we not perhaps criticize, say, Al if he all of a sudden launched a solo tour with cheerleaders fronting the stage?

I honestly don't think Al would be criticized nearly as much if he did a solo tour with cheerleaders on stage.  

[rab2591]

http://www.petsoundsforum.com/thread/1675/perspective-on-beach-boys-remakes?page=1

Take note of the "usual suspects" remark in his post. Ever notice that the usual suspects are usually correct?

It's funny, because in the list that KDS meticulously assembled there is only one song there that had been reprehensibly reimagined with a guest star from the 90s for SOLO release that was performed BY THE BEACH BOYS on live national television on a major holiday broadcast.

The issue isn't recording covers, it's recording a solo cover (mostly unanimously decided BAD cover) and then using The Beach Boys band and name to promote that same solo cover single on live television...then promising to do more covers like this in the future. So pardon that a few of us have concerns that Mike will yet again steer The Beach Boys ship into an era that people will laugh and cringe about 20 years from now.

I mean, did we even watch the video? I did from The Beach Boys official Facebook page. Can't wait for more of these videos to pop up there.

I did watch the video.  I only listening to the single and watched the Capitol Fourth Event.  And I commented both here and PS that it's pretty bad, but at the end of the day, I think it's harmless. 

I will not defend the quality of DIA 17 because, let's be honest, I can't.  It's awful.  But the argument of Mike doing another cover, because he can't do anything original, or that this solo cover somehow taints the legacy is just something that I don't agree with. 

So you're okay with Mike performing admittedly terrible solo reinterpretations of BB songs using The Beach Boys touring band on live television?

As a one time thing, I don't really care.  If Bruce or Scott starts yelling "DO IT!!!  DO IT!!! DO IT!!!" at the shows, then I'd change my opinion. 

And there's your legacy right there. We're at a point where this sh*t doesn't even phase some fans. I guess after years of Mike's Beach Boys playing rodeos, parking lots, and sweat lodge tents in New England we've come to a point where a nationally televised holiday broadcast of a horribly autotuned 'Do It Again' featuring Mark McGrath lip syncing "do it!" on repeat isn't even anything to be bothered by.

Again I'll say, The Beach Boys 60s legacy will always be cemented as a crowning achievement of music. But sh*t like Full House, SIP, etc ARE remembered and that's part of the legacy too - legacy is what people remember about something - it's the memories handed down to future generations. Of course the music will always be there and it will always be admired. But embarrassing sh*t like this, thanks to the internet, will be apart of that legacy for the whole of the future to view if they so choose.

That's why I'll agree to disagree.  Plenty of other bands have done dodgy things, appearing on sitcoms, putting out crap albums,  touring with fractured lineups, mediocre remakes, and I don't think it affects the legacy.  

Look at how many young people go to Brian Wilson and Beach Boys concerts.   Do you think they care out an appearance on a cheesy sitcom or one subpar album (let's be honest, Smiley Smile and Love You weren't exactly gems either)?  No.  

KDS, picture a Beach Boys band that didn't do SIP, that didn't do Full House, that didn't perform a concert in the parking lot of the Lucky Strike's Lanes and Lounge in Anchorage Alaska. Picture a beach boys that actually had the maturity to not kick Brian and Al to the curb after the C50.

You realize the uproar that this single would have if The Beach Boys legacy weren't already tainted with all of this embarrassing crap? I'll go back to my Ringo Starr analogy: had he done this same thing with the Beatles name it would be a headline (negatively) in every music magazine out there. That's because their legacy is rooted in mostly tasteful acts that only benefit their legacy. Whereas Mike's Beach Boys have spent the last two decades topping each embarrassing act after the other, to the point where no one bats an eye at stuff like this...that's the effect it has had on the legacy.

