1) After all these years I still think of Ron Wood as 'the new guy'.

2) Notice how they never replaced Wyman?

"It is believed one of the reasons for the delayed tour is because of Keith Richards's health"

Upon first read, I misread "health" as "death".

Mr Eavis has also previously expressed how The Rolling Stones, Dolly Parton and Led Zeppelin would be his dream bookings.

Now, that's a show.

douchebag/hater: 1) After all these years I still think of Ron Wood as 'the new guy'.

2) Notice how they never replaced Wyman?

1) Ditto.

2) Nope, they never officially did. I'm willing to bet that he's going to be at this one (if it happens).

This is precisely the thing that's going to kill Keef; seeing the writing on the wall. There have been rumors that he hasn't been quite right since his fall. A world without the Rolling Stones does not include Keith Richards, cosmically.

/saw the Voodoo Lounge tour in Detroit, they looked like ants working on a large bread crumb from my seat.
//Q: How many guitars does Keith Richards own. A: All of them!

Aar1012: I hope they sing 'My Generation' as the last song. There is an irony of that song that I just love

I know Keith is usually credited for Pete's guitar theatrics but I don't believe he was ever credited to his song.

I attended a concert on their first "We're retiring after this" tour.

The year was 1980.

Maybe I'll buy a poster to go next to my KISS FAREWELL TOUR 2000 poster.

The Rolling Stones have never done a gig or tour and promised it would be their final one. This is a first.

"It is believed one of the reasons for the delayed tour is because of Keith Richards's health"

So you think maybe he didn't take good care of himself all these years?

Yes, I know it is more likely due to his fall. But I hate to think the ultimate Rock Star was done in by a tree.

(Any grammar nazis want to weigh in on the use of the apostrophe-s on a word ending with s? Is that legit using the Queen's English?)

Aar1012: I hope they sing 'My Generation' as the last song. There is an irony of that song that I just love

4/10

/Would have been better if you'd included a pic of a random 60s Brit Rocker

Dwight_Yeast:4/10


He hoped it'd fly but then he got told.

SVenus: I attended a concert on their first "We're retiring after this" tour.

The year was 1980.

My uncle saw them in San Diego that year. He said the same thing. It is one of his long running "jokes".

it will be a very sad day when Keef is too sick to perform

The_Philosopher_King: (Any grammar nazis want to weigh in on the use of the apostrophe-s on a word ending with s? Is that legit using the Queen's English?)

It's a subject of serious debate, and has caused more than a bit of strife in my family.

/Personally would go with Richards'
//People in the UK use Richards's

If this truly does turn out to be their final performance it'll be a sad day indeed. Despite all the crappy albums, the age, the teases of new tours/material, yadda yadda, it's still the motherfarking Stones. A world without the possibility of a new Stones show or two every few years is a dark one indeed.

People will be underwhelmed, and probably won't buy any tickets...

CZMisfitsFan: If this truly does turn out to be their final performance it'll be a sad day indeed. Despite all the crappy albums, the age, the teases of new tours/material, yadda yadda, it's still the motherfarking Stones. A world without the possibility of a new Stones show or two every few years is a dark one indeed.

I don't "this" much, but consider this "thised".

The Stones started out emulating their blues idols, and like their blues idols they played into their 70's. They didn't puss out and quit, like so many people who were missing the point have been calling for them to for 30 years.

Remember all those punk bands giving the Stones shiat for existing 30 years ago... where the fark are they now? Oh yeah, probably on their 3rd or 4th integrity-challenged reunion tour.

Aar1012: Spartapuss: Aar1012: I hope they sing 'My Generation' as the last song. There is an irony of that song that I just love

I know Keith is usually credited for Pete's guitar theatrics but I don't believe he was ever credited to his song.

Fark....I knew that was going to bite me in the ass

You utterly fail at rocknroll. I just want you to be clear on that...

theorellior: It's one thing to keep playing blues until you're seventy because that's how you make your daily bread, it's another thing to keep playing lame-ass blues rip-offs until you're seventy because your real estate portfolio is looking a little slim and you need to buy a new LearJet.



Never got a lift off a LearJet when he could fly back home.

/Sorry it was easy
//I prefer to think they stopped working after Some Girls

it's another thing to keep playing lame-ass blues rip-offs until you're seventy

you're talking about Jimmy Page & Led Zep, amirite?

fusillade762: Who?

