Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Aspen Orson There is definitely an excellent idea hidden in the background of the film. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find it.

jc-osms Yet another assemblage of vintage clips of the Stones, this time celebrating their 50th anniversary together. For some reason, it starts with footage of the "I-want-to-be-trendy" talk-show host Dick Cavett hanging with the band during their access-all-excess 1972 American tour, itself recently the feature of a film all to itself. From there, it works backwards to the band's origin, then taking us back up to 1978, when they temporarily rejuvenated themselves for the "Some Girls" album, actually an apt place to stop as their music hasn't progressed, far less excited, any since, like in their glory days. More than that the film signs off by tellingly making the point that having started out as a blues-covers band, then become deliberately moulded into the anti-Beatles by manager Andrew Loog-Oldham, they progressed from counter-cultural anti-heroes to fully fledged members of the establishment (arise Sir Mick!) and become everybody's favourite rock and roll band/brand, a title they've never relinquished but equally the irony of which appears to escape them.I am a big fan of the band and enjoyed seeing some footage I'd not seen before, particularly impromptu or backstage stuff, but most of it I had, while the band interviews, none apparently latter-day revisionist, similarly don't tell us much we didn't know already. Jagger certainly comes across as the most intelligent and loquacious, with Keith playing up to his bad boy persona, leaving Charlie and Bill not giving a damn about the fame and celebrity that goes with the gig. Mick Taylor sensibly explains that he left for the good of his health and Ron Wood was apparently brought in as much for his peace-making irreverence as his musical ability. Brian Jones gets mentioned in dispatches in the first hour, but probably less than he deserved.All the band's major events are chronicled with contemporary film footage, like deliberately choosing their "black-hat" marketing image, the breakthrough of learning to write their own songs, their first US mass-popularity in 1965, the Redlands drug-bust in 1967 which saw Mick and Keith controversially sentenced to jail for drug possession, Brian Jones' exit and soon-afterwards death-by-drowning in 1969 and to close out the decade on a low, the disastrous free concert at Altamont.There's less of interest in the second part, unless you count their new tax-exile status as a major event, eventually leading up, from a long-way out, to Keith's drugs bust in Toronto in 1978. One doubts if the producer could have filled another two hours on the years from 1978 until now, for which I suppose we should be grateful. However this interesting document, filled with attitude and great music is definitely a watchable tribute to the best-surviving band of the 60's.

Tony Bush Brett Morgan, director of THE KID STAYS IN THE PICTURE, delivers this almost superb chronicle of the rise of The Rolling Stones. Interview sound-bites from unseen Jagger, Richards, Watts, Wood, Taylor and Wyman pass comment over a backdrop of newsreel, home movie and concert footage which continuously and unbrokenly spools across the decades.If you lived through most of it, it's a moderately emotional and involving experience, full of nostalgia and wistful insights. There is little bite or revelation going on, but the entertainment value is high – especially for fans. Casual onlookers might not be converted easily, but the scope of this at times faintly nightmarish modern "fairytale" of fame and success is likely to have at least some impact.Richard's autobiography LIFE and Stephen Davis's masterful band bio OLD GODS ALMOST DEAD have a certain meat protein on their bones and an incisive analysis in their bloodstream that CROSSFIRE HURRICANE fails to come close to replicating on screen. It nearly nails it with depictions of the bands early yob behaviour and riot incitement plus a truly chilling depiction of the Altamont concert which manages to successfully generate a tangible sense of the fear and danger permeating that particular event. The ramshackle death and disintegration of the peace and love movement of the sixties is directly and probably quite correctly connected to the Altamont disaster.There is much to see of the sixties and seventies, but not really enough added depth of inquiry to resonate passionately with the imagery and sound. The story is told, but told deadpan and without much genuine emotional punch or guts. The grit and gore, the down and dirty stuff never materialises. It's all rather civilised. Then it gets to the early eighties, jump-cuts to the Beacon Theatre concerts in 2006 (Scorsese's SHINE A LIGHT) then abruptly ends. What?I love the Stones and always will. Anyone with an interest in popular music who can't appreciate their immeasurable contribution and cultural influence in creative terms alone might as well be living in a sterile vacuum on some other planet. Where rock and roll is concerned, these are the real deal, they ARE the old gods, and almost dead or not, they still shine bright. If hearing Satisfaction, Jumping Jack Flash, Sympathy For The Devil, Gimme Shelter, Miss You, Sweet Virginia, don't move you in some way, then you just ain't got a taste for the stuff that don't taste of anything but sucrose, Tupperware and Styrofoam. They might have become a corporate cash cow touring machine, but when it came to delivering, they delivered.CROSSFIRE HURRICANE delivers also, but to a limited extent. It provides some truly great visuals and some truly great sounds. But the definitive Stones movie is out there somewhere still waiting to be made. This ain't it, but it will do to pass the time with until the glorious day arrives.