Yeah, people are still going to listen to the music and go to the shows, I'm not disputing that. I'm saying clearly that the legacy (the sh*t people remember about this band) has been altered by this crap. The evidence is everywhere when you look at random YouTube videos of the Boys from the 90s, or when you have a casual conversation with someone about this band and they do laugh about the Full House appearance. Again, legacy just means what will be passed down (and what has been passed down) and remembered...that includes the good and the bad.

As for Love You and Smiley, gotta say at least those albums charted, music from both is revered by many. Polarizing? Yes. Artistic merit? Yes. Can't say the same about DIA '17 - didn't chart, it's pretty much unanimously hated, and it has zero artistic/creative merit.

I still don't see how an appearance on Full House can hurt them in any way.  If brought younger fans to the band.  That's how I was introduced to them when I was 8.  Who cares if people chuckle about an appearance on a cheesy sitcom?  

Sure, the Beach Boys might be a tad more respected had they packed it in before Endless Summer?  But, The Who might be as revered as Zeppelin if they retired after Moon died.   Plenty of bands / artists have made questionable decisions late in their careers.  It doesn't change anything.  With the possible exception of The Beatles, name me a band that hasn't some something to questionable to cost them some cool points.  

I'm saying it's all the embarrassing crap, KDS...not just full house. I mean, HeyJude brought up a great point about The Beach Boys being hurt after the C50 ending debacle. My point about the Beatles is that their legacy is on the highest most respected precipice because they've maintained their legacy partially by not being tacky with their image.

Whereas The Beach Boys legacy could be so much greater at the moment if Brian and Al were let back in (and if other embarrassing things were not done). If their legacy could be better then obviously something is dragging it down right now.

[KDS]

I have to confess, I'm interested to learn who these "usual suspects" are as referenced by KDS.

Care to list some specific names, KDS? Or is it just a blanket term that would now include the hundreds of negative comments and commenters who have been posting to the band's FB page?

It's a blanket term for the legions of people who jump on Mike Love any time he makes a move deemed "offensive" to The Beach Boys legacy.   Look at the comments on The Beach Boys Facebook page.  Just plain nasty....over a song. 

It's just a song. It's just one statement about Brian. It's just one lawsuit. It's just one nationally televised nightmare. It's just one accusation about Brian being controlled. It's just one time he blew off listening to his cousin's solo single. It's just one time he berated his cousin's solo album. It's just one time he waited to sign off on a major motion picture soundtrack. It's just one time Brian felt like he was fired from his own band. Its just one comment about Brian's drug use. It's just one comment about Brian's mental illness. It's just another lawsuit. It's just....

You see where I'm going? It's not just over a song. It's over a pattern of bullshit that has gone on for decades now. People didn't just wake up one day and decide to dislike Mike Love.

I'm not saying they did.  And I get it with the lawsuits and everything.  

But to keep harping on Full House, SIP, DIA 17, etc etc, all of which pale in comparison that anything Mike did (or supposedly did) in the inner working make no sense to me.

Plus, the ending of C50 is far more than Brian being "fired."  

[SMiLE Brian]

Remember that wacky quote from Mike about the C50 being "overexposed".....

[HeyJude]

I still don't see how an appearance on Full House can hurt them in any way.  If brought younger fans to the band.  That's how I was introduced to them when I was 8.  Who cares if people chuckle about an appearance on a cheesy sitcom?  

Sure, the Beach Boys might be a tad more respected had they packed it in before Endless Summer?  But, The Who might be as revered as Zeppelin if they retired after Moon died.   Plenty of bands / artists have made questionable decisions late in their careers.  It doesn't change anything.  With the possible exception of The Beatles, name me a band that hasn't some something to questionable to cost them some cool points.  

And the "I don't see any problem with the Full House connection" thing is where, as occurred with filledeplage for instance, there is no more room to really debate. If you truly don't get the downside to that "Full House" association, and what it represents, then there's no convincing you.

I'd also say The Who continuing on post-Moon is not the same at all as the Beach Boys having a *continuing* association with John Stamos and "Full House" over numerous years.

