The opening shots of the film shows an early stones line up under the leadership of Brian Jones getting their first gig. It is stylishly shot in black and white and as they roll through little red rooster a camera takes stills of the action. Then from the slow blues rift you are suddenly thrust to the frantic end as Brian is found dead in the pool. It is the stark contrast that works well and shocks the viewer into the heart of scene. Then the incredibly tragic and eccentric life of Brian Jones is told in a heady mix of flashback drug trips and sly nods to 'performance'. Leo Gregory stumbles through the film as Brian much like Michael Pitt did as Kurt Cobain in Van Sant's 'last days', you already know the outcome but it's the road on which you get there that forms the backbone of the plot. As Jones becomes more estranged, paranoid, wildly extravagant and more drug fuelled it begins to rub off on frank the builder who is doing work on Brian's house. Brian being bored and in need of not only a nanny but a drinking partner takes frank under his wing to a certain extent. But Jones being the flamboyant pop star doesn't see frank as anything more than a builder and taunts him until its too late. Frank see Jones' world of excess and wants in, although when he finds it out of reach that want turns to anger and jealousy. If you approach this film looking for a story of the stones you wont find it, this film like last days is a film that shows one mans downfall and the lives of those around him who should have helped. Jones portrayed as never happier than when making music is rock and roll myth personified. Without the tragic end to his life, the question is posed, would anyone still remember the tortured genius behind the stones early formation? There is obviously a love for the era and Jones from director Woolley, who not afraid to show Jones' vulnerable side also tries to show the man behind the myth. Whether a fan of the band or not this is an interesting film full of directing techniques and skillful editing that blend into a heady mix of rock and roll excess which takes the viewer to the sixties and back through one of the most interesting stories of the time.
40 Reviews
Missing the Point
thebinman17 November 2005
I'm afraid that 'Classic Rockher' has completely missed the point! Director Stephen Woolley has spent well over 10 years researching this film so as to paint as accurate a picture as possible of the suspicious death of Brian Jones. I know it may be difficult for die-hard fans to accept, but The Rolling Stones was founded by Brian Jones!!! Keef and that art school student poser, Mick Jagger, were recruited into the band by Brian. Brian's love was for 'the blues' of Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters and Elmore James ... and hence the lack of over played 60's Stones tunes in the film. Stephen tracked down the likes of Anita Pallenberg, Brian's ex girlfriend who had disappeared back to her native Germany many years before, to make a film about Brian's death NOT a film about the Stones. One theory is that he was killed by his builder/chauffeur/gopher, Frank Thorogood, who was sacked the morning of Brian's death and has himself since died in 1993. I believe this film portrays the most accurate view on the last sad days of genius Brian Jones. 'Classic Rockher' come on - wake up and smell the coffee!!! Bob the Binman
Cliché-heavy but mildly entertaining rock biopic
IKMacbeth14 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
The turbulent life and mysterious death of Rolling Stones guitarist and founder Brian Jones has all the elements of a cracking thriller, and has already inspired at least three books prior to this film. "Stoned" concentrates largely on the relationship that developed between Brian Jones and Frank Thorogood, the building contractor hired to spruce up his dilapidated country pile, in the final, fateful months of the musician's life. While this bond strengthens and ultimately, inevitably sours, flashbacks tell the key events of Jones's earlier life his disintegrating relationship with model Anita Pallenberg; his spiralling addictions to drink and drugs; and his increasing estrangement from a band he still thought of as his long after Jagger and Richards had wrestled the creative reigns from him. While the story of a working class outsider being inexorably drawn into the decadent demi-monde of a fading and reclusive rock star has already been told with far more style and imagination in "Performance", thanks largely to the talents of Britain's finest young actor, Paddy Considine, as Thorogood, it's not here that this film falls down. Rather it is director Woolley's inability to resist hackneyed clichés and ham-fisted symbolism that makes "Stoned" such a chore at times. For instance, when Jones takes a swing at Pallenberg in a Moroccan hotel room, inadvertently smashing a mirror, Woolley can't help but give us a shot of Brian's despairing reflection in the shattered glass; likewise, as Jones sinks to the bottom of his swimming pool in the final reel, a shooting star streaks across the night sky (no, really); while the decision to use Jefferson Airplane's "White Rabbit" to score an acid trip is an 'idea' so trite that the screen practically groans beneath the weight of it's obviousness. And that's not the only soundtrack faux pas either actual Rolling Stones recordings are conspicuous by their absence, while the use of music by The White Stripes and, of all people, Kula Shaker, jars like the sudden appearance of a digital watch in a Merchant Ivory period drama. That said, the action rattles along with gusto, and the non-linear narrative structure is confidently handled, meaning that, despite his best attempts, Woolley doesn't quite manage to make a complete pig's ear out of this silk purse.
