The other day, an eagerly anticipated vuh-deo showed up in the mail from my good buddies at Netflix: a Blu-Ray DVD of the Stones’ legendary Ladies and Gentlemen, the Rolling Stones concert documentary.
In general, it didn’t disappoint: the band was hot (gotta give out mad props to Bill Wyman and a surprisingly eager Charlie Watts), the song selection was choice (how could it not be in 1972?), and — well, it was just pretty dang great from one end to the other.
Except for one little problem: Mick Taylor.
Seriously, I’m a huge Mick Taylor fan. I even love his 1979 solo album! But, for crying out loud, every time the camera was turned on the dude, he brought the party down. Don’t believe me? Check out this clip, of Keef, Mick, and the boys blasting their way through “Happy.”
I swear, this bit of film gives me goosebumps — until MT takes his solo. Instant softie! Come ON, Mick Taylor! Aren’t you feeling the drive, the desperation, the swagger, the booze-n-heroin infused, grab-you-by-the-nutsatchel urgency of this song? Why you gotta go all Steve Howe on us now?! Save that standing in place, showing no emotion shit for some other tune, like “Midnight Mile” or something. No fooling, you don’t have to let the groove take over your body all the time — but, shit, man, would it hurt to give in to the music and at least tap your feet once in a while?
Sheesh. Who knew?
HVB
Well, not that I have any idea what was up in there, but to me it looks like he’s got a serious jar of pissed-off open. Isn’t he looking daggers at the Jack Daniels twins throughout? I’ve seen this in others over the years, and it looks like mid throw-down was time to hit the stage, to me.
Gee, I wonder if Taylor would have fit in better in early Genesis?
In all seriousness, he never really seemed to ever have anything in the way of stage presence. When you have dudes as dynamic as Mick (especially) and Keith in your band, and even as famously deadpan as Bill and Charlie, you can afford one dull dishrag on lead guitar.
Mr. Royale relayed that in “Life,” Keef mentioned that Mick Taylor was very morose and difficult to work with.
p. 371: “Mick Taylor was always a bit morose. You’ll not see Mick Taylor lying on the floor, holding his stomach, cracking up with laughter for anything.” Even in the photos he looks unhappy.
My personal theory – he is envious that he didn’t get to wear the sash or ruffled shirt.
Did you hear the one about the drug addict who complained about the other drug addict being a drug addict?
If you have a tendency towards moroseness, maybe opiates are not your best choice as a recreational drug.
For the duration of his Stones career he always looked looked a frightened rabbit caught in headlights of a car screaming towards him.
I’m not surprised. He was a low-energy guy whose best contribution to rock was his hair. I feel kind of bad for him in this clip.
Maybe he was ticked off that so many people were focusing on his look rather than how good the Stones were as a live band for the years he was there sulking away but anchoring a group that otherwise has a very mixed record as a live unit.
I mean, I agree, he is not Mr. Excitement, but neither is Wyman. That’s why the camera seldom does more than glance at them. But they’re doing their jobs, it seems to me, based on the results in the dvd.
I *knew* somebody who throw Wyman at me! Let me just stop this nonsense right here. Wyman is the *bass player*. Bassists are not obligated to show emotional involvement in the same way that guitarists — especially “lead” guitarists are. Sorry to go all old-school playground rock logic on you, but sometimes the old rules are the best rules.
Yes, quite right, and I note the distinction. But, really, it is beyond me to think that anyone could watch Ladies and Gentlemen…and be thinking about Mick Taylor’s charisma deficit rather than on how powerful the band is, absolutely never better and seldom even close since them, for my money. But if MT really is a problem, I will gladly loan you some gaffers tape or something to block out the Mick Taylor part of your tv screen, or maybe someone can superimpose footage of a more visually stimulating lead guitarist, such as Steve Vai, ’cause I wouldn’t want anything to interfere with your enjoyment of the dvd.
At least Taylor always kept both hands on the guitar while he was playing.
I think the restraint and elegance Taylor brought to the band worked really well in the studio. It brought balance to their sound. Live the feral intensity tended to take over, and Mick and Keith didn’t know/wouldn’t learn how to use Taylor as a foil.
I think Keith in particular never appreciated him, and unfortunately once Taylor left they hired a Keith wannabe and ruined the balance.
That solo in Happy is really not happening though, I have to admit.
LOL! Good one!
Historically speaking, have the Stones ever gotten anything/intended to get anything out of the Not Keith Spot on stage? It seems like the band was built around the “Mick and Keith flanked by two sedate guys” formation, which changed slightly in the later years when the two of them couldn’t be bothered to pretend to like each other anymore, and Ron Wood became the intermediary. He’s kind of like the Michael J. Pollard to Keith’s Warren Beatty as Clyde and Mick’s Faye Dunaway as Bonnie.
