-
-
Maybe, despite the mobility that the skirts would grant them, they didn't want to give the Romans a free peek up their skirts while they clambered over that tiny wall.
Or, they were too drunk to climb it. Every time they tried to get a leg over, they'd fall down.
I'm leaning more towards the latter. I bet being a sentinel at the wall was a riot, seeing all those drunk Scots trying to negotiate a waist-high wall.Comment
-
I have as yet to see a single 'docudrama' movie based on any rock star that was even remotely as compelling as just watching footage or listening to the music of the actual star.
That Def Leppard VH1 docudrama that came out in the 1990s was laughable. The flick concerned itself roughly with the years 1978 to 1988.
The Buddy Holly Story with Gary Busey was one of the better ones.
I'd just as soon see footage of the 1978 stadium shows Van Halen was opening up for/at the bottom of the bill of than watch a bunch of actors pretend to be Van Halen.Scramby eggs and bacon.Comment
-
Not so much kicking myself, because it is clear the author had access to a fair amount of key people around back then along with documents and such that I never would have and he also (I imagine) had the time and ability to do the research needed to fill in the meat on the skeleton of what had previously been known about Van Halen's early years.This was put out by the pride of Bill Grahem before he died tragically. It's a path that could have been taken, rather than grunge.
But back to the subject at hand. Van Halen Rising is an amazingly detailed accounting of one of my previous ('78 to '83) preoccupations. It is also one of the fastest books I've ever read. Thank you Mr. Renoff.
P.S. How many of you are kicking yourself for not thinking of documenting, err - I mean writing, something like VHR yourselves? I'll bet most of us here have the passion to do it.
VHR fills a huge void.
He did a really good job balancing the nuts-and-bolts mechanics of the financing, equipment and a lot of technical details all the while driving the narrative forward in a compelling way.
Even though the history of the band from 1978 to 1985 is probably better-known, I'd love to see him take a stab at writing THAT book, as well.Scramby eggs and bacon.Comment
-
Build a wall to keep me IN?!
Fuck that! Once The Donald takes over, we'll all have HUGE opportunities to clean toilets at one of his casinos or resorts for substandard wages, right alongside "the blacks" he currently employs there.Scramby eggs and bacon.Comment
-
Agreed on The Buddy Holly Story. Alone, the roller rink scene was worth the price of admission. Although the historical accuracy of the movie's story line has been called into question by those who were in a position to know, Busey put his back into it playing the part. He refused to lip synch the tunes and did them live. This aspect, imho, makes the movie.
For any VH docu-drama casting it seems clear that Ralph Saenz and Russ Parrish would make the short list. This would be something I would stand in line for. I wish the same could be said for the actual band. I'm still trying to forgive them for booting Mike and then calling it a reunion. Maybe Ed should jam with his kid on his _own_ time, call back MA, and quit fucking around. grumble grumbleComment
-
I mean, I get that it's difficult to condense elements of a person's life into 90 minutes, but virtually all of those movies take too much in the way of artistic license which ends up fabricating things that never happened in order to supposedly make the film more interesting. Oliver Stone's The Doors is one of the most egregious examples, where in scene after scene it's like "this never happened", "this never happened", "this never happened", "this has some elements of truth but used composite characters who never existed", etc. etc.Scramby eggs and bacon.Comment
-
Well, as near as I can piece together (and none of this is exactly anything unique in terms of original thinking), the Van Halens and Ed in particular once the band became successful started looking at Mike Anthony as someone who wasn't pulling his fair share of the load in terms of getting an equal split with the rest of them. Certainly not on a creative front in terms of songwriting in Ed's mind, whereas Ed would always concede (even after the 1985 split when there was plenty of bad blood) that Roth contributed a great deal to the creative process.
