Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
gfx gfx
671848 Posts in 27041 Topics by 3971 Members - Latest Member: kindofgreen September 21, 2021, 04:38:51 AM
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2
1  Smiley Smile Stuff / Welcome to the Smiley Smile board / Re: Spiders?? on: October 23, 2007, 11:16:12 PM
I'm sitting here with my mouth open and the top of my head spinning.

thank you Andrew, you said what I was feeling! 
am i just too old?
2  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Peter Reum? on: October 13, 2007, 12:11:44 AM
You're all partially correct about Peter..... and even me. 
The "Doe-ster" is most informed, so his response was the most accurate.
Whew!  Getting logged in after being absent so long was weird!
Peter is practicing his P-sychology in Montana.  He is working with substance abusers.  I don't know what y'all know about MT, but there's a gob of what we used to call Indian Reservations there and the Meth abuse among the indigenous people is extreme to put it mildly.  Pete, as you know, is an extremely compassionate, generous, and well educated fella.  It's wonderful that he has chosen to do this work.
On the other hand, he recently remarried and got a whole family in the bargin.  he is still very much part of his biological children's life as well, so he's busy personally too.
His "usual" e mail addy is filled to refusing any new mail.
I talk to him, at least, monthly on the phone and he is fit and happy.
Peter and I both got behind Peter Carlin when he did his book and Reum felt so good about it I think any ideas he may have been harboring (your right he did have plans) were laid aside when Catch a Wave was being written.
Many of the observations that Peter wanted to "let out" were given by Reum to Carlin. 
Those ideas and points of view were presented in Carlin's voice and style but remain the vision the "the Elder Reum".
Don't be intimidated by Peter's commitment to his "vision".  He gets terse occasionally but except for those who don't believe he has been to the mountain and spoken with Moses, he's quite willing to entertain most ideas and points of view.  It's just that he has known Brian personally for so long and was there and supported David Leaf (yes, even financially) when he wrote the original biography of B-dub.
Peter did for Leaf sorta what I did for Carlin and for the same reasons.  We provided "entre" and introductions and asked for perspective.
I, on the other hand am just lazy and grumpy most of the time.
It's really sweet of you to express yourselves to Peter and me this way.  It great to be appreciated for loving something, and someone, as it just comes naturally to me and Pete.
Listening with our heart you see.
I will see to it Peter sees these posts.
I'd have loved to attend the RFH, but time and distance and timing said NO!
As to the most recent of my postings on "another board"  Leaf and I sent missives back and forth over the RFH shows and I said something or another that he insisted I post at Brian's board.  So I did.
I don't even remember what I said exactly, but it was to the effect that ...."Brian is finally allowing himself to work in manner that he invented for himself with Good Vibrations, and expanded upon with SMiLE.  Aural vignettes.  What a leap at such a time.  Now he's comfy with them...HOORAY!
                    ciao & thanks,
3  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: October 04, 2006, 11:35:39 PM

"Bob, I rode out to San Bernadino and back with Brian and Judy for a gig at the American Legion. She seemed pretty quiet and unassuming. I was out front watching and I don't remember connecting up with her during the show at all.  She disappeared, presumably back stage; one might predict  that faithfulness and modesty (like the young Marilyn) were traits that Brian appreciated in a woman."
  -a friend of a friend, of ours-  
4  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: October 04, 2006, 11:02:35 AM
I'll ask!
5  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: October 01, 2006, 07:16:42 PM
pick, pick, pick!
You're both right, but then again so are so many others.
I remembered it as being closer to the "original" with the "lesser", production values. 
Did you hear Surf Jam yet?
6  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: October 01, 2006, 11:23:25 AM
Wasn't there a band from Glendora (east of Asuza) called The Raindrops and aren't they in the film ? Been a loooooong time since I've seen it, but...

<< you're thinkin of the band that did the opening song.  Their name escapes me too.  Great garage band (IMHO) from as you point out, Glendora.
I'm sure most of us have the same poor quality dub so digging it out is not high priority, but I think I'll do so to nudge my memory. In the words of Randy Newman, "I could be wrong now, but I don't think so!" 
It was the combination of hearing the sound on this film and having known Robin Hood and Bruce Griffin for decades, and hearing them say over and over that a huge amount of the music was written pre-BBs, finally made me accept that point of view or reality. I had always been at least somewhat unwilling to accept that reality until the "occasional music sounded so much like All Summer Long, and I swear to God, Surf Jam appears in the film in nearly the exact version that is on Surfin USA.
As to the Capitol connection.  The label is totally uncredited and unthanked anywhere in the credits, and the version of Surfin' Safari that is shown is the Hite Morgan version not the full on Venet production at Capitol. (I'm not saying the film was dubbed or anything) The film maker (though Dick Clark claims ownership by possession of the original film) still lives on the Great Pacific Hwy. in SF, I believe!  We could ask him I guess, but I doubt he'd talk to just anyone like me.   
7  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: September 30, 2006, 10:37:16 PM

Bob also well said. I think with Mike I am more inclined to think he did write those songs,"

I wonder if you noticed what the claims and contentions were song to song in Mike's lawsuit for writer's credits.
" 'round, 'round, I get around"/"she's real fine, my 409"
Now Mike wrote some songs. But through 1964 Brian would write the chords the melody and most of the words.  (Two thirds is the percentage that I have heard thrown around since the early seventies when I made con-tact.) Mike would then come in and make small changes in lyrics, sometimes!  When Brian would "get stuck" Mike might or might not suggest another way to proceed.  That particular duty was also open to Dennis, Carl and even Al to chime in on as well.  Sometimes on those early sessions that Peter alludes to, the "musicians" would only be capable of what they could do.  So compromises were made to facilitate the completion of the song(s).  Words too.

For instance.  One night, pre-Beach Boys, Robin Hood got a phone call from Brian.  "Robin.  Gary and I are over here at the house and we're writing a song.  Gary has heard the next big deal from Chevy is going to be a 409 displacement engine.  Right?"  
Robin: "yeah, why".
Brian: "well what is it about the 409?"
Robin: "it's 4 speeds, dual quad, positraction.  A chevy big engine car!"

Now Robin then said to me.  "I didn't write any of that song.  Brian and Gary Usher did!"