Really, Wood’s function on stage is kind of like Stephen Tyler’s mic stand – it’s the thing he moves around and leans on when tired for those times when Joe Perry won’t make eye contact.
But anyway, what this clip should do is highlight how amazing Jagger is and how unique his stage presence is. Does anybody else in rock do what he does in terms of using the entire stage? Watch the last half minute or so without the sound on to really get the Mick vs. Mick juxtaposition, since he’s directly in front of Taylor. You need whoever is standing there to be almost motionless to not take away from Jagger going to work.
The cut from Taylor’s face to Jagger shaking his pirate sash with wild abandon is perfect, and the move Jagger does immediately afterwards where he powerwalks sideways, completely exiting the shot to leave Keith in command, flanked by his two immobile bandmates and turning back to play at Charlie…that’s killer choreography. That’s some next-level Globetrotters shit there. Then, he finishes the song by rolling his eyes (anybody want to analyze that one?) and pointing back to Keith to give him credit for the whole thing. Tremendous leadership. Jagger, rock’s greatest stage general.
That is superb analysis, esp. the Wood as Michael J. Pollard bit. Just outstanding.
I agree. This is outstanding work that Alex Magic is doing.
However, I would hasten to add that Mick’s stage persona has its limits and that, aside from its many positive attributes, cocaine has a downside too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o4Fgh0KW_4
Note especially at the1:40 mark, Mick’s inability to recognize social cues or the boundaries of personal space (acceptable, or at least unnoticed, behavior in the Stones camp) is only tolerated by a room full of baked Rastafarians because he was their label chief at the time.
Yeah, Taylor’s solo stinks – he’s certainly lukewarm water to the fire and ice, perhaps more like a lamp in the motel room where Keith and Mick are having their torrid love/hate affair, you know it will be smashed, but until it is, it does throw some light on the event.
What surprises me most in this performance in Keith’s singing – better than the album!
Brian was quite animated, and found antagonizing the boys up front very entertaining. I think the band originally had three guys up from that were fun to watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2TifucrJeg
But yeah, Jagger is amazing. I saw him on the Steel Wheels stage in Cleveland, which was one of the few stadiums huge enough to use the entire stage, and the dude went essentially from the first row of the 20 yard line, down steps across the entire dog pound, up steps and out to the opposite 20 yard line over and over again. That was 1989, and I was 27 and running that path one way would have gave me a heart attack, and he was singing, too.
I suppose if you’re gonna just stand there and look at your fingers, you better tear ass. Mick Taylor does a little better at this show, if you ask me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_O_wRuxu14
No question, MJ’s stamina was and probably still is something to behold. But the problem is that, to my ears, the more running around he does the less actual singing he does. Funny that you mention “dog pound”–since what he seems to do more than sing is bark the words. “Barkbarkbark, barkbarkbarkbark barkbarkbark….”
(That’s the first line of Jumping Jack Flash.)
The 1981 tour seems to have been the high water mark for that style of canine vocalizing, but I don’t think by any means that it has gone away entirely. The thing is, he doesn’t do it on record. So I see it as a by-product of treating his latter day (like, post ’78, maybe) performances first as aerobic workouts and only second as singing.
I hope people check out that Tosh/Jagger clip. Personally, I think the only time Mick is really crossing personal space boundaries when he makes his entrance doing his march right in the big guy in the background’s face. But that guy doesn’t react at all, which is probably the perfect response from a guy standing in the Wyman/Taylor position, so I figure Mick took it as a signal that he was free to break out his Stones playbook.
As for the rest, I think it comes off as awkward initially for two reasons. First, it’s a small room, so Mick has to adjust his game: no room for any lateral movement and not even any space to spin. Second, the camera is positioned weirdly to one side instead of head on, which means Tosh has to face inwards, and this severely messes with Mick’s initial attempts to do classic Jagger/Richards mic sharing. They figure it out as the song goes on (note the impromptu hip wiggle vs. guitar wiggle dance they synch up on at 1:4), so points for Tosh for realizing what was happening. By the second half of the song, he’s made room for Jagger to share the mic with him. I’m betting he studied some game tape of Mick before filming.
Something else of note: Tosh had a subtly wide stance. I like it for him, gave him a nice power base and center of gravity, but that’s also clearly screwing up Jagger’s floor movement in the early going. Mick actually picks up on this as well. Note around 1:40, where Mick employs the classic Jagger Chicken Stance to reposition Tosh, and then they both start doing that foot stomp dance, which literally alters Tosh’s stance. The positioning problems don’t resurface after this, a textbook example of Jagger moving without the ball to open the floor.
