Added: 1 year ago
From: BILLYKARLOFF
Views: 6,891
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (59)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • this is "25 X 5"...for sure.

  • Biggest shit ever! Stones are the best!

  • What dreary cunts. Time to listen to Brown Sugar nice and loud :)

  • What a bunch of crap!!!!

  • These pricks prefer Van Morrison and Lou Reed over the Stones these days? That tells me all I need to know.

  • crap documentary. totally 1 sided. same could be applied to any great artist-people grow-evolve-if you want to see mick in the 60's go drop some acid and put on your ipod.

  • Jealousy and envy is a bad thing just makes a person bitter and sad like the people involved in the making of this documentary .

  • This is a bunch of trash.

  • @G8GT364CI YE

  • WHAT A BUNCH OF ASSHOLES!!!!!!!!

  • i strongly disagree what these 3 clowns are saying,and i believe millions disagreee also, these are sorry,pitiful,spiteful souls, rock on Mick and boys, rock on...

  • Comment removed

  • You cant expect that a band that huge take on a moral obligation to satisfy some socioculturula normsystem throughout their career.

  • Every rock band sings the songs that made them famous. All artist don't move on, they sing what makes the big bucks. These men have never seen other casinos bands.

  • Good documentary, but nothing we didn't know, it's stating the obvious.

    Thanks for uploading

  • yes, they are millionaire capitalists but at least they never hid that, did they ever cover up their intentions? Is Jagger on at the start of this vid lying? He seems to be telling it as it is

  • man you think Under My Thumb is bad, read the lyrics to Brown Sugar. In an interview i had in some rock magazine(cannot remember) Mick spoke about the lyrics to Brown Sugar with some regret. Of course they reflect on the past and their mistakes, this vid is so bias

  • You cannot run a band with a socialist attitude, capitalism is cut-throat. Any one that starts a band better wtach out and handle their money well, otherwise they will be eaten up. Of course this is all wrong, but that's the reality of this world, at present, but not for long

  • @COMMUNISTPHILOSOPHY any musician can find other artists to work together. All you need is your instrument and your talent...

    Making music has nothing to do with capitalism.

    Making money is something else.... Making music for the money is like making love for the money.. Prostitution

  • @FijneWIET true, BUT if you want to get a band running and play in pubs you need to run it like a business if you want to survive and make a buck. When we had the band going our lead singer bought all the latest midi gear and racked up a debt of over $20,000. He had NO idea at all.

    If you want to sit on a beach at 3am in the morning with an acoustic thats fine, people here get stoned and do it. (not meaning you)

  • @FijneWIET speaking of prostituion: the new zealand government tax that then re-distribute the money(or some of it) back into society. many things have moral issues

  • what a stupid vid this is, it's so very bias. It's ironic that the capitalists that made this vid are complaining about the Stones "maketing cynicism" lol.

    Under my Thumb?? Well, wake up, there's an anti-feminist movement happening right now. There are anti-femiNazi groups on facebook. The song may appear repressive and and out-dated but it's a record of that time of THAT context-just like Hendrix, Beatles and others are

    The Stones always were into money. A band is a capitalist business

  • under my thumb? go fuck youself,you miserable bastards.

  • They play songs from the 60's and 70's because people want to hear them!!! We like them and they still hold up. This is the first ant-stones thing I have run into.

  • if you read keith's book it was mostly mick's insecurity that led to all the commercialization. apparantly he wanted to be like david bowie and michael jackson. i don't think this time reflects the whole band. they hated mick for what he was doing but didnt know when to quit. but that being said.... i see the stones for what they were in their golden age given that it has been 40 years

  • There's a lot of lies going on here. Could Van Morison write "Miss You" no1hit from '78 or "Undercover"'83 an anti US in central america( contemporary songs full of energy). or a more modern classic like "Saint of Me" '97 and then step back to"Voodo Lounge" which had some gutsy relevant lyrics abou the IRA in "Blinded by Rainbows" and if you really listen to their lesser creative period, many songs have an honest sense of humour about growing old as rock's legends.Better than being too serious

  • rock&roll music didn't fit in the 80's sound experiment. charlie loves jazz. keith loves blues. music from the 80s sounded artificial and horribly commercial. this ill feeling based "documentary" was made right after the 80s. in the 90s recordings were sounding nice and natural again and in 94 the stones came up with a killer come back album. people who don't like the stones it's because they could never like their personalities and hate to see them being globally successful.

  • If "times had changed" then how come music is now much more misogynistic now than it ever has been. The closet case commentating seems to think musicians have some sort of obligation to cintinually make statements, so hwo come people still isten to Beethoven and Mozart which are centuries old and still sound the same ?

  • i cant think of a better or more successful rockband. everyone who talked in this interview is just a jealous know it all prick. i guarantee not one person who as seen this agrees with anything these people are saying.

  • @yutuubfreak Not even Lou Reed, a huge Stones fan. About Van Morrison, ahh get off it! He's got a good record, his greatest hits and even THAT, "I'm a skippin' and jump'n" around most of the tracks. Van Morrison on the player, a glass of wine and your chick after a fight ok. I'm going to one of his shows. As far as their old material NOT BEING relevant today? Why do so many kids still buy it and go to their shows. In '94 i saw beautiful teens screaming and crying for Mick. He was 50!

  • @JoshSwartzberg  I mean't to say that I am NOT going to go to a Van Morrison, concert.

