adam
Door Half Open
Posts: 100
|
Post by adam on Feb 15, 2011 18:47:05 GMT
alex you're commitment to the truth & the doors are colossal
you're uncompromising & incredibly talented in what you say & the way you write.
but with the greatest of respect my friend if (IF) you wanna get thru to these arce-holes & perhaps make a difference then you need to fight smart as well as hard
i wouldn't change anything you think or feel for the world, but i'd like to see you get thru to these people & make them think a little...
i've never posted on densmores forum, but i read it, once he said he wanted to go for a beer with you, anything ever happen??
(i still smile about that time you shouted at ray in the street @ paris)
|
|
|
|
Post by TheWallsScreamedPoetry on Feb 15, 2011 18:58:50 GMT
i've never posted on densmores forum, but i read it, once he said he wanted to go for a beer with you, anything ever happen?? Yeah mate he basically banned me from his forum  If he ever came to Paris I would let him buy me a large G&T as long as he bought a drink for everyone in the bar as well. I note what you say mate but these people are such assholes it's a waste of time trying to be smart as they are so incredibly dumb only a steel toecap up the ass ever gets through to such dimwits. (i still smile about that time you shouted at ray in the street @ paris) Now if that man ever offered to buy me a drink I would say yeah mines a pint and when you get it shove it up your arcehole. |
|
adam
Door Half Open
Posts: 100
|
Post by adam on Feb 15, 2011 19:44:48 GMT
lol
what did you do at densmores' place then? bang on about the trial or dicalio movie?
john would prob buy us all a drink, he'd like the attention
|
|
|
|
Post by TheWallsScreamedPoetry on Feb 15, 2011 19:54:20 GMT
lol what did you do at densmores' place then? I asked him if he was drunk the first time he saw the movie as he did not see how crap it was. He is the most decent among them and the only one I would speak to. I think he would buy the round because he is not that bad a guy really. He's a bit hypocritical sometimes but I quite like the guy a lot of the time. |
|
adam
Door Half Open
Posts: 100
|
Post by adam on Feb 15, 2011 23:50:24 GMT
just had a catch up on densmores place... weird warning post from the "the doors" saying people are only allowed to voice uplifting opinions..
couldn't find your posts as 'wallsscream...' just 'guest_wall' you seemed to be ok... pretty well behaved & accurate at least with a reasonable amount of support... that woman you were mainly talking with on the wys thread (mew...somethingorother) was that sally stephenson? (or what ever she's called)
what the fuck was all that shit you said about the LL & janet erwin calling you a groupie? erm didn't janet :wink wink: with morrision, or am i confusing her with someone else?!!
i grew tired of the OEM boards so long ago really, that's why i like this one!!
i read a great article this evening about the internet (in regards to social networking) but basically how the end user of a software product isn't realising that the product is not neutral....
....msgs boards are like this when u log in on line you log off your 3rd dimension as a person & this gives evryone the "right" to be someone to share their thoughts & opinions, which is great - but ultimately we have to be someone to have anything to share....
...the doors world is full of people who think their record collection gives them the right to state opinions as fact... only really a few people seem to be 'arced' to research their POVs to actually have a real opinon
& that's the ppl here (+ me), you've attracted people with interesting things to say that have taken the time & effort to have a measured opinion
nice one !!
|
|
|
|
Post by TheWallsScreamedPoetry on Feb 16, 2011 7:21:57 GMT
Cheers bud! That's the sort of people I am hoping we will attract in the coming months and make for some interesting debates. I like to be able to back up things I say so that's why I always have the ammunition from a bit of research ready when the counter arguments turn up. Yeah that Doors message annoys me as those three hate the sight of each other and are so full of shit to be hardly worthy of any attention as people. I had Jim who runs the place remove my account as if I could not speak I did have any desire to be a member. Mewsical is not sally stephenson but Sally Stevens who worked for Elektra and knew Jim slightly. She is a good lass and it would be nice if she came over here as she gets into the debates a bit. Most of the Densmore crowd were good folks and I enjoyed it there as it was and still is I presume run really well by Jim and Dianne who are two people I have utmost respect for and like very much. But I don't miss it anymore (did for a while) and that's one of the reasons I started this place up again. Janet was just controlling people who were dissing WYS on LL and dragged my name into the argument to attack some one there. Those sort of Doors fan quite frankly sicken me I can't be bothered with ass crawlers like her. From what I seen lately of that toilet it's been sanitised completly with harpic and is now just a place to crawl round a Door rather than say anything worth reading. It was always a cool forum here it's just that debate dried up to nothing as it tends to do but with the 40th anniversary of the likes of LAW and Jim's death coming up I thought it worth having a go again. There is a nice half dozen getting into stuff but hopefully I can attract a couple of dozen more for the rest of the year to make it really interesting with a good cross section of views to stimulate a bit of debate. In the next few weeks I will get a few more good thread going and hopefully folks will bring a bit of deabte here themselves. Darkstar is working on the calander which is absolutely awesome from what I seen of it so far and is growing daily. I think people should express their opinions about this group but as you say it's better to do a bit of your own research. It's not like there is no info about The Doors. People's opinions are welcome here and I won't ever censor any but of course I WILL argue with them as that's the whole point of deabate. Hopefully folks will feel comfortable here and express themselves including the few who have not spoken here yet. I can never see the point of joining a forum and NOT speaking as that's the whole point of a forum to add to or join in the deabte. |