Sixties culture clash
cliffhanley_24 October 2005
It has taken Stephen Woolley ten years to get this on to the screen, which allowed him plenty of time to do his research. He began by acquiring the film rights to the book, 'Who Killed Cock Robin?' and added the rights to the deathbed revelations of Frank Thorogood; then the rights to the book by Anna Wohlin, one of Jones' two current girlfriends. He topped this by hiring a private eye to find Janet, the other girlfriend, to get her confirmation about the size of the Stoned lifestyle and some of the details of Jones' death. He was also able to find a few original cameras including a vintage Bolex, to match the ancient film clips slotted into parts of the story. Getting any film made has to be an obsession, and a major one at that, if it takes ten years. What kept Woolley going was having been too young to be a hippy, the realisation that he had bought (as we all did) the PR stunt depicting the leather-clad speed-freak drunk-rolling Beatles as nice fluffy chaps and the middle-class cricket fans from Kingston-upon-Thames as the evil and dangerous Stones, ' Jagger was at the London School of Economics', and seeing Brian Jones as the only band member who was a genuine bad boy; 'the missing link' to the decadent bohemian world. He links this to the dichotomy between Brian, the studiedly effete and spoiled brat, and Frank (Considine), a real bloke, an ex-soldier, with whom Woolley found himself identifying. He says he screened 'Performance' for the cast before shooting began, to get them into the zeitgeist, (We of the hippy generation realised that we could measure the effect of the encroaching years and our possible maturity by noting how we moved from identifying with Turner to 'being' Chas), and in fact the shooting of the gun scene from that gets a quote here. There are many little bits of contemporary reference intercut, and all so nearly subliminal that the audience could miss them if it were not well-acquainted with them from the first time round and/or didn't posses a certain amount of quick-fire intelligence. It's pleasurably flattering to be a member of an audience which is assumed to have these qualities. When you can say it in twenty frames, why milk it? The opening scenes establish Brian (Gregory) as the kingpin, getting a gig by phone while the rest of the band waits outside the red box. Although not much later Andrew Loog Oldham sells himself to them as manager, most of the subsequent story dispenses with a strictly chronological narrative. The general situation moves on, but in bunches of flash-back, present and flash-forward. Time's tooty-fruity. What happened after the Stones got Big was a gift to a film maker: Frank is taken on as a builder to tart up Brian's little mansion and, in spite of the huge gaps between their respective cultures, becomes part of the Stone's world. The parallels between this reality and the fictional scenario of the contemporaneous Cammell-Roeg film, are fascinating and should form the basis of a PHD for some 'sixties-fixated student sooner or later. For the camera-work, colour, montage, in purely visual terms 'Stoned' is worth seeing, although it would have been well worth Gregory putting on several extra pounds to cover his taut, well-toned musculature - Brian was quite chubby in real life - in fact all the band members could have added a little more puppy-fat. One obvious failing in 'Stoned' is its lack of bloody marvellous soundtrack; but there's hardly a film out now without a bloody marvellous soundtrack, and there are plenty of precedents; Orson Welles' 'Touch of Evil', for instance. For lasting power a film has to stand as a film rather than an extended marketing device. As a film, this cuts it. CLIFF HANLEY
No One Came To His Emotional Rescue
bkoganbing26 July 2011
Stoned tells us about the life and early death at 27 of Brian Jones who founded and actually named the group. I do remember it back in 1969, that there was such controversy around it I did not know. It seems as though the Stones went on without any pause or at least that's how it appeared in America.
Part of the problem with this film is that Brian Jones is not presented as an especially likable figure. It seemed to me that his love of all kinds of hedonistic pleasure took over and ruled him. What started as creative differences between Mick Jagger and Keith Richards and Jones just eventually came down to the fact that Jones would rather party than work. Not that those two guys ever lived like monks, but you do have to please the public with your music and that requires working on it and on a product to please said public. It's why the Rolling Stones are still a hot act in almost 50 years of performing and not on the nostalgia circuit either.
Leo Gregory plays Jones and some really good casting was done with him and those who played the rest of the Stones. Paddy Considine is Frank Thorogood, Jones's estate builder and general factotum who was fired the day Jones was found in his pool. Whether he had help from Thorogood or anyone else is still fodder for speculation.
I agree with another reviewer who said the sound was of bad quality. That that reviewer was from the UK says something because I would be tempted to blame it on their accents. I well remember when the Beatles first came to America they were unintelligible with their Liverpudlian speech pattern which was not something American ears heard that often. But here it's just bad sound recording.
Maybe it was his hedonism over all way of life, but I could not develop a rooting interest in Jones as I could with say Jim Morrison or Jimi Hendrix or Janis Joplin and I'm not really into that music.
Part of the problem with this film is that Brian Jones is not presented as an especially likable figure. It seemed to me that his love of all kinds of hedonistic pleasure took over and ruled him. What started as creative differences between Mick Jagger and Keith Richards and Jones just eventually came down to the fact that Jones would rather party than work. Not that those two guys ever lived like monks, but you do have to please the public with your music and that requires working on it and on a product to please said public. It's why the Rolling Stones are still a hot act in almost 50 years of performing and not on the nostalgia circuit either.
Leo Gregory plays Jones and some really good casting was done with him and those who played the rest of the Stones. Paddy Considine is Frank Thorogood, Jones's estate builder and general factotum who was fired the day Jones was found in his pool. Whether he had help from Thorogood or anyone else is still fodder for speculation.
I agree with another reviewer who said the sound was of bad quality. That that reviewer was from the UK says something because I would be tempted to blame it on their accents. I well remember when the Beatles first came to America they were unintelligible with their Liverpudlian speech pattern which was not something American ears heard that often. But here it's just bad sound recording.
Maybe it was his hedonism over all way of life, but I could not develop a rooting interest in Jones as I could with say Jim Morrison or Jimi Hendrix or Janis Joplin and I'm not really into that music.
Drugs Are Evil
denis88823 September 2013
Well, not that bad as I first imagined. THis 2005 production is fairly competent take on last days of Brian Jones' life and his tenure with the Stones. This is a very British film, but at times it draws too much from Oliver Stone and his The Doors or Nixon - the imagery, color scheme, sequence, plot, music, faces, blurred visions. Apart from that, Paddy Cinsidine is good as FRank, he did a marvelous job and showed his acting skills to the full. It is Not a movie about The Rolling Stones - well, they are here, you see all 5 of them, but Billy and Cahrlie never utter a single sound, and Mick is a bit detached. Keith is more prominent, but he is a bit too slow and languid. Anita is good, she is not very vivid here, but her drug-drenched life is shown well. What is great, is the excellent scenery of the park, and the excellent 60's soundtrack. Too much nudity is a bit embarrassing, and too many drug moments are a bit imposing. But that was part of life, just another faucet of that. All in all, a nice Brian biopic, with many good details and nice memos. Good for Stones fans, and a good word of warning - drugs do kill
STONED (Stephen Woolley, 2005) **
Bunuel197624 August 2006
I was looking forward to this one (despite the negative reviews it got) because of its subject matter - the mysterious death of Rolling Stones guitarist, Brian Jones. However, apart from good central performances - Leo Gregory (Brian Jones), Paddy Considine (Frank Thoroghgood) and David Morrissey (Tom Keylock) - and a couple of attractive females, I have to say I was let down by it. There really is little depth to the characterizations: Jones, especially, is portrayed as a pill-popping, egotistical snob who beats up his girl and enjoys needling the meek Thorogood but he is shown to lose interest in his band's activities far too early (in 1966!) which is negated by history given that he still exerted some control over the Stones' musical direction in unusual sounding songs like "Lady Jane" and "Paint It Black". First-time director Stephen Woolley (Neil Jordan's frequent producer) overdirects most of the time and, apart from Jagger and Jones, none of the rest of the Stones look anything like the real people. To add insult to injury, three of the classic songs of the era are only rendered via bland recent cover versions rather the originals which, at least, would have given it an air of authenticity.
