Utterly terrible


Stoned? The director, screenwriter and most of the cast should be- and I'm not talking marijuana.

This is one of the worst 'professional' films I've ever seen. Only Paddy Considine emerges with his dignity intact and even he has difficulty finding anything positive to work with in this feeble joke of a film.

Weak dialogue, appalling acting, wayward direction, patronising script, pointless cinematography and over-reliance on montage. The scene that typifies the whole obvious, overcooked and condescending nature of Stoned is the one where Brian meets Anita Pallenberg in Morocco. It sort of goes like this...

Brian- Anita, what's this piece of blotting paper that you're putting in my mouth?

Anita- Lysergic acid diethylamide Brian. EL. ESS. DEE.

(Cue Jefferson Airplane's White Rabbit and yet another montage of 'trippy' images).

Who pays idiots like Stephen Wooley to come up with this crap? Oops, it's us, the gullible cinema-going public. If you enjoyed this film for any other reason than to laugh at it's inadequacies, kill yourself now.

reply

I fully agree, it was a bad, bad film.

reply

I agree!It was pure crap! The film was based on the book "the Murder of Brian Jones" written by Anna Wohlin.. READ IT! It's MUCH MUCH better than the so called film!

reply

Actually, it was based on three books, one of which was Anna Wohlin's. The second was "Who Killed Christopher Robin" by Terry Rawlings, and "Brian Jones" by Alan Clayson. If you read "Who Killed Christopher Robin", the whole film makes much more sense. Personally, I found Anna Wohlin's book whiny, weepy, and genuinely remorseful for having done nothing to expose the underhanded dealings at the time. If there was a murder, while she probably couldn't have done anything to stop it, she certainly could put up enough stink to have the officials give everything a closer look.

reply

Can anyone justify this film being made? Utterly pointless drivel. Could have been acted out better in a 5 mins short. WHY MAKE IT? I genuinely do not understand what the producers and Woolley were hoping to end up with. The actress playing Pallenberg was the only thing that kept me up past midnight watching this piece of excrement..

reply

'The actress playing Pallenberg was the only thing that kept me up past midnight watching this piece of excrement...'

Really?? I thought she was particularly bad... especially as she was occasionally (and hilariously) portrayed La Pall as being 'level-headed' ('You've had enough now Brian - you can't handle the drugs'... 'No Brian, I don't want to join in your threesome' etc). Hmm, well-known for being 'down-to-earth' was old Neet, I don't think. Plus she didn't look owt like her - you need a little more than a '60s hairdo with big fringe.

reply


It ain't that bad. Problem is, if you read some biographies of the Stones, was that their lives were simply damn boring. Concert, drugs, sleep, Morocco, sleep, drugs, sex, concert etc. ad infinitum.
Even Jagger gave up on a biography a few years ago because he couldn't remember anything interesting happening (and he was the one who never touched drugs).
Jones's death was probably slightly interesting news when it happened but he was clearly a complete waster by then anyway.
Difficult to make an interesting film out of such slim material, but still a film which makes an effort at period atmosphere, so no more offensive than any number of twittering Jane Austen adaptions we're inflicted with.

large chris

reply

[deleted]

monet mazur was awesome, she really had that exotic danger edge which was the most important part of anita.

um actually some of that levelheadedness comes from stuff she actually did, that foursome scene with the hookers was for real. she didnt wanna get involved, so he beat her up and she ran to keith, just like in the movie. the only diff is that in real life anita and keith were already shagging and she and brian were breaking up slowly.

i think the "you cant handle the drugs" stuff was from later pallenberg when she was looking at where he went really wrong.

reply

You had to have been there.

reply

it was okay, but yeah i wish they focused more on the music. seeing him really fall in love with the blues and all that stuff. wayyy too much dope and sex to the point that there was no point to the movie.

reply



"Weak dialogue, appalling acting, wayward direction, patronising script, pointless cinematography and over-reliance on montage".......That's what it's like being in a band.

Have'nt you ever been in a band before?

reply

Yes, the drummer broke it up after finding out that the £100 he gave the guitarist to pay the gas bill in their shared house was promptly spent on weed instead. The same drummer ran off with my girlfriend a couple of years later. So I drowned him in his garden pond... Actually I thanked him for saving me from her, man did me a favour.

reply

I agree. This movie gave absolutely no insight into Brian Jones. It was a TV movie with nudity and profanity. It's because of cliched biopics like this that a satirical film like "Walk Hard" is so essential.

reply

Just watched it on DVD and really enjoyed it. It seems to be in vogue to run it down.

Reading the reviews on here, the split between those that enjoyed it and those that didn't, seem devide along the lines of those who knew anything of the story before hand.

Those old enough, or have read the books to know the background, appear to be much happier with the film than those who expected a stones biopic. I obviously fall into the first group.

reply

I agree completely. I thought this was about a guy in the Rolling Stones. I expected, I dunno, some music, maybe to see and hear this guy play some music? Apparently all he did was screw and take dope. That's all they've got to say.

Zzzzzz.

reply

I am old enough to have read all of the Stones' biographies and especially those about Brian,and I agree.....you tend to like the film more if you already know how brilliant and innovative a musician Brian was.Stoned lacks any scenes where a young Brian teaches himself slide guitar (and he was one of the first in the U.K) and harp until his fingers bleed or later on where he picks up any exotic instrument and has mastered it in hours.I have read that it is inexplicably hard to get permission to play Stones music in films,so as this was a film on a tight budget,the music had to go.Shame.I advise the younger ones to listen to Aftermath and in fact all of the early Stones stuff.Brian is all over the music in those songs.He was very respected amongst his peers in the 60's.
I can say in the film's defence that they got his clothes down to the very last detail.However this is without any indication that Brian was actually the first androgynous pop star who set the path for glam rockers and goths in the future.He cross dressed with a flair all of his own that was way ahead of his time...no personal stylists then,remember.A decadent dandy.A very complicated decadent dandy, I might add,who had enough Jekylls and Hydes in his small, delicate frame to make any psychiatrist jump out of a window in despair.
Any film about Brian without the music is going to come across many hurdles as regards the dark side of his nature/sexuality and how to portray him evenly.Many loved Brian,(including Mrs Hallet the Cotchford maid-where was she in this film?)many-mainly girlfriends-suffered terribly as he descended into madness and despair.Really,you'd need a film lasting 24 hours and a very special actor to get all aspects of the condradiction in blond that was Lewis Brian Hopkin-Jones!!

reply

I could be the child or grandcild of a Rolling Stone and I totally liked the movie! I haven't read anything about Brian Jones or heard that much Stones (apart from their psychedelic period which I like), and I really think it's a good film. Great film style - and certainly great clothes/hair style! Brian Jones looked very hot and I find him an interesting person as well.
My boyfriend should wear outfits like that :-)

reply

[deleted]