Simply put, the Beach Boys turned into a *novelty* at a certain point when they could have continued to be artistically valid. Not only would this have helped their "reputation", but it would have altered the trajectory of their careers and resulted in more *good* music for fans.

When the Beach Boys were doing sitcoms with John Stamos and touring incessantly without releasing much of any new music, guys like McCartney were putting *new* albums out, getting *Grammy nomination* for his new music, and so on. The Beach Boys could have strived for that.

If you think the cheesy decisions the BBs made don't "change anything", then you're ignoring the difference between, to borrow Howie Edelson's analogy, Lou Christie or Frankie Valli versus Mick Jagger. The two former examples are marginalized novelties, while the latter can still fill stadiums.

As Howie Edelson also mentioned, as was told to him by an industry guy, C50 allowed the Beach Boys to change an AARP brand into an arena act. Mike then *actively chose* to reject that to go back to smaller fairs and venues and gigging with John Stamos and doing duets with the guy from Sugar Ray.

Full House and John Stamos = Frankie Valli/Lou Christie/Sugar Ray

C50 Reunion and Brian-helmed new album = Mick Jagger/arena shows/industry respect

[KDS]

http://www.petsoundsforum.com/thread/1675/perspective-on-beach-boys-remakes?page=1

Take note of the "usual suspects" remark in his post. Ever notice that the usual suspects are usually correct?

It's funny, because in the list that KDS meticulously assembled there is only one song there that had been reprehensibly reimagined with a guest star from the 90s for SOLO release that was performed BY THE BEACH BOYS on live national television on a major holiday broadcast.

The issue isn't recording covers, it's recording a solo cover (mostly unanimously decided BAD cover) and then using The Beach Boys band and name to promote that same solo cover single on live television...then promising to do more covers like this in the future. So pardon that a few of us have concerns that Mike will yet again steer The Beach Boys ship into an era that people will laugh and cringe about 20 years from now.

I mean, did we even watch the video? I did from The Beach Boys official Facebook page. Can't wait for more of these videos to pop up there.

I did watch the video.  I only listening to the single and watched the Capitol Fourth Event.  And I commented both here and PS that it's pretty bad, but at the end of the day, I think it's harmless. 

I will not defend the quality of DIA 17 because, let's be honest, I can't.  It's awful.  But the argument of Mike doing another cover, because he can't do anything original, or that this solo cover somehow taints the legacy is just something that I don't agree with. 

So you're okay with Mike performing admittedly terrible solo reinterpretations of BB songs using The Beach Boys touring band on live television?

As a one time thing, I don't really care.  If Bruce or Scott starts yelling "DO IT!!!  DO IT!!! DO IT!!!" at the shows, then I'd change my opinion. 

And there's your legacy right there. We're at a point where this sh*t doesn't even phase some fans. I guess after years of Mike's Beach Boys playing rodeos, parking lots, and sweat lodge tents in New England we've come to a point where a nationally televised holiday broadcast of a horribly autotuned 'Do It Again' featuring Mark McGrath lip syncing "do it!" on repeat isn't even anything to be bothered by.

Again I'll say, The Beach Boys 60s legacy will always be cemented as a crowning achievement of music. But sh*t like Full House, SIP, etc ARE remembered and that's part of the legacy too - legacy is what people remember about something - it's the memories handed down to future generations. Of course the music will always be there and it will always be admired. But embarrassing sh*t like this, thanks to the internet, will be apart of that legacy for the whole of the future to view if they so choose.

That's why I'll agree to disagree.  Plenty of other bands have done dodgy things, appearing on sitcoms, putting out crap albums,  touring with fractured lineups, mediocre remakes, and I don't think it affects the legacy.  

Look at how many young people go to Brian Wilson and Beach Boys concerts.   Do you think they care out an appearance on a cheesy sitcom or one subpar album (let's be honest, Smiley Smile and Love You weren't exactly gems either)?  No.  

