REVIEW: SHINE A LIGHT (DEVIN'S TAKE)
- By Devin Faraci
- Published 04/4/2008
- Reviews
It's only fair to tell you up front that I saw Shine A Light in
a screening room full of critics, which means that nary a head bobbed
and not a foot tapped throughout the concert film. I say that because
it's possible that some of my reaction to the movie was shaped by being
in a dead room, and that someone who goes to see the film this weekend
with a crowd of Stones fans will have a more energized experience.Sometimes life is funny in that it does things you wouldn't even believe in a movie. Gimme Shelter, the documentary about the doomed Altamont Concert, is famous for capturing a man being stabbed to death by Hell's Angels during the Rolling Stones' set. Decades later the Stones are again being filmed, and again someone fatally injured - but instead of a sudden, drug-fueled bout of violence, Ahmet Ertegun, the founder of Atlantic Records, fell down and hit his head and went into a coma. Director Martin Scorsese opts to leave Ertegun out of the film except for a dedication at the end, but surely he had to look at that moment and realize how much times have changed.
If the Stones are miles away from Gimme Shelter, director Martin Scorsese is light years away from The Last Waltz, the greatest concert film ever made. With The Last Waltz Scorsese had a narrative - The Band was giving their goodbye concert, and that conceit allowed Scorsese to create structure. Here there's nothing. This isn't even a real Rolling Stones concert - it was put together because Scorsese wanted to shoot the Stones in an intimate venue. Scorsese makes an attempt to use himself as the counterpoint to the Stones, making his neurotic New Yorker personality clash with the free wheeling touring band, but that doesn't offer much to hang a movie on. And besides, who believes that? Mick Jagger makes a show out of telling Marty that they won't know the setlist until an hour before they hit the stage, but when you're a massive arena band like the Stones you're being much more organized than Jagger lets on. Those effects and lighting tricks and moving stage parts don't all just happen on the fly - they're tightly planned and rehearsed.
Planned and rehearsed is a perfect segue into talking about Mick Jagger. Jagger is doing the same moves he's been doing for decades; he knows what people in the audience expect from him and he dutifully gives it to them. Seeing Jagger's mechanical performance juxtaposed against the Stones' guitarists, Keith Richards and Ron Wood, makes it all the more glaringly obvious. Richards and Wood have fun; there's an energy between them that is never there with Mick. Even Charlie Watts, the most reluctant Stone of all, seems to be feeling the moment more than Mick does. It's all right there on the screen - armed with a dozen cameras and the best operators in the business (we're talking guys you'd be lucky to get as the DP of your film), Scorsese captures the smallest details of the band. While Watts is surrounded by plexiglass (for sound) you'd think it was Jagger separated from his bandmates.
To be fair, I'm a little cranky about all this. I don't like Mick Jagger anymore, it seems, and the longer the film went on the less I liked him. His sexual pantomimes don't so much disgust me as make me feel sad; Christina Aguilera comes out for a duet and when he grinds against her ass at one point she has a look on her face that could be worn at a wedding reception when Korean War vet Uncle Ernie has a few too many and gets lewd with the young ladies.
I'm also cranky about the place of the Stones in rock today. Scorsese opens the film with behind the scenes footage as everybody prepares for the concert, which happens to be on Bill Clinton's birthday and is a benefit for his foundation. Friends of Bill show up to get pictures taken with the Stones, and they bring their little kids with them. The group photo has to wait until Hillary's ancient mom shows up. Watching Keith Richards paraded around like a man in a character costume as Disneyland I found myself realizing how fucking lame this group has become. Is there anything less rock and roll than being introduced by the president of the United States? I've been reading Please Kill Me, a history of punk rock, and watching these rich old men play to a crowd of rich people who barely move during songs, let alone dance, really helped crystallize just what it was that the kids wearing safety pins in 1978 were rebelling against. This isn't rock and roll - this is a very loud Lawrence Welk performance.
There's no faulting the Stones as a band, though. They play the songs well, and the film features many of the favorites. Thankfully there are no songs from the last few albums; the Stones have continued since the end of the 70s without recording a single good song, let alone an album worth buying. Listening to new songs is amazing as you know that you're listening to music that is technically well written and well performed but that you will be unable to so much as hum in twelve minutes.