Little Boy Lost
Goingbegging26 October 2017
This is a story of two people, not ten, as you might assume from the poster, which suggests a bio-pic of the Rolling Stones and their various rock-chicks. We are actually looking at the last few weeks of Brian Jones, the group's genuinely brilliant creator, whose colleagues had just fired him on the grounds that he was no longer fit to create anything, after plunging too deep into the debauchery of the 60's music scene. He would soon be found drowned in his pool, possibly at the hands of an unpaid builder, Frank Thorogood, resentful at living so near yet so far from the pop-star life.
The murder theory is far from proved, and even then there is an alternative suspect in the Stones' chauffeur and minder Tom Keylock, who plays a menacing role in this film, while others claim that the asthmatic Jones had simply gone swimming while stoned out of his mind.
It is the relationship between Jones and Thorogood that drives this story - the glamorous celebrity and the humble tradesman, dazzled and disoriented by the young groupies casually brushing past him with their mini-skirted thighs.
To Thorogood, Jones is generous with his drugs and his girls ("Haven't you ever heard of free love?"), but relentlessly tight with money. He was in fact a small, narrow, mean character, as shown by the offhand way he ordered his first girlfriend to abort their baby. But by now he is overtaken by debt, having failed to deliver good songs for some time. And Thorogood's men are wanting their wages rather badly...
Those of us with vivid memories of the 60's will pick up some too-obvious images of people smoking cigarettes in a theatrical way, so you don't miss the point, and a poster of the Black and White Minstrels, long since branded as non-PC. Also Thorogood's wife commenting on his new trendy long hairstyle. And a few contemporary song-hits (sung in cover-versions only).
The scenes of drug-taking do not really touch a nerve among us non-druggies, and as for the free love, there is some weird camera direction, especially at a climactic point where one of the girls seems to be resisting group-sex, while a male voice shouts "Experiment with me!". The nature of the experiment remains obscure.
Meanwhile the swimming pool is featured almost like a character in the story. Jones and Thorogood are seen lounging and drinking beside it. When it's empty, they even make a recording down there, with echo effects. And there is a ghostly reappearance of Jones, thanking Keylock (but not Thorogood, you notice) for making him a martyr. "If it wasn't for you, I'd still be alive and no one would care." For Jones had earned immortality as founder member of the 27 Club, commemorating rock-stars who die at that age, for which there is (supposedly) a statistical spike.
As one of the rock-chicks remarks, showing an unexpected shaft of profundity, "Stonesville. A very strange place."
The murder theory is far from proved, and even then there is an alternative suspect in the Stones' chauffeur and minder Tom Keylock, who plays a menacing role in this film, while others claim that the asthmatic Jones had simply gone swimming while stoned out of his mind.
It is the relationship between Jones and Thorogood that drives this story - the glamorous celebrity and the humble tradesman, dazzled and disoriented by the young groupies casually brushing past him with their mini-skirted thighs.
To Thorogood, Jones is generous with his drugs and his girls ("Haven't you ever heard of free love?"), but relentlessly tight with money. He was in fact a small, narrow, mean character, as shown by the offhand way he ordered his first girlfriend to abort their baby. But by now he is overtaken by debt, having failed to deliver good songs for some time. And Thorogood's men are wanting their wages rather badly...
Those of us with vivid memories of the 60's will pick up some too-obvious images of people smoking cigarettes in a theatrical way, so you don't miss the point, and a poster of the Black and White Minstrels, long since branded as non-PC. Also Thorogood's wife commenting on his new trendy long hairstyle. And a few contemporary song-hits (sung in cover-versions only).
The scenes of drug-taking do not really touch a nerve among us non-druggies, and as for the free love, there is some weird camera direction, especially at a climactic point where one of the girls seems to be resisting group-sex, while a male voice shouts "Experiment with me!". The nature of the experiment remains obscure.
Meanwhile the swimming pool is featured almost like a character in the story. Jones and Thorogood are seen lounging and drinking beside it. When it's empty, they even make a recording down there, with echo effects. And there is a ghostly reappearance of Jones, thanking Keylock (but not Thorogood, you notice) for making him a martyr. "If it wasn't for you, I'd still be alive and no one would care." For Jones had earned immortality as founder member of the 27 Club, commemorating rock-stars who die at that age, for which there is (supposedly) a statistical spike.
As one of the rock-chicks remarks, showing an unexpected shaft of profundity, "Stonesville. A very strange place."
Got this one out on Cheap Tuesday. Fortunately.
wadechurton20 March 2008
No, one should not expect a fictionalization of the Stones' story, but one does expect a reasonable attempt at a depiction of Brian Jones' time with them. As it is, the Stones are peripheral characters in the screenplay. Apart from a few bluesy jams, their own music is absent entirely. The story focuses on the relationships between Jones and his foreman/com-padre Frank Thorogood, out at the rock star's country estate. The large house is conspicuously the movie's prime set. Fine, 'Stoned' had a low budget. Then again, it's from a real-life story which was basically made up of people talking, fighting and falling over. Not so fine is that 'Stoned' had to be so bad. One of the hardest things to swallow about 'Stoned' was the casting of Leo Gregory as Jones. He does little characterization beyond a 'fatalistic' smile, and although 27 years old himself (Jones' age at the time of his death), on screen he looks ten years older and wears a risible array of mail-order hairpieces to represent the varying Jones eras. At times he looks like a young Jon Pertwee in a fright wig. The direction by Stephen Wooley is wildly erratic and at times laughable. Jefferson Airplane's 'White Rabbit' underscoring an acid trip scene is the hack cinematic equivalent of the 'city/pretty' hack songwriting rhyme. It took Wooley ten years to put this botch-up together? Looks more like it was desperately cobbled together late Sunday night and breathlessly handed in by the Monday 9AM deadline. Another Bad Movie Night contender.
A descent docu-drama
KineticSeoul8 October 2009
This movie had sex, drugs, and rock and roll like the audience would expect and even though I am not a big Rolling Stone fan I decided to give this movie a chance. The casting for this movie was excellent although sometimes the acting seemed a bit weak. Leo Gregory and Ben Whishaw did a exquisite job of portraying Brian Jones and Keith Richards. This film was a good surprise, with even creating the atmosphere of the 60's, the music was great and the editing was done really well. This film got me hooked from the beginning but didn't add anything new besides showing some cliché stuff some rock stars do. This movie is also not about the Rolling Stone but Brian Jones and some struggles he went through in the band and his private life in till his death. This movie isn't a intelligent docu-drama, but it isn't that bad and somewhat kept me interested.