When I called Robin to tell him that Mike had won $10 million in the lawsuit over writing credits, Robin said: "Bob, he was always like that!  Maybe it was because he was older than us and had to be in charge?"
Now I hope to God that Robin never reads or hears of my post here.  He'd never speak to me again.  I don't want that to happen.   I do however feel it's important to get perspective correct on those theoretically innocent times when the battles that played out on the plains left their deepest scars on our beloved Brian.
Brian never really wanted his family in his musical group.  That was pure Murry.  I also feel that Mike had a bravado/confidence/arrogance/moxy/whatever?, that Brian admired and feared in the early days.  
Oh btw it makes Robin and a few more of the Hawthorne crew crazy when Brian says that Surfer Girl is the first song he ever wrote.
They maintain that many songs that didn't appear until '64 and '65 and even later were already written, they just had different words and sometimes a slightly different "message" than what "came out" later.
Find a copy of "One Man's Challenge" to see what I'm saying.  Besides Surf Jam, there are instrumental passages in that film that didn't occur until All Summer Long!  When that movie was made the BBs hadn't yet signed with Capitol!  The music was credited to the band who did the theme song, the BBs, and the Raindrops.  The only Raindrops that HAD existed were the east coast NYC group featuring Jeff Barry and Eli Greenwich.
The instumentals were not played by them, it was Brian and friends.

I talk to fuckin' much!

8  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: September 30, 2006, 09:56:41 AM
Brian did have some bad things happen to him and to a  lesser extent was the cause of bad things happening to others. I think he was not a "sinner" to anyone intentionally except himself. Sadly he beat himself up as bad as anyone else ever did. Why he did is of course sad, but it cannot be denied that this is what happened. Let's just be glad he ended his path of self destruction.

<< Well said, and thought. 
As I have pointed out many times, Brian's sins were mostly sins of "OMISSION" while some others around him sins were of COMISSION.
To fear his father was sort of forgivable.  If indeed as we believe the abuse began at an early age, then in would be natural for him to carry the fear of Murry into adulthood regardless of the obvious foolishness of doing so.
However, after Murry died for Brian to continue to allow Mike to go unpaid for California Girls, a song I'm convinced may be one of the only songs that Mike wrote nearly all the words to, IS A CRIME/a sin of COMMISION (neither spelling looks right and I'm far too lazy to check my spelling.sorry).
See with Brian we call it lazy but it's really fear!  The pain and fearof doing, or even considering doing anything that might "rock the boat" and bring the wrath of Dad or Mike or whoever, became so great in his head that it became life itself.  Drugs may that go away at first, at least for awhile.  Alcohol is really good at this kind of anestesia.  Then the pain and guilt  of addiction makes everything worse!  More fear, more guilt, more fear more pain.  It's cyclical and seems impossible to overcome.  Will power does not break the cycle in spite of what Brian says publically.
ya gotta face your sh*t! 
Brian is doing a better job of that these days but he obviously has some "issues" about making records....huh?   
9  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: There's a first time for everything, right? on: September 26, 2006, 12:02:28 AM
Well, Mike is nearly at home. 
There was a tradition until just before Carl died that the entire "extended family" would get together in Vegas on New Years to "let by gones be bygones.
Marilyn and Daniel attended one year, together.  No Brian, but others showed.
It had started many, many years before. It was, as it was explained to me, sort of the anti-thanksgiving, where instead of getting drunk and pissing everyone off, everyone was on their very best behavior to try and start the New Year correctly.  As friends!
Was David Marks ever in attendance or was it just family?  Does anyone know?
Maybe it was the Wilson/Love clan and divorcee's, I just don't know.
anywhoo it sort of dove-tails into the "kiss and make up" of the past few months to dust it off and even make it something bigger.
obviously I really know nothing, but I had a keyboard in front of me......
10  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Brian Wilson at Adelphi Theatre London 12 November 2006 on: September 13, 2006, 12:32:05 AM
I'm just so "luke warm" about the hype of a reunion.
I know Al would give up body parts to work with Brian again.  Al really wants to make one last statement as a band called the Beach Boys.  It is important to him, and I find his position sympathetic.  That said, what are the odds of any of that happening with only 3 real BBs or 4 if you let David "represent" and then Bruce?
I'm sorry if this sounds all "fuzzy" and glum to boot, but the 3 brothers together made one GIANT spirit!  Al knows that fer sure!  He still wants to leave something important to end it. 
Mike and Bruce have other motives, perhaps. 
I know Brian and Al were/have been talking on a semi-regular basis.  No more information than that was given me, but it was a very reliable source.
I was lead to believe it was personal and not business, but music is personal to both gentlemen, I believe.
Al got a hard lesson in humility over the last "X" number of years.  I can see Brian "reaching out" with an olive branch.  Brian knows Al can sing.  I remember Brian quoting Audrey about Al's voice "being like a bell".  Nice compliment imo.  It indicated to me that Brian admired Al's voice too. 
If you're gonna take a "first step" this is a good one.
Now I sound like a "fan" of forced togetherness.  I'm still not.  It's the hype that makes this all so dreary to me.  The more we talk and speculate the more likely to be disappointed we are.
It's not unlike Darian calling from Chicago after originally turning down the Brian tour.  "The music is going to be the star of the show!  Melinda agrees and so does Joe that doing the original arrangements is best.  We may have to change keys to aid Brian singing lead, but original arragnements!"
Well the music was star until Joe couldn't play the chords.  Then Brian had to move forward in the shows.  He wasn't ready or shouldn't have had to or....? whatever.
A new album from Brian.  Great!  Call it Brian Wilson Band Album....but no!  Brian is now the star.  The band plays for scale or less sings backgrounds ala BBs.....but not, when they could have shared vocals, taken leads and Brian would have been able to be the King within that format.  Nope.  All Brian all the time.  That was never who he was musically, was it?  He knew how it should sound, but he heard other's voices, and he knew he could create counterpoint and harmony better'n the rest of 'em 'cept maybe Carl after awhile.
These remaining Beach Boy guys are on very different "wavelengths" I'm afraid.  Something truly wonderful is a real longshot.
Brian and Scott B are such different people maybe what they've been doing will be "up" and interesting.  Most of what Brian has written since '88 are dirges about the dark.  Great chords but the melodies are too dark for me.
Yet like the lover I am, I still believe in perfect.....Maybe?
I honestly hope that all of you who posted here get what you are hoping for!  I mean that sincerely.  Everyone of you deserves "your dreams come true". 
11  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: September 11, 2006, 10:03:30 AM
Thanx Peter, it seems the inability to seperate the "then" from the "then", form the "now" is very difficult.  I do understand it, I just don't seem as able to address it as you do, so well.
I tend to respond in anecdotes from "the day" to try and give the younger folk a perspective.  It really was a larger and yet smaller world for us coming of age then.  We were truly "in it together" more than anytime since.
It never fails to amaze me how a young guy like yourself really, really "gets it".  Maybe you actually pay attention when other people speak.  I'm only being slightly sarcastic.  You really do hear what is said, even by "old folks".
"Obsession" and "compulsion" are symtoms of the "dysfuction"/disease that Brian suffered.  They are now words used as synonyms, to describe behavioral imbalances/eccentric behavior (whatever that is?) so I do   understand the confusion.  It just seems that blaming drugs for ALL of Brian's issues makes the solution so simple.  "Stop taking drugs", blame the people who supplied them, and ignore, ONE MORE TIME, the genetic and environmental issues that honestly have had considerably more influence on "the problem" than 3 LSD trips and a "hat full" of pot leaves.
So, once again I will insist that the original "lock up" of Brian in 1968 is/was far more detrimental to his on going mental health than any of we'uns
seem willing to admit.
12  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: September 09, 2006, 07:52:43 PM
Hopefully this comment will help shed some more light on the problem of being chemically imbalanced.  I love all of the input from everyone, that I have seen to this point, and God I wish I had been a succinct in my relpies as Peter is in his.
Some of "us", are sensative  or prone to emotional issues.  Add to that the dysfunction of "the day(s)" that we came up in and we were "ripe" for what Brian called "breakdowns".
Now add the genentic disposition to brain chemical imbalance.
Here comes alcohol into every teen or just post teens life,(which Brian avoided for the longest time based on what he had witnessed and experienced in his own household). Then pot, then LSD (now there's a drug not to be triffled with! At one point the US military was experimenting with "acid" as a weapon to create a pschotic state of paranoia in one's enemy!), benzedrene, hash and whatever.
Now those "little fears" that have been present since puberty, have started to be on one's mind all the time! 

