just watched the man who fell to earth on netflix and noticed john pillips was responsible for the sound track.
i was an art student at a university in north texas when it was originally released. i remember a young guy with a new style bowie hair cut at a glasses store at valley view mall getting fitted for a similar pair (with photochromic, light adjusting lenses) to those bowie wore in this film. i dont think theyve improved them since then. you could choose from clear to half dark or half dark to super dark. in the film they could go from clear to full black. its a great soundtrack though.
i also enjoyed the contrast of 70's southwestern life with futurism in the film. im generally not too interested in sci-fi otherwise.
i also watched "the mayor of sunset strip" free from hulu. good back ground on the 60's-70's LA music scene. but a sad, sad, sad film. i discussed this recently with greg slab who mentioned that its so sad cause its so true, having eye witnessed what was left of it out there in the 80's.
i was aware of rodney from cream magazine and following the glam music scene. no one really fares too well in the film (including the subject) but kim fowley and ray manzarek come off as real turds. fowley (claims he invented holding up a match or lighter at concerts. really.) im giving a pass because hes such a fascinating whack-job but manzarek never seams to lift himself from the minutia of a life of self pity. if it wasnt jim ruining it for the whole band its john lennon eating all his east coast shrimp before kim allowed them into the backstage buffet.
thx. dont know if you are bringing your biases to the movie though. was it a sad sad film or are you just lamenting the end of an era because the film doesnt spend all that much time devoted to the corporatization of rock radio. theyre more sympathetic to the notion that he never found or looked for a way to cash in on his position. but he certainly lived as rich a life as anyone in that world or so we are led to believe. certainly it was wistful throughout but not sure it was sad. suppose that could be a matter of degrees.
and i didnt get the "real turds" sense either more that fowley was as you said "a fascinating whack job." manzarek i had no opinion of. thought the shrimp story was amusing.
glam was a form of modernism that celebrated the host culture. like the dreaded italian futurists. we can see now that this host was poison too. the movie was sad because rodney was a pretty sad sack. abandoned by his father early. mom was a hottie cocktail waitress who abandoned him too to work and emotionally as well and then left him on some star he had a crush ons doorstep at age 16 in hollywood. he was informed she was away so he walked over to sunset strip to join the rest of his lost generation runaways. everyone kind of chuckled through the whole movie."oh yeah, that rodney." a davie jones of the monkies stand in? sure he was getting laid liike mad. but by groupie social climbers who delivered to get another person closer to their goal. no real emotional connections. ultimately the glam hedonism was short lived as are all things of the flesh and the pretty young things are now dead or dying or just appear that way. lets just say that generation didnt age well. ive seen too much footage of manzerek complaining to let that get by. and freaking fowley just cant ever get over himself but is too interesting to hold accountable. his poor $ remuneration served as metaphor for lack of emotional pay back, for me anyway. and its all his moms fault.
oh its sad. it fritzed out on me and i have to come back to the 2nd half.
well, i doubt im going to win the semantic debate over "sad" as he undoubtedly came across as "sad-sacked" and his early life certainly was damaged but he still managed to live an interesting life (at least from the perspective of a callow viewer) and cultivated a certain degree of success albeit not of a financial nature. and, sure when the music was over and the lights were turned on he was old and alone but that trajectory wasnt guaranteed by his empty hedonism.
im not entirely straight on your notion of host culture but id imagine most of rocks history is littered with debris although glam may have glorified excess in a way that was unprecedented at the time. and id figure glam to be postmodern with its authentic inauthenticity.
i will say the most telling moment for me came when he got into a fight with his friend and former protege who he imagined was stealing his (already dissipated) mojo as a dj at another rock station. his warholian-sized insecurities broke through the placid facade to reveal the broken psyche underneath but in this reality-tv besotted age, his lashing out almost seemed quaint by comparison.
"John, this is Ray."
"Are you calling about Light My Fire again?"
"A lifetime of riches, John."
"Ray, the answer is still no. Jim wouldn't have wanted it."
"Cat food commercial, John. Several cool million."
"Ray, I'm hanging up now."
|
i was an art student at a university in north texas when it was originally released. i remember a young guy with a new style bowie hair cut at a glasses store at valley view mall getting fitted for a similar pair (with photochromic, light adjusting lenses) to those bowie wore in this film. i dont think theyve improved them since then. you could choose from clear to half dark or half dark to super dark. in the film they could go from clear to full black. its a great soundtrack though.
i also enjoyed the contrast of 70's southwestern life with futurism in the film. im generally not too interested in sci-fi otherwise.