There are a couple of moments that shine. Jack White, of the White Stripes, joins the Stones for a song and his excitement is palpable (although like Wood and Richards his energy only serves to highlight the stiffness of the Tick Tock Man of Main Street), and a Buddy Guy appearance seems to up the general energy level of the whole band. But despite some good moments, and despite a collection of some of the best rock songs ever written, I kept hoping the next song would be the last number. Short of that I kept hoping for a little more depth; Scorsese has not followed the format of The Last Waltz with the talking heads, but he has added in some old news footage and interviews with the Stones as thematic counterpoints. He uses these bits cleverly, and I would have liked more of that - I wanted to see more of the band as it was compared with how it is, with the young Stones offering commentary. That could have been the narrative Scorsese needed to give the film cohesion, but he doesn't go all the way with it.
I love the music of the Rolling Stones*, but fond memories of the tracks weren't enough to get me through Shine A Light - especially as so many of those songs have new connotations; Start Me Up, now a software commercial, comes in ironic proximity to Satisfaction, a song where Jagger decries advertising. The Rolling Stones are a band that hasn't figured out how to properly become old man musicians but that also hasn't figured out how to just stop. It's sort of boring to complain about old men rocking, but the Stones' early catalog is completely young man music. Having old men up on stage singing these songs about rebellion and fighting and fucking is strange at best. I wish I understood why it is that blues guys can get old and decrepit and still have the magic but rock bands can't.
6 out of 10
*I reject the concept that one must choose between the
Stones and the Beatles. I mean, you probably have to like one more than
the other, but you can love both of them a whole lot.
Spread The Word
Related Articles
Comments
Comment #1 (Posted by Eileen)
I'm going to guess your score would be 3 or 4 out of 10. I agree with your assessment questioning the point of this film. Picturing Richards being shuffled around to take pictures with kids makes me want to take to my bed for a week - simply pathetic.
Comment #2 (Posted by Nazim Masnawi)
Yo, Dev. What's the asterisk on the first line at the last paragraph for?
Comment #3 (Posted by j)
Good review
Comment #4 (Posted by Mr. Fab)
What does "Decrepot" mean?
Comment #5 (Posted by Pat from Boston)
"...Korean War vet Uncle Ernie has a few too many and gets lewd with the young ladies."
Beautiful.
Comment #6 (Posted by an unknown user)
As much as Devin can occasionally be a douche, he has enough moments of brilliance that keep me reading this site:
Watching Keith Richards paraded around like a man in a character costume as Disneyland I found myself realizing how fucking lame this group has become. Is there anything less rock and roll than being introduced by the president of the United States? I've been reading Please Kill Me, a history of punk rock, and watching these rich old men play to a crowd of rich people who barely move during songs, let alone dance, really helped crystallize just what it was that the kids wearing safety pins in 1978 were rebelling against. This isn't rock and roll - this is a very loud Lawrence Welk performance."
Comment #7 (Posted by Grandjester)
WOW, way to let your personal dislike for an individual color your review.
Fucking douchenozzle.
Go see it with fans asshole.
Comment #8 (Posted by anon)
FYI, "Start Me Up" was used for the Windows95 launch campaign, not an Apple commercial.
Pardon, OCD and all that.
Comment #9 (Posted by johngalt)
Totally agree with the review. i've been on a real Stones kick lately so I was really looking forward to the sneak peek screening. Thoroughly disappointed by the slick production and the pathetic posturing by the ancient band. I want to remember them as the rebellious youth that they were; walked out after 40 minutes. The jack white duet was nice, but I wanted to leave the band with their dignity intact so I bailed early. Go for a average concert film, don't expect much of a documentary.