  • its an unfortunate byproduct of the era that bob dylan, the beatles and the stones were taken for and expected to be spiritual and political leaders by the youth movement of the day. this movie shows that some people still feel cheated by the fact that these were really just kids that wanted to be famous entertainers. It is hard to relate to when that is exactly what you now expect of anyone in the media today. strange movie, the RS are not the only ones to go through such a transformation.

  • @fablence That's it! The 60's passed. No one has made anything as relevant in rock and roll since, with a few exceptions. I'd love for the Stones to come out with a mind blowing record today, isn't it too much to expect. The fact that they can come up with a few good tracks on each new cd isn't bad. But what could they or anyone else come up with to match, Jumping Jack flash or Sympathy or Paint it black. Did Dylan or one Beatle match their best? Some good stuff. Of the best today, who?

  • Are these guys for real? What could they possibly know? Ass holes.

  • The paddy that looks like Gerry Adams needs to SHUT THE FUCK UP. They are beter than U2 and motherfucking Boyzone

  • these guys are your classic liberals....far left type of guys that noone can usually stand

  • What these people are saying is that they (well Jagger really, the others follow, god knows why) are more interested in making money as opposed to being just enamored with music, as they should if they are a band. The Beatles made way more money but decided to concentrate on making high quality music because they were more interested in the possibilities of where music could be taken, than pursuing the financial gains to their enterprise. That is why the Beatles are the best. It was about music.

  • @AnIntangibleBadge With the exception of some of Lennon's solo music, your out of your fuck'n head! Paul made a load of $ writing commercial senseless dribble. No sense of humour and barely rock 'n roll it can't be compared to the worst of the Beatles. Except "Live and Let Die". Early on harrrison had some ok solo music for getting stoned on the couch, not getting out! "I got my mind set on you" wtf was that?!!?? Take your worst Stones song in the last 30 years up against any of it.

  • @AnIntangibleBadge The Beatles at best were still boring. I downloaded Sgt. Pepper and Her Satanic majesties request and the Stone were for more intense in their record 2000man 2,000 light years from home, citadel, she's a rainbow. yeah i know they were "copying" the Beatles idea, but so what? they delivered, in MY OPINION. and that's just it, my opinion. I thought that you might have had a point until you made that last comment. Paul McCartney,wow! Slagging off Jagger in favor for him?

  • im now going to contact all these butthurt critics, it just proves that they know fuck all. how is complaining about other peoples way of making money a job anyway?

  • epic trolling?

  • This is so true.

  • Sean O' Hagan why so bitter, just enjoy the music.....If they want to make money so be it.....Loads of other bands live on past glory......Its better to be a has been than a never been.....

  • ...everything awright in the critics section?

    obviously not at the time this "docu" was made^^

    I wonder how they feel about their statements today.

    they have every reason to be embarrassed.

    fail!

  • oh god if you make 500 million dollars in a world tour its  because the audience likes the show . if YOU go out on tour how much money will you make ??? some 3 million people went to see the stones on 2005 thru 2007 . i guess they still like rock n roll .

  • these guys take themselves so seriously it's ridiculous.

    typical critics... they wouldn't have a job unless they slagged off at everything

  • these guys were just so obsessed with the mythology of The Stones in the early days that they couldn't bare with the changes. i do however agree with their views on the greedy marketing schemes of the 80's.

  • He hates the mysogony of Under My Thumb, what a fag lol.

  • the fucking stones taught everyone how to do it, they don't need to be dangerous anymore. theyre like 60 year old men for fucks sake, they've earnt the right to do whatever they want. lou reed was awesome, but he hasnt done anything worth remembering for a long time and the same goes for van morrison. fuck these dudes, fuck their suits and fucking combovers and go listen to the stones. FFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUCCKKKKKKKKKKK­KK

  • That Malcolm McClaren looking dude really has it out for the Stones.

  • Jesus, what a bunch of twats. Everyone knows the Stones have become giant caricatures of themselves, but who gives a fuck. The presenter is smug and grotesque; he seems to be completely unaware of how ironic, witty and sardonic the band were in their prime. Rock 'n' Roll isn't made to stroke your beard and adjust your glasses to.

  • these guys seems sooooo bitter.

    the stones have become a tribute act to their former selves but so what?- people like the old stuff and want to see legends on stage. everything is corporate. everything is a sellout. i wonder how much these guys got paid for their sad opinions?

  • Piss off.

    Really, moaning about the fact they are not rebels and moaning about the fact they dare to still sing Under My Thumb.

    These guys are talking out their arze.

    Waffle.

  • The Stones do write new material, okay so their 80's albums weren't great but they tried & Don Was fucked it all up. And we fans do like to hear the old ones as well and they're not gonna alter the lyrics for nerdy fuckheads like the guys because they couln't give a rats ass what they think, and that has always been The Stones. These guys have a cheek to say that, they sound exactly like the men who critized them back in the 60's calling them "grotesque" so they don't keep up with the times!

  • Did the Rolling Stones leave burning bags of crap on these guys' doorsteps? I don't understand why they're so angry at them! The Rolling Stones are timeless, and one of the greatest innovators of rock and roll. Get lives, and stop being bitter.

  • What sad, envious, bitter, nasty men. The Stones still rock ore than any other band. Why do they expect a band to be some constant pretentious political force? They're a rock band, and a fucking good one too. Admittedly the Steel Wheels tour was too slick, but they've been superb since then. This documentary is a desperate attempt to tar the reputation of the greatest band in the world. No-one comes close to them.

  • @hugoegbert79 isn't it?  I don't understand why someone let them make this. I could understand this being an editorial somewhere, but a film documentary? Yeah, no.

  • never seen this before. Thanks

  • So cool! Great job.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more