- bill 8-28-2009 2:00 pm
i also watched "the mayor of sunset strip" free from hulu. good back ground on the 60's-70's LA music scene. but a sad, sad, sad film. i discussed this recently with greg slab who mentioned that its so sad cause its so true, having eye witnessed what was left of it out there in the 80's.
i was aware of rodney from cream magazine and following the glam music scene. no one really fares too well in the film (including the subject) but kim fowley and ray manzarek come off as real turds. fowley (claims he invented holding up a match or lighter at concerts. really.) im giving a pass because hes such a fascinating whack-job but manzarek never seams to lift himself from the minutia of a life of self pity. if it wasnt jim ruining it for the whole band its john lennon eating all his east coast shrimp before kim allowed them into the backstage buffet.
- bill 8-28-2009 2:28 pm [add a comment]
thx. dont know if you are bringing your biases to the movie though. was it a sad sad film or are you just lamenting the end of an era because the film doesnt spend all that much time devoted to the corporatization of rock radio. theyre more sympathetic to the notion that he never found or looked for a way to cash in on his position. but he certainly lived as rich a life as anyone in that world or so we are led to believe. certainly it was wistful throughout but not sure it was sad. suppose that could be a matter of degrees.
and i didnt get the "real turds" sense either more that fowley was as you said "a fascinating whack job." manzarek i had no opinion of. thought the shrimp story was amusing.
- dave 8-28-2009 6:32 pm [add a comment]
glam was a form of modernism that celebrated the host culture. like the dreaded italian futurists. we can see now that this host was poison too. the movie was sad because rodney was a pretty sad sack. abandoned by his father early. mom was a hottie cocktail waitress who abandoned him too to work and emotionally as well and then left him on some star he had a crush ons doorstep at age 16 in hollywood. he was informed she was away so he walked over to sunset strip to join the rest of his lost generation runaways. everyone kind of chuckled through the whole movie."oh yeah, that rodney." a davie jones of the monkies stand in? sure he was getting laid liike mad. but by groupie social climbers who delivered to get another person closer to their goal. no real emotional connections. ultimately the glam hedonism was short lived as are all things of the flesh and the pretty young things are now dead or dying or just appear that way. lets just say that generation didnt age well. ive seen too much footage of manzerek complaining to let that get by. and freaking fowley just cant ever get over himself but is too interesting to hold accountable. his poor $ remuneration served as metaphor for lack of emotional pay back, for me anyway. and its all his moms fault. oh its sad. it fritzed out on me and i have to come back to the 2nd half.
- bill 8-28-2009 8:09 pm [add a comment]
well, i doubt im going to win the semantic debate over "sad" as he undoubtedly came across as "sad-sacked" and his early life certainly was damaged but he still managed to live an interesting life (at least from the perspective of a callow viewer) and cultivated a certain degree of success albeit not of a financial nature. and, sure when the music was over and the lights were turned on he was old and alone but that trajectory wasnt guaranteed by his empty hedonism.
im not entirely straight on your notion of host culture but id imagine most of rocks history is littered with debris although glam may have glorified excess in a way that was unprecedented at the time. and id figure glam to be postmodern with its authentic inauthenticity.
i will say the most telling moment for me came when he got into a fight with his friend and former protege who he imagined was stealing his (already dissipated) mojo as a dj at another rock station. his warholian-sized insecurities broke through the placid facade to reveal the broken psyche underneath but in this reality-tv besotted age, his lashing out almost seemed quaint by comparison.
- dave 8-29-2009 1:02 am [add a comment]
well stated. id only parse that for my purposes postmodernism exists as a temporal subset of modernism rather than a replacement mode. glam revitalized an encumbered rock. it reestablished rock and roll by bring back the "and roll" part. its voo doo.
--schwarz
- ree 8-29-2009 2:09 pm [add a comment]
i did anticipate that response though i didnt think youd glam it up to proffer it. answering as a transgender will earn you style points but not debating points. i cant really answer it though to my satisfaction because to my joy and chagrin im not well versed enough in theory to know the prevailing wisdom. but i doubt it is taken as a given that "postmodernism exists as a temporal subset of modernism rather than a replacement mode." ultimately i suppose its a matter of opinion and you are more than welcome to yours.
- dave 8-29-2009 3:49 pm [add a comment]
your right. im pretty sure im in the minority there.
- bill 8-29-2009 5:02 pm [add a comment]
"John, this is Ray."
"Are you calling about Light My Fire again?"
"A lifetime of riches, John."
"Ray, the answer is still no. Jim wouldn't have wanted it."
"Cat food commercial, John. Several cool million."
"Ray, I'm hanging up now."
- tom moody 8-28-2009 3:23 pm [add a comment]