Comment #10 (Posted by It's Only Rock'n Roll/Star Star)
Nice review. Love the Stones, hate plastic Jagger, & have to agree with everything you say. It's absolutely amazing their journey from proto-punk garage blues(the anti-Beatles) to polished, accomplished, respectable sell-outs. (When was the last time they were dangerous?) While they may still rip this joint-what's the point? (One of my fave rock n roll books of all-time is Stanley Boothe's account of the doomed '69 tour.. It's a "Let It Be"-type intimate look at a band on the verge of falling apart...'cept they never did. Kinda remarkable, I guess) And I suppose, Mick & Keith once again pass on the opportunity to pay tribute to Brian Jones. I don't think there's ever been a band more distaneful or ashamed of a legendary, founding member(Even Pink Floyd pretends to like Syd Barrett). Anyway, who am I kidding I'll be at the IMAX this week end, nodding my head, taping my feet, & shaking my ass-enjoying the Stones on the big screen, warts and all.(Hope I don't leave shattered)
Comment #11 (Posted by Brent)
Awsome review.
You really captured a lot of what it is about the Stones today that bothers me.
Comment #12 (Posted by Zachra)
For me, the Stones sullied any rad feelings I had for their prime catalog work with the past 30+ years of not tastefully packing it in. And Jagger has been "working" to be Jagger since the late 70's. Sad.
Comment #13 (Posted by J Mak)
The Grandejester is a total fag. Who the fuck types douchenozzle?
Comment #14 (Posted by Andy)
A Bigger Bang has some great songs on it, the standouts being "Rough Justice" and "She Saw Me Coming." It was reading your dismissal of the band's most recent record(s) that caused me to essentially dismiss everything else you had to say about it. I usually love your reviews, Devin, but it seems like you were dead set on hating this film before you had entered the theater.
Comment #15 (Posted by oslowe)
To slightly disagree w/ Devin's assesment that the Stone's new material has sucked since the late 70s, I got me a soft spot for the Keith Richards on vox recording of Love Is Strong. It's kinda dirty white-boy blues, the way it should be.
Comment #16 (Posted by Josh)
I like you Devin (in fact I'm thinking of forming a Devin fan club only because the member list would be small and manageable) but I've always hated this asterisk shit. You started doing this about 2 years ago completely out of the blue and as I don't follow the forums religiously (getting posting privileges on this site is kind of a ridiculous process(I could buy a gun in less time)) I never heard the reason for doing it. All it causes me to do is scroll down in the middle of the fucking article to see what it is you have to say. And here you've finally gone and left a dangling asterisk. I knew it would happen sooner or later. Just stop it! If you must, just use ridiculous amounts of parenthesis instead (like I do). Or just have the fucking aside be a mouse-over pop-up. It's the internet son. Fucking technology and all! Also you mispelled decrepit and "Start Me Up" was for Windows last I checked. Armchair Editor out!
Comment #17 (Posted by Captain Obvious)
What have I learned today? The Rolling Stones suck, and Fight Club is all deep and stuff. Your musings are increasingly obvious, and your writing is shakier than ever. The Ertegun bit just doesn't work, and Windows '95 commercials happened 13 years ago. And when you can't use asterisks properly anymore, maybe it's time to give up the gimmick.
Comment #18 (Posted by Devin)
Sorry about the asterisk, had a cut and paste problem when taking the review out of Word. Fixed now.
Comment #19 (Posted by RyanC)
Is there a thread for this in the forums? I was going to comment here, but I just feel dirty when I post talkbacks. CHUD is too good for them. Anyway, thanks for the review Devin.
Comment #20 (Posted by RCA)
Check out U2 3D in IMAX if you still can. That fucking rocked.
Comment #21 (Posted by JaimeRey)
I've never really felt that the Stones were all that dangerous to begin with; all their swagger and egde seemed well-studied from the blues musicians that came before them. Then I had read Lemmy's autobiography "White Line Fever" and he pretty much summed it up for me. See, Lemmy is old; really old. As in, old enough to have been there when both The Beatles and The Stones started. He said he always admired The Beatles because they were four real tough bastards who came from a rough place, but were still able to write music that came from a place of real admiration for, and identification with, American rhythm and blues. The Stones, on the other hand, were just a bunch of college-bound ponces who never had to fight a day in their life and nothing to really sing the blues about. They've always been posturing. It's just a hell of a lot easier to see the pose when age sets in.
