I've just seen The Filth & the Fury for the first time and its a brilliant documentry, but why did the Pistols have to hide in the dark?
I'm well aware of the critical hammerings they recieved from British tabloids in the 70s, but its not like they were criminals and we all know what they look like any way, so why hide in the dark?
Did I just completely miss the point?
It was to preserve the imagery of The sex pistols as they were in the '70s, rather than introduce these men in their late 40s talking about "Those old days"
McFly
Yeah, you can see that Lydon is sitting there in what looks like burmuda shorts and possibly a loose fitting Hawaiian shirt or something to that effect. It really would destroy the old image, though they still have some years to go before they become The Sexagenarian Pistols.
Marty
-----------------------------------
The Sexagenarian Pistols.
-----------------------------------
I laughed out loud at that.
"A cliché is full of truth, otherwise it wouldn't be a cliché."
Yeah, seeing all these bands the way they are now upsets me. I know it really shouldn't, but since I'm only 15, and live in suburban America, I really feel like I missed out on everything. Because I did. I've been really, deeply, madly in love with the music and the attitude and even the clothes of early punk rock. And just seeing that none of that will ever happen again, and can't be recreated, and isn't still alive just makes it seem more hopeless that anything fun or interesting will ever happen. But isn't that kind of the appeal of it? That it was a once-ever thing?
shareYou can always go make your own thing.
shareDon't fall in love with someone elses' past...create your own.
share'Yeah, seeing all these bands the way they are now upsets me. I know it really shouldn't, but since I'm only 15, and live in suburban America, I really feel like I missed out on everything. Because I did. I've been really, deeply, madly in love with the music and the attitude and even the clothes of early punk rock. And just seeing that none of that will ever happen again, and can't be recreated, and isn't still alive just makes it seem more hopeless that anything fun or interesting will ever happen. But isn't that kind of the appeal of it? That it was a once-ever thing?'
Wont happen again, or, is still happening but you just don't know about it? The attitude is still there if you want it, you can make whatever music you wanna make, and you can sure as hell have a fun and interesting time doing it. If you're worried that things like this will never happen again, there's only one person to blame, and that's yourself. Don't wait for someone else to have the fun for you.
But we all know what they really look like now. Steve is still fat but has now got muscles, Paul looks exactly the same as he did in 77, and John looks a lot older and worn out, but he's even "cooler" now, in a way, he still does his own thing completely, dyes his hair (whats left of it anyway) and wears weird, unique, awesome clothes. Maybe I'm biased, but hey!.
********
“Don't accept the old order. Get rid of it.” ~Johnny Rotten aka John Lydon.
You missed the point. Just like record execs pretending to be on the phone. Directors have to find some way of making the mundane interesting.
Tuco Benedicto Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez
Because it's a film about the Sex Pistols as a band in the 70's, not about who they are now. Why is that such a stretch to figure out?
They are different people now, regardless of what they would like you to believe. It was bittersweet to see Lydon on stage with a big middle-age belly and threatening to cancel the show after the first song when someone tossed a (horrors!) water bottle on stage.
Nonetheless, the film gives a great insight into where they sprang from and the influence they had on music (did anyone notice the marquee they showed for their first concert in the US at the Longhorn Ballroom had Merle Haggard listed under them? Shades of Spinal Tap...)
Not a streth at all really, but it would have been interesting to see how the years have treated them.
shareThat wasn't the first show, actually, that was the next-to-last, at the Longhorn here in Dallas. I so remember that show .. or at least, the news reports showing all the freaks there. It's very interesting to watch the film of the show (if you can find a torrent): above the stage and the Pistols, hung on a red velvet curtain backing, are a dozen or so large framed portraits, of such luminaries as Hank Williams, Dolly Parton, and (of course!) Merle Haggard. Interesting juxtaposition there, no?
Needless to say, being a freaky Punk Rocker in Dallas, Texas was not very safe back then, *especially* at a *beep* heaven like The Longhorn Ballroom was (as the band also found out that night). In fact, McLaren deserves a good punch in the face just for that one scheduling decision -- obviously another of his many stupid choices to try and brew up headlines with no concern for the welfare of the band themselves. There were many other far more suitable venues in Dallas, even back in 1978. (And I also knew several guys who got beaten up at that show, more victims of McLaren's overriding urge to make himself a million pounds.)
I never would have guessed at that time that within a year or two I'd be hanging out with those freaks, tho... Hell, I'd BE one of them! But of all the concerts I've ever missed out on, that's the one I most wish I'd been at.