|
adam
Door Half Open
Posts: 100
|
Post by adam on Feb 16, 2011 13:21:55 GMT
. Hopefully folks will feel comfortable here and express themselves including the few who have not spoken here yet. I can never see the point of joining a forum and NOT speaking as that's the whole point of a forum to add to or join in the deabte. your forum stats are completely fuct at 5 members & 90-odd quests... c'mon strangers, come & say hi if you're just here to read, then you obv have questions & want to know things, so join & ask maybe it's a bit intimidating that alex et el know so much, but just ask the questions, that's all i do & no one's fammed me or anything so go for it you'll find the register button at the top of each page here from you all soon! |
|
|
|
Post by casandra on Feb 16, 2011 18:48:34 GMT
Thanks, helenclare I like this forum because I can say myself with freedom and you make the effort to understand my words, knowing that English isn’t my original language. On the Doors Official Forums I have always been afraid to participate because sometimes I have seen hard discussions for misrepresented or misinterpreted words. Densmore Forum was interesting before but now is dying. The Official Forum isn't a serious place for debating. Sometimes it's shallow and comic, for the naivety of some people, because someone occasionally comes along who wants to know, for example, the color of Jim Morrison’s toothbrush and after 20 or 30 speculating answers, “the old ladies” like oracles, give the “true answer”. They personally knew Jim Morrison, also they carefully should watch him and should point out all conversations with him in a notebook, because they remember all the details when they met him (as he was dressed, the car he was driving, if he drank a glass of wine, whiskey or beer, how many cigarettes smoked,...). After their “wise answer”, everyone is happy and thank them because they have got to discover one of the greatest mysteries of the human race... Another people very funny on the Official Forum are “what is the next?”. They frecuently ask, ask, ask and they never are tired. Jampol says a few cryptic words and they begin to speculate about the next CD or DVD. When the product finally comes, they buy it, they hear or see it a couple of times, keep it in a drawer, thank him and follow asking, "what is the next?", "what is the next?"... They don't make a real criticism about the quality of the product with which you can't trust in their opinions about if the products are good or bad.  |
|
|
|
Post by TheWallsScreamedPoetry on Feb 16, 2011 19:39:33 GMT
That's one of the best descriptions of The Doors Official Forum I have seen. I was a member there from the first couple of weeks and have seen it first hand go from a very good debating forum to a toilet. You made a good point as I myself saw many posters who were not that good with English get ridiculed by complete assholes. Also first time posters would get attacked there usually by Janet Erwin who supposedly knew Jim and was exactly like you describe. I had a lot of run ins with those people but they were not able to bully me the way they did many there. In the end they just banned me |
|
adam
Door Half Open
Posts: 100
|
Post by adam on Feb 16, 2011 20:24:55 GMT
the whole thing with these women who knew jim somehow having elevated status to add to discussions in a "oracle" (good word cas) sense is ludicrous
everyone knows who jims friends were... frank L babe etc not even ray disputes who jim's friends were (just their value) & i never saw janet or sally mentioned in franks book (i think, been a while since i read it)
i do remember the bit where franks says jim had a huge mistrust of journalists tho.... erm what was sally's (& janet's?) job in the 60s again?
|
|
|
|
Post by casandra on Feb 17, 2011 17:52:30 GMT
Thanks, Alex. I agree with you.
On the Official Forum, the serious discussions always finish in personal attacks or trivial asks, for that if someone has some interesting questions to say, he leaves bored. And if he doesn’t speak English well, he often appears ridicule. They don’t realize the effort to write in other language.
But the Spanish forums are no better. In those, always appears a guy that the only thing he know to say is "Viva el Rey Lagarto” or similar, and he constantly interrupts the discussion. When someone says him something for reprimand, he begin to say insults based on the nationality of who has said him something politely. He doesn’t care if he is Spanish, Argentine, Chilean, Mexican, etc., he has prejudiced against all the people. Everyone leaves it and the forum is dying slowly.
Adam, thanks. Those women have raised themselves to oracles (I'm glad you like the word) because they have removed the other people out the forum and there, all the people believe anything they say. Their only argument is: “I know all about Jim because I met him”. The toothbrush was an example I imagined, but the people do very weird asks and they always have an answer that everyone wants to believe.
