 |
|
List Price: $19.98 |
|
Publisher: Abkco
Salesrank: 24138
Released: 2003-10-21
Theatrical-Release: 1970-04-26
|
| Our Price: $15.99 |
|
|
|
Availibility: 1
Costumer Rating:  |
Customer Reviews:
I found this film fascinating, despite its reputation…. 
This film has been unfairly maligned by many (Rolling Stones fans, Godard fans), but it’s actually pretty good and absolutely fascinating at times. Godard’s politics get in the way of his cinematic mastery at times, but overall I found this as good and as compulsively watchable as his classic films. One of the greatest things about this film (as others have noted here) is showing The Rolling Stones in their rawest state. This isn’t a slick, MTV, reality style TV programme with lame interviews and an obsession with showing only the “fun times” while working. Godard shows (with his camera circling the studio in brilliantly filmed long takes) how absolutely TEDIOUS it is to make a record/CD/music. We see Jagger, Richards, Wyman, Watts (and studio musicians) obsess over the most minute details on how the song Sympathy for the Devil is going to sound. It’s not like “hey, let’s do the song”, and one take later, they’re done. There aren’t any groupies, flashing lights, nothing. It’s just The Stones making their music, and it shows the dedication that great musicians like The Rolling Stones put into their craft. It’s also especially sad to see Brian Jones, who was pretty much “gone” at the time of this film. The Stones put him off in a corner (he looks like he’s sitting in his own little box), and you can hear him strumming inaudibly. There’s a microphone in front of him, but it obviously isn’t on, and Jones doesn’t seem to know. Jagger, Wyman, Richards, and Watts pretty much ignore him, and soldier on without him. Jones’s drug use and alienation were at its zenith here, and he died shortly after these sessions. These sequences might be the most realistic depiction of rock musicians recording an album ever.
Godard intercuts a lot of political material in the film (this film was made during his generally abysmal “Maoist” period), but his framing (especially scenes shot at a junkyard) is classic Godard. Even though these scenes in the junkyard are with the Black Panthers and their rhetoric/dialogue are completely dated, dogmatic, and overly political, the scenes are still well shot and crafted. I never found the film boring, unlike some of Godard’s other Maoist films like La Chinoise, which was REALLY boring. So if you’re a Godard fan, or a Stones fan, you should see this film. It’s really quite good, despite some of its politics.
***pathetic (NO sympathy!) 
Great song; ridiculous movie.
I’m of this silly generation, yet it is not the silliness of half this movie which bothers me. (The movie mixes footage of the Rolling Stones recording “Sympathy For the Devil” with immature, amateur social “commentary”.)
It is the arrogance and the ignorance which flows from this film that bothers me, the fakery that richness and idleness birth. Silly me! When I was impressionable, I listened to these jesters and these jumping jack flashes rather than the wisdom of the west.
Maybe this is why so many had so many objections to us in the 1970s; we were so objectionable.
Continue to listen to the song. Save yourself, though, from this dull, pornographic drivel. (Unless, of course, you want to see just how ugly and empty we were then.)
Caveat Emptor
I must have had this movie in my hands a few dozen times before I finally picked it up in a hasty moment recently. The reviews herein hit the nail pretty squarely and if you are wondering about it, please take note: THIS IS NOT A DOCUMENTARY ABOUT THE STONES.
I know nothing of Jean-Luc Godard’s work and have no desire to if this is indicative of his style. That’s not a knock on him at all, just a definition of my own taste. That said, the Stones footage is priceless, especially is you are intrigued by what some might consider the mundane nature of composing a song. Keith has often confessed that the best songwriting of the band comes from what he calls a “marination” process and that is an apt description of how Sympathy for the Devil is created in the footage from the studio we are treated to. The film captures this fascinating process as the song progresses and transforms. Highlights along the way are Keith’s seemingly off-the-cuff riffing that mirror the final stinging solo of the recording, the keyboard morphing from organ to the more classic piano, and the percussion component ending with the now classic work from Rocky Dijon. It was like being a fly on the wall and proved mesmerizing to me.
However, if you are inpatient with the interwoven parts of the film that the back cover calls “political cartoons” and find it too tedious to sift through, I would strongly advise renting before owning. Interestingly enough, I found Gimme Shelter far more frustrating because much of the Stones footage in that movie was focused on Jagger exclusively. In this movie, we are treated to a broad canvas and get to see everyone, including Brian Jones, contributing. Many slag off his part in the process, but I think he was doing his best and was not nearly as “out of it” as many reviewers have stated.
Five stars for the Stones, minus two for the rest, that’s the final rating of three.
3 and 1/2 stars : a little misunderstanding about this film must be pointed out
i don’t think this movie is an absolute masterpiece (and sure, there is better films of Godard than this one) but it contains some interesting moments and situations like a lot of Godard’s films ; Godard is not the strongest director for telling a linear narrative tale but in his film the situations, the originality of the scenes are predominant without expecting that the man will tell a common story with a beginning, a middle and an end ; however, he is a good director. Secondly, in my opinion this is an error to watch this film with the idea that the film is a movie about the Stones (maybe this is partly due to the fault of the american title, referring to the famous song of the band, the french title is ‘One + One’), this is above all a Godard’s film and the director uses the Stones as a tool, a chapter in his film and not with the intention of filming uniquely this band ; so my advice for the fans of the Rolling Stones is to search elsewhere and buy some Stones’ live stuff (i suppose there is plenty of that on the market) instead of watching a Godard’s film with the purpose to watch a Stones’ one.
A Goddard classic 
An amazing depiction of the creative process in contrast to the “revolutionary” process. The Stones, working together, create a new piece of music, which is itself a commentary on political upheaval. At the same time, Goddard, pointing his finger at the true “devil” - i.e. the deadening impact of the media - playfully contrasts the Stone’s creative process with the decidedly “uncreative” language and actions of the “revolutionary” forces of the time as well as the keepers of the status quo. As with all of Goddard’s films, here too the media is indeed the message, but one that is in no way a massage; “revolutionaries” mouthing words that they hear played on a tape recorder, a book-store where you have to punch a hippy and give a Nazi salute before you can leave with copies of pornography - these are the images that Goddard assaults us with right outside of the studio where the Stones are doing their creative work.
All in all, a wonderful cinematic interpretation of the Stones’ song, Sympathy for the Devil. Nor does Goddard exempt himself, or at least his own medium, from his critique of the deadening power of the media. Check out the last image of the film.