ADDICTIVE THINKING 101: "the drugs got me here, maybe they can get me out of this mess". 
All of a sudden you're using some substance, all the time.  Not to feel good but just to feel "normal", but you're not normal. That "reality" makes you depressed and guilty and even more confused than ever.
If you've never taken LSD, here is a bit of a primer.  There is a point in every "trip" where you are offered a "choice".  Relax and remember you are under the influence of a very powerful chemical and think of positive things, OR let the fear that the "rush" seems to emulate take over and have a bummer of a time.  Dodging monsters and demons of your own creation. 
That's why I believe Loren laughed.  It happens to everyone once at least.  Maybe you didn't "prepare", or no one let you know what to expect. It is initially scary and overwhelming, after all "it's in your head you know"(GH).  Then as the "trip" wiles on, you return to your center and "well that's enough of that!" is a solid sane and true statement. 
I won't give Loren the total credit for cosmic understanding of that reality way back then, but I believe he knows what happened back then in the comfort of retrospect, so his laughter doesn't offend me the way it seems to bother others on this board.  OK, ok, the guy was a hanger on.
I wish I'd been in a position to hang on during that creative time.  Can't blame him for wanting to be there!  All that music, all those talented, hip people.
A friend of Brian's called me after he read the chapter where he is quoted.  He was concerned he might be seen as "a rat" (his words), because he and Brian would go out driving around trying to score pot.  It wasn't exactly like that.  They weren't going to east L.A. or Long Beach or Compton (which were just up the road from Hawthorne) to the real drug dealers they "were looking for a place where the kids were hip" in the part of town where they were from or live now.  You know, if you're from that time what I'm saying.  Looking for "Heads" within your comfort zone.  Hip people to be co-enlightened with.
Based only on the images from what was a much longer interview/conversation I probably wouldnt' want to hang out with Loren, but like Peter says, he's probably a perfectly nice guy. 
My own first meeting of  Michael Vossi was interesting the too. 
Another "leaping gnome", full of fun and playfulness, sixties kinda guy, with fond memories of the "insanity of the chaos".
After all IT WAS THE SIXTIES! We honestly didn't know any better, maybe we should have, but we didn't.
We were reacting or over reacting to the repression of our youthfull culture and to the extreme life or death situation that existed as Conscription whether consciously or unconsciously in each of we males lives.
We were really seeking acceptence, freedom and finally respect.  Somehow it, for some of us appeared to be escape, but was really severe personal emotional, psychic and even physical imprisonment.
Weid times!
13  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: September 08, 2006, 12:34:19 AM
I have read your posts, and to be hones the only reason I reacted is because I generally like what you have to say.
You think and ask us to think as well.
I am a recoving alcoholic/substance abuser, who has been screwed by the psychiatric community for decades.  I have been clean and sober since 6/21/'77 (PLEASE DO NOT CONGRATULATE ME-I mean that!  It's not a big deal, it's just my life path). 
I can't blame the guy that gave me my first hit of anything.  The curiosity was mine.  Some of my friends got away with using everything and never missed a beat.  I couldn't.  It's not their fault or mine, it is what it is.
Loren may indeed be a "toadie" as you say, but he is not the reason for Brian's path. 
As to having Van Dyke work the anti-drug side of the street, I can't even begin to understand that point of view.
I have a friend in L.A. who will not forgive Van for anything until Van admits that substance caused him (Van) severe personal problems in the seventies. 
God I hope Van never sees this post, because he and I have a nice relationship at this point and I don't wnat to lose that, over 2nd hand issues a thousand years old.
Van has told me that during that time he was very "unclear about the roles of a lot of people around Brian in those days".  Michael Vossi in particular, but Loren's name never came up.
I know Mike Love dispised him! 
Like I said, not in so many words, he was/is a geek.  Brian likes weird, out of step people.  Re-read Rock Wives, Marilyn's observations about Brian's attraction to weird-ohs, is classic.
I have all the footage for the Tower '88 cd signing gig.  At one point a guy that looks like someone out of a Warhol movie or perhaps from one of the moons of Jupiter, gets Brian's ear and has to pried loose, because he's holding up the line and he and Brian are nose to nose in heavy confersation.  Brian doesn't want to let go either.
All these things dovetail into the real deal.
14  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / brer Leaf's latest hit! on: September 07, 2006, 11:53:57 PM
E-mail message   
Subject: From the Hollywood Reporter
Hello Bob,
Obviously, we are very proud of this one.
Aug. 30, 2006
'Lennon' docu could score Oscar nom
By Martin A. Grove
Lionsgate's "Lennon": Although we tend to think of entertainers protesting a
war as being a contemporary phenomenon linked to the Bush administration and
Iraq, like so many other things, it's really just history repeating itself.
For those who have forgotten or, perhaps, are too young to remember John
Lennon's passionate opposition to America's entanglement in Vietnam in the
1960s and '70s, Lionsgate's documentary "The U.S. vs. John Lennon" will come
as a valuable revelation. "Lennon," which is being screened at film
festivals in Toronto, Venice, Telluride and elsewhere, opens Sept. 15 in New
York and Los Angeles and expands Sept. 29.
Watching it recently left me thinking that "Lennon" could score a nomination
in Oscar's best documentary feature category. It's a film that's likely to
resonate with older Academy members, who lived through America's tragic
involvement in the Vietnam War, as well as younger Academy members, who will
view it in the context of today's tragic U.S. involvement in the war in
Written, directed and produced by David Leaf & John Scheinfeld, it was
executive produced by Sandra Stern, Kevin Beggs, Tom Ortenberg, Sarah
Greenberg, Tim Palen, Nick Meyer. Steve Rothenberg, Erik Nelson, Michael
Hirschorn, Brad Abramson and Lauren Lazin. The film stars John Lennon and
Yoko Ono and features appearances by Carl Bernstein, Noam Chomsky, Walter
Cronkite, Mario Cuomo, Angela Davis, John Dean, Ron Kovic, G. Gordon Liddy,
George McGovern, Bobby Seale, Tommy Smothers and Gore Vidal. It's a who's
who of people who were boldface names when the U.S. government was trying to
silence criticism by Lennon and Ono by deporting them. Through their
comments Leaf and Scheinfeld remind us of what that period of
socio-political upheaval was like and what a key role Lennon and Ono played
as critics of the war.
"Lennon's" the kind of film you simply have to talk about after you've seen
it, so I was happy to be able to do just that recently with Leaf and
Scheinfeld and to ask them how they managed to get it made.
"John and I have wanted to tell this story for a long time, going back to
the 1990s," Leaf explained. "It really wasn't until the post-9/11 world that
we started to get traction, particularly in the wake of the invasion of Iraq
when people at the studios and the networks started to feel that this story
about something that happened a long time ago might have some contemporary
relevance and resonance."
"In terms of footage," Scheinfeld added, "David and I really consider
ourselves when we do these shows to be really detectives in a way, searching
for the best audio-visual material. We've developed a lot of sources over
the years, both domestically and internationally and we just literally scour
the world looking for the best material to put in. We also preferred to use
material that hasn't been seen in 10 other documentaries that have been done
on John Lennon and The Beatles. So we really set as a goal for ourselves to
try to find as much footage as possible that hasn't been seen before or has
rarely been seen before."
"Just to give credit where credit is due," Leaf said. "John is the Hercule
Poirot of the team. He is a tireless detective and does not take no for an
answer. As an example, in the film you saw the footage of the day John got
his green card (enabling him to remain in the U.S.). I'll let John speak to
it because he's the one who did not give up."
"We'd been told for months and months and months that the footage either did
not exist or had been destroyed many, many years ago," Scheinfeld pointed
out. "We just kept at it. About three weeks to go before we finished the
movie the footage was finally discovered in the wrong box, mislabeled in the
wrong part of the news archives. But they found it and we transferred it
and, as you saw in the film, it really helps accentuate what was a very
critical moment in our story."
"One of the things that's interesting to me," Leaf said, "is you look
closely at Yoko and it appears like she's choked up. This is a very
emotional moment. We kind of take it for granted that it happened, but when
you see it actually (taking place) you realize that this was a serious thing
that was happening."
"And the other thing that I think probably helps define our style as
filmmakers," Scheinfeld told me, "is to show don't tell. We'd heard the
quote that John had given to the press that day when he was asked, 'Do you
hold any grudge against (then U.S. Attorney General) John Mitchell and other
people for doing this to you?' But (it was) much better to have him say it
himself (in the footage that was finally unearthed)."
How do they look for footage that they don't necessarily know exists? "I
think because of our history both as documentary filmmakers and our personal
history as somewhat inveterate collectors," Leaf said, "we are plugged into
a network of people around the world who literally have rescued these
treasures through the decades as they've been discarded or displaced or
dismissed from official vaults. A lot of stuff that's out there is in the
hands of private collectors. So, essentially, it's sending out an SOS (that
finds footage)."
"The other half of the equation," Scheinfeld added, "is we will just sort of
outreach to archives all over the world where we have connections and say,
'We're looking for footage that has John Lennon and Yoko Ono in it between
these years.' And we see what comes back. Oftentimes there will be some
on-the-street press conference kind of footage. We wouldn't have known to
specifically ask for it, but it came back to us on a whole reel -- 'Here's
press conference footage' -- and then we could pick out of that what suited
our storytelling."
Lennon, he continued, "has occasionally been called the most photographed
man of the twentieth century. Now that could be a little bit of an
exaggeration, but not by much. There's a lot of material available on him
out there so we had quite a bit to look at. We probably went through more
than a hundred hours worth of material searching for just the best moments
for us."
The government's ongoing efforts at the time to deport Lennon (and Ono, too)
is something that not everyone still remembers. "It's an episode in John's
life that essentially came to define everything that happened to him after
The Beatles," Leaf observed. "We sort of took the point of view that
people walking into the theater to see this movie, particularly if they're
under 40, really don't know much about John Lennon. They know he was in The
Beatles. They know he wrote 'Imagine.' And they know he was killed (in New
York Dec. 8, 1980). Beyond that, there's not a lot of context to their
knowledge of who John Lennon was and why he mattered. And to us this is the
movie to watch if you want to know why John Lennon mattered during his life
and why he matters afterwards.
"He was willing to speak to power, to stand up to power, in a way that we'd