People make the same case about Alex Van Halen or tend to lump him in the same boat as Anthony (hey, what the fuck, Alex was just the drummer), but Alex and Ed cut their teeth/developed their chops together and I can't imagine Ed playing with another drummer BESIDES Alex in terms of them feeding off of one another/each knowing where the other was going when playing. Yeah, it would obviously be physically possible for Ed to play with another drummer, but that level of musical intimacy is something developed over a lifetime. Plus, Alex is blood: who else besides a family member would tolerate Ed's eccentricities? Anthony hung in there much longer than I would have. Especially after his financial percentage was whittled down from the early 1990s through to 2004.
And I think of where Ed was by the time 2006 rolled around, divorced, in the throes of various addictions, no record label, no singer, no prospects beyond wanking around in his home studio and rattling around in his dilapidated mansion. Considering all that, I don't think anyone else BUT Wolfgang could have served as a motivation for Ed to stop dicking around and actually get up and DO something. No bass player outside of Ed's kid could have been that motivating force. And the kid was smart enough to realize that getting Roth back in the band was the only viable move left to make and was the only person on the planet who could tell Ed this in a way that Ed would actually listen to it. Yeah, the only reason Wolfgang ended up in the band was nepotism, but that same nepotism served a positive aspect in revitalizing Ed.
To be sure, the reunion hasn't resulted in a bounty of new ideas on a musical front. It's been a fairly standard reunion, and in what has sadly become a reality for Van Halen post-1996 there are obstacles that have proven insurmountable (and will probably remain so) in restoring the band to what it once was all those years ago. And even if Anthony rejoins the band, it's never going to be what it once was. The best that could be hoped for was a touring unit that on their best nights could perhaps provide fleeting reminders through their set of the brilliance they used to be able to summon at will and sustain for an entire tour with seemingly little effort. That's the feeling I got when I saw them in 2008 and 2012 at certain points during the shows: every so often the pieces of the CVH band that remained, weathered by age and former abuses, would click in at operate at 100% of their capacities and capabilities today and it would give me a nostalgic sensation of re-experiencing a memory of that utter greatness the band had that turned me on way back when.
Saenz could serve up Roth's vocals with Van Halen now better than Roth could ever hope to these days. That's just a factual statement. However, seeing that isn't really something I'd necessarily want to pay money to see. For whatever gripes I have about Roth these days, to boot him out and get a tribute band ringer in there would slot Van Halen into even more of a freak-show element than it was seeing Wolfgang there on the first Roth reunion tour, when the kid looked awkward onstage and just out of place. THAT situation resolved itself somewhat in 2012, when seeing Wolfgang up there onstage felt natural. Not to the point where I wouldn't have preferred Anthony to be up there, but as natural as it would get WITHOUT Anthony there.
Were the band to ditch Roth for Saenz, the net result for me would be the same as if they ditched Roth and got Hagar back in: my interest (what remains of it, which even with Roth there now is very little; short of a miraculous new studio album full of interesting NEW ideas I think the band has gone as far as it can with Dave re: doing anything of interest to me) would be nada. Zip. Ziltch.
Van Halen for me are just basically done, you know? At least in the sense of waiting with anticipation for what will happen next. Even the prospect of a new studio album is something that I'm taking a wait-and-see/"okay, let's see what you got/impress me" attitude toward, rather than "man! I can't WAIT for the new Van Halen album".Scramby eggs and bacon.Comment
-
Pardon the delay here, Terry. I agree with what you are saying for the most part. However you misunderstood my enthusiasm for Saenz. I was suggesting that Ralph would be a natural for the role of Roth in a movie - not as a stand-in replacement for DLR in VH. That would be similar imo to AC/DC having replaced Scott with the singer who did "Dirty Deeds Done With Sheep". According to one of the Young brothers (I forget which) there were many dead ringers, if you'll pardon the expression that showed up for an audition after Bon had met his maker.
The way I see it, mega-bands that have run out of steam (such as AC/DC, and yes, VH) need to put their pride aside and get a producer involved that will whip them into shape. Someone they can bounce ideas off of who they can't ignore... and who won't let them lie to themselves.
If Tom Werman can polish terds like Motley Crue, he can do the same for tarnished gems such as our home boys.Comment
Tweet
Comment