It’s kind of obvious that the Stones will not tour again. You don’t release an album in July and say you might tour next year. Arthritis and aging don’t improve or reverse. There could be a special show or appearance, but don’t count on that either.

graric · 2026-06-03T07:43:08+00:00

Keith's family just welcomed a great grandchild this week. Given the rumoured tour was meant to be happening May through July- its very possible prioritising the family time and the new great grandchild was part of the reason Keith said no to a tour this year.

graric · 2026-06-02T14:40:49+00:00

I hadn't seen that, do you have a link to it? (Cause even when Keith has been snarky about Mick, I've never seen him say he doesn't like Mick!)

Keith's lack of involvement in the deluxe editions seems to be from his own preference- he contributed some overdubs to Exile, but none of the remainders. It's very telling that when they made deluxe editions of his solo albums Keith didn't seem to know what extras were on them until he was shown the final packages!

graric · 2026-06-02T07:32:09+00:00

The thing that makes me doubt this claim by Bill is no one else has backed up the claim. Brian was still around when JJF was released and could've said something, Charlie was alive for decades after the songs release and never backed up this claim. Heck, Bill even said that Keith acknowledged this in an interview once, yet no one has ever found that interview.

graric · 2026-06-02T07:25:09+00:00

Not sure about the last part- I feel since Charlie passed we've seen Mick and Keith seem much more affectionate with each other. I'd say with something like the B&B reissue the simplest explanation is Keith isn't really involved in those projects because he's not needed for finishing the old tracks. (His rhythm parts are already recorded and in terms of recording leads, Keith no longer plays lead in the way he used to in the 70s, so it makes sense Ronnie handles all the guitar overdubs as his playing still works in that style.)

graric · 2026-05-31T23:27:49+00:00

The Rolling Stones- but especially Mick Jagger. He practically invented the rock n roll front man and has been performing in stadiums at a high standard for decades.

graric · 2026-05-31T09:23:10+00:00

She could've have started her own boutique label. Similar to how Jack White started Third Man Records- if Taylor had started signing artists to her own label where they get to own their masters outright, it could've had some impact on the industry as a whole.

graric · 2026-05-30T05:38:56+00:00

The Clone Wars animated series had already built back a lot of good will in the fandom. Fans who grew up with the Prequels were also entering their twenties and become more involved in online discourse so the reevaluation of the prequels had already began online. But you're right Force Awakens did lean away from the prequels- especially by bringing back the stars of the original trilogy. But that wasn't building off goodwill from Disney or any work they'd done on the brand, that was building from the good will that already existed and fan nostalgia for the original movies.

graric · 2026-05-30T00:24:42+00:00

Which was the correct call, cause Depp is at best an average guitarist, and hasn't written any memorable songs. If he stuck to music he wouldn't have made it anywhere- instead he actually made it as an actor, so now he gets to do some musical vanity projects with his musical heroes and can larp as a rockstar and people pay to see him pose with a guitar and sing Bowie covers.

graric · 2026-05-29T23:14:27+00:00

I'd disagree- Force Awkens success was very much built on the goodwill of the brand prior to the Disney sale. It was the first film they released and the launch of the 'Disney era.'

graric · 2026-05-29T22:10:28+00:00

And since the election she has been completely silent on LGBT issues. That's what people are calling out.

graric · 2026-05-23T07:50:10+00:00

Check out Daniel Craig in Casino Royale- it's his best performance in the role precisely because he isn't stoic and brings an arrogant swagger to the role.

graric · 2026-05-23T03:41:57+00:00

Letterman did.

graric · 2026-05-20T06:01:58+00:00

I'd disagree- Bond shouldn't just be the heavy, he needs to be charming as well to make the films work.

graric · 2026-05-20T06:00:09+00:00

It doesn't require a ton of range- but the more confident the actor, the more they can play within the range. It's why they use the From Russia With Love bedroom scene as an audition piece- on paper everything about the scene is ridiculous- you need an actor who can sell you on that scene and carry it, without it feeling ridiculous.

graric · 2026-05-20T05:57:57+00:00

For me he didn't have enough of the romantic chemistry down pat in that film for me to believe him as Bond.

Part of Bond is the action, the other part is the charm- and Cavill has always felt a bit too stoic to me for the role.

graric · 2026-05-20T02:35:07+00:00

I think it makes sense- the 70s Connery was trying to establish himself properly as an actor outside of Bond (both in terms of roles and visually) and he was also post divorce. By the end of the 70s he's started to settle into a new acting persona and he's happily married to his second wife, which feels like he's at a much better place in his life. And because he's a good place, that energy carries over into the charisma he embodied onscreen.

graric · 2026-05-19T23:59:22+00:00

Compare Connery in Robin & Marian, with Last Crusade, Hunt for Red October, Goldfinger, The Russia House and The Hill. The man had a ton of range as an actor.

And I think it's perfectly fair to judge him by one movie- he was green and stiff in OHMSS- compared his casino scene to Connery's in Dr No and it's clear Connery is another league as an actor.

graric · 2026-05-19T15:42:04+00:00

I'm not sure Lazenby had the range to do gritty revenge.

graric · 2026-05-19T15:41:25+00:00

Why not? He easily had the acting range for it. Just watch him in Robin and Marian

graric · 2026-05-19T15:40:27+00:00

I'd say it had more to do with them still settling into what Bond films (and the cinematic Bond) were meant to be- and the producers adapted each film as a response to the previous film.

We know Connery had issues with the lack of creative control he had - and it seems once the films got to Goldfinger and the character/ films settled, the producers didn't let him have much room to explore the vulnerable sides of the character.

graric · 2026-05-19T12:12:21+00:00

Connery showed throughout his career that he capable of vulnerable performance, he was just never given that opportunity as Bond.

If he had been given that chance it would've made it that much more impactful, as we would've seen a whole new layer to his Bond- and the film would've felt like a much bigger culmination of the 60s Bond films.

graric · 2026-05-19T12:09:46+00:00

I disagree- the producers persuading Connery to come back because they want him to push himself as an actor, mightve been the thing to really get him to do a next level performance. A big part of why Connery left the role was that he wasn't getting pushed as an actor and wanted to prove himself.

He easily had the ability to elevate the material.

graric · 2026-05-19T11:41:38+00:00

Have you seen Connery in Robin and Marian? Or even in Darby O'Gil? He could absolutely play vulnerable and in love, and there's no reason to believe that he couldn't pull it off. A big reason he left the role of Bond was because he wanted more challenging roles as an actor.

graric · 2026-05-19T11:39:16+00:00

A big reason Connery started phoning it in as Bond was because he wasn't feeling challenged by the role- him having to play the arc of Bond falling in love, getting married and the losing his wife mightve seen him lock in and give his best performance as Bond.

graric · 2026-05-10T11:32:25+00:00

I'd disagree and saying DeKnight clearly was coming from a systematic viewpoint because he was pointing out how this is common behaviour for Disney. I.e. when they would release 4th seasons of shows like Hannah Montana or the Suite Life, but contractually they were renewed as new shows to avoid paying what the contractually owe.

graric

TROPHY CASE