Very interesting your ad: "Internet is written in ink, not pencil" You know… It's Orwell’s Big Brother...
|
|
|
|
Post by casandra on Feb 17, 2011 18:07:47 GMT
Darkstar: the calendar is incredible!!!! Congratulations!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by TheWallsScreamedPoetry on Feb 20, 2011 17:45:05 GMT
2) Misrepresentations of Jim MorrisonFrom the outset DiCillo wants to present a particular vision of Jim Morrison and makes an early bid for that Morrison in the the first segment of the film dealing with his pre UCLA days. 'One teacher sent home a note scolding him as self centred'. This is a remarkable error on behalf of the film maker to condense this period of Jim's life into such a ludicrous phrase. It gives the impression of someone who would become a serial killer than a humorous young man who was erudite enough to read and understand philosophers and be able to watch a film and analyse the way the director structured his film. This kid read and wrote poetry, read about the poets he liked and understood what he was reading. It's remarkable for someone that age to be so gifted and to simply insinuate he was self centred is a travesty of misrepresentation. Would this idiot dismiss Mozart by saying he was self centred? The information of how smart Morrison was has been available since NOHGOA and has been expanded upon ever since so DiCillo can have no excuse for this ridiculous misconception of Jim Morrison. It adds to his underlying portrait of an attention seeking. self centred, vain preening, fame seeking groupie. It is without doubt the most insulting portrait of Jim Morrison I have come across since Dark Star by Dylan Jones. A brief but more intelligent look at Jim during this period! Jim Morrison: Genesis of a PoetJim Morrison: High School Reader & PhilosopherPinman Jim Morrison's first film
Jim Morrison Art.
Jim Morrison: The Roots of The Doors?
Our first job was a Xmas party at a house of some relative of Robby.
Then our first job was at the London Fog on sunset strip, it's a small club that no longer exists.
The most people it could hold is about 50, on a good night.
There was a bartender named George and a doorman named Sam; sometimes Joey would be at the door.
A waitress named Suzy a dancer named Rhonda who danced in a little cage across from the band stand
Jesse James was the owner. He was a young man who was dying of cancer and it was kind of a struggle to keep the place going.Jim Morrison to Mike Lazar & Steve Flesser University of Oswego radio interview. This is an interesting interview with Jim from September 1967 just after the band had major success for the first time with LMF. Now it would seem to me that a fame obsessed self centred vain superstar would not remember such detail about some shitty club they worked in the early days of 1966. But Morrison reels of the names as if he has a fondness for these people who were part of his bands beginnings. Rhonda Lane was the dancer who danced in the cage and Jesse James was indeed struggling with cancer during this time but he gave The Doors a chance to basically rehearse and get some food money. he could not pay much as the club never got any customers but he gave them the break they needed to hone their music and attract a small following. Eventually Jesse had to let them go but they had been noticed by the Whisky by then. It seemed James always was fair to The Doors and for Jim to remember that during a mickey mouse radio interview nearly 2 years later tells its own story. |
|
|
|
Post by TheWallsScreamedPoetry on Mar 11, 2011 16:26:58 GMT
The Doors drummer John Densmore is urging fans to see the film after watching it at the Berlin Film Festival
He says, “I think this film shows a little bit more about all four of us. And it shows Jim in the beginning, his innocence and shyness and everything, and I love seeing that – that’s the Jim I knew.”
Amazing statement from The Doors ex drummer. Makes me wonder if he was not accidentaly in the next screening and was watching From Paris With Love.
The film did show us John was afflicted by rashes and Ray was pleased with his first royalty cheque.
But it gave us very little insight into the group as it was all about Jim Morrison.
very little of Jim in 'the beginning' was seen other than he was self centred at school.
"his innocence and shyness and everything" seemed to centre around him being a drunk and obsessed with fame which led him to start a riot in Queens and ended up with him in Miami which was the centre piece of the whole sorry mess.
Jim's humour and generosity barely rated a mention as did his poetry which received about as much interest in WYS as it did in Oliver Stones movie. Which by the way WYS seemed to mirror quite disturbingly.
It shows the level of collusion that The Doors have with this Godawful travesty as they make similar comments when it is evident that the narrative is geared to portraying Jim Morrison as a vain fame obsessed knob.
I have said this earlier but the crux of the problem with the film comes in the way things are left out that could have disputed the ridiculous portrayal of Morrison.
Cherry picking certain parts of the History to make a DiCillo point but leaving out important supporting elements that would completely destroy the Morrison the director was selling in this disgraceful documentary.
How John Densmore was incapable of seeing what a mere fan could see from one showing is in itself telling but then the fans don't have a financial stake in WYS but JD does.