7/10
7/10
Bland and predictable
Nh322 November 2005
After watching the film I really don't think the history told here was worth making a film, very few things happen and all of them can be deduced or were told in the trailer! The only reason of this film seems to be the fact that he once had been a Rolling Stone. It's quite difficult to like the protagonist, in fact I found myself hating him and sympathizing with Frank. The decadence of this character is just predictable and his "phases" shown during the film as scenes are too obvious and predictable from certain point of the film. The montages with the young Rolling Stones, the 60's ambientation and all that is quite well done, although some scenes with the band look so artificial that are impossible to believe. Quite an unnecessary film that can be ignored.
Not That Bad
fbradley320 November 2005
I actually read 2 of the 3 books written about Jones and his demise, and if nothing else, the film is an accurate portrayal of the books. If you want to know what the last few months of his life were like, and also get a brief overview of how he got there (via flashbacks), then this movie will do it for you. If you want something else, then perhaps not. I would rather see a film on a subject like this get made with a low budget than not get made at all. Yes, some of the acting is bad, but some is very good as well. My only strong complaint is that the editing -- especially the sound editing -- is really poor. Especially the cuts/fades/transitions.
A Provocative And Worthwhile Biopic
iamyuno228 December 2013
While I'm not going to rave about the acting in this movie, it was above average and certainly respectable. What makes this movie worth seeing, however, is its fabulous recreation of the life and times of Brian Jones and the Stones - and the little-known details surrounding Jones' mysterious death. Here, a theory is put forward that I have accepted (especially since there's been a death-bed confession) and I believe needs to be known. Stones fans will learn much here, too, about the rocky relationship Jones had with his bandmates toward the end and the reasons for his being fired from the band (including some surprising morality issues that played into it). You'll find yourself gaining new respect for Mick and Keith. While some aspects of the movie don't rise above the feel of a TV flick, I highly urge Stones fans to see it. It gives us a glimpse into a world long gone that helped lead to some of the best songs ever.
"....Disappointingly Stoned...."
jubilee7724 September 2008
Most people would have expected this film to be an insight in the early days of the Rolling Stones and it's ill-fated founding member Brian Jones. Unfortunately, it seems to be that we were wrong as it actually provides very little insight and tells us an incredible story that he was murdered by builder Frank Thorogood and then Thorogood makes a confession on his death bed that looks certain to have been incoherent ramblings while some of Jones' former girlfriends too make up the conspiracy theories. It had also taken more than a decade for director Stephen Woolley to piece this film together but it had with hindsight, turned out to be boring, a bit of a near-miss and a disappointment. Brian Jones' time with the Rolling Stones was in fact an increasingly high and turbulent affair. The changeover of the management team behind the Stones lead to Jones' position of fall-outs and absences from several gigs and eventual decline. By June 1969, Jones was under pressure to quit the Stones. Less than a month later, he was found dead in his swimming pool.
Frank did us all a favour.
hibzarecool8 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Its very dubious to put at the end of the film that Thoroughgood confessed to the killing on his deathbed in 1993 as if its fact as its solely based on the testimony of the only witness to that alleged statement, Tom Keylock, and cannot be corroborated. Therefore it is not fact and should not be portrayed as such.
Also if you listen to the featurette on the DVD about the making of the film they mention they cut the school swimming scene at the start cos the the actor (Gregory) playing Brian Jones looked too muscular and could not pass as a schoolboy. The commentary noted he had spent 'too much time in Third Space' gym. Unfortunately they didn't seem to have a problem with 'six pack' playing a junkie and alcoholic in later life.
Couldn't imagine De Niro training to get a six pack if he was portraying a waster junkie alcoholic musician. Vanity perhaps on the part of Gregory? It also made it look a bit improbable when the skinny Considine (Thoroughgood) is able to push the muscular (Gregory) Jones under water with ease.
Also if you listen to the featurette on the DVD about the making of the film they mention they cut the school swimming scene at the start cos the the actor (Gregory) playing Brian Jones looked too muscular and could not pass as a schoolboy. The commentary noted he had spent 'too much time in Third Space' gym. Unfortunately they didn't seem to have a problem with 'six pack' playing a junkie and alcoholic in later life.
Couldn't imagine De Niro training to get a six pack if he was portraying a waster junkie alcoholic musician. Vanity perhaps on the part of Gregory? It also made it look a bit improbable when the skinny Considine (Thoroughgood) is able to push the muscular (Gregory) Jones under water with ease.
Visually exciting and somewhat interesting study of a man whose lifestyle caught up with him via someone else.
johnnyboyz7 May 2009
You might think the life and lifestyle of rock star Brian Jones consisted of a little more than what we get in Stephen Woolley's 2005 film entitled 'Stoned'. But then again, it isn't about his life as much as it is about his death; it isn't really about Brian Jones as much as it is about a certain Frank Thorogood, and the things he did during a famous but fateful period of time. I read that there is no definitive answer regarding Jone's death, a deathbed confession that supposedly never was; a tragic accident that was apparently very deliberate. The film is, in the end, a documenting of one side of the story – a belief a certain director might have or a take on previously transpired events. It is a documentation that is brimming with style and emphasis on the visual as it flies through this person's life up to the point he'll meet the man that supposedly murdered him, before slowing down and making a meek study.
The man in question is Brian Jones (Gregory), a member of a rock band named The Rolling Stones from which I'm pretty sure the title of the film comes; although he did rather like his drug use. The film begins with Jones' euphoric rise to power with archive footage shoved in our faces as fast edits, bright colours and general build up hogs the screen. This is before Paddy Considine's Frank Thorogood arrives, a builder who leads a very simple life with unspectacular but somewhat desired results. He is unimpressed by Jones at first, even under-rawed by his presence in comparison to flocks of screaming fans shown mere minutes ago. And so the slight study is established with an underwhelmed Thorogood initially meeting super-star Jones before time develops mindsets and attitudes eventually change.
The study isn't so much obsession with a celebrity, as explored in The King of Comedy, as much as it is eventual jealousy; a taste of the forbidden fruit and then a constant temptation to revert back to it. But it is Jones whose given the majority of the runtime, through a series of necessary flashbacks unfolded mostly through a visual filter of bright colours; bizarre camera angles shot on an array of different lens'; this down to the influence the ecstasy has on said people. We get all the necessary stuff: the scenes at the concerts; progression with the rest of the band members and how that spirals out of control; the progression of his relationship with girlfriends and the meeting of a certain Anna Wohlin (Novotny) backstage at Munich, although I'm not sure how she got through all that crowd control. She does, incidentally, pretty much exist to remove her clothes every now and again as well as act as the object of Thorogood's gaze.