KDS, picture a Beach Boys band that didn't do SIP, that didn't do Full House, that didn't perform a concert in the parking lot of the Lucky Strike's Lanes and Lounge in Anchorage Alaska. Picture a beach boys that actually had the maturity to not kick Brian and Al to the curb after the C50.

You realize the uproar that this single would have if The Beach Boys legacy weren't already tainted with all of this embarrassing crap? I'll go back to my Ringo Starr analogy: had he done this same thing with the Beatles name it would be a headline (negatively) in every music magazine out there. That's because their legacy is rooted in mostly tasteful acts that only benefit their legacy. Whereas Mike's Beach Boys have spent the last two decades topping each embarrassing act after the other, to the point where no one bats an eye at stuff like this...that's the effect it has had on the legacy.

Yeah, people are still going to listen to the music and go to the shows, I'm not disputing that. I'm saying clearly that the legacy (the sh*t people remember about this band) has been altered by this crap. The evidence is everywhere when you look at random YouTube videos of the Boys from the 90s, or when you have a casual conversation with someone about this band and they do laugh about the Full House appearance. Again, legacy just means what will be passed down (and what has been passed down) and remembered...that includes the good and the bad.

As for Love You and Smiley, gotta say at least those albums charted, music from both is revered by many. Polarizing? Yes. Artistic merit? Yes. Can't say the same about DIA '17 - didn't chart, it's pretty much unanimously hated, and it has zero artistic/creative merit.

I still don't see how an appearance on Full House can hurt them in any way.  If brought younger fans to the band.  That's how I was introduced to them when I was 8.  Who cares if people chuckle about an appearance on a cheesy sitcom?  

Sure, the Beach Boys might be a tad more respected had they packed it in before Endless Summer?  But, The Who might be as revered as Zeppelin if they retired after Moon died.   Plenty of bands / artists have made questionable decisions late in their careers.  It doesn't change anything.  With the possible exception of The Beatles, name me a band that hasn't some something to questionable to cost them some cool points.  

I'm saying it's all the embarrassing crap, KDS...not just full house. I mean, HeyJude brought up a great point about The Beach Boys being hurt after the C50 ending debacle. My point about the Beatles is that their legacy is on the highest most respected precipice because they've maintained their legacy partially by not being tacky with their image.

Whereas The Beach Boys legacy could be so much greater at the moment if Brian and Al were let back in (and if other embarrassing things were not done). If their legacy could be better then obviously something is dragging it down right now.

I will agree with you that the return of Al and Brian would bring more legitimacy to The Beach Boys as a current touring band, and they'd definitely be able to play bigger venues.  

The Beatles also retired after less than a decade.  The Beatles didn't stick around to put out a disco song, rerecord a song for a soda commercial, carry on after the deaths of key members, appear on a cheesy (but still beloved by many) sitcom, put out albums of questionable quality, etc etc.  So, you really can't compare.

[HeyJude]

I honestly don't think Al would be criticized nearly as much if he did a solo tour with cheerleaders on stage.  

Well, it would be one thing rather than a litany of things over decades as is the case with Mike.

But in the moment, as it occurred, I think Al would totally be called on it if he did a very specific thing that he had previously very publically criticized (and was then infamously chastised within his organization for complaining about).

[SMiLE Brian]

Setting the bar low for the BBs just because Mike has done those things is not the answer. That's why sunshine tomorrow was so great, it was a glimpse of a properly run BBs organization.

[KDS]

I honestly don't think Al would be criticized nearly as much if he did a solo tour with cheerleaders on stage.  

Well, it would be one thing rather than a litany of things over decades as is the case with Mike.

But in the moment, as it occurred, I think Al would totally be called on it if he did a very specific thing that he had previously very publically criticized (and was then infamously chastised within his organization for complaining about).

He's be called out on it, but not to the same extent.  

Heck, Nelson Bragg's girlfriend ran around the stage on a tiny dress during the encore at some dates of Brian's NPP Tour, and I don't recall much of a hub-ub about that.  Yet, Mike brings some girls on stage during Barbara Ann and he gets crapped on.