.. you know.. in the opening minutes of JJF where Mick purses his lips and points vigorously downwards.. rolls his eyes and smiles...

..he wants someone to look at the monitor doesn't he?

I heard someone say he wanted Keith to come forward but I don't think so.

Because just before he does all that... he bends over towards the monitor whilst singing and he's trying to hear it.

Yes?

It's a nice moment in what I think is their best ever live performance of JJF.

Brilliant Mick vocal, The pace is right, Keith's timing and slurring of the chords is perfect and Charlie is magnificent.

He wants Keith to sing his backing vocals.

It's a nice moment in what I think is their best ever live performance of JJF.
Very good performance indeed, but why all the focus on Jagger? The camera doesn't move away from him during the whole song.

I was under the impression he was trying to get Keith to step forward into the spotlight on stage, but Keith ignores him and Mick gives up.

I read once...maybe here...that he was trying to direct the camerman to film someone in the audience at the front...Yeah, right....camera off Mick...LOL

Quote
DiscoVolante
It's a nice moment in what I think is their best ever live performance of JJF.
Very good performance indeed, but why all the focus on Jagger? The camera doesn't move away from him during the whole song.

The camera barely moves away from him during the whole movie.....

If you watch the video.. Mick is bending down craning his hear towards a monitor just before he starts pointing.





@ 1.37 Mick ducks down then turns around questioningly.

@ 1.46 he points

@ 1.55 you can see Keith (in his own world) at the back by Charlie, nowhere near where Mick was looking.

Also there are no vocals at that point, it's the great chainsaw guitar run down.

Yeah.. I know.. it's all a bit anal.. but I'm like that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-09-11 11:51 by GravityBoy.

Monitor not working?

1.37: WTF 1.56: (to the tech) this one!

C

He starts looking around earlier. At 0:52 he is distracted and turning in both directions;it all seems like monitor issues. But resolved in typical '69 fashion.
I do like how Taylor and Jagger's eyes meet for a second at 1:40.


God, that's a good video. What did the USA think? To us this is all same as it ever was. But to '69 this had to be huge. They had not seen Jagger and the Stones like that. When had the last US tour been? In '66? That was a different world.

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

God, that's a good video. What did the USA think? To us this is all same as it ever was. But to '69 this had to be huge. They had not seen Jagger and the Stones like that. When had the last US tour been? In '66? That was a different world.

This is something that always made me curious.

But for me it was the other way round: it was huge in 66! The band that toured the US in 66 was red hot, the set list was short, yes, but it was almost a greatest hits, Brian Jones was a superstar and I could go on and on.

In 69 the tempo was much more laid back, no Brian Jones, and the set list was somehow different. 69 was great, but if I had been around back then my first reaction would have been "gimme the old band any day"!!


C

Maybe he was pointing out a girl to Bill Wyman?

It is charming to see how happy Mick is looking, just to be on the stage.

Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

God, that's a good video. What did the USA think? To us this is all same as it ever was. But to '69 this had to be huge. They had not seen Jagger and the Stones like that. When had the last US tour been? In '66? That was a different world.

Well, everything had changed in those few years. So the Stones had to change as well. And with all the development in music this didn't come as a big surprise or shock.

Quote
marcovandereijk
It is charming to see how happy Mick is looking, just to be on the stage.

It is.

There's a joy about it all.

They were hot and they knew it.

I love the beat... I'm not a drummer and I don't know how to define such things.. but that's not a straight 4/4 beat is it?

What I mean is that Charlie is hanging back a fraction on the snare and cymbal crashes? (beat 2 and 4)?

Look at the way the audience are nodding their heads.

Is that swing?

It's just brilliant... this is perfect Stones for me.

He always made some mistakes or little inaccuracies. But I too loved his drumming best in 69 (when he had a good day) . .

Quote
GravityBoy
Is that swing?

Also known as 'the roll'

Quote
GravityBoy
If you watch the video.. Mick is bending down craning his hear towards a monitor just before he starts pointing.





@ 1.37 Mick ducks down then turns around questioningly.

@ 1.46 he points

@ 1.55 you can see Keith (in his own world) at the back by Charlie, nowhere near where Mick was looking.

Also there are no vocals at that point, it's the great chainsaw guitar run down.

Yeah.. I know.. it's all a bit anal.. but I'm like that.

Yah-yah yer right,

I forgot how good many of those '69 recordings are. I've been listening to them again. The Inglewood shows (especially the 2nd); the Oaklands; San Diego is generally good and some of it is superb; some of Detroit is good; Baltimore and NYC (27th) are both wonderful. Love where the band was at that time. And those guitars! Fun to listen to them work it out as they moved east. The shows were not "exciting" in the way they would become later, but they were something better...they were historic, they were very honest, almost modest and they had Keith at his classic best.

My guess would be a monitor problem. There were lots of equipment glitches on that tour, feedback, etc.

Quote
liddas
Monitor not working?

1.37: WTF 1.56: (to the tech) this one!

C

Yeah. I always thought that was very clear - TURN THAT ONE UP. Or as they say, MORE ME.

If I had one song, one video clip that went into the time capsule about how and why the Rolling Stones are the greatest, sexiest, swingingest rock and roll band of all time it would be that song, that night, that performance. It's just freaking awesome.

TeaAtThree

Quote
pmk251
I forgot how good many of those '69 recordings are. I've been listening to them again. The Inglewood shows (especially the 2nd); the Oaklands; San Diego is generally good and some of it is superb; some of Detroit is good; Baltimore and NYC (27th) are both wonderful. Love where the band was at that time. And those guitars! Fun to listen to them work it out as they moved east. The shows were not "exciting" in the way they would become later, but they were something better...they were historic, they were very honest, almost modest and they had Keith at his classic best.

I think the real problem was that at that time most of us didn't see how good it was as many people were looking for Cream-like endless solos . .