No,
The Rolling Stones; aren't you paying attention?

2wolves: theorellior:

You sound very U.S.-ian. Music hall culture in the U.K. isn't at all like the U.S. where if you're 32 you must die or retire.

You are not correct - the Beach Geezers are getting back together for their 50th anniversary. Not the pretend Beach Boys that Mike Love has been pimping for the last few years. This time Brian Wilson is involved.

theorellior: spacebar: The Stones started out emulating their blues idols, and like their blues idols they played into their 70's. They didn't puss out and quit, like so many people who were missing the point have been calling for them to for 30 years.

Oh, PLEASE. Comparing the Stones' touring longevity to that of Lightnin' Hopkins or Blind Lemon Jefferson is utter bullshiat. It's one thing to keep playing blues until you're seventy because that's how you make your daily bread, it's another thing to keep playing lame-ass blues rip-offs until you're seventy because your real estate portfolio is looking a little slim and you need to buy a new LearJet. And it's a whole lot easier to keep touring when your ass is pampered on tour by the royalties you earned by ganking the songs your idols were playing in un-airconditioned juke joints and road houses without benefit of groupies, roadies or luxury chartered coaches.

Since probably the late 70s the Stones have been about one thing and one thing only: perpetuating the myth of the Stones.

Actually, as a live act you're right. The myth is as big a part of the blues as it is a part of rock. And since the late 70's, people went to see the myth as much as hear the music when they went to see the Stones.

As a creative band their output has been spotty since the late 70's, but most bands only have 1 or 2 Exiles or Sticky Fingers in them anyway. But from Undercover to Bigger Bang there's a modern Stones classic album or two among all the filler.

But I don't understand the animosity. Real estate portfolios and lear jets aside... should they not make money? Should they pretend to be poor so they can play blues based rock? Or give all their money away for authenticity. Should they not sell millions of tickets on tour whenever the fark they feel like it?

spacebar: But I don't understand the animosity. Real estate portfolios and lear jets aside... should they not make money? Should they pretend to be poor so they can play blues based rock? Or give all their money away for authenticity. Should they not sell millions of tickets on tour whenever the fark they feel like it?

I think it's more a matter of age-appropriate behavior. When Jagger turned 30, people wondered aloud if he was "too old" to be prancing around on stage like he did when he was "young". Now that he's nearly 70, he's definitely too old. I have no problem with them continuing to tour, but it would have been better if Jagger had evolved his act as he got older.

The only person more embarrassing to watch these days is Steven Tyler, who actually seems to think he's still in his 20s.

Dwight_Yeast: I think it's more a matter of age-appropriate behavior. When Jagger turned 30, people wondered aloud if he was "too old" to be prancing around on stage like he did when he was "young". Now that he's nearly 70, he's definitely too old. I have no problem with them continuing to tour, but it would have been better if Jagger had evolved his act as he got older.

The only person more embarrassing to watch these days is Steven Tyler, who actually seems to think he's still in his 20s.

In both cases I'd paraphrase Bill Maher, get women half to a third of their age to stop farking them. If a plumber their age could get the action they do, they'd probably walk around and act a lot like Mick and Steven.

Ken VeryBigLiar: In both cases I'd paraphrase Bill Maher, get women half to a third of their age to stop farking them. If a plumber their age could get the action they do, they'd probably walk around and act a lot like Mick and Steven.

Which just goes to show that Maher is wrong about most things.

Both Jack Nicholson and Robert DiNiro are around Jagger's age, and both have done a pretty good job aging while still dating women much younger than themselves.

Hell, I still have a fair amount of respect for Hugh Heffner, who's in his 80s, dating women in his 20s, as the most embarrassing thing he does is leave the house in his pajamas, which is something he's been doing since he was in his 30s.

Bill Maher in a farking Rolling Stones thread? Now I'm pissed. Why don't you just go and fark yourself. Jesus!

/Bill Maher and The Stones shouldn't be mentioned together in the same decade

Dwight_Yeast: Both Jack Nicholson and Robert DiNiro are around Jagger's age, and both have done a pretty good job aging while still dating women much younger than themselves.

De Niro's been wishy-washy at best the last ten years and Jack has just been playing roughly the same thing (save About Schmidt) for about as long. Granted, the Stones haven't eclipsed Exile or even Goat's Head Soup in the last decade either but Bobby and Jack haven't been putting out Goodfellas or Chinatown, either.