Jones seems to have garnered all of what he had by accident. He's portrayed as immature and not as a particularly clever individual at the best of times, but he inherits all this fame and attention which comes with the house, the cars and the women following shows across Europe. But rather than portray Jones in a negative light and force us into disliking him, I really just felt sorry for him; that this individual, who clearly loves what he does for a living, just doesn't know how to use all this money and fame in a sensible manner with moderation seemingly ever-elusive. A lot of whatever kick you're going to get out of the study the film makes, lies within Thorogood's gaze. He, along with a few other builders, is hired to extend Jones' huge manor house based out in the country as Jones himself faces exile from the band that made him famous.
As a character, Frank is central to the film. He represents not only the audience, as a figure that is given permission to be allowed into this little world of allure and fame, but additionally as a representation of how easy it to fall into the 'trap' of this lifestyle; how someone quite feasibly on Brian Jones' 'level' of sensibility and intellect can be lured into a life of women, hallucinogenic drugs and rock music. It also acts as a demonstration on Jones' influence and how his way of life is able to influence. Frank is allowed glimpses of Anna when he does push-ups in front of her as well as Jones; he gets a flavour for the laid back lifestyle as Jones sits beside an empty pool and listens to rock music, Frank looking over him in eerie fashion given how it all ends; and the casual drug use soon follows before Frank begins to loose the trust and connection with his fellow builders, much like Jones began to loose the respect and acknowledgement of his own group of co-workers, that being his band: The Rolling Stones.
It's all quite interesting, but progressive and feels somewhat obligatory. David Morrissey turns up now and again as Tom Keylock, Jones' manager and chews the scenery as he spouts dialogue delivered in what sounds uncannily like a Michael Caine impression; but the supporting cast is disappointing on the whole. The other 'Stones' members are there purely for petty visualisation; the girls exist to get naked and daft cameos from people like David Walliams as an accountant just distract when it shouldn't. Regardless, the film is worth seeing for its documentation of Jones' last days and its look at the lifestyle it studies.
The man in question is Brian Jones (Gregory), a member of a rock band named The Rolling Stones from which I'm pretty sure the title of the film comes; although he did rather like his drug use. The film begins with Jones' euphoric rise to power with archive footage shoved in our faces as fast edits, bright colours and general build up hogs the screen. This is before Paddy Considine's Frank Thorogood arrives, a builder who leads a very simple life with unspectacular but somewhat desired results. He is unimpressed by Jones at first, even under-rawed by his presence in comparison to flocks of screaming fans shown mere minutes ago. And so the slight study is established with an underwhelmed Thorogood initially meeting super-star Jones before time develops mindsets and attitudes eventually change.
The study isn't so much obsession with a celebrity, as explored in The King of Comedy, as much as it is eventual jealousy; a taste of the forbidden fruit and then a constant temptation to revert back to it. But it is Jones whose given the majority of the runtime, through a series of necessary flashbacks unfolded mostly through a visual filter of bright colours; bizarre camera angles shot on an array of different lens'; this down to the influence the ecstasy has on said people. We get all the necessary stuff: the scenes at the concerts; progression with the rest of the band members and how that spirals out of control; the progression of his relationship with girlfriends and the meeting of a certain Anna Wohlin (Novotny) backstage at Munich, although I'm not sure how she got through all that crowd control. She does, incidentally, pretty much exist to remove her clothes every now and again as well as act as the object of Thorogood's gaze.
Jones seems to have garnered all of what he had by accident. He's portrayed as immature and not as a particularly clever individual at the best of times, but he inherits all this fame and attention which comes with the house, the cars and the women following shows across Europe. But rather than portray Jones in a negative light and force us into disliking him, I really just felt sorry for him; that this individual, who clearly loves what he does for a living, just doesn't know how to use all this money and fame in a sensible manner with moderation seemingly ever-elusive. A lot of whatever kick you're going to get out of the study the film makes, lies within Thorogood's gaze. He, along with a few other builders, is hired to extend Jones' huge manor house based out in the country as Jones himself faces exile from the band that made him famous.
As a character, Frank is central to the film. He represents not only the audience, as a figure that is given permission to be allowed into this little world of allure and fame, but additionally as a representation of how easy it to fall into the 'trap' of this lifestyle; how someone quite feasibly on Brian Jones' 'level' of sensibility and intellect can be lured into a life of women, hallucinogenic drugs and rock music. It also acts as a demonstration on Jones' influence and how his way of life is able to influence. Frank is allowed glimpses of Anna when he does push-ups in front of her as well as Jones; he gets a flavour for the laid back lifestyle as Jones sits beside an empty pool and listens to rock music, Frank looking over him in eerie fashion given how it all ends; and the casual drug use soon follows before Frank begins to loose the trust and connection with his fellow builders, much like Jones began to loose the respect and acknowledgement of his own group of co-workers, that being his band: The Rolling Stones.
It's all quite interesting, but progressive and feels somewhat obligatory. David Morrissey turns up now and again as Tom Keylock, Jones' manager and chews the scenery as he spouts dialogue delivered in what sounds uncannily like a Michael Caine impression; but the supporting cast is disappointing on the whole. The other 'Stones' members are there purely for petty visualisation; the girls exist to get naked and daft cameos from people like David Walliams as an accountant just distract when it shouldn't. Regardless, the film is worth seeing for its documentation of Jones' last days and its look at the lifestyle it studies.
Disappointed and a half.
classicrockher22 October 2005
I went into the theater very excited about 'Stoned'. I mean, come on- it's a film about The Rolling Stones, one of the greatest bands of all time. I left the theater completely disappointed and almost angry that I wasted almost two hours of my life watching this film. The acting is horrible, not believable at all. The sex and nudity is overdone. I understand the whole free love, yay sex, drugs, and rock n roll thing- but honestly, it's a little too much. The ending of 'Stoned' makes no sense either. And the most disappointing part was that there were only 3 Rolling Stones songs in the entire film, and it wasn't even them singing! That part I can forgive because of the whole copywrite issue, but it's still a big bummer. If you're a big Stones fan like me I would suggest skipping this one. 'Stoned' should be considered sacrilege!
This Scattershot Narrative Just Drags and Never Pulls Together..
