The Classic/Retro Pop Culture Thread

Sounds like Smokey, but not really a memorable song.

Same. Sounds like The Turtles, but not as memorable as some of their others.

A fun sing-along song (except for those listening to me sing along).

Yeah, that never happened on Starsky & Hutch. Almost never.

I do shamble a lot.

More or less. He was The Man With No Vocabulary. I always wished that there could have been a movie, or at least an episode, where Josh and Paladin teamed up, because they are such polar opposites. I wished the same thing about Columbo and Monk.

Just the usual quizzes and fun facts lately, but I usually get something on Saturday, so maybe there will be an update today.

 

The overwhelming criticism was dead centered on the war not on unrest in the streets (which to any rational mind, knew LBJ could not do anything about--effectively--to address beyond what he already put forward with legislation), since the critics--that anti-war culture--was obsessed with that to the exclusion of anything else. Its no wonder that Nixon--who campaigned on a promise to end the war--was invited to make that September 16, 1968 cameo on Laugh-In, as he--despite being one of the most hardline of Cold War Republicans (the polar opposite of the Hollywood Left) was seen in any favorable light because of that one and only thing the Hollywood left was most concerned with. Further, Laugh-In producer George Schlatter has said he thought the L-I appearance won the presidency for Nixon (suggesting the show's support also won over voters from other parties who may not have supported the Republican.

Whether that was true or not cannot be verified, but one cannot underestimate the fact Nixon's "end the war" promise was the reason he was invited to the show when under any other circumstances, Nixon was seen as everything from being a loser to a toxic figure in 1960s politics.

Long before Millennials deceived themselves, Baby Boomers had conned themselves about their own importance to every corner of life, and when it came to LBJ, there's no doubt their assessment of him centers on Vietnam, their response to it, and how LBJ was the worst thing since the Black Plague. I've seen and heard enough of that generation to know they push LBJ's historic domestic achievements aside all to harp on the war. Of course, for such a peace-loving faction of a generation, the conveniently forget how they treated returning vets, like my recently retired local postal driver, who once told me that he was soiled by dog feces hurled at him at the hands of "peaceful" anti-war individuals when he returned home in 1971.

Go figure.

More than establishing it, Bullitt brought a level of adult realism to so many aspects of a police drama and the politics that was manipulating the streets of that time. In Vaughn's Chalmers, we not only see the prototype "young-ish" politician playing both police department, his own office and the media for his own ends (and not caring about the danger of making San Francisco a magnet for organized criminals hunting his fake witness), but we see how he still dangled career advancement to Bullitt--even after the murders of the Remicks--which he was partially responsible for, not to mention his apparently racist demand that African American Dr, Willard be replaced for being "too--(any number of lies)" despite the nurse identifying him as one of the top physicians. That layered character building made Chalmers as vital a character to the story as Bullitt, and the perfect, phony contrast to a man who as real with everyone as one can imagine, and reflective of the era's increasing distrust of politicians, the latter being a model for that kind of commentary in nearly every police TV series and movie since, right up to current productions.

This was no law enforcement officer--or politicians cut from the Jack Webb mold to be found here. In other words, you could not find a greater opposite to all things Bullitt than Dragnet or then-recently premiered Adam-12.

Eh?? Bissett's character (Cathy) was there to represent the normal, human side of the world and Bullitt's life, specifically the man, not the badge, but most importantly, her questioning his apparent acceptance of / lack of revulsion at the horror of death or murder (notably Dorothy Renick in a stark, realistic crime scene moment), which comes back--as a bold end to film--to stop Bullitt cold in the wake of his necessary killing of Johnny Ross, as he sees Cathy sleeping, then he almost shamefully accepts her assessment as he looks in the mirror.
That was a unique, powerful characterization of one in law enforcement on film. Until this film, it was rare for any TV or movie cop to seriously doubt himself and whether of nor not he had been too consumed by the blood and brutality of the job, and what kind of human he would be. This was touched on in episodes of Naked City (ABC, 1958-1963) and the original N.Y.P.D. (ABC, 1967-1969), but that's the point--it was touched on, not used as a larger commentary on the soul or identity of the main character, and certainly not ending on a note of clear uncertainty. As mentioned above, that was bold end to a film. No triumphant no idiotic puns or parting smart-ass-ery (like too many cop, action and superhero films of the 80s - to the present).