Mick’s biggest mistake in the whole thing: the guy in the tank top playing the keys on the far left was totally up for some Jagger interaction. He’s got the best moves in the backing band but Mick never goes to him. This is something I definitely would have asked Jagger about in the post-video press conference.
Jagger always wore so much makeup during this era. It was frightening.
Stamina? Listen to the Street Fighting Man clip 2kMan posted. Jagger is so completely out breath he hardly even tries to sing. He still got enough in the tank to throw rose petals though.
It’s true. I cut him a little slack on that because it was the last song of the set.
That was the encore. Don’t you wish you’d have seen that show in person?
Partly because of this discussion, I downloaded the bootleg called Brussels Affair ’73 when I came across a link to it recently:
http://www.aquariumdrunkard.com/2010/11/29/the-rolling-stones-brussels-affair-1973/
Mick Taylor is pretty much on fire on this stuff. Even Happy, where he tears off a slide solo. Maybe it helps to listen and not look at Taylor’s impassive countenance while he plays.
I’m sure there are countless documents of Taylor ripping off beautiful solos in concert, but can you deny that his solo on this version of “Happy” SOUNDS like he’s not the least bit interested? And, more importantly, can you deny HVB the right to feel down after noting this?
To me it sounds like he can’t find his way onto the runaway train that the song represents. I personally would not infer lack of interest in the music just because he’s not prancing about. And hvb totally has the right to feel any way he wants.
Yes, well, I suppose I would be sullen too if’n I had never received my song-writing credits for the Rolling Stones.
Give me a break! Do you
honestly think Jagger and Richards would have even considered hiring Taylor if he even DARED to try to come close to their grandstanding? Mick Taylor was a serious artist a cut above the so called “Glimmer Twins” Their first mistake was not trying to taking care of Jimmy Milller (one of the greatest producers of all time). Just listen to how quickly they became a self parody and their “sound” headed for the toilet on “lt’s Only Rock-n-Roll” with the two exceptions of Taylor co-writing “Till The Next Goodbye” and “Time Waits For No One”, which of course, he received NO WRITING CREDIT. Taylor had too much musical and writing ability for the corporation that The Stones became.
Nothing they have released since his departure bears any of the importance of music conceived with him.Don’t get me wrong, the Stones are my all time favorite band, but Keith felt threatend by Taylor’s talent and ideas and Mick didn’t have the balls to give Taylor any writing credit, nor stick up for him.
THE STONES OWE MICK TAYLOR A GREAT DEAL FOR HIS CONTRIBUTION TO THE “GREATEST ROCK AND ROLL BAND IN THE WORLD”, a title they received after he joined,
and has people scratching their heads after he left.
Ron Wood ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Kieth Lite !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
Great debut (right?) post, joehep! Your point about Jimmy Miller is especially good. Welcome aboard and keep the good stuff coming.
You got it buddy, I mean Mr. Moderator.
I hear so much bullshit out there, sometimes i have to get it off my chest.
I understand people have aright to their opinion, but I do believe some are living under a rock.
Joe
Hey, I love Taylor with the Stones, but I don’t think he did his reputation any favors by producing so little of any consequence after quitting the band.
From what I’ve read it would appear that Jagger purposely didn’t want to give Taylor any song-writing credits.
That would mean encroachment on the Jagger/Richards fortress,
let alone threaten Richards even more about M Taylor’s superior guitar gifts. Ever hear some of the “unofficial” live releases from ’72, ’74 and ’75 ? Taylor is amazing and Richards sounds like he’s never even HEARD some of the songs before.
The US 72 tour and Australian and European tours of 73 Keith Richards plays like a man possessed, and on copious amounts of coke. Keith is surprisingly consistent and spot on for those tours and Taylor certainly has his moments, but consistency isn’t his forte.
I’ll have to pull out the pince nez for 74 – there was no tour that year. I’ll put it on the other eye for 75. Ronnie Wood stepped onstage for The stones that year.
How did I miss this day? I think I was out of town.
Anyway, The Rolling Stones were already kinda popular the day Mick Taylor joined. They could have just quit the day Brian left and they’d still be the greatest band ever.
I’m not sure what shows the “Headin’ For An Overload” bootleg is from, maybe Canada. Supposedly there were quite a few bad gigs, this was one of them. At times Taylor’s leads are a bit much, almost overcompensating for Richard’s sloppy rhythm.