never seen a pop personality do before. It may be that his greatest work of
art was his campaign for peace in terms of his post-Beatles career. He spent
years and years using his fame and fortune to actually try to make the world
a better place. I don't think it had ever happened before. We live in a time
where everything's a reality show. John and Yoko were essentially pioneers
in that, but they weren't using it to promote an album. They weren't using
it to promote a movie. They weren't doing it to promote anything except
peace and that's what makes them heroic artists here. And then to have the
courage to stand up to the power of the United States -- the presidency, the
White House, the FBI and the INS -- (shows they were) courageous artists and
courageous people."
It was a little known story at the time, Scheinfeld said, and "in fact, it
was really about four years after it started that the press got the first
wind of what the government had been trying to do to Lennon. Some
information has sort of crept out over the years. Professor (of history at
the University of California, Irvine) Jon Weiner has written a book ('Gimme
Some Truth: The John Lennon FBI Files') in which he publishes a number of
the FBI documents which came out under the Freedom of Information Act and
really through his good efforts a lot of what the government did is now
known. But at the time it was a not a well known story.
"We're gigantic Beatles fans so we had sort of come across this story, but
didn't really know a lot of the details and that's what originally got us
interested back in the '90s. And the more we looked into it, the more
compelling a story it became for us. We started production just a little
over a year ago in July of 2005, although knowing that we were going to be
doing this at some point about three months earlier (we shot some footage
"This is a story we've long wanted to tell," Leaf added. "I came of age with
The Beatles. I was at school in D.C. during the Nixon administration. So to
me this was always a fascinating story. And when you can find unknown
stories about people that you think you know everything about, it's really
exciting. We had kind of put our archival world on alert, if you will, that
we expected to be making this movie. We probably did that about two years
ago or so. Not telling them what the subject was, but just that it looked
like we'd be doing a movie on John Lennon. The reason we were doing it then
was that we had done what was one of the key steps in making this movie a
success -- we'd gone to Yoko Ono and asked her to participate."
How did they get Ono to say yes? "We just asked," he replied. "We said, 'We
think this is an important story that needs to be told.' We explained how we
wanted to tell it. Her attorney's initial reaction was, 'Well, this story's
in the public domain. Why do you need us?' (We said in order) 'to tell this
story right and to make it the kind of movie we want it to be, we need three
things. One, we need Yoko to sit for essentially exhaustive interviews. We
need her to speak retrospectively for her and John and also to immerse us in
the emotion of it as it was happening. We need John Lennon's music.' And we
needed access to the Lennon-Ono archives because a lot of the footage that's
never been seen before that's in the movie comes from John and Yoko's
private collection."
"And so we knew that these were essentially storytelling elements,"
Scheinfeld added. "And if we were going to tell the story, we're going to do
it right is our feeling or we're not going to do it."
Asked if Ono needed a lot of coaxing to get her to participate in the film,
he replied, "David worked really hard to persuade her to do it. As you can
imagine, she gets asked to do a lot of things by a lot of people. She's also
a little bit wary, I think, and rightly so because she routinely gets
blasted by the media for this or for that. So I think there's always an
element of wariness. But David was the one who had gone to New York and
worked really hard speaking with both the attorney and with Yoko to gain
their trust and ultimately he did. And then as a partnership, as we've been
working with her over the last 12 months, we've really gained her trust as
she saw that we delivered the movie that we said we would. And that's been
great. I think with anybody like that there's an element of persuasion that
is necessary."
"We have something of a track record," Leaf noted, "of working with artists
and/or their estates to create film retrospectives that tell stories in a
way that bring an audience to an artist that might not have come to that
artist. John's just written and directed a film about Harry Nilsson that's
playing (soon) at the Mods and Rockers Film Festival. I did a film for
Showtime two years ago on Brian Wilson and the lost 'SMiLE' album. We've
done programs on Sinatra, Bette Midler, Jonathan Winters and The Marx
Brothers. And in each one of these we tried to do two things. One was to
make a film that we wanted to see. And, two, in a sense to bring an audience
to things that we have passion for. To say, 'This is important to us and
here's why it should be important to you.'"
"I think the other thing that distinguishes our work from our standpoint,"
Scheinfeld said, "is that we're storytellers. We're not just guys that go
out and collect footage and slap it together and hopefully it works. We both
come from the world of primetime television and know how to tell a story in
a dramatic way. I think you see that in most of the productions we've done
-- which is that it's storytelling. It isn't just, 'Okay in 1967 this
happened and in 1970 that happened.' It's the way you lay it out."
Aside from getting Ono on board, what were the biggest challenges they faced
in making "Lennon?" "I think from a storytelling point of view it was
getting the right -- and this is a strange word to use for a documentary --
cast, the right on-camera witnesses to tell the story," Leaf replied.
"We were determined to have people in this film speaking with immense
credibility, whether they were part of the Nixon administration or the
radical left. Whether they were, perhaps, the greatest broadcast journalist
of his time (like) Walter Cronkite or the greatest American historian ever
like Gore Vidal. These are people who when they speak speak with immense
context and credibility. So one of the key challenges was getting the right
people to speak on camera.
"The real challenge, I think, for us as filmmakers was making sure that the
film remained focused on story. There were a lot of side trips and cul de
sacs that spin out of 'The U.S. vs. John Lennon' that as we got further and
further into editing we just tossed out because they were taking us away
from the story and so very much like a dramatic scripted film the challenge
was to tell the story in a way that felt inevitable, that felt completely
seamless so that when you reached the end of the movie the only way it could
have ended and it all made sense and the audience feels they've gone on a
journey with you in the way that all great films do."
"I think the other challenge goes back to what we were discussing before,"
Scheinfeld told me, "with regard to finding material. It's one thing to sort of
find generic John Lennon and/or Yoko Ono material. It was a whole other
thing to find footage that really supported the story we were telling or
that would have a unique resonance to the story we are telling. And we were
able to do that. There's a reason why every piece of footage is in there and
it does relate to the story we're telling."
"Another thing that was a challenge for us," Scheinfeld said, "was how do
you score a movie about one of the greatest songwriters of the 20th Century?
David and I wanted every piece of music in this film to be by John Lennon
and we wanted the music to advance the story or give us some insight into
what he might have been thinking or feeling at a time. That's why when in
the film you hear clips from his songs, the lyrics are doing exactly that.
They're moving the story forward or telling us what he was thinking or
feeling at a particular moment. But then, how do you support those dramatic
or humorous or poignant moments where you would normally bring in a
composer? Again, because she came to trust us, what Yoko allowed us to do
was to have 24 some tracks of John Lennon's solo work remixed to take out
the vocals, leaving all the underlying music there. So in moments of the
film where you're just hearing dramatic music, that is John Lennon music. So
everything in the film is his."
"There's one Yoko song in there," Leaf pointed out.
"That's right," Leaf said. "So we were really delighted to be able to do
that and we think creatively it served our purposes and I think the film
benefits from it. And I do want to acknowledge our editor, Peter Lynch,
because he is a great filmmaker, too. He's got a great visual sense, but he
also has a real gift for how to use music in movies. And because music is so
instrumental in our documentaries we can't do it without him." Among Lynch's
credits are editing "Beautiful Dreamer: Brian Wilson and the Story of SMiLE"
in 2004 and editing and co-producing "Who is Harry Nilsson...And Why Is
Everybody Talkin' About Him" in 2005.
In its theatrical release "Lennon" is a fast-moving 99 minutes. Looking down
the road to its DVD release, I asked if there will be more content
available? "Absolutely," Scheinfeld replied. "Actually, we're just finishing
the bonus material. We could do the history of the 1960s from some of the
interviews we got with people like (political activist) Noam Chomsky and
Gore Vidal, but for the DVD we've narrowed it down to a half-dozen really
interesting featurettes, if you will -- story threads that didn't make the
"It's a little early to talk about the DVD," Leaf observed. "We're focused
on how people are responding to the movie, itself. I buy DVDs and more often
than not I watch the movie and not the bonus material. I know there's a lot
of people who look forward to that, but if the movie isn't great I'm not
buying the DVD for the bonus material."
With Lionsgate's solid track record when it comes to theatrical marketing,
"Lennon" is in good hands as its release approaches. The film came to
Lionsgate, Leaf explained, when "we sat down with our agent, Bruce Kaufman
over at Broder (Broder Webb Chervin Silbermann, which was acquired by ICM in
late July), and we made a list of where we thought this film belonged. And
Lionsgate was right at the top of the list. Their interest was
"We're very independent guys," Scheinfeld added, "and that's always been our
approach to work and the working environment. We had said to Bruce that we
would more comfortable in a real independent type studio. So that's why
Lionsgate was really at the top of the list. And really from the very first
conversation they seemed to get what we were trying to accomplish here and
they've really been extraordinarily supportive all the way through."
Focusing on documentaries as a genre, Scheinfeld pointed out, "I would (mention)
one thing that I think distinguishes documentaries from dramatic films. In a
dramatic film the producer, the director and the actors are all working from
a script. The scenes are there and then when the film goes into editing it
follows the script. They move things around, but mostly it follows the
script. We're sort of the opposite in a documentary. We gather all the
material, all the interviews and then we assemble it much like a jigsaw
puzzle. The difference being that the jigsaw puzzle you probably got from
your folks when you were a kid only fits together one way. What we do could
fit together 20 ways or 50 ways or 100 ways. So when we talk about us being
storytellers, it's whatever gift we have that enables us to put those pieces
together in a way that someone will say, 'Hey, works for me.' And that's
something that's important to us."
15  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: September 07, 2006, 11:43:20 PM
The intent in the sixties does seem more pure, but in light of what they did to Brian I fail to see his drug use as funny. I think Darro should say what he wishes, but I disliked that his viewpoint wasn't contested by a diifering opinion.

