Shine a Light...Scorsese doc illuminates surface but falls short!

"Shine a Light" igniting the silver screen in IMAX is a visual experience you may not want to miss - if you're a Rolling Stones fan - in particular.

In the fast-paced documentary, with Oscar-winning Director Martin Scorsese at the helm, a penetrating lens slices through layers of the mystique with razor-sharp precision close to the bone.

But, ultimately, the doc misses its mark.

By the end of the film, Jagger remains as elusive and mysterious as ever.

But don't say Scorsese didn't try.

In an insightful effort to add a bit of depth and breadth to mix, Scorsese handily juxtaposed old news clips, with scintillating stage footage, to great effect.

After all, the mesmerizing image of Jagger - prancing, pouting and sashaying about - is still potent stuff.

By today's standards, though, Jagger pales a tad.

Indeed, a younger generation in a feeding frenzy over titillating sensual MTV images ( and used to slick choreographed numbers by boy-bands and the like) may find Jagger a bit tame.

But, the pop icon still awes.

In what amounts to a tribally-inspired sexually-charged strut - a bold-faced tease, if you like - Jagger still manages to captivate and hold the excited crowd in his thrall.

Years ago, when the celebrated Pop Icon was queried about the phenomenon of his success, Jagger (then, a doey-eyed innocent - on the surface at least - who sported a page-boy cut and fashionable tweed jacket with collar turned up, just so) opined off the cuff:

"I guess, there is a chemical reaction, of sorts."

News reels of yesteryear reveal a surprisingly down-to-earth quality and Jagger's healthy sense of humor.

For example, when Dick Cavett starts to pose a simple question - which ends up being a long-winded, confusing one - Jagger grins, shakes his head, and confesses with a sheepish look on his face.

"I've forgotten the question."

Keith Richards could be remarkably quick on the uptake, too.

When one reporter probed - What question are you asked most?" - without skipping a beat e chuckled "That one" - with a delicious smile on his face.

Given the opportunity, I'd ask Mick about his wardrobe selections.

Are they of his own choosing - conjured up with the assistance of a stylist - I wonder?

In "Shine", he sparkled and made tantalizing fashion statements.

The lead singer for the Stones - the world's "top rock band? - tends to favor elegant button down shirts in lush fabrics (oftentimes, fashioned in blood red) usually highlighted with a stylish panels adorned with sequins running down the front.

On occasion, he squeezed into a black "T" with a spray of glitter across the face - which caught the light - and subsequently dazzled.

In one shot, he looked for all-the-world like an idyllic "Prince of Pop" in a tastefully-tailored Tuxedo jacket - with ubiquitous tails and satin lapels - to boot.

A mainstay?

Black jeans, which fit snugly, and screamed out pure "sex" appeal.

At the beginning of the film, Scorsese often came across as a wise old owl perched on high from afar.

His on-the-ball crew often captured the award-winning director fussing about behind-the-scenes - and occasionally - rabble-rousing with Jagger over an issue or two.

But - when the lights went up and the show began - the camera-work was flawless and carried out to perfection.

The expert cameraman were there to catch each solo riff, or striking vocal that chimed in unexpectedly from across the stage, for instance.

In fact, the reveal was so up-close and personal now and then, that the audience caught sight of Jagger's dental work and perspiration soiling his underarms.

Back off a little, Marty.

While the cinematography was excellent for the most part, the lighting - in contrast - was not very flattering to the boys, at all.

If what they say is true - you get the face you deserve at fifty - then it applies in this instant case.

The mugs of Mick and the boys were haggard and deeply-lined; a roadmap which reflected the downside of their jet-setting, party-hearty lifestyle, eh?

One failing of the documentary?

Scorsese failed to take a foray into their backstage personas; in fact, their seemingly endless days of wine and roses and lusty pursuit of women, is left out in the cold.

Essentially, the doc is a superficial glance at Jagger and the lads.

In sum, "Shine A light" doesn't.

Perhaps, it would be more aptly titled "In Concert".

For this reason, as a whole, the audience doesn't get much satisfaction.

Scorsese directed!

A Hard Day's Night...madcap antics of Beatles still excite!

The Fab Four...


I was zipping along Beverly Boulevard when I spied a marquee screaming out an enticing double bill:

"A Hard Day's Night" and "Across the Universe"

I clicked on my blinker and roared into the nearest parking space.