For me, the oft-referred to car chase was merely an accent about the forces surrounding Bullitt--from Chalmers trying to undermine and politically break him, to the killers' actions essentially leading to the same fate for him. Its no more the most important element of the film than Popeye's car pursuit was in The French Connection (which, by the way, featured stunt driving/co-ordination by the late, great Bill Hickman).

What made the film was its naturalistic, bleak depiction of police and politics with McQueen perfectly bringing the "caught in the middle fighter" to life. While movies already had lone or unconventional cop/detective films, such as Harper with Paul Newman (Warner Brothers, 1966), Bullitt was one of film's major genre breakthroughs with an almost incalculable effect on TV and movie law enforcement productions. Put it this way, the detective/cop genre had been around since the dawn of film, with some classic films peppered among the lot, but then there was everything after Bullitt, which was a different animal ushering in the desire for realism, instead of the spit-and-polish still sold on TV and some of the movies predating it.

Even though McQueen would end the decade with the Oscar-nominated The Reviers (Solar / National General Pictures, 1969), Bullitt could be seen as the true cap of an indisputably historic decade of landmark films for the actor.

 

Ah. Often considered the nadir of The Monkees as an entertainment force, but I've always felt that was a knee-jerk overreaction.

I disagree. Magical Mystery Tour had no plot at all (as everyone except Paul freely admitted anytime the question was put to them), but at least Head was clearly about breaking the conventions of the group's origins and the greater artificiality of Hollywood as a business. Anyone not getting that in 1968 must have been watching another movie, being needlessly churlish, or were, shall we say, "on something" and were too far in another zone to get it.

One of their better songs, and it was great to see the group actually in concert again (from a May, 1968 performance in Salt Lake City)--beyond the tour episode of the TV series.

The sessions which produced the Head tracks marked yet another natural transition for the group, with songs that not only reflected their individual musical influences, but took on the less pop-oriented sounds typical of music at the end of that decade. It was this transition that--in my view--made the group's overall discography stronger / evidence of growth as the decades passed, instead of their output only sounding like the early Boyce/Hart material.

In the 1997 30th anniversary TV special, Hey. Hey, We're The Monkees, (yes, it was released a few months past the actual 1996 30th anniversary date, but was produced to acknowledge it) Davy was of the opinion that a film like Ghostbusters was the kind of movie the group needed to make, but I thought he was incorrect, as a Ghostbusters-type of film would have been a more expensive version of the "Monkees vs. Monsters" episodes already well known to the public, and would have only served to keep the group locked into that TV image. Then again, it always seemed Davy wanted the "good 'ol days" of early Kirshner-era Monkee success to continue, but he should have realized that one, they had much success after Kirshner, were a markedly superior group as time moved forward, and two, its doubtful the public would have spent a couple of generations (by the time of the documentary) wanting to see the return of the group (and rediscover their catalog) if it had been one long Kirshner / Davy-gets-the-girl production from start to finish.

Head is certainly not flawless, but the combined talents of the group made for a better experimental production (and window into a group changing beyond that which initially made them famous) than The Beatles' ill-fated Magical Mystery Tour or equally ill-fated Rolling Stones' Rock 'n' Roll Circus.

 

So, you're saying they were on some sort of tour involving magic and mystery?

 

I did like most of the musical numbers.

 

I can only echo that well-said post. If you follow the detective story up from film noir, it's mostly a vehicle for private eyes, with police detectives usually serving as foils and not too interesting in their own right. There had been some good and realistic police stories, but the detective was usually a basic square civil servant. McQueen made the cop the cool one, with a sense of style, a distinctive muscle car, a pretty, upscale artist girlfriend, and most of all a basic mistrust of the authority figures over him, and the corruption above that. The cop even the counter-culture could get behind. This was a radical new look for the police procedural.

I felt like the scenes with Bisset were not just an obligatory love interest, but to remind the audience that Bullitt was a real person, what he was doing was not normal, and it could have real negative consequences for him. If that seems obvious today, try to imagine 1968 era Jack Lord doing similar scenes on Hawaii Five-O. That said, the dialogue they wrote for her was not great.

