bushchoked at yahoo.com
Wed Jul 28 10:25:21 CDT 2004
> some nice shots in it, but I couldn't figure out
> what it was about.
It was about transition. It was about Jimmy coming to
terms with responsibility. This was plain in his
interaction with his ex.
Of course, part of that was their economic situation.
Both were on the dole. No future, no joy.
> miserable. I can't
> identify any sign in the movie that it's about Keith
Nor can I. Jimmy had no money, Keith had more than he
could spend. Jim's poverty is the root of his actions
with his ex (sorry, can't recall her name as my copy
is on Beta so it's been a while since I've watched
> I was pleasantly surprised at QUAD the movie. I,
> too, was expecting
> something like TOMMY and I'm not a fan of that one.
Right. We didn't need a Hard Day's Night from The Who.
Tommy was all flash, which lessened the impact of the
subject matter. It was like a bunch of connected
videos. How predictable for a Rock band to make a
movie like that (to be fair, The Who didn't make
Tommy...Russel did, and they only starred in it). How
revolutionary (and therefore Who-like) to make a real
FILM with a story suggested by an album.
> one for Whofilms, as MCVICAR is well-done, too, and
Ah, you only like it cause you get to see Rog's ass.
> You once believed that crazy accidents
> were happening to you
> You were chasing a capricious wind
Do you think Keith even thought about stuff like this?
> I think Pete creates multi-layered works,
> psychological, social, spiritual,
> everything joined together as ours live ordinarily
Absolutely. It's his gift. He certainly speaks to MY
life, and continues to. Psychoderelict was brilliant,
and I was particularly moved by Now And Then. I've
been in that place.
"Now even as we speak, there are those who are
preparing to divide us, the spin masters and negative
ad peddlers who embrace the politics of anything
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
More information about the TheWho