The film footage may well show a different side of Jim as HWY shows him outside The Doors doing something he enjoyed but this pleasing portrait is tarnished by bad editing and the use of the footage to make points that it was not produced to make.
The same can be said of the Morrison interview and audio footage which is also used to relate to points Tom DiCillo made as part of his awful narrative.
One other thing it certainly did show was the level of hypocrisy and greed that is evident among the three remaining Doors.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheWallsScreamedPoetry on Mar 16, 2011 11:14:58 GMT
taken from. Jim Morrison Interview L.A. Free Press 1968 This from the actual horses mouth and as I stated earlier a complete contradiction of what DiCillo was selling as his Jim Morrison. If Morrison was so vain and addicted to fame why did he not want his face on the 2nd album? It's a fundemental question as DiCillo by ignoring the reason behind why Strange Days has carnival performers on the cover manages to promote his vain preening Morrison in his silly film. As I said it's not just in what he says during his narrative it's also in what he does not say that is crucial. Ignoring inconvenient facts that Jim Morrison was so addicted to fame he went out of his way to not promote himself as the groups focal point. Two other excellent examples of this are that he did not put his name to the songs he wrote in the earliest Doors period and in the later period deliberately hunches down during the photo shoot for LA Woman so as not to place himself above the other Doors. These three examples are just the tip of the many other examples that Jim Morrison was the opposite of the attention seeking Jim DiCillo promoted in his film. Why the other Doors did not pick up on this and make a comment in support of their ex bandmate is of course a question for them. |
|
|
|
Post by darkstar3 on Mar 16, 2011 12:39:32 GMT
taken from. Jim Morrison Interview L.A. Free Press 1968 This from the actual horses mouth and as I stated earlier a complete contradiction of what DiCillo was selling as his Jim Morrison. If Morrison was so vain and addicted to fame why did he not want his face on the 2nd album? It's a fundemental question as DiCillo by ignoring the reason behind why Strange Days has carnival performers on the cover manages to promote his vain preening Morrison in his silly film. As I said it's not just in what he says during his narrative it's also in what he does not say that is crucial. Ignoring inconvenient facts that Jim Morrison was so addicted to fame he went out of his way to not promote himself as the groups focal point. Two other excellent examples of this are that he did not put his name to the songs he wrote in the earliest Doors period and in the later period deliberately hunches down during the photo shoot for LA Woman so as not to place himself above the other Doors. These three examples are just the tip of the many other examples that Jim Morrison was the opposite of the attention seeking Jim DiCillo promoted in his film. Why the other Doors did not pick up on this and make a comment in support of their ex bandmate is of course a question for them. Good point, Alex. The entire DiCillo film is questionable. All DiCillo did was take film that already existed and fit it together to show how Jim Morrison was the cause of the entire Doors downfall. All one has to do is read the eyewitness accounts on these boards from audience members, and from the people Jim called his friends to know that Jim Morrison did not act alone in causing the Doors demise. Many factors were at play during the latter years of the band and in DiCillo's film only one factor is recognized and that is the "Jimbo" character. Jim Morrison cannot speak for himself so survivors are free to speak for him and about him in any manner they choose. Of course, by putting the blame on Morrison, it absolves the survivors of any pointing fingers as they are still alive and would have to mentally deal with the consequences of their actions whereas Jim Morrison has no more consequences. At this point the real person Morrison once was is a distant memory that has been clouded and judged by others over the decades in the form of many mythical figures. Very sad situation. If one wants to believe all of the tales brought forth in the survivors stories in regards to the "Jimbo" character, it should be noted that without Jim Morrisons' participation in the band the last 40 years would have been hard times indeed where the survivors are concerned as their coffers would have been mighty light at this point in time. For whatever harm they say Jim caused them, I believe he has paid them back in riches and wealth beyond their wildest dreams since in his death 1971. Of course you never hear any praise or thank you to Jim Morrison only the continuation of how he ruined the band. |
|
|
|
Post by TheWallsScreamedPoetry on Mar 16, 2011 15:01:53 GMT
Not only cannot Jim speak for himself as being dead is a bit of a hinderance but as you rightly pointed out when this discussion was on the Densmore forum he was not allowed to by DiCillo with the connivance of his fellow Doors, including said drummer.
His audio interviews which were used in the film were twisted by the so called film maker to back up points HE was making rather than stand for the points, if any, Morrison was making.
Along with all the other misrepresentaions that are highlighted in this thread that was one of the cruellest injustices of this film.
All the others were given a voice but not the subject of the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkstar3 on Mar 16, 2011 20:33:02 GMT
When Your Strange
Aired on PBS May 12 2010
Darkstar's Review May 13 2010
The film footage was spectacular and it was a pleasure seeing clips of “Hwy” and “Feast Of Friends” in such clarity. Johnny Depps’ narration was adequate considering the script he was given to read. His monotone delivery mimicked the overtones of the film.