OH OK, I get it.  You don't see that Brian had issues prior to drug usage?
Some of us should never have used drugs....ever!  Some of us (10%) of the population are physically capable of becoming addicted to alcohol.  The other 90% of you will never suffer a grand mal seizure or die in withdrawl from alcohol.  That is science.
Imperical observation suggests that perhaps people who addict are also people who suffer from "Clinical Depression" or Manic Depression (i know, i know, it's now called Bi-Polar Disorder, watch Geo Carlin's bit on euphemisms, please).
The medical science suggests that we who addict exasserbate the PERHAPS already mis-firing neuro-transmitters or clog up the PERHAPS already chemically imbalanced neuro-receptors.
As to Loren what-ever-the-frig he chooses to call himself, he is not depreciating Brian then or now by enjoying the moment.  Brian is not a cripple.  He can be laughed at, in fact according to his oldest friends it was his self depreciating selflessness in his sense of humor that seemed to make Brian, Brian.....and he knew it.
Loren is what none of us really ever thought we were, and never wanted to be.  Eric Burdon acted that "fool" that Loren was, in his melo-dramatic comic (not necessarily intentionally comic!) fantasy. "San Francisco Nights.  "A leaping gnome" indeed!  Crappolla at it's deepest!
John Sebasitian comes to mind too,  with his hipper than hip, hippie love rap from Woodstock....nothing anyone that was really hip would of said "for all the farms in Cuba" (Bob Dylan said that)
  Just too much in every way.  But these people existed, they still do, they are not intentionally or inherently bad or wrong. 
LSD, and pot did not drive Brian round the bend.....ask anyone that was there in 1968 that bothered to go see him when he was locked up for the first time. 
Accepting that "everyone" (meaning the band his wife, his dad, the people that mattered) thought he was truly "Crazy"! Add to that, the fact that in those days, mental facilities especially county psych wards (yes once again Brian was the "crazy uncle" no one could deal with, LA Medical School a mile away and he goes to an L.A. County booby hatch!) used hynotics like Thorozine (which was indeed the drug used on Brian), to simply "manage" the "patient".   Who cares that he spends his day starring at a wall and drooling on himself.  Stop the drugs and send him home.  Patient "management" remember, not cure!
I have written this diatribe a dozen times.  It remains the truth! 
Cocaine and Meth hurt Brian's brain, ABSOLUTELY NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT!
But, the "legal crap medicine" of the olden days, hurt him just as badly.
The next big mistake was mis-diagnosing Brian as a Schitzophrenic and treating him with severe psycho-tropics in the mid seventies caused the beginnings of tardive dyskenesia (an uncontrolable grimacing of the face!).  Not to mention the resultant brain damage caused by using Psychiatric Ward size doses for a disease Brian's brain didn't need.
Make no mistake all the people played their little or larger roles in this drama, but don't give Loren more credit than he deserves.  He was just one more hanger on.  If he wants to be known as the guy that "turned Brian on" that's his problem, the "sh*t" was everywhere in Brian's creative world, Loren didn't invent it.   
I would also like to go on record that I do not believe that Marilyn was complicit in Brian's undoing.  She was very young and was surrounded by some very "heavy" situations that no one could have expected her to understand, especially with managers, parents, friends and all telling her "how bad it was". Mar certainly doesn't need me to speak for her, but once again through no fault of Peter Carlin's or perhaps even Marilyn's she and her side of the family are not "on record".  Peter tried, and tried, and tried, but it just didn't happen....again!
16  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: September 07, 2006, 10:18:10 AM
[quote author=Roger Ryan
MBE is referring to the on-camera interview Loren Daro gave in the "Beautiful Dreamer" documentary where he displayed a very cavalier attitude toward Brian's drug use.

