About LS.n


 
 

Review: Gimme Shelter
by Jordan Hoffman

published 8/28/00

REVIEWS HOME




Jordan Hoffman is LeisureSuit.net's Queens-based Senior Editor.



MOST RECENT YAK ABOUT THIS ARTICLE:

Subj: gimme shelter
please,meeting whit information for events ,the last decade.

-- reynaldo landi
May 31, 2006 at 1:13AM

Read more or post your own





Be cool like us!
Are you getting our weekly update?





It's GOOD to share!
E-mail this article to a buddy

Warning: This movie may cause one to make bold statements.

Statement One: The Rolling Stones in 1969, with “Beggar’s Banquet” and “Let It Bleed” under their belts, and “Sticky Fingers” and “Exile on Main St.” gestating, were the greatest band in history.

Not the best band at the time. Not the best the Rolling Stones ever were. The best band in history. You deny it? I’ll meet you out back.

Statement Two: The cinema verite style is immeasurably more moving when the film is from a time before 24 hour news and the use of video.

The images, specifically of musicians or artists in a pre-Access Hollywood universe, were all we had to go on, and therefore more meaningful.

Statement Three: Gimme Shelter is the perfect marriage of form and content, on a subject about the importance of form and content. It is therefore a masterpiece for the ages, a once-in-a-lifetime treasure that will never be duplicated in this or any other life time.

Now that that’s out of the way, here’s the real news: this movie fuckin’ rocks.

On tour with the Stones in ’69, first blowing away Madison Square Garden, the camera is glued to Mick on stage. He is creating the arena rock presence that has not died. He is an artist, a matador, an idiot, a poet-warrior. He wears an Uncle Sam hat and a scarf, he wears a pimp’s hat and shades. He looks at himself on a Steenbeck weeks later and says, “Well all right.”

The story, briefly, is about the disaster of the free concert at Altamont. The planning stages, the chaos, the fighting, the death, the fallout. We know the fallout. Everyone says it’s where the 60s ended. They choked on their own hubris. The filmmakers make their case plain: waking up the next morning the flower children hobble home in the dawn light blinking as if coming out of a horrible drunk. Just what did I do last night? Only last night was five years and a spit in the face of society.

We see the silver coiffed lawyer behind his giant desk festooned with roses and a granddaughter’s picture. “There may be 20,000 kids driving there right now!” his worried aide reminds him. He’s got to find them a place to pee.

Somehow the Hell’s Angels, years before The Road Warrior would be released, show up to act as interim cops. It’s the “do as you feel” festival of sorts, so no one says no. The cameras watch as the show unfolds. Unlike Woodstock’s hazy split screen, our eyes stay focused. Deterioration. Decay. Hubris? Too much beer and idiots!

There’s music, too. “Love in Vain” as a stoned-slow anthem. Dazzling in frozen red light. The rhythm section of Richard-Watts-Wyman is unmatched. Wyman’s bass will pound through you. As a friend said, “Bill Wyman was in my throat, I felt like a 13-year-old schoolgirl.”

The 30th anniversary re-release, the one that I saw twice this week, offers no new footage, only a remixed soundtrack. But with time, of course, it’s offered a new perspective.


Your name:

Subject:


Comments:

Forward a copy of this yak to the LS.n Editors

Forward a copy of this yak to this article's author

If you want to get an e-mail if someone responds to your yak, give us your address below. It won't be made public.

THE YAK SHACK


Name: reynaldo landi
Subject: gimme shelter
-- May 31, 2006 at 1:13AM
please,meeting whit information for events ,the last decade.

Name: Jordan Hoffman Responds
Subject: Re: Gimme Shelter
-- Aug 24, 2004 at 6:41PM
I get a lot of Yaks that I ignore, but this one I find funny. The Maysles Brothers should be ashames. You, dear Shannon, are a fucking moron.

Name: Shannon
Subject: Gimme Shelter
-- Aug 24, 2004 at 2:44PM
By noting that the camera is "glued to Mick on stage" the reviewer unwittingly points out this films primary flaw: extremely poor camera work. There is much more footage of Mick Jagger's face than of the Rolling Stones actually playing. Shots of Jefferson Airplane and the Flying Burrito Brothers are equally flawed. It's like someone just stood on the side of the stage with a Super 8 camera. The Maysels brothers should be ashamed.

Name: DI-ANNE
Subject: Fan club
-- Aug 3, 2001 at 8:21AM
Could anyone tell me if there is an Australian
Fan club.

Name: Lemont
Subject: Gimme Shelter
-- Aug 28, 2000 at 8:07AM
Why does every writer in this site have to stake his/her claim by stating a series of SUPERLATIVES!! about the film they are reviewing?

The Stones have never been regarded as the greatest band in history - it's universally accepted among all critics who have grey matter that The Beatles are the greatest band in history. (And the writer didn't even preface this comment with the note that this was only his opinion.)

This review reads like a twenty year old wrote it and was desperate for an "A" on his weekly paper.

Shallow writers splattering superlatives doesn't make for a "cool" magazine.

Harry Knowles or whatever his fat name is does this, and sounds as bankrupt as the studio hacks who shove pablum down the public's throat for a living.

Where is the erudition, intellect, perception, or sense of proportion about the subject and the times?

It's as if he thought the editors would fire him unless a random viewer, who stopped and read the review, after reading it, would have to say: "This is the greatest, most rockin' freakin' review I EVER READ! And that's only my first STATEMENT about this review blah blah blah.

Substituting velveta for real chedder here makes for too a cheap read.


This page is best viewed with the latest version of the Netscape or Microsoft Internet Explorer browser.

© Copyright 1998-2001 LeisureSuit Media, LLC, All Rights Reserved.
Some content is copyrighted by the author and is used with permission. No portion of this page or its content may be reproduced, in part or in whole, electronically, in print, or in any other form or by any other means, without the written consent of the LeisureSuit.net editors. Contact us at webmaster@leisuresuit.net.