STOP HERE AS THERE ARE SPOILERS AHEAD - IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THE FILM DO NOT READ ANY FURTHER
As many other reviewers have mentioned, the film clips were out of sequence and for this error there is no excuse. When a veteran film maker such as Tom DiCillo is handed original film and in addition been given an all access pass to The Doors archives, I would have expected more professionalism. In fact, there is a lot of film footage that does exist that was not used in this documentary. For one the 1967 performance of The Doors on American Bandstand, Murray the K and the CBC filming of “The End.” Instead and for example for coverage of the year 1967 the viewer sees film from a 1968 performance in London.
In all of the sequences where Jim’s film “Hwy” is included there is no narrative to explain exactly what “Hwy” meant to Jim Morrison. The “HWY” film in and of itself was an unfinished work and was based on Jim’s screenplay, “The Hitchhiker.” Jim was hoping to gain financial backing to finish the film. He was also working on a screenplay with Michael McClure at the time but these facts were never mentioned in the documentary. Although, a few lines from Jim’s interview with Howard Smith (1969) was used in this film, all references to the making of “Hwy” or Jim’s involvement with the McClure screenplay were left out.
The documentary relies too much on stock footage intermingled with film taken by The Doors camera crew during the tour of 1968. The Doors for all intent and purpose have always been labeled as the alternative band to the hippy movement but it is stock footage of the hippies that occupy the film as filler through out.
Making a point to inform the viewer that LSD was used as a tool by not only Jim Morrison but by the other band members as well in the early years of 1965 there is no mention that at that time LSD was legal in the United States.
It is suggested that Jim was living on “someone’s” rooftop writing songs to a concert in his head. Why wasn’t Dennis Jacobs’ name included in the description?
The inclusion of scenes of the band rehearsing in a beach house was adequate but unfortunately these scenes were spliced in with other years in the bands history.
The viewer learns that Robby Krieger is the author of Light My Fire but the film footage is not of 1966 but once again, the 1968 London performance.
There is a bit of confusion as the narration describes The Doors stint at the London Fog which leads to a “talent booker” for the Whisky falling for Morrison. The talent booker talks to the management at the Whisky begging him into hiring them as house band for the club. There is no mention of Ronnie Harran’s name or her story as to how she got the band the gig.
After the 1st album is released it is mentioned that each of the songs is credited equally to all four members of the group. There is no indication as to why the songs are credited that way when it is customary for each writer to get individual credit. The Doors were different than other groups of the time but there is no explanation as to why.
Within the 1967 scenes we see more of “HWY.” This time the clip covers Jim pulling into a gas station in Joshua Tree. The original soundtrack is cut and overdubbed with different music. Right after this scene we see Jim drive on down the road as Jim Ladd of KLOS explains that Jim’s death is shrouded in mystery and rumors of Jim faking his death as reported sightings of him have been made. This narrative is straight out of No One Here Gets Out Alive.
The film switches over to show Jim being interviewed where he is talking about the feeling of Doors music being a heavy, gloomy feeling, not completely relaxed of one not quite at home. During this interview, Jim is explaining Doors music in general where in the interview he goes on to say, I would like to do one that is a total expression of joy, the film maker makes the cut so the viewer thinks Jim is talking about his own death.
The documentary rolls on and the narration gives the explanation of Doors music in general from the perspective of the surviving Doors as shadowy dreams, mystery and use of a carnival type atmosphere. It is at this point the viewer is introduced to the album Strange Days (1967). Carnival scenes and animals are inserted as filler here and there is no explanation as to why the cover of Strange Days includes the carnival figures other than the symbolic nature. It has however been explained in interviews over the years that Jim did not want the 2nd album to feature his face on the cover, put a flower on it or something.
The narration further suggests that Ray Manzarek sees the audience believing that Jim is a Shaman leading his followers. Please. In Lizzie James Interview with Jim Morrison in 1968 Jim completely discards this notion saying, “I'm not sure it's salvation that people are after, or want me to lead them to. The shaman is a healer – like a witch-doctor. I don't see people turning to me for that. I don't see myself as a savior.”
The viewer is now approaching the time frame of the Waiting For The Sun lp. Love Me Two Times is heard on the soundtrack at this point and reference is made that its Morrison’s bandmates that keep him together on stage bringing him back to earth when he stumbles.
At this point the 1968 London Press Conference is shown with a snippet of an answer that Jim gave to an unknown question, the music cannot help but reflect what is swirling around it.
The narration at this point also includes one of Jim’s answers from the 1969 Howard Smith interview, “….I’ve noticed that when people are joking their usually dead serious and when their dead serious it’s usually means exactly what you say and it’s opposite.” There is no question to support the answer so the film maker uses the quote out of context.