Michael-7026 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This is the first film directed by Stephen Wooley, who is better known as a producer, so I want to be kind, but I have to be honest as well. Interestingly, it was written by Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, who wrote a couple of the Pierce Brosnan, James Bond films. The movie begins with Rolling Stones founder Brian Jones being pulled out of his swimming pool having evidently drowned.
The film then scatter shoots in all directions and styles. Black and white for flashback scenes in the sixties and color film for trips to Marrakech. But the narrative never congeals. Perhaps if I knew more about the real beginning of the Rolling Stones the film would have more meaning for me, but I never got invested in it. I found the film to drag and to only jump in fits and starts.
There are some unmistakable elements of Nicholas Roeg's style here and that's not a bad thing. At least Wooley is copying from a good director, but the bottom line is he's just copying. It doesn't look like he's learned anything. Also, I found the performances in this film a bit lax and I don't know if that's the fault of the screenplay or the less than inspired direction.
Paddy Considine, who is usually quite riveting is lost here as a handyman who is sent to do some refurbishing on Brian Jones house in the country, and little by little gets caught up in the drugged out world of Brian Jones. The film also shows his character murder Jones by intentionally drowning him in the pool and an end title tells us that on his death bed, the real James Thorogood who Considine plays admitted that he had in fact killed Jones, but there is obviously no way to confirm that now.
The actor who plays Brian Jones has a nice androgynous quality and occasionally shows some creative spark, but again, he remains a total mystery. There had to be something about him that people liked. Damned if I can find out what it is from this film. Is it his musical ability? We don't see it. Is it his songwriting skill? We don't hear it. Is it his long schlong? That we see, but there has to be more to the guy than that.
Is it just because he has lots of drugs around? Maybe, that we see also, but I never quite knew what to make of him and the house builder. Was there supposed to be some kind of opposites attracting kind of thing here? You know, the artist against the workman? I'm not sure, if that was in there, it was very faint. Stoned would seem like a better film if there weren't in fact many better movies about music stars crumbling under the pressures of the business.
For a sublime look at that kind of story, you can't do much better than Gus Van Sant's Last Days about a Kurt Cobain like musician and Sid & Nancy about Sid Vicious and The Sex Pistols.
I give the people who made this high marks for the attempt, but unfortunately the result was a film that dragged and made me feel very bored.
The film then scatter shoots in all directions and styles. Black and white for flashback scenes in the sixties and color film for trips to Marrakech. But the narrative never congeals. Perhaps if I knew more about the real beginning of the Rolling Stones the film would have more meaning for me, but I never got invested in it. I found the film to drag and to only jump in fits and starts.
There are some unmistakable elements of Nicholas Roeg's style here and that's not a bad thing. At least Wooley is copying from a good director, but the bottom line is he's just copying. It doesn't look like he's learned anything. Also, I found the performances in this film a bit lax and I don't know if that's the fault of the screenplay or the less than inspired direction.
Paddy Considine, who is usually quite riveting is lost here as a handyman who is sent to do some refurbishing on Brian Jones house in the country, and little by little gets caught up in the drugged out world of Brian Jones. The film also shows his character murder Jones by intentionally drowning him in the pool and an end title tells us that on his death bed, the real James Thorogood who Considine plays admitted that he had in fact killed Jones, but there is obviously no way to confirm that now.
The actor who plays Brian Jones has a nice androgynous quality and occasionally shows some creative spark, but again, he remains a total mystery. There had to be something about him that people liked. Damned if I can find out what it is from this film. Is it his musical ability? We don't see it. Is it his songwriting skill? We don't hear it. Is it his long schlong? That we see, but there has to be more to the guy than that.
Is it just because he has lots of drugs around? Maybe, that we see also, but I never quite knew what to make of him and the house builder. Was there supposed to be some kind of opposites attracting kind of thing here? You know, the artist against the workman? I'm not sure, if that was in there, it was very faint. Stoned would seem like a better film if there weren't in fact many better movies about music stars crumbling under the pressures of the business.
For a sublime look at that kind of story, you can't do much better than Gus Van Sant's Last Days about a Kurt Cobain like musician and Sid & Nancy about Sid Vicious and The Sex Pistols.
I give the people who made this high marks for the attempt, but unfortunately the result was a film that dragged and made me feel very bored.
Film does little to provide insight into a 60's icon's life and death.
japonaliya21 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
The worst thing about this film (and there are so many) is that Brian Jones is portrayed throughout as a snotty, drugged out loser.
Yes, he was at the end...but there was so little insight about his prodigious musical abilities (beyond a cursory look via grainy flashbacks) that it is hard to be sympathetic to his plight, and unfortunate demise.
(another curious point)
Why, besides the ton of boobs shots, were there mostly frontal nudity of the male characters only? This has nothing to do with my main comments, but it is indeed curious why only male "members" are shown, and female genitalia were mostly hidden? It is usually the reverse in most films. I also now might add that I am no prude, but the gratuitous nudity seemed more for "show" then to further the idea that indeed... this was the swinging 60's.
The scene near the end sums this movie up. Tom is telling Frank how he has to "clean up" everyone's messes including Frank's. Frank is about to confess to the murder, when Tom cuts him off, saying that he doesn't want to know how it happened. Tom's attitude mirrors my own.
It really doesn't matter what the truth is/was, Brian Jones was dead..and who cares at this point? ..and that's exactly the biggest problem with this film.
After making Brian himself and the viewer so desensitized to his life and accomplishments (and only belaboring the drugs, booze and sex) the movie at the end, tries to insert some meaning into it all by a imaginary meeting between Tom in his old age, and Brain's ghost. The scene might have been more poignant if the whole movie was a flashback through Tom's eyes, but it wasn't, so the scene plays out like one of Brian's drug hallucinations.
Another way the film tries to patch things up is the statements on the screen before the credits, but it is too little, too late.
My first thought when I turned off my DVD player was, "what a waste"..... and that goes for both Brian's beleaguered life, and this film...
Yes, he was at the end...but there was so little insight about his prodigious musical abilities (beyond a cursory look via grainy flashbacks) that it is hard to be sympathetic to his plight, and unfortunate demise.
(another curious point)
Why, besides the ton of boobs shots, were there mostly frontal nudity of the male characters only? This has nothing to do with my main comments, but it is indeed curious why only male "members" are shown, and female genitalia were mostly hidden? It is usually the reverse in most films. I also now might add that I am no prude, but the gratuitous nudity seemed more for "show" then to further the idea that indeed... this was the swinging 60's.
