| « Rock Town Hall T-Shirts!!!: Just In Time For The Holidays!!! | Rock Town Hall Reflections: Voices Carry » |
The Horror, The Horror: Amy Winehouse With The Rolling Stones
12/27/07 | by Mr. Moderator
I wish I could find the hi-def broadcast version of this guest appearance by Amy Winehouse with The Rolling Stones at the 2007 Isle of Wight Festival. It's really bad, and the camera crew on the hi-def broadcast picked up some very telling looks of varying emotions from the musicians:
- An embarrassed glance between that keyboard guy, Chuck Leavell (?), and the Bill Wyman replacement bassist
- Keef and Ron discussing real estate in the Bahamas while tossing off beginner blues licks that had nothing to do with the lame performance of the song
- Amy-as-desparate-fangirl, clutching to her sole snack sack of tricks in full knowledge of how badly she was being exposed (no wonder she's throwing down all those drugs)
- Mick as Alpha Bitch, blind to how bad the whole scene is, wholly focused on putting on his show, not getting distracted by thoughts of the days when a real guest star could step onstage to match moves with him. Oh, Tina!
If anyone finds a clip of the hi-def broadcast version, please send it our way. Thanks!
8 comments
I don't know what possesses the Stones to those guest spots at their concerts. I wonder if they don't know they're The Rolling Fucking Stones sometimes. I don't mind them paying back a little to John Lee Hooker or Bo Diddley, but Amy Winehouse? Justin Timberlake? Who cares? Do they really think their fan base listens to that stuff? Do they think they're still played on the same stations as those artists?
Sometimes I wish they'd start preserving their legacy and making sure vault releases meet the band's standards, but then they do something like that and I think they really just have no idea who or what they are, and they should just let me do it.
Sometimes I wish they'd start preserving their legacy and making sure vault releases meet the band's standards, but then they do something like that and I think they really just have no idea who or what they are, and they should just let me do it.
12/28/07 @ 11:26
Comment from: shawnkilroy [Member] 
I'm not big on the Stones Motown shit either.
I like Jagger Richards compositions.
They might as well have played R-E-S-P-E-C-T.
I like Jagger Richards compositions.
They might as well have played R-E-S-P-E-C-T.
12/28/07 @ 11:38
Comment from: saturnismine [Member]
yeah, this is just ridiculous.
amy can sing with the best of them, but when she's trying too hard, she sounds like an American Idol reject, oversinging every god damned note.
2K, when you write "I wonder if they don't know they're The Rolling Fucking Stones sometimes", it sounds like you're having a tough time with this reality: Mick's show-bizzy, shticky approach won out over any other direction a long time ago. The stones have been paying lip service to their darker side for awhile now.
amy can sing with the best of them, but when she's trying too hard, she sounds like an American Idol reject, oversinging every god damned note.
2K, when you write "I wonder if they don't know they're The Rolling Fucking Stones sometimes", it sounds like you're having a tough time with this reality: Mick's show-bizzy, shticky approach won out over any other direction a long time ago. The stones have been paying lip service to their darker side for awhile now.
12/28/07 @ 12:11
Well saturn, I definitely have days where my fanboy adoration of the Stones is challenged by the fact that they are first and foremost, Stones Inc. and have been for a very long time. Since 1969, I'd say. But when the rock n roll is as good as they can do it, then I can handle the fact that these guys aren't like all those little bands I love and can see and meet for next to nothing.
But when their albums are pathetic, like A Bigger Bang and they tour when it seems Keith's fingers are so swollen he can't even play, then I start having problems. The 2002 tour was pretty exceptional by any standards and I didn't feel I paid too much. 2005 was fun more for the where and who I was with, and I think if I'd have dropped 400 bucks on it, I'd have been let down. In 02 I felt they still played the kind of rock n roll I really love, but by 05 it seems they just got stiff on their legend.
Which really bums me out.
But when their albums are pathetic, like A Bigger Bang and they tour when it seems Keith's fingers are so swollen he can't even play, then I start having problems. The 2002 tour was pretty exceptional by any standards and I didn't feel I paid too much. 2005 was fun more for the where and who I was with, and I think if I'd have dropped 400 bucks on it, I'd have been let down. In 02 I felt they still played the kind of rock n roll I really love, but by 05 it seems they just got stiff on their legend.
Which really bums me out.
12/28/07 @ 13:40
Comment from: Mr. Moderator [Member]
Our friend HVB, still having trouble posting from his exotic locale, sends the following comment:
"I can´t hear the track in this Internet cafe, but I can see the vuh-deo.
Perhaps my inability to be distracted by the awful music has allowed me to
key in on a particularly important visual aspect of this performance,
namely: Mick´s dance moves. Trust me, I wish I were joking when I say:
Jackie Rodgers, Jr.
Go back, watch again, and tell me if I´m wrong.
Ciao from not-very-sunny Uruguay,
HVB"
"I can´t hear the track in this Internet cafe, but I can see the vuh-deo.
Perhaps my inability to be distracted by the awful music has allowed me to
key in on a particularly important visual aspect of this performance,
namely: Mick´s dance moves. Trust me, I wish I were joking when I say:
Jackie Rodgers, Jr.
Go back, watch again, and tell me if I´m wrong.
Ciao from not-very-sunny Uruguay,
HVB"
12/30/07 @ 07:55
Comment from: michael k [Member]
Holy crap - what song is Amy Winehouse singing??? Reminds me of the clip I saw of the Stones in Philly where Keith starts playing 'It's Only Rock N Roll' and Mick sings 'Satisfaction' instead. Aye...
btw Mr Mod - kudos on the Jackie Rogers Jr reference. we watched the SCTV Christmas DVD last week (again) and the "live via satellite" show with Bobby Bittman (HOW ARE YA??) and Jackie Rogers Jr is priceless...
incidentally - is Jackie Rogers Jr related to Thom Yorke?
btw Mr Mod - kudos on the Jackie Rogers Jr reference. we watched the SCTV Christmas DVD last week (again) and the "live via satellite" show with Bobby Bittman (HOW ARE YA??) and Jackie Rogers Jr is priceless...
incidentally - is Jackie Rogers Jr related to Thom Yorke?
01/02/08 @ 09:38
Comment from: Mr. Moderator [Member]
I love that Jackie Rogers Jr/Thom Yorke observation. We might have to run their DNA through RTH Labs. The reference to JR Jr, however, was HVB's. I was just passing along his notes from Uruguay.
01/02/08 @ 12:04
Comment feed for this postComments are not allowed from anonymous visitors.