The film maker will also do this later on the documentary once again using a snippet of an answer from Morrison but offering no lead in explanation of the statement, “Can you imagine doing that? Posing for a picture. Can you imagine? And you know, really looking in the camera and posing. It’s insane.”
This is the quote in it’s original context:
Howard: Back at the beginning of The Doors you seem to be model of the year. You couldn’t pick up a fashion magazine or some magazine without those sultry pictures.
Jim: Sulky too.
Howard: Sulky?
Jim: Well you know…..I was so…..in vogue.
Howard: What did it mean to you at that time?
Jim: I must have been out of my mind. To do….can you imagine? Can you imagine doing that?
Howard: No, that’s hwy I’m asking you.
Jim: Posing for a picture. Can you imagine? And you know, really looking in the camera and posing. It’s insane. I must have been out of my mind. If I had the whole thing to do over again…..I wouldn’t, I wouldn’t do it.
Howard: What did you think during that time?
Jim: I thought I knew what I was doing. I thought I knew what I was doing. And the whole thing about a photograph is once it’s done you can’t destroy it. It’s there forever. So can you imagine when I’m 80 years old and I have to look at myself posing for those pictures. It’s to late. This guys trying to put me on a bummer man.
Jim: (Pause) That’s alright Howard go ahead.
Howard: Un, also back in the beginning there was also all this talk about your sex appeal. About how all women of different ages…..I wrote that in the Voice way before…..you know, pretty early.
Jim: That’s another thing see….talk gets around crazy talk like that and what happens, you know? (pause) That’s a difficult burden to bear. It is…cause we all know no one is any sexier than anyone else, right? Everyone’s got the same equipment unless biologically you got mixed up or something. We’re all about the same. (phone rings)
Howard: (sarcastically) Yeah well there you were with the leather pants….
Jim: (raises voice) Yeah and it’s guys like you man….it’s the reporters…it’s the press, people like that that create this insanity. That make up this stuff and then people start believing it.
Howard: You weren’t consciously playing that?
Jim: Hell no.
Howard: And you didn’t dig it?
Jim: (pause) Well I must admit that there were occasions when uh….having a reputation like that did help me out in some tight situations. Plus I got to meet a lot of groovy ladies that uh…otherwise you know…they probably wouldn’t have noticed me. So in that respect it was all to the good.”
In all fairness, the three surviving Doors enabled DiCillo to write his script for this documentary. It is unfortunate that DiCillo did not give Jim the courtesy to explain himself in his own words. There is certain plenty of audio out there to warrant inclusion in this film but it was used only in partial form to suit the images on the screen. On other hand, the three surviving Doors give their explanations nearly 40 years after the actual events have happened, which is certainly acceptable but Jim should have been given the same opportunity.
We see Jim at the Singer Bowl concert and the narration advises the viewer that Jim was either mingling with his fan base or he needed the attention from the fan base and actively seeked it. In my opinion, by seeing Jim mingling with the fans he is showing them he just another human being looking for conversation and he’s not trying to prove anything but maybe discard the “myth” that has been attached to him.
The viewer at this point is still learning about the “Waiting For The Sun” lp. The narration claims that producer Paul Rothchild refuses to include “Celebration of the Lizard” in its entirety on the album. Instead he takes songs left off the 1st album to complete this recording. There is no mention of Jim’s disappointment instead we learn of “Hello I Love You” reaching #1 status on Billboard and the fact that the fan base propelled the album to #1 as well.
We are treated to film scenes of the recording of “Wild Child” which introduces the viewer to the making of the “Soft Parade” lp. The narration tells us that the writing credits for this album are split between the lyric’s composers but there is no explanation as to why this change happened after previous albums all credited The Doors as a group.
It is also at this point in the documentary that we learn of Jim’s drinking and drug taking reaching a peak in the band’s history. We see another clip of Jim’s “HWY” film and more clips of hippies inter spliced. For painting such a dark period in the history of the band I question why the film maker would chose to show hippies.
At this point the band mates begin to splinter because of Jim’s drinking and drug abuse. Within the context of this film, the other three band members do not partake in such a lifestyle as Jim has chosen for himself. The narration offers insight, “Ray originally thought that LSD was the key to enlightenment but a series of bad trips sends him into a different direction turning towards meditation along with John Densmore and Robby Krieger.”
This is a revelation in terms of Ray’s LSD experiences of the time and somewhat confusing as we all know that Ray as been advocating the use of LSD over many decades right up to and including interviews granted in 2010. He goes so far as to encourage fans to partake in this mind altering substance but he himself knows better and has learned his lesson many, many years ago.
Due to 100’s of takes in the studio under Rothchilds insistence, the Soft Parade takes 11 months before it is pressed and stocked in record stores. There is no mention of the extensive horn and string sections that have been added to the final product.