The scene near the end sums this movie up. Tom is telling Frank how he has to "clean up" everyone's messes including Frank's. Frank is about to confess to the murder, when Tom cuts him off, saying that he doesn't want to know how it happened. Tom's attitude mirrors my own.
It really doesn't matter what the truth is/was, Brian Jones was dead..and who cares at this point? ..and that's exactly the biggest problem with this film.
After making Brian himself and the viewer so desensitized to his life and accomplishments (and only belaboring the drugs, booze and sex) the movie at the end, tries to insert some meaning into it all by a imaginary meeting between Tom in his old age, and Brain's ghost. The scene might have been more poignant if the whole movie was a flashback through Tom's eyes, but it wasn't, so the scene plays out like one of Brian's drug hallucinations.
Another way the film tries to patch things up is the statements on the screen before the credits, but it is too little, too late.
My first thought when I turned off my DVD player was, "what a waste"..... and that goes for both Brian's beleaguered life, and this film...
Stoned out of my brain
tim-fletcher25 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Being huge fans of the Stones - and Brian Jones in particular - my girlfriend and I eagerly anticipated the little publicised release of Stoned. We made the journey to our local cinema and sat side by side, hardly uttering a word throughout, and watched as the life of one of the greatest musicians our shores have ever produced, slowly ebbed away - we were not disappointed. Having read The Geoffrey Giuliano book documenting Brian's death, I felt the film offered an authentic portrayal of the weeks leading up to that fateful night when Brian Jones boarded a celestial plane to the other world or in other words, was found face down in his swimming pool at Cotchford Farm.
Leo Gregory put in a fine performance as Jones - cruel, paranoid, vulnerable, needy, flippant, kind, fickle, sadistic, brilliant - and Paddy Considine was great (as always) as Frank Thoroughgood, the builder/hanger-on, riding first class on the Brian Jones gravy train. As the relationship between the two main characters developed, I must admit that I found myself feeling a little sympathy for Thoroughgood (but then I reminded myself that this was the man who robbed us of the founding member of the Rolling Stones), having to endure Brian's unreasonable demands, mood swings, mind games and mental humiliations. Thoroughgood however, seemed quite willing to put up with such behaviour for the sake of his new lifestyle, away from the mediocrity of normal life. As the film progressed, we watched as Thoroughgood's resentment and jealousy consumed him, culminating in the cold-blooded killing of Brian Jones thus creating a legend.
The film is entertaining, well written and in my opinion, well acted. I was interested to read a previous review left on this site by an author who was rather disappointed with the film. Well, to counteract two of the author's points: 1 - This was not a film about the Rolling Stones, but a film about Brian Jones and the events that led to his untimely death. 2 - There was too much sex and nudity in the film? Nonsense! Brian Jones was a rock star who loved - and lived - the sex and drugs lifestyle, so much so, that his addictions and inability to cope with the trappings played a huge part in his eventual downfall. The sex/drug scenes were an integral part of the film and were undoubtedly there to show us the kind of lifestyle that Jones was leading at the time. I personally thought the scenes which showed Jones basking in the glory of his drug and sex fuelled existence were brilliantly done - hazy flashbacks, quick fixes and foggy mornings after.
The ending is a little odd, showing the ghost of Brian talking to Tom Keylock, and the soundtrack could have been better, but apart from that, a thoroughly enjoyable insight into the life and times of a true rock legend, the inimitable Brian Jones. Rock on!
Leo Gregory put in a fine performance as Jones - cruel, paranoid, vulnerable, needy, flippant, kind, fickle, sadistic, brilliant - and Paddy Considine was great (as always) as Frank Thoroughgood, the builder/hanger-on, riding first class on the Brian Jones gravy train. As the relationship between the two main characters developed, I must admit that I found myself feeling a little sympathy for Thoroughgood (but then I reminded myself that this was the man who robbed us of the founding member of the Rolling Stones), having to endure Brian's unreasonable demands, mood swings, mind games and mental humiliations. Thoroughgood however, seemed quite willing to put up with such behaviour for the sake of his new lifestyle, away from the mediocrity of normal life. As the film progressed, we watched as Thoroughgood's resentment and jealousy consumed him, culminating in the cold-blooded killing of Brian Jones thus creating a legend.
The film is entertaining, well written and in my opinion, well acted. I was interested to read a previous review left on this site by an author who was rather disappointed with the film. Well, to counteract two of the author's points: 1 - This was not a film about the Rolling Stones, but a film about Brian Jones and the events that led to his untimely death. 2 - There was too much sex and nudity in the film? Nonsense! Brian Jones was a rock star who loved - and lived - the sex and drugs lifestyle, so much so, that his addictions and inability to cope with the trappings played a huge part in his eventual downfall. The sex/drug scenes were an integral part of the film and were undoubtedly there to show us the kind of lifestyle that Jones was leading at the time. I personally thought the scenes which showed Jones basking in the glory of his drug and sex fuelled existence were brilliantly done - hazy flashbacks, quick fixes and foggy mornings after.
The ending is a little odd, showing the ghost of Brian talking to Tom Keylock, and the soundtrack could have been better, but apart from that, a thoroughly enjoyable insight into the life and times of a true rock legend, the inimitable Brian Jones. Rock on!
Really poor!
tim-scott9 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
So the director had the cast watch Performance first, eh? Its a pity that none of the originality, menace, atmosphere or talent of that film rubbed off on the crew or cast involved in the making of this turkey. The story of Brian Jones has so much to recommend it to filmmakers. There is the journey of the middle class kid from small town England to international rock star, there is the story of the cultural changes that took place in the 1960's, there is the doomed love-affair between Brian and Anita, there is the story of the Rolling Stones themselves; how they changed the face of pop music and then there is the story of Brian Jones relationship with his gardener. All of them have the potential to make a great film. So how come Stoned fails on very single one of them?
Brian's wig for starters. Brian's "acting". The clichéd, lazy script. The awful choice of music (lame cover versions for the most part). The underwritten characters. The complete absence of any sympathetic characters. Missed opportunity after missed opportunity. Stay away from this film.