Comment #22 (Posted by Matt Goldberg)
My problem with the film is a fundamental one for the rockumentary. Since there's very little found footage or interviews, it's mostly a rock concert but one where I'm not aloud to rock out because I'm in a movie theatre. If anyone could ever make it work, it would be Scorcese and the Stones, but I felt constantly frustrated by the film.
Comment #23 (Posted by Beldar)
JaimeRey, you should read Elijah Wald's book "Escaping the Delta" which suggests that even since Robert Johnson's time, the blues has been about posturing. Sure the guys were poor and they may have been involved in some scrapes here and there, but they still were creating on stage personas and giving the audience what they wanted. A lot of their songs were fiction. And in that sense, the Stones are just following in the blues tradition.
I agree with Devin for the most part, but if Keith Richards is Disneyland, then Johnny Rotten is like a crummy Six Flags about to be shut down for safety concerns.
Comment #24 (Posted by The Nid Hog)
Since 1978, the Stones have done nothing but release a torrent of crap into the faces of their grateful fans. I would rather watch a GAF Viewmaster program about the water cycle than pay to see this dog.
Comment #25 (Posted by thatguyoverthere)
Have to disagree with the review. I think people are hating on Jagger because they can't do half the stuff he can even though he's three times their age. And the smarmy dismissal of their studio work over the last few albums is incredibly short sighted. "Moon Is Up" "Thru And Thru" "Sparks Will Fly" "Mean Disposition" "Saint Of Me" "Out Of Control" "Might As Well Get Juiced" "Jump On Top Of Me" "Rough Justice" and "Laugh I Nearly Died" are all amazing songs. I would attribute your dismissal of them as either a lack of taste or just not bothering to listen to them. Your loss!
Comment #26 (Posted by Gerry)
I am astounded at what a complete fucking idiot this reviewer is. Do us all a favor, and stop writing about things you know nothing about. Also, please eat shit.
Comment #27 (Posted by mista spock)
you can't fuck to the beatles. you can, on the other hand, fuck to the stones. sooo, fuck the beatles. go figure.
Comment #28 (Posted by monkeywoman2)
the rolling stones have made me deathly afraid of my strat.
Comment #29 (Posted by Jason)
Devin, your an idiot.
The scene with Clinton, shows how far they came along, from the time they started as a band. Back when, they were considered vagrants and outlaws. Now they meet with royalty. Maybe its lame, but I found it cool how much times change......Fuck you and your review! Your pal....Jay
P.S. Why is it always the nuthuggers that reply first?
Comment #30 (Posted by Brock)
BTW, Please Kill Me is a fucking great book. Devin, you'll really start to enjoy it when Iggy Pop gets his first dose of the clap from Nico. No way anybody could make that shit up.
Comment #31 (Posted by booooyyyyy)
I will go see the film and probably be pretty happy with it. At age 36, my earliest memories of the Stones starts with Start Me Up, and Undercover of the Night so I don't fetishsize them like many boomers do.
As far as the punk comparisons and the difference between the Stones' rough and tumble beginnings and their positions now, look...it is what it is.
Ask yourself, have the Stones changed that much, or is the world around them that's changed. It ain't 1968, 1978 or even 1988 any more. The days of what the MC5 described as "Dope, rock and roll and fucking in the streets" are OVER. The Stones have made a transition and they is what they are.
Certainly, Mick Jagger -- sorry SIR Michael Jagger occupies a different universe than Kieth or Woody or even Mick Taylor. He and Brian Jones aspired to be British dandies of the rock n roll age. Mick has accomplished that somewhat with the partying in the 70s, et al. But that's what makes him who he is.
I strongly disagree with your assesment of their records since 1981. Even Dirty Work has a couple of cuts worth remembering. The Stones showed they could get funky and if it didn't always work they certainly weren't rehasing their sound. Other cds like Bridges to Babylon and and Bigger Bang have them getting back to guitar roots. If the same songs were performed by some "hot" young studs from Detroit the critics would be falling all over themselves.
Yes, it's a pose at this point, but they've earned the right to do so.