It is during the Soft Parade sessions that the viewer learns of John Densmore’s headaches and break out rashes due to the stress of making the album and complicated by the circumstances surrounding Jim’s behavior at the time. John walks out of the studio and returns the next day to finish the recordings. Jim is described as the Elephant in room of which people ignore. They must not have ignored him completely because it is obvious his actions had a profound effect on the group as a whole. The narrator suggests that the band members confronted Jim about his drinking and drug taking and Jim agreed to straighten up. Jim sobriety only lasted about a week. The narrator goes on to say sometimes the drinking helps Jim and sometimes it doesn’t…..What? The drinking helps him, how?
Because the film is out of sequence at this point there is no mention of “Light My Fire” being sold for a commercial and the fall out thereafter.
In addition, there is no explanation offered as to why Jim Morrison is drinking so heavily and any opinion as to why he has cut himself away from the band.
The viewer is now hurled back to 1967 in New Haven and witnesses Jim’s arrest. Although there are a few photos in existence that show Jim after he was maced backstage, the viewer does not see any of those. The 20 second footage of the arrest made on stage is overdubbed and we hear the song “Sunday Trucker” as a faint soundtrack.
The narration switches to include an important point although late in the film and out of sequence but nonetheless important telling us the audiences at this point have come to see a spectacle and are not there to listen to the words and music. It is suggested that Jim has morphed himself into his stage persona in his personal life. Once again no details are given as to how the script writer knows this event for a fact.
Jumping ahead to late 1968 and the Soft Parade album, we learn that Jim wants to quit the band. In fact, according to reliable sources this event took place after the Hollywood Bowl concert in July of 1968. Ray talks Jim into giving the band another 6 months. If this part of the bands history was left in correct sequence the viewer would learn of the LMF commercial, the Living Theatre performances, the rehearsals for Morrison Hotel which includes Jim rap leading up and the inclusion of the infamous Miami concert.
We are treated to a few seconds of a card game between the band members which occurred in a Holiday Inn in 1967 where Jim says something… maybe I don’t like where this is going. The card game scene is included in a video called The Best of The Doors and Jim’s words are taken out of context for inclusion in this scene.
Once again there is no explanation or opinion as to why Jim wants to leave the band.
It is also mentioned by the narrator that Jim picked his own clothes and did not have a publicist…um, interesting, as I recall a lady named Diane Gardner was Jim’s publicist.
Pamela wants Jim to concentrate on his poetry and forget music at this point. It is a fact that Jim used to confide in Pamela his inner most problems and she did talk him into seeing a psychiatrist of which there are claims he attended one appointment. This is complete irrelevant without any explanation of why Jim was so disappointed during this period of time that his behavior warranted a trip to a shrink.
The narrator tells us that Ray has given a name to Jim’s other half, the person he becomes when he drinks too much, “Jimbo.” Oliver Stone showed a lot of that “Jimbo” character in his film and even capitalized on it to which he has received harsh criticism over the years. It is hard to understand why this film, a documentary hailed as the anti-Oliver Stone film would emphasize Jim’s alter ego, “Jimbo.”
The viewer now witnesses Jimbo driving his car around in circles in the desert.
It is now revealed by the narrator that several drinkers have been hired to look after Jim, not bodyguards or people who are hired to keep Jim out of trouble but drinkers to look after him. Of course, Jim casts them aside and drinks more than they do.
The narrator goes on to tell the viewer about Janis Joplin breaking a bottle over Jim’s head at a party when in fact this happened outside of Barney’s Beanery. We also learn that Jim’s mother comes to a Doors DC show but Jim refuses to see her, which is true but the film is approaching 1969 not 1967. The European tour is briefly discussed and it is this point in time we learn of LMF being sold to commercial at a loss to the band of $75,000.
The band is still splintering further and further away from each other which raises questions but offers no other explanation than it is because of Jim’s drinking and drug taking. The band members have confronted Jim but it doesn’t work and at this point they do not know how to help him other than to keep him on stage and performing.
We are now at the Miami fiasco. The scenes depicted at this point in the film are slow and once again give no real explanations with the exception of the court documentation and the Decency Rally footage the viewer does not learn anything that has not already been told that includes the Oliver Stone version.
From the film’s point of view after the Miami incident is capitalized relations within the band are shown at all time low. Intermingled within the narration are extensive scenes of Vietnam, the violence in America that includes handgun ownership, The Mason Family and political assassinations are brought to light with preexisting stock footage.
We learn of the Doors last show in New Orleans in December of 1970 as the final performance with Morrison. The narrator tells us that Jim simply sat down on the stage and stopped singing it was at this point Manzarek says he saw all of Jim’s spirit leaving his body. There is no mention of Jim bashing the mic stand into the stage until it splinters or his total disgust with being a performer.
