Amazing Journey DVD details (spoiler alert)

Scott Schrade schrade at
Mon Nov 5 18:52:36 CST 2007

> 3. "no direction home bob dylan" was over 3 hours long and dealt with the 
> early part of dylan's career. there's a tom petty and the heartbreakers doc 
> coming out that's 4 hours long. couldn't the who recieve this kind of treatment?  
> I can imagine how long that upcoming doc on the stones will be. 

I still haven't seen AJ (with sound!) but I share the same trepidation stated
in your comments above.  I, too, wish someone would make a kick-ass
six- or eight-hour documentary on The Who!  Something that really takes
its time & digs deep.  After all....this is The Who we're talking about.  A
main pillar in the triumvirate of Rock (Beatles, Stones, Who).

Watching it on VH1 at that bar, I noticed the post WHO'S NEXT content 
flashed by very quickly.  Which is becoming almost a cliche' in discussing 
the history of The Who.  Perhaps a three- or four-hour timeframe suits
the Who's story best.  That would've been ideal.

But remember, they made this mainly for the general rock audience with
the added bonus of rare footage to excite the hardcore fans.  Perhaps the
producers felt two hours was enough.  A buddy showed me an Alice Cooper
documentary & I got pretty antsy when it went past the two hour mark.
And I couldn't even imagine sitting through a four-hour Tom Petty docu-

But like you said:  Don't The Who deserve something more?  Something
bigger?  Dylan, Beatles, Stones....  Zeppelin....  Are they the bigggies now?
Is The Who more like a footnote?  Albeit a very important footnote?  Has
their fan based shriveled up, leaving The Who trailing behind those biggies?
(Why should I care?)

In a similar light:  I notice Eric Clapton's biography is No. 2 on the New 
York Times best seller list.  Does Pete's autobiography have any chance 
of reaching that height?  Can you imagine it?  I can't.

- SCHRADE in Akron

More information about the TheWho mailing list