Dwight_Yeast: spacebar: But I don't understand the animosity. Real estate portfolios and lear jets aside... should they not make money? Should they pretend to be poor so they can play blues based rock? Or give all their money away for authenticity. Should they not sell millions of tickets on tour whenever the fark they feel like it?

I think it's more a matter of age-appropriate behavior. When Jagger turned 30, people wondered aloud if he was "too old" to be prancing around on stage like he did when he was "young". Now that he's nearly 70, he's definitely too old. I have no problem with them continuing to tour, but it would have been better if Jagger had evolved his act as he got older.

The only person more embarrassing to watch these days is Steven Tyler, who actually seems to think he's still in his 20s.

Um... what? fark "age-appropriate behavior"... count me out...

People thinking you're "too old" is the best reason to keep doing anything. What's more rock and roll than that?

Mick Jagger in his 60's still kicks more stadium ass than just about anybody ever has. He's the greatest front man in the history of rock and roll. It's just a fact. The dude has never failed to deliver the goods.

Mick Jagger in his 60's still kicks more stadium ass than just about anybody ever has. He's the greatest front man in the history of rock and roll. It's just a fact. The dude has never failed to deliver the goods.

amen, brother

theorellior: One can only hope.

You can't always get what you want.

Ken VeryBigLiar: De Niro's been wishy-washy at best the last ten years and Jack has just been playing roughly the same thing (save About Schmidt) for about as long.

Right, but neither of them try to sell themselves as "sexy" any longer in the roles they play, even though in their personal lives they still have no problem problem dating women young enough to be their granddaughters.

spacebar: People thinking you're "too old" is the best reason to keep doing anything. What's more rock and roll than that?

I don't see his age as a reason for them to stop touring. I do find him embarrassing to watch at this point, trying to play "Mick" on stage when he's 70. The problem is that most rock singers who sold their image based on being sexy are dead before they're fifty (By the time Elvis was Mick's age, he'd been dead for twenty years). Look at Robert Plant and David Bowie as good examples of guys who managed to mature their stage persona as they aged, yet still sell the goods.

spacebar: Mick Jagger in his 60's still kicks more stadium ass than just about anybody ever has. He's the greatest front man in the history of rock and roll. It's just a fact.

Nope. He comes in at number two, behind this guy:



It'd be really interesting to see what he'd be doing, if he'd lived.

Dwight_Yeast: I don't see his age as a reason for them to stop touring. I do find him embarrassing to watch at this point, trying to play "Mick" on stage when he's 70. The problem is that most rock singers who sold their image based on being sexy are dead before they're fifty (By the time Elvis was Mick's age, he'd been dead for twenty years). Look at Robert Plant and David Bowie as good examples of guys who managed to mature their stage persona as they aged, yet still sell the goods.

spacebar: Mick Jagger in his 60's still kicks more stadium ass than just about anybody ever has. He's the greatest front man in the history of rock and roll. It's just a fact.

Nope. He comes in at number two, behind this guy:

[zazenlife.com image 309x427]

It'd be really interesting to see what he'd be doing, if he'd lived.

Have you seen the Stones live since... I don't know, say '89? The "gee, he looks old" wears off after about 5 minutes (standing next to Keith helps...) and you start to realize this dude is rocking a stadium effortlessly. And believe me, there is no lack of "sex appeal". His "job" is to be "Mick Jagger" for 2 1/2 hours, and nobody in that stadium leaves disappointed. You may not like the Stones, or they may be off that night, but it's not because "Mick Jagger" failed to show up. Every single show. For 50 years.

Elvis was great. But rock and roll ate him alive (or vice versa) at 42. Mick Jagger still does 2 1/2 concerts at 68. Advantage Jagger.

And as awesome as they are, there would be no Plant, Mercury, or Bowie without Jagger. Attitude, theatricality, danger, androgyny... aw hell, never mind. I just described Little Richard. But Jagger made all that cool for his generation and beyond.

E_Henry_Thripshaws_Disease: Mick Jagger in his 60's still kicks more stadium ass than just about anybody ever has. He's the greatest front man in the history of rock and roll. It's just a fact. The dude has never failed to deliver the goods.

amen, brother

That is right on. He performs as though he has no thought of mortality.