From this point forward there is a race towards the bottom. As the film picks up speed the Isle Of Wight festival, the making of Morrison Hotel and LA Woman are compacted into a mere 15 minutes. The narrator does mention that during the sessions for LA Woman, which according to the narrator was completed in a week and half that Jim was using cocaine at this time. What happened to Manzarek’s continued rants that The Doors were not a white power band as Oliver Stone suggested?
During the soundtrack we hear “Riders On The Storm” set to stock footage of Vietnam. At one point you see a helicopter being thrown off the side of a Navy ship this would happen 4 years after Riders On The Storm in 1975.
DiCillo also includes a frame of Jim diving off a rock into the Kern river, naked…I guess this was a shot that he had to include if only to draw a certain type of audience into seeing the film as the scene has no motive to be included in the documentary at all other than for effect.
When the scene comes to where Jim is found dead in Paris there are no alternatives to the official story it is with these passing frames that the documentary draws to a close leaving the viewer with a lot of unanswered questions “You can’t burn out if your not on fire.”
This was a great movie that was made as a tribute to the survival of the 3 remaining Doors as it shows the trials and tribulations they went through in trying to cope with an alcoholic of which by their own admission there was no hope in finding a cure for him. On the other hand, the film lacks any real narrative by excluding Jim’s thoughts in his own words. Jim Morrison was a young man when he died. Fame came early for him and he took the brunt of the adulation from fans. This is well documented through several sources but you never hear in this film Jim’s own words to counter any accusations. Jim’s interviews certainly do exist and could have been included but unfortunately only snippets of his statements were used and all of those were taken out of context.
I am of the continuing opinion that the only film makers who are able to make a Doors documentary are those who were there on the outside looking in, Frank, Bill, Babe, Rich, Paul and Vince. Give these people the financing to do a documentary as they are the people most qualified to tell the definitive story of the Doors. There is no better evidence of this fact than to listen to the radio show, “Three Hours For Magic” (1981).
END.
|
|
|
|
Post by kristyob on Mar 16, 2011 20:59:24 GMT
Here is what I know about the film. In December 2005 I met with Cory who is Jeff's assistant (I had an appointment with Jeff, but he stood me up lol!). Cory told me they had just interviewed Jim's father. Who exactly 'they' is, I don't know....I don't know who was attached as a Director at this point.
For years, the Doors camp had been telling fans that a doc was in the works. But as far as I know, this was the first effort to film or interview anyone.
Tom D. wasn't involved at this point and it seemed a traditional approach was the chosen method of telling the story. I do know that the Doors management was more focused on the book that came out a short time later...the one with Ben Fong Torres (the same guy who had told me about 6 months earlier, when approached about an interview 'why anyone still be interested in the Doors is beyond me').
So basically, Tom DiCillo was brought in as a hired gun. Sure he may have been a Doors fan but this project was not a personal endeavor, not born of a passionate desire to tell Jim's stories. From reading his blog, it's easy to see that he was given access to various odds and ends of footage and it was his job to come up with 'a concept'...what the film was going to be about. So it's not surprising the end result! He is a visual thinker, not a historian nor a journalist nor a documentary filmmaker.
Given all of this, I think his apporach was creative and the footage is beautiful (thanks to Pauol Ferrara).
A number of years have passed so I don't recall if Cory told me this or if it was my personal deduction but I got the impression that the focus and the purpose of the Doors management was to come up with projects that would create new fans (particularly young fans). IMHO this is why the myth is continually perpetuated. It may not be solely about money but a way to 'go down in history'.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheWallsScreamedPoetry on Mar 16, 2011 22:08:11 GMT
Regardless of what DiCillo was brought in for HIS name is on the finished product and HE has taken the credit for that finished product. He wrote this tripe so has to accept the criticism for doing a piss poor job. His failings as an historian or documentary film maker are irrelevant as The Doors give him the credit and he is happy to accept that. His concept is indeed creative as he creates an Historical figure that didn't really exist in his vain, attention seeking Jim Morrison which is contradicted by the evidence presented here and loads more that has not been mentioned. And to be honest DiCillo did boast about the level of Doors/Morrison research he put in and still the end result was so awful. I doubt he was much of a Doors fan and much of a film maker if the two movies of his I watched are anything to go by. A number of years have passed so I don't recall if Cory told me this or if it was my personal deduction but I got the impression that the focus and the purpose of the Doors management was to come up with projects that would create new fans (particularly young fans). IMHO this is why the myth is continually perpetuated. It may not be solely about money but a way to 'go down in history'. Jampol has insinuated this on a few occasions and the film reflects this as it is more a Doors for Dummies than anything else. For me, to forget the Historical Doors for a user friendly Doors for the 21st century is both a crime and a tragedy. The History of the band is something to be treasured not forgotten for a few sensation tales. But that's the kind of people we have to deal with nowadays.  |
|