The car chase gets all the attention and understandably so. But it was a riveting peak that built on the realistic world that the movie had built to that point. A lot of the lighting is documentary-like, as are the way locations are shot. Harper was mentioned above, and it's a fine film, but they are still "driving" with rear-projection behind them. No way were Yates and McQueen going to do stuff like that.

Most of all I think it's a case of an almost-perfect match of time, movie and star. Personally I still think that the role McQueen was born to play was Jake in The Sand Pebbles, but Bullitt hits pretty much all the right notes for me.

 

The Saturday MeTV email came yesterday, but there's no mention of any schedule changes or new shows coming to the lineup.

Written by Jack Nicholson. Interesting. "Ever dance with a Monkee in the pale moonlight?"

Not Micky? What a pity.

Maybe they should have quit while they were ahead.

Oh, it's nice enough, just not their best.

No, I disagree with that completely.

That's just a matter of history at this point.

I'm pretty sure that distinction goes to the Trickster.

The latter is a valid criticism, which I mentioned earlier (and one of the early reasons why I've gone to great lengths to point out that I'm a Liberal and not a Left Winger), but nobody ever brushed aside LBJ's civic accomplishments. His image is definitely tarnished by his failures, but that's pretty much a universal phenomenon, especially for public figures-- just ask Bill Cosby-- but his contributions to American idealism are hardly forgotten. Tricky Dick himself could make a better claim to having his achievements buried by Watergate and Vietnam-- he did make a couple of positive contributions, after all.

It could be that this mission was an outlier in that regard.

No JCAHO accreditation for him!

Sweet.

I hope they introduced themselves as Dr Huer and Wilma.

They should have called it "New Acquaintance Should Be Forgot."

Now there's something Wiki should have explained.

Didn't that actually happen at some point?

Aww.

 

Ohh...please..no references to that horrible movie with the short, wrinkled guy in the foam rubber suit...

…..ahem...

Why? The group's 1968 began still riding the wave of one of their biggest hits in Daydream Believer (released October, 1967), and had another major hit in February '68 with "Valleri". Even after the TV show was cancelled, the album The Birds, the Bees and the Monkees reached #3, giving every indicator that they had more to offer. One misunderstood film was not the sounding of an alarm, when the film was largely missed--meaning something few even knew was in theaters (as pointed out by the band) had no bearing on their lives as a band.

We can agree to disagree, but the standing judgement of LBJ usually begins with that ceremony on Air Force One (understandably so), and then becomes a lengthy tirade about the war, with his domestic achievements pushed into the background, almost as if that happened independently of LBJ, or was "destined" to happen no matter who was the president, when there were no guarantees or inevitability regarding any rights were black people were concerned.

Well, it IS the Wiki-verse, the black hole of sense, accuracy and presentation....

Recall the climate of the time: if Nixon had announced his run on a pro-war platform, Schlatter--considering his political views--would not have invited Nixon to the show. Nixon's biggest "chip" on that table was the fact he offered the one thing the Hollywood Left was most interested in, so even if he was one of the most known/vocal Cold Warriors of that age, the promise of saying bye-bye to Vietnam was all they needed to hear, which was the opposite of what Humphrey offered--meaning staying on track with the hated LBJ's Vietnam policies.

Race was suggested, as Chalmers--given his position--could have asserted himself and "pulled rank" (essentially what he eventually resorted to) with any of the staff to get information, but he--almost immediately--starts laying on "reasons" why Willard was anything but the right physician for the job. I think there's strong evidence to say director Yates, and writers Kleiner & Trustman meant Chalmers to go in that direction, particularly because the film--produced and seen as playing it so true in so many ways at that critical point in U.S. history, so a politician like Chalmers harboring race issues would not be surprising, but in line with character type.

I did in yesterday's post with:

"Head was clearly about breaking the conventions of the group's origins and the greater artificiality of Hollywood as a business."

Clear as day. On the other hand, a bus tour with allegedly colorful characters is not a plot but a one-line post card from anyone taking the Greyhound in the 60s. The 70-bus pile-up that was Magical Mystery Tour should have been predicted, as its lack of structure and wanna-be "cutesy/whimsical" trappings (and other issues) were not within a country mile of coherence as a film.