<< I'm not sure the word "cavalier" is appropriate to describe what Loren is trying to impart, but I'm not sure it's not appropriate to today's point of view of "those" historical events.  Seen from "here".

Maybe you had to "be there".  I don't mean "there", there, but there. 
Having lived, and theoretically grown up (there is some controversay about that statement), the time and the event of Marajuana going "mid-america, Ousley Acid and the Peace movement.
Pot made people silly.  It wasn't the hydroponically grown "kick your ass, hold you to the floor", DRUG that it has become over the decades.  It was a herb (pronounce the H please).  "Dirt Weed" lifted you up let you see a bit differently, both philosophically and perceptually.  Not a HUGE event but an eye opener unless you simply didn't pay attention. 
LSD was different.  They were called "acid trips" because they were very informative and long and interesting.  Sometimes, very personally disturbing and sometimes very kind and gentle, full of God/Love.
Behavior of people high on acid was eclectic and sometimes very interesting to say the least! 
We, of those halcyon days, had been brought up to be stiff, regimented & repressed "good little soldiers".  Cogs for the "great good" machine of the "Military Industrial Complex".  Remember, there was Conscription. A "draft"!  "Whoopee, we're all gonna die" hadn't been coined yet, but it was very real in our minds and souls.
The Fities were not "a gas" to grow up through, they were very "stick up the butt", hypocritical, social more, repressive.  Thus the "James Dean/Rock n Roll rebellion from the kids of that period. 
LSD blew that point of view to pieces! 
For Loren to laugh during the remembrances of any LSD trip, is natural to my experience. 

