Thursday, August 23, 2018

Those Fabulous Sixties. Not.

From 1979, please enjoy my somewhat jaundiced review of a certain movie musical as it appeared in The Magazine Formerly Known as Stereo Review.

Sorry I was too lazy to transcribe it, but all you have to do is click on it to enlarge it to readability.

In retrospect, I'm not sure I still agree with all the views expressed, but I like it nonetheless. If truth be told, however, I'm mostly reprinting it here because a certain Idiot from Maine© has been dissing me for being overly nostalgic for Woodstock Nation.

As if.

Have a great weekend, everybody!


Mark said...

I agree with your sentiments about the sixties, a time when marketing the then-present exploded in our faces. We take it for granted now, but the notion of selling (marketing, actually) recent cultural experiences was new in the sixties. A fifties revival, as expressed by Sha Na Na in the late 1960s? The fifties were TEN years ago then, and at the time, I thought people wanted to FORGET the fifties!

And as for Woodstock itself as a measure of the sixties, I've always had serious doubts about the hype. See

Blue Ash Fan said...

Did the editor from yesterday's post call you in for this one, too?

Was there ever a "rock" musical that actually, well, rocked? Jesus Christ Superstar? Rocky Horror Picture Show? Godspell? Not to these ears.

Anonymous said...

I started to respect the writing in "Hair" after hearing Nina Simone and Brian Auger/Julie Driscoll cover "Ain't Got No/I Got Life," and Auger/Driscoll also doing "Flesh Failures/Let the Sunshine In."

Next year is Woodstock's 50th anniversary, so prepare yourself. Looking forward to releases of the full sets of some of the acts.

Shriner said...

TBH -- I like this soundtrack. I never liked the original cast album of "Hair" at all -- and thought all the best songs on it were done better by other people. But I think overall this presentation of the material is pretty good. I still put it on occasionally and enjoy it

The movie is hit-and-miss for me

As for "rock" musicals that rock -- check out "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" -- now *there's* a film soundtrack!.

Gummo said...

Actually, the original off-Broadway recording of "Hair" rocks a lot harder than the Broadway version. IIRC, the house band is a true 5 piece rock band - bass, guitar, 2 drums and keys.

It also has a couple of songs cut before the show got to Broadway.

Worth checking out -- I think it became available again a few years ago.

Shriner said...

"In the Off-Broadway version of Hair, the lead role of Claude had been written as a space alien who aspires to be a cinematic director."

Well, you learn something every day!

pete said...

Loved the comparisons to Grease. Spot on.

Anonymous said...

Media representation of the 60's (actually 1964 - 1975, including the Briitish invasion/antiwar movement/black pride movement/San Fransisco sound/assasinations/ up through the advent of disco/punk/Nixon's resignation and brain death of our generation) has been almost non existent.

On TV & the movies the 40's, the 50's get much more creative coverage. Then there is a creative jump to the seventies on up to recent times. Lots of documentaries about back then but little fictional storytelling.

I see this as happening for these reasons:

1- Hollywood doesn't have the creative smarts and guts to make the sixties storytelling work believably. The issues were too complex to be told easily and believably. Subtlety is not one of Hollywoods strong points for the past forty years.

2- Our generation doesn't want our kids (and now our grand kids) to know how much fun we had and how dangerous much of what we did and what happened to us was back then.

3- At least at first the drugs we took were (supposedly) life affirming. Courting stupidity and death was not our aim early on!

Right arm/left fist!!! I still dig hippie chicks!!!

Captain Al