Again, clear as day. To anyone knowing the kind of humor used by the group, breaking narrative conventions was something they excelled at, the story did not need much more to get its point across. That said, the problem with the reception to the film was not the story or presentation at all, but was hiring some would-be Avant Garde marketing man (John Brockman) who used his mug to promote the film, rather than sell it as the very thing I was--a Monkees film. I cannot think of a more disastrous example of mismanaged / mischaracterized promotional campaign for a film than the one for Head.

Here's the thing about The Rock 'n' Roll Circus' failings: contrary to Stones-issued myths--was not the performance by The Who (by the way, they were the runaway superior act of the production, but not the derailing of the production), it was not the ostracized Brian Jones, or anything other than Jagger--once again--trying to get in on the aforementioned "cutesy / whimsical" vibe/image in the Beatle tradition, which was clear for a band not known for entertaining that kind of identity in so public a fashion (far beyond the experimentation during Their Satanic Majesties Request recording).

This suggests that Jagger's claim that he was the driving force behind the "back to roots" direction of that year's Beggars' Banquet, was more self-promotion than fact, since of all the Stones, he was nowhere near the true blues/bluegrass enthusiast he tried to make himself out to be.
]

 

And, sadly, it was probably the best of all the Batman movies.

Actually, I was just punning on the title.

I suppose it depends on the focus of the documentary and the depth of the reporting.

Definitely epic stuff there.

I know it and I like it, but I've never paid much attention to it. I didn't even recognize it by the title.

There's certainly plenty here I've never heard or have forgotten.

Toni Basil had a wondrous one hit in the early 80s with "Oh, Mickey." "Oh, Mickey, what a pity you don't understand-- you take me by the heart when you take me by the hand." You've heard, and can't unhear it, but you've forgotten it was her.

Interesting. I'll have to remember that the next time I listen to it.

I've seen it a lot, because Channel 38 used to run it endlessly when I was a kid, but I never paid a lot of attention to it. I'm pretty sure I remember somebody falling through to the tunnels, though.

Sweet.

 

Wha...? Acoustic slide guitar was blues before it was country.

I wouldn't recommend listening any other way. Beggars Banquet to Exile on Main Street is often regarded as one of the strongest album runs in rock and roll history, and I'm hard pressed to come up with a wasted track in any of it.

"Jumpin' Jack Flash" I can see, but "She's A Rainbow"?

Finally having taken a break from touring, Jagger and especially Richards began to look back to early blues, which had had something of a rediscovery as part of the '60s folk scene. This proved to be a lasting source of inspiration, and combined with Jones dropping out of the band, led into what many think of as the Stones' most fertile period. Some of the Stones trademarks really come to the fore on this album, like the background bed of acoustic guitars, Richards beginning to experiment with alternate tunings, and Jagger's distinctive "blues accent" ("stone" and "gone" almost rhyming).

I don't think too much about the dark/Satanic Stones vibe, though it was certainly great marketing. Nor do I care about Beatles comparisons, but personally I've listened to "Beggar's" probably 50-to-1 over "The White Album."

And before 2018 is behind us, I'll bring up a 50 year old favorite that doesn't seem to have been mentioned yet. The Kinks Are the Village Green Preservation Society is almost the opposite of experimental rock, but a wonderfully coherent and focused piece of work. Ray Davies's almost obsessive nostalgia for a simpler time is singularly British, and yet somehow universal for anyone disillusioned with the complexities and pressures of adult life. In addition to being a metaphor for his obvious conflicting feelings on the "rewards" of music stardom, he also seems to look back fondly at the post-war era in Britain, when times were tough but everyone pulled together. One gets the impression that he knew those days were gone for good, and wants to document them before the memories fade away. There are not one but two songs about photographs, capturing moments in time "to prove that they really existed." Character studies of old school chums, local tarts and eccentrics are as deft as any Davies ever drew. The metaphysical "Big Sky" is strangely powerful and uplifting in its condemnation of indifference. "Starstruck" is a deceptively jaunty look at the pitfalls of fame. Despite the lack of a familiar single, the strength of the album has made it one of the strongest of the Kinks' catalog, and appears on many critics' best albums list. A great favorite of mine and one I never tire of listening to, with a great many lines that I find come to mind in life's situations.

 

Oh I see. Point taken!