I once left a group of people after having taken LSD and when I returned and hour later, it was pointed out to me that I had some yellow crap all around my mouth.  I did not know for the life of me what that could have been.  I had only walked around the block.  It took an hour? !
Then one of the women in the group started laughing and shreiked "you have dilly mouth!". 
Yup!  It was early spring and I had picked some Daffadills and since they don't really have an aromatic aura I had eaten 1 or 2 (?) in order to experience their essence (that's pretty intellectualist bullshit .... I really have no idea why I ate them, I was hungry ..... or maybe i was high ?) and they had left thier pollen on my mouth.
In retrospect, that's funny crap.  Silly and free and child-like!
Brian anyone? 
Drugs like "benes" became methamphedamine, and then cocaine showed up BIG TIME in the seventies! ("H" and "Coke" were always american institutions, but we thought we were "smarter than that", I guess not!)  Then the whole thing went sidways. 
Back in the olden days, LSD was generally not taken to "get away" but to experience something from "inside".
I cannot fathom being "addicted" to acid, but then again pot was not a "gateway" for me either.  Alcohol was.
I know people who say they were addicted to pot....I believe them.  I'm just saying, not for me.  Too personally demanding to take all the time.  Too self-revealing, in a personal analysis sort of way.   
At least for me. 
We've all heard Brian's paranoia on hash or pot during the Columbia "Argument session".  Seems he didn't need to use pot socially either.
Some of us had issues before we found drugs.  The drugs didn't cause them, they simply exasserbated them.

17  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: September 04, 2006, 09:11:31 PM
[quote author=SMiLEY
It's hard for me to feel sad for them. Mike, because, well....he's Mike. Stan, mainly because he and a co-hort beat the living bejabbers out of Dennis and were proud they did it.

<<The Love's wouldn't want anyone to "feel sorry" for them. 
I was hoping some of the insights that Peter brought forth in CAW about the Love's early life might actually bring some understanding of their "humanity".
I just had a high school reunion and it turns out NONE of us had a functional upbringing.  We're now old enought to realize that.
So, I'm afraid, goes it for the Love's.
Stanley is a good guy who really, really loves his cousin and did what he did at the behest of others, yet to this day Stanley also hates who Dennis was in Brian's life at the time of the incident.
I have no idea what Rocky's motives were, but Stanley genuinely believe(s/ed) that "they" had tried everything else to keep Dennis from supplying Brian with drugs and he had been warned of "this posibility/enevitibility, and Dennis out of pure selfish, willful disregard and arrogance chose to "take his chances".
I've never met Steven, but he was proven not guilty of his alleged mis-doings as well.
Mike is indeed Mike, but in fairness even Melinda said publically that she is sure that, "he (meaning Mike) really loves his cousin". 
I've known some of the Hawthorne-ites interviewed for the book, for many years now and at least one of them said to me, "Bob, he's (again meaning Mike) always been like that!  A bully, sort of, maybe it was 'cause he was older than us and felt he should be in charge?!".
I wish them all long and prosperous lives!
I agree with you about everything else and sincerely believe, Peter has written the best book ever done on Brian Wilson.....period! IMHO of course. (It really shouldn't be necessary to say IMHO, it's automatically implied when one compliments or is critical of some subject or work.)

18  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: August 23, 2006, 04:35:01 PM

Jon Stebbins said:
Hey Rev. your not living under a rock. The DM book release date is still pending. Things are "firming up" as they say in the big world of show biz. There will be an "announcement" soon. I'm gonna call Gregg "ZAL" next time I talk to him in yours and the Lovin' Spoonful's honor.
Truth is, that "cat's" name is Eric Jakobson.  He was with Koppelman/Rueben or Faithful Virtue Publishing.  Obviously there is a lot of crap that i have in my head I can't really remember.
Maybe Eric was a Nashville Cat?
Ask Gregg, maybe he'll know.
Sadly I think you were right about my having created a "love child" by using the name Nik.
I still say "it was late as my 'go to' excuse"!
19  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: August 23, 2006, 09:41:51 AM
[quote author=Jon Stebbins
Nik Jakobson? Must be the love-child of Nik Venet and Gregg Jakobson. I do talk to an old friend of Dennis'(who co-wrote Forever) he's up in Oregon and calls himself Gregg ...should I ask him to tell me about Nik?.  Wink

OOPS! it was late. I goofed.  yeah, he's GREG. but he did live in Shedd.  I think he moved to Corvalis (right next door, where Oregon State Univ. is, and only 40 miles from my house) 
I like to give him the first name of the guy that was involved with the Lovin' Spoonful.  I don't know why.
I freely admit my mistakes, thanks for fact checking, I don't want to piss anyone off any more than I already have.
Is there an official date for your book?  Or am I living under a rock and should already know?
20  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: August 22, 2006, 11:25:01 PM
[quote author=Dancing Bear
I'll keep that in mind when Dan Lega, Sir Rob, Bob Hanes and Rob McCabe disagree with any fact or opinion stated in "Catch a Wave". If you're gonna claim it as THE final statement then you'd better buy the whole thing as the truth, not just the sections that favour your crusade.