"A Hard Day's Night" is a tantalizing black and white feature that the Beatles lensed on the crest of their rise to musical popularity in England in the late sixties just prior to conquering America a short while later on their first major tour.

The film is a zany fun comedy about the Beatle's rise to Pop Icon status and the pitfalls and trappings of fame.

Surprisingly, the four lads display a remarkable gift for acting here - comedy - in particular.

Indeed, when the bio-flick (thirty-six hours in the life of the Fab Four) was first released - critics not only raved - but compared the mop-heads to the legendary Marx Brothers.

In one hilarious moment on a fast-moving train - one of the famous Liverpudlians actually stoops over mischievously as he raises and lowers his eyebrows a smidgen - then taps on an imaginary cigar in his hand.

Yes, it's a delightful take on Groucho Marx.

The dialogue in the film is intelligent, sophisticated, and witty and hits the funny bone just right.

However, the moviegoer has to be quick on the uptake because the jokes move along at rapid-fire pace.

In many respects "A Hard Day's Night" was groundbreaking when it was first unleashed on an unsuspecting public hungry for Beatlemania.

The camera angles are artful, for instance, and the basic storytelling devices are fresh and innovative in approach.

In one memorable scene - the quartet (looking a lot like keystone cops) zigzag around a soccer field as they occasionally slam into each other - bouncing this way 'n that.

At one point - the four lads tumble to the ground and playfully stare wide-eyed at a striking expanse of sky - and all its wonder above.

Although the film was shot and released before the Beatle's celebrated experiment with transcendental meditation - and their acknowledged use of hallucinatory drugs - there are a few hints of what is to come if you pay close attention.

For example - in a club car on the train - Lennon puts a coca-cola bottle up to the right nostril and sniffs at the top a trifle. Then, does the same thing with the left side of his nose.

Was he subtly hinting at "snorting" coke?

It occurred to me that the bathroom shot - where Lennon plays with a toy submarine - may have actually triggered the creative thrust for a later project "Yellow Submarine".

Of course, a big plus is the repertoire of songs featured in the fast-paced comedy; some of the most poignant and tender ever written by the Lennon/McCartney team.

The rapt audience was so enthralled with the celluloid offering that they often tapped their feet to the catchy beat, rocked back and forth in their seats, and occasionally burst into song.

On occasion, I was surprised how easily I was able to suddenly recall the lyrics for signature tunes, such as - "I Want to Hold Your Hand", "She Loves You", "Can't Buy me love", and "If I fell".

But the hits were so memorable, why the heck not?

I fondly recall when the Beatles first hit the pop airwaves.

I was residing in Scarborough (Canada).

Such an innocent lad, I was!

If a boy was lucky enough to have the kind of hair that styled into the moppet cut - and parents hip enough to allow it - he was the envy of his classmates.

Meanwhile, a handful of boys settled for the leather cap - or a cheaper one in corduroy - in the event cash was strapped.

The Nehru-style jackets were all the rage, too.

Kids snapped 'em up in black or grey - with ubiquitous trim accenting the collar - which rounded out the mod "look".

Beatle Boots were optional, but what an ensemble if you could pull it off!

The big question of our youth?

Who was more popular - the Rolling Stones or the Beatles?

The scruffy strutting peacocks in competition with Beatles - John, Paul, Ringo, and George - had a darker more sinister appeal to some.

The ultimate cool?

Mick Jagger, you betcha!

But, fans had their fave mop-tops, too.

Some pined for Paul and his pretty face. Others, got a kick out of Ringo and the multitude of glitzy eye-popping rings he adorned his fingers with. The more mature waxed eloquently about Beatle John Lennon - the intellectual - and raved about his fine line drawings and unique offbeat poems. Others focused on the laid-back earthiness of George.

When the Beatles were scheduled to first appear on the Ed Sullivan Show, I was ringside in my Grandmother's prim and proper parlor bug-eyed like the rest of North America, as the extraordinary historical event unfolded before us on the telly.

A couple of years later the Magical Mystery Tour - that was the Beatles phenomenon - fizzled to a halt, though.

A short while later, I recalled one fan lamenting:

"Since the Beatles broke up, life has never been the same."

But, we still have the music, and bouncy tunes that breathe on in a myriad of intriguing new incarnations.

Just screen "Across the Universe" or tune into "American Idol" each week and you'll fathom what I mean.

Jagger, the King of Rock 'N Roll...