Brian's wig for starters. Brian's "acting". The clichéd, lazy script. The awful choice of music (lame cover versions for the most part). The underwritten characters. The complete absence of any sympathetic characters. Missed opportunity after missed opportunity. Stay away from this film.
too much of a challenge
lazur-216 June 2006
How does one cast a movie portraying at least three of most worshiped, admired, envied, charismatic people in the business? Add to that, two of them are still alive and performing, maintaining their persona quite effectively into their sixties. Perhaps if this all had occurred before high-quality film, video, and sound-recording was so easily available. As it is, any one from any generation can get a first-hand idea of how fascinating the Rolling Stones' entrance into the pop-music scene was. If you want to know all about the aspects of Brian Jones that really matter, listen to the music; his total immersion into whatever style he was interested in gave him almost instant ability on whatever instrument he wished to play; his knowledge of and ability at Chicago Blues guitar styles,(not the hot solos, but the foundational group styles), was unparalleled. If you want to understand why he was so adored; look at his pictures. You're not going to get the idea from this film, but it's almost not fair.
Happiness is boring, man
rowmorg1 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
The Rolling Stones ripped off the blues greats, and were just another example of white men ripping off black men, like Elvis and all the rest. I have no idea what contribution Brian Jones made to their tinny dance records, and I tended to agree with the outraged father of a fourteen year-old girl (depicted in an early scene) who said how much he despised him for getting her pregnant. Jones's despicable answer was that a doctor could do away with it. Way to go, Mr Wooley, set up your hero as a total tosser right from the get-go! Now we don't care about him at all, let's get on with the rest of the film, eh? There's no mystery about the pool death now, any more than there was in Sussex at the time: I was there. The guy was a decadent poltroon who had an asthma attack while swimming and accidentally drowned because he was hopelessly overweight and weak from chronic dypsomania. No one killed him, he killed himself, blatantly. Looking at the footage of the half-million attending the free concert for Brian held in Hyde Park, I wonder what got into everyone at the time. It must have been the very powerful sound systems that were coming in, and could reach big crowds and make more money than anyone had ever imagined. Give me Nora Jones instead of Brian Jones any time.
A Great Producer
dhlough-12 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
The mystique of the Rolling Stones isn't well served by Stoned, a speculative film about the last three months of the life of original guitarist Brian Jones. But nor will their legend be marred by this inept and ineffectual bio-pic.
Directed by famed producer Stephen Woolley (The Crying Game, Breakfast On Pluto), Stoned shows us Jones final days through the eyes of Frank Thorogood (Paddy Considine), a contractor brought into the fold by the Stones road manager Tom Keylock (David Morrissey) to help with the landscaping of his East Sussex manse and, eventually, keep an eye on the free-spirited rock star.
Since we know that Jones (Leo Gregory) drowned in his pool, Wooley stages it with a flash forward of the body's discovery near the start of the film. But any mystery about the relationship of the working-class Thorogood and the rich Jones begs for more incisive scenes than the clichéd mise-en-scene of all too familiar 60's tropes. To believe that the contractor could be moved to murder Jones, we need more than a mild scene of humiliation and a dismissal without final pay. We need shadings of Thorogood's psychological discord, and a fuller performance from the usually reliable Considine.
Not that the other actors fare any better. Gregory plays Jones as a Lost Boy and an opportunist, sporting a Little Lord Fauntleroy shag that turns him into David Spade's somewhat sexier brother. The women are lovely, but basically negligible whores or hangers-on and the rest of the band loose approximations of the younger Stones, with Keith Richards the moral center of the film.
Neither the script, by Neil Purvis and Robert Wade, nor the director, shapes scenes for drama. Jones life, like the film, seems aimless; we never understand his importance as the architect of the original Stones. On the evidence of Stoned, one can rightly say that as a director, Woolley is a great producer.
Directed by famed producer Stephen Woolley (The Crying Game, Breakfast On Pluto), Stoned shows us Jones final days through the eyes of Frank Thorogood (Paddy Considine), a contractor brought into the fold by the Stones road manager Tom Keylock (David Morrissey) to help with the landscaping of his East Sussex manse and, eventually, keep an eye on the free-spirited rock star.
Since we know that Jones (Leo Gregory) drowned in his pool, Wooley stages it with a flash forward of the body's discovery near the start of the film. But any mystery about the relationship of the working-class Thorogood and the rich Jones begs for more incisive scenes than the clichéd mise-en-scene of all too familiar 60's tropes. To believe that the contractor could be moved to murder Jones, we need more than a mild scene of humiliation and a dismissal without final pay. We need shadings of Thorogood's psychological discord, and a fuller performance from the usually reliable Considine.
Not that the other actors fare any better. Gregory plays Jones as a Lost Boy and an opportunist, sporting a Little Lord Fauntleroy shag that turns him into David Spade's somewhat sexier brother. The women are lovely, but basically negligible whores or hangers-on and the rest of the band loose approximations of the younger Stones, with Keith Richards the moral center of the film.
Neither the script, by Neil Purvis and Robert Wade, nor the director, shapes scenes for drama. Jones life, like the film, seems aimless; we never understand his importance as the architect of the original Stones. On the evidence of Stoned, one can rightly say that as a director, Woolley is a great producer.
The movie sucks.... really sucks
top_cio17 September 2006
I was so disappointed by this movie! I mean... there are NO songs by the Rolling Stones in the movie that I (or anyone else I know) would recognize, Brian Jones never wrote any of their songs, and the Stones "members" might as well have been extras on the set for all the lines they got and acting opportunities received. All of that in itself makes the movie awful. But it gets worse, if possible. Unless you grew up in Cockney Town England, you're not going to understand a THING any of the actors say in the whole movie - they might as well have been speaking Japanese! Just a bunch of Blimey mumbling, cigarettes hanging out of their mouths, and a stupid, twisted, pointless plot line that would probably have been more intelligible with the sound off. In fact, that's my advice to any future watchers - just turn the sound off and the movie won't seem quite so bad.
This movie is a prime example of dollars wasted on a stupid theme, a stupid subject, a stupid premise (about the Rolling Stones, but no Stones are really present in the whole movie), and just stupid in general. If you've seen Oliver Stone's great movie "The Doors", and think this one is going to be the same kind of ride except about the Rolling Stones you are in for a grave, deep, and permanent letdown - buyer beware!
This movie is a prime example of dollars wasted on a stupid theme, a stupid subject, a stupid premise (about the Rolling Stones, but no Stones are really present in the whole movie), and just stupid in general. If you've seen Oliver Stone's great movie "The Doors", and think this one is going to be the same kind of ride except about the Rolling Stones you are in for a grave, deep, and permanent letdown - buyer beware!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