Ah, I did not know that.

 

Arguably their best record of the 60s, along with Aftermath, 12x5 and December's Children (And Everybody's).

AKA the most pointlessly over-analyzed song in the Stones catalog by equally pointless music "journalists". As Richards once said (paraphrasing), after that song's release, people became ridiculous about the group; it wasn't like they were walking around with their arm around Lucifer's shoulders like he was their pal, hence a song of this kind. Then again, music "journalists" are often the worst kind of fanboys who geek out on a projected image as if it were real.

Brian has more contributions to Stones tracks (depending on what studio source you refer to), and personally, "No Expectations" is tied as the best track of the album, along with "Street Fighting Man". The son has a deeper, inwardly pointing heart to it that that would never be heard on a Stones album again.

...and that makes it rather sophomoric. Like the kind of suggestive, teasing writing of Little Richard over a decade earlier.

See my earlier comment on its place on the record.

...sans the intrusive choir of the album version on Let it Bleed.

Its generally considered one of the great albums by a rock group of the 1960s, all-time, and is certainly held in higher regard (deservedly so) than The Beatles/White Album. It was not only a return to their Brian-influenced roots, but marked a true next stage that--despite the internal chaos and legal threats--would propel them into the next decade, while the White Album only marked a confused, disjointed beginning of the end of the rudderless Good Ship Beatles.

What? They entered 1968 riding on the one of the best selling singles of the decade, and even after the series was cancelled in March, still had a #3 album, which means they were still crushing most of their contemporaries. By your criteria of "quit while they were ahead," then Elvis should have packed it in during those pre-'68 comeback/movie period when he was a largely irrelevant, greasy-haired throwback to what was then an already by-gone era. Or perhaps The Moody Blues--after a big hit such as "Go Now" should have "quit while they were ahead" before the rapid decline...which means they would have never lived to enjoy the rebirth as one of the great acts? In other words, there was no logical reason for The Monkees to quit at the time of their 5th LP, as there was no indicator of reception to the group, Head, or anything else justifying dissolving the group.

The group still had massive followings in Australia and Japan, among other places, as evidenced by their touring record post-TV series. Traditionally, America is usually the first to jump on an entertainment act, rocket them to the moon, then drop off after a time. Other nations had more long-term and arguably more expansive tastes not dictated by one or two "top" acts as the chief influence. This explains why long after the TV show entered re-runs, the group still had large international audiences.

You're misinterpreting what a theme and plot is. The plot was--again--clear as day, with the characters openly referring to the artificiality of their film world, and wanting to escape it, and those around them that seem to flourish the fake backdrop worlds. That is the plot. On the other hand, in Magical Mystery Tour, a bus ride with oddballs and oddball moments is not what anyone would describe as a plot; its barely a TV Guide description, and even that would be adding more to it that the actual idea deserved, hence the reason is was critically sledgehammered. There was no reason, no beginning, middle, end or overall message, other than trying to be strange and fanciful, and that is not a story.

Of course. Country musicians lifted much from blues artists (and did not give credit where it was due, of course), and ham-fisted it into country tracks. Early country musicians had never heard of a sound like slide guitar in the blues tradition before, and were completely taken by surprise by its "lyrics without words" way communicating emotion.

Some of this is more Jagger/Richards myth; despite Brian Jones being a very experimental and/or revolutionary figure in adding new sounds to rock, he was the blues man of the group, and founded it to be just that. Reportedly, he was never fond of Jagger trying to go the "whimsical Beatle" route with songs, and enjoyed returning to the sound(s) that would lead to Beggars' Banquet, hence his contributions being among the most memorable of the album.

Keith Richards was never a true blues musician at all, and has since sold himself as something he certainly was not when Brian was a force in the group (and taught Richards whatever he knew about the blues), and if one listens to Mick Taylor, Richards was not during his run with the group. Richards was and remains a devotee of Chuck Berry, hence his endless Berry-esque riffs (instead of the blues lines created by others) on almost every album cut after Taylor's departure.

Heh...who wouldn't?[/quote]

 

Happy New Year! I think....

Mild, but very easy to listen to.

Sounds like....

Yeah.

The year was off to kind of a slow start.

This is pretty catchy.

Hah! Yeah, right over my head.