Where Are the Stones?
Yeah, with a title like this, I kinda expected SOME sort of Stones movie.
shareI agree....that was the only reason I came to this page! Disappointed that this has nothing to do with the Stones!
share
MovieChat Forums > Gimme Shelter (2013) Discussion > Where Are the Stones?
That's like saying you expect Stand by Me to be about Ben E. King or Boys Don't Cry to be about The Cure. People can name their movies after songs regardless of what their movies are about.
___
Donate to help finish a Leslie Nielsen film: http://watermanstudios.com/movie/
Yes, they can. It's their right. But it's also my right to say that naming a movie after a song when said movie has nothing to do with the song or its author is dumb and unimaginative. "Gimme Shelter" is a perfect example. Sounds to me like they're trying to capitalize on someone else's work.
shareWhat I mean is so what if a movie's named after a song and the movie doesn't have to do with the artist/band who made the song? Now, the song, itself, is different. If you feel the movie doesn't have anything to do with the song the movie is named after, then sure, I might understand why you would negatively criticize the movie's title. However, have you actually seen this movie?
___
Donate to help finish a Leslie Nielsen film: http://watermanstudios.com/movie/
EclecticEnnui wrote:
What I mean is so what if a movie's named after a song and the movie doesn't have to do with the artist/band who made the song?
So what? How about the fact that they even ripped off the unusual spelling of the words "give me" into the condensed "gimme," just as in the Stones's song title? They could have at least had the decency to create their own variation on the fusion of those two words. They could have titled this movie "Give Me Shelter" or "Shelter" or "I F'in Need a Place To Call Home." But no. They lifted the Stones's song title, which gives the crass appearance of piggybacking on the name recognition of that song to give attention to the film. share
Naming a movie after a song doesn't necessarily mean they're "piggybacking on the name recognition of that song to give attention to the film". Again, so what if the movie has nothing to do with the artist/band that made the song? I've already given two examples of films that have done it, but here's some more: Brazil, Blue Velvet, and The Kids Are All Right. Yeah, how dare they?
___
Donate to help finish a Leslie Nielsen film: http://watermanstudios.com/movie/
Hey, I just made a movie called "Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band." It has nothing to do with The Beatles. It just happens, coincidentally, to be about a guy who drinks lots and lots of Dr. Pepper. Alone. Brilliant isn't it?
Oh yeah. He's also in the military.
Quite brilliant.
Like I said before, if you've seen the film, I think it's fine to criticize its title if you feel it has nothing to do with the song or if there's a ridiculous connection, though it might depend on whether the film's a comedy, in that case. Anyway, I stand by what I've been saying about films having song titles and not being about the artist/band that made the song. So... what?
___
Donate to help finish a Leslie Nielsen film: http://watermanstudios.com/movie/
... And he's in a band. And they play on the weekends at a club called The Lonely Hearts Club. ROFL. The Stones should sue this film's producers. It's like calling a movie about transvestite hookers in Bangkok "The Ford Motor Company." It makes no sense and shows how unimaginative the filmmakers are, which in turn suggests that the movie will suck. OP is 100% correct.
"Ass to ass. Ha ha ha ha. ASS TO ASS!"; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa5z77EI8y0
Other than possibly having the song in the film (I don`t know if it does or not), I don`t think anyone else would jump to that conclusion. It`s not like that`s the only song they were known for and a movie about the Stones would probably have the word Stones and/or Rolling in the title.
shareIt`s not like that`s the only song they were known for and a movie about the Stones would probably have the word Stones and/or Rolling in the title.
There's a movie about the famous Altamont Speedway concert the 'Stones played called Gimme Shelter. It was made infamous by the killing that can be seen (briefly) onscreen.
This means that it's not just a song title that's being used, but a movie title as well, featuring the band. When I saw the new film's tile, I thought it was some new documentary about the events or a remake based on the original. share
The Stones did have a movie released in 1970 under the same title. Usually when a movie goes to the ratings board and gets a rating the title can not be used again. And I believe the only way to do this is to have the producers of this movie(or any other movie) pay a fee to use the same title. Who this fee goes to?I believe who ever owns the rights to the title. this may not apply if the movie is a remake or reboot as the studio usually owns that property. great example is ROBO-COP. since this is owned by MGM they can do a remake. AS they received ownership of this when they purchased Orion Pictures when they went bankrupt.
shareGimme Shelter was a documentary movie about the Altamont Speedway Concert featuring the Rolling Stones. Similarly The Kids are Alright was a documentary about the Who.
Both movie titles were made into other, completely unrelated movies. In both cases it seems the titles were used specifically to get attention by leading people to think of the earlier song/movie. Whether or not the earlier producers gave the ok, the practice seems intentionally deceptive. But then again, this is Hollywood.
If your dog could talk he'd say "Can I smell your butt?"
Especially when they make Hudgens almost look like a young Jagger on the cover. Same hair, can't really see the face to well and the title. I thought maybe it was a docudrama about the Stones at first as well.
Because of this blatant dishonesty I refuse to see the film. Besides, I'd rather see Hudgens as some hot stripper gone psycho as opposed to a pregnant girl with short messy hair, but that's just me.
[deleted]
Spammer
share"Why don't the Rolling Stones sue the filmmakers?"
Don't laugh, the Rolling Stones successfully sued the band the Verve for (IMO) a much less blatant act.
Burns: "Smithers, have the Rolling Stones killed".
Smithers: "But sir, they are not the R .."
Burns: "Just do as I said!".
yeah I think they got 50% of Urban Hymns, what a terrible time for the verve to really explode, amazing album, amazing percentage of somebodys elses album for a sample on one song.
shareThe Stones were the only reason I saw this film, though I knew that other than the title, this film had nothing to do with the band.
"Gimme Shelter" 1970: 9/10
"Gimme Shelter" 2013: 5/10