Btw, where's McShane?  Grin
I have to say, I'm not sure what you are saying in this post.
There is no "final statement".  I have never implied of insisted that perspective. 
There is only opinion and perspective.
As I have said thousands of times, "you will never get any of these people, in this story, through the eye of a needle".  They were/are all too human and flawed.
I know how much research went into this book because as Peter points out, I introduced him to lots and lots of people. 
Some of whom are the "old high school pals of Brian's & Dennis' that I have had the good fortune to know and become friends with.
I have been trying to get their perspective into print or on film since David Leaf and Don Was did I just wasn't made for these times.  I was able to get some of the "Hood family achives home movies" into Morgan Neville's - Peter Jones Production for the Biography Channel (USA) (a bb's tale was the title in England) but until now many were unwilling to talk out of fear of betraying Brian.  Or truthfully, being sued by Mike.
Peter, I know for a fact went into this book willing to hear and use that information, no mater how corny or boring or unhappy or unhip/unhollywood it might seem.  It's the most important perspective in the whole story in my humble opinion.  No one knows you beter than the people you peed in your pants around.  The team mates you had in Jr High and High School.  The boys you shared your first sex story with, or the girl who never knew you loved her.
They knew what made you, you better than your parents a mile.  My dream is complete, I saw and got to help a really good writer who loves the sound and feeling of the music first, and came to love the men involved over the years, in a distant, yet personal way to investigate for himself what was really going on, or more accurately what really went on, (AND THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART) according to the perspective of as many of the people who were THERE as would talk to him.
I am going to assume, that what Peter put in the book was an amalgum of all those perspectives, allowing the predominant points of view to take precendents over any "wild shots in the dark" sort of disclaimers.  Not that I know of any.  I did not input my opinion EVER! 
Though it doesn't show in a quotation form, Peter went to the little farm community of Shedd, OR and interviewed Dennis' manager and co-writer Nik Jakobson.  Nik his Dennis out from Charlie Mason for months, and that information can be found in someone else's book (which title escapes me at the present moment).
Jan Berry's work with Brian was passed over....again.....another book for someone else to write.
Once again the refusal of the Rovell extended tribe goes un-represented.  I know Mar, she's great!  The emotional politics are incredible.  Many afraid to talk, many too angry to talk.  Many unwilling to talk, because it might aid a comfort an arch rival.
Obscurity be thy name.  'nough already                          ciao   
21  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: August 22, 2006, 10:55:12 PM
[quote author=MBE
I think the Mike interview is featured well in the last chapter and in the first chapter.
Cam, I think that's a good answer.
You should ask Peter.  He's available on line.  I think he probably has a profile here too.  Write him a private message and ask.

It is not a book about Mike Love.
I honestly believe you should consider gettng ahold of Mike and arranging to do his "in depth", "warts and all" biography. 
I am convinced that Mike's role in the BB's up to a certain point was invaluable.  His vocal work even after that "point" were great!  There will never be another sound like the BBs, vocally....not ever, and each singer played his role.
I think Peter's presentation was even handed and fair. 
I will not go into speculation as to why Mike's point of view was not represented enough to satisfy you.
I will simply remind you once again that this book was not about Mike Love.
Never once did Peter say to me, prior to the contract, "I think I'd like to write a book about Mike Love and his amazing contribution to American Music through his group the Beach Boys, and I know he didn't say that to a publisher either.
Write you book mr. Mott, tell Mike's true story....please!
22  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: NEWS FLASH - JOSH HOISINGTON/AEIJTZCHE ATTACKED!!! on: August 22, 2006, 11:53:02 AM
glad you're "feeling much better now"!
Peritonitis (sp?) is no day at the beach. :-) 
23  Smiley Smile Stuff / Ask The Honored Guests / Re: The Peter Ames Carlin Thread on: August 22, 2006, 11:35:33 AM
Peter doesn't need me to speak for him. And Peter I apologize.
Peter flew to Tahoe and spent at least 1 full day with Mike.  He had numerous phone conversations with Mike, Al, & Bruce.  I know he spent days with both Al and Bruce in person.
If there was information that was pertinent to the book that those gentleman had to share or chose to share Peter would have included it.
I think the trouble Peter went to to lay a sympathetic history of the Love family, by speaking at great lenth in person with Stanley, and Maureen was an indication of his "good faith".
We all know what you're getting at dear misguided Mott. 
I do not insist that you accept what others believe or know to be so.  I only ask that you not clutter us with your same old unfounded, unresearched personally one on one,  and pesonally speculative "point of view".
Sometimes a cigar is really a cigar and the truth is what everyone else believes.
24  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: \ on: August 14, 2006, 07:50:07 PM
NO, you're not alone.  Brian loved those "shuffle" bass lines.  Good Vibrations is one, as is Rick Henn/Brian Wilson penned song.  On Here Today Brian takes the idea into the "surf genre" and uses a Dano Electric to "rumble" the (nearly) bass line in certain points.
Signature stuff fer sure, and probably why Love You is nearly an early album, except for the vocals.
25  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: \ on: August 14, 2006, 04:58:38 PM
you're right it's brian.  i assumed, even knowing better, that i remembered it being Al.  I listened again to recall the chatter, so I could post it properly.  You got it perfect.  Definitely Brian.
In my own defense, during that Sunflower period Al was singing so much of "Brian sounding vocals, Alan acctually had to call Al to verify when it was him and when it was actually Brian on released and unreleased material.
No matter what anyone says, Al has chops vocally! 
Pages: [1] 2
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 4.116 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!