And personally, I thought the 'anonymous source' filming trick was VERY effective. If you're not sure, google up a few recent pics of Jones and Cookie... Trust me, most of us 40-something punkers do NOT want to be reminded how old we are, ok? *sigh*
I think it was a play on their image during the 70's as being a bunch of no good neordewells, and they did all have criminal records. People are also shown in black when they are ashamed of their past and don't want to be recognized. Even though they were a great band, what Malcolm did to them was truly shameful.
--
"Surrender Dorothy!"
Now really, do you think they're ashamed of their pasts?
shareno its exactly as has already been stated, its because its its a film about the sex pistols and what they meant in the late 1970's, not a 'where are they now' piece for vh1
shareYeah, I took to be just a little joke along those lines. "The Notorious Sex Pistols" kind of thing.
shareI watched the film with the commentary on and Julien Temple said something about how 'Making it look like the witness protection program added effect' or something of the sort. I heard something about 'nobody wants to see a bunch of old punk rockers' but I dont remember who said it or the exact quote.
shareWell, I guess they don't want to be regocnized, there's been so much trouble in their lives + Johnny was attacked so many times you know.
shareIt isn't like that for him anymore. He was on I'm a Celebrity Get Me Outta Here for heavens sake. I think that it is just to make it seem more interesting and also like people have said, the film is not about them now, it is about what they were.
shareJohnny is a very public figure now (I don't think he looks much different now than he did 35 years ago) and the rest of the band have websites w/ present pics of them. I think they did shadow interviews to piss you "rotters" off like did in the 70's. Or it was because no one would want to see Rotten cry while talking about Sid. Anyway, that's just my theory.
"Some of the worst mistakes of my life have been haircuts." -Jim Morrison
Actually, I read that the reason they shot them in the "dark" was so that would hide their physically aged faces. You would only actually see their faces when they were younger. I guess sort of the "youthful spirit" of rock and roll motif.
Which by the way I thought was a great way to film the documentary :)
"He who laughs last didn't get the joke" -Annoymous.
well he really does look like sht now due to attacks and alcohol and sht
http://www.ananova.com/images/web/62266.jpg
don't blame him
Possibly to avoid the whole cult of personality thing.
The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing new. Samuel Beckett
Yeah, Rotten looks terrible now....I was really shocked.
I saw an interview with him on TV a couple of nights ago..and I was like "Whoah" its hard to believe that's the same guy....Steve Jones looks even worse.
To be honest when the Sex Pistols reunited in the late 90's I had no interest in going to see them, just because they were so much older. Who wants to see a bunch of forty year olds playing punk rock? I would much rather remember them when they were younger....
"He who laughs last didn't get the joke" -Annoymous.
Hmm also i remember a few years ago Johnny was feautured in the skate video "Sorry" for the company Flip. He was sorta the guy who introduced each of the seperate skaters and i dunno the dialogue he used and the way he acted just seemed like a ploy to punk up a guy whose obviously aging in his defense though he didn't look horribly old.
shareYeah, I figured they tried to perserve it, although at first I was pissed...anyway, here comepare these:
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep04/images/classic3pistolsmatlock.l.jpg
http://www.npg.org.uk/live/OC_Data/images/weblg/5/8/mw82858.jpg
But did you guys realize that some of the footage was overused like two or three times?
"they said they wouldn't send any money 'cuz we'd spend it on drugs!"
"We would!"
I did wondered about the dark myself when I first saw it. What made it even stranger was that when I saw it on the UK channel Film Four it had a short introduction by John Lydon before the film began but it was filmed in the same room, with Lydon in the same clothes but without the dark effect.....why they decided to use it on the film I'll never know.
shareit annoys me, i'd rather just see them as they are, warts n all. We all know what they look like anyway and the reasons for it are just pretentious.
shareYes, these types of 'jokes' or 'homages' grow tiresome when they're done for TWO HOURS. I hope there's raw footage without the effect added on somewhere. I'm sure they just upped the contrast or something.
share[deleted]
The whole point of filming in the dark is pure effect, to mimic crime related programmes where informers / individuals who wish to remain anonymous are filmed in a darkened room - it's a wonder they didn't distort any of the Pistols' voices, as that could've been a good idea.
Naturally all the members are in their early 50s now - there's been the odd comment posted about how bad / crap Lydon looks, etc. but how do you expect someone to look like at that age? This isn't Paris Hilton, or some other plastic prick being interviewed - age takes its toll!
As the man himself says: "I ain't no bell of the ball!"
Made it a little confusing as to which of them was speaking, however!
share