crossbow0106 Although, this film has some tremendous footage never or rarely seen it also has the feel of a crib notes version of the band. Its hard to encapsulate 50 years into less than two hours and this film is watchable, but mostly for Stones fans. The members of the band do voice overs (everyone would like a film where they all sit together and comment on things), and Brian Jones, Altamont and other things are covered, but this is by no means comprehensive. That is probably the point, if you're even a casual fan you know whats been going on with the band for 50 years. Stones fans will likely and rightly give this an 8 to 10 rating, others that never cared about the band may not wish to sit through it. Recommended for the great footage, but don't expect to get much more insight into the band than what you already know.

gregwetherall It is high time for a look back on an illustrious career that has famously had more than its fair share of sex, drugs and rock n' roll. However, those looking for a Beatles Anthology-esque examination will be disappointed. This is more ramshackle than that, much like the band themselves. This is a concise one-off film of only 118 minutes. Considering it took director, Brett Morgan, four months to wade through the archive footage (with assistance from co-producer, Mick Jagger), it is a shame that he hasn't been minded to create a more sprawling work, befitting of the Stones' lengthy career. In fact, the documentary ends abruptly at around 1977, and offers nothing after this date, save for closing credit live footage of Exile On Main Street track 'All Down The Line' lifted from the 2008 film, Shine A Light.Opening with colour backstage footage and a live rendition of 'Street Fighting Man', attention soon turns to the early days, and the maelstrom that consisted of live performance in the early and mid-60s for the Rolling Stones, with the incessant screaming and stage invasions. Emphasis is firmly placed on what it must have been like within this vortex, having to deal with a rapid ascent and devotional teenage girls (England) and boys (the rest of the world).Whilst discussing the early period, coverage is given in a frank manner as to the band's feeling about the demise of original band member, Brian Jones. Whilst acknowledging his talent, it turns out that the band felt a degree of inevitability over his eventual death. Even though an element of mystery hangs over the drowning, Jones' relationship with drugs is well-known (Godard's film, Sympathy for the Devil, shows an induced and distracted Jones in the studio). As matters arose, the death came only two days before a free Hyde Park gig in front of 500,000 people - a gig that would mark a baptism of fire for new guitarist, Mick Taylor, and also act as a remembrance for Jones. Drummer Charlie Watts recalls Mick crying in the corner of the dressing room on the day of the performance. By contrast, Keith states that his reason for not going to the funeral is because he didn't want to make it 'a circus', and that he didn't even go to the funeral of his own mother and father.Arriving at the late 60s, there are compelling scenes offered up by the Altamont stabbing of Meredith Hunter, but these are taken from the previously released feature, Gimme Shelter. This time around, however, it is enhanced by comments from the band looking back, which is illuminating seeing as it has since been perceived as the incident that killed the hippie dream and the anti-Woodstock.Although the archive footage is interesting, there is not necessarily a dearth of unseen live material. The narrative itself is loosely played with, especially at the start, diverging down different avenues whilst vaguely seeking a chronological path (of sorts).There are some interesting revelations contained within this documentary that will interest fans. For example, Mick Taylor finally provides the reason as to why he left the Stones. Jagger himself concedes that he did not know or understand why, and Taylor goes on to explain that during the early 70s, he was falling into heroin addiction.Bill Wyman also distills what he believes is the sound of the Rolling Stones. Bearing a theory to Richards oft-quoted opinion that many bands can rock but not many can roll, he points towards the sound as being a consequence of Charlie's decision to follow Keith's lead, which means that the drums come in slightly behind the guitar, which is unusual in itself, whilst Bill's bass would be slightly ahead. Wyman describes this as leading to 'a wobble' effect, where things could fall apart at any given moment.There is some interesting black and white footage of Mick and Keith writing material together in what is either backstage or in some sort of hotel room. Having an insight into how they worked together on the verge of what would be a particularly prolific part of their career is fascinating. Keith later voices opinion that of all the songs they wrote, 'Midnight Rambler' would be the essence of the Jagger/Richards writing partnership. He states a belief that anyone else could have written any of the other tunes, but only he and Mick would have thought about making an opera out of the blues.Coincidentally, much like that tune, this is certainly a film goes on a ramble of its own. Starting in slightly messy fashion, like a band tuning up after a short time apart, and taking a while to lock into the groove. As far as flaws go, no reference is made at all to Ian Stewart, which seems a glaring omission considering this is an overview of the Rolling Stones' career and all the significant players. His distinctive piano work enhanced songs such as 'Brown Sugar', amongst many others, and his lack of appearance in this documentary feels unfair and a missed opportunity. Also, there is no real detail on the relationship the Stones had with manager Andrew Loog Oldham.Introducing the film, Jagger congratulated Brett Morgan for managing to cover 50 years of the Stones in a couple of hours. Well, he hasn't managed that. He has covered 25 years pretty well, but with some gaping holes. Whether this is down to the Stones' reticence in opening up, or a lack of probing is anyones' guess.I know it's only a rock n roll film, and you might not necessarily love it, but you'll probably like it.for more film reviews: toomuchnoiseblog.com and www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-wetherall