Wanna contribute to a debate about "This Is Spinal Tap"?

Cafe Society
1

Friend Across Town and I were discussing the film last night, and were unable to resolve it before Mr. Rilch and Mrs. Friend wanted to bring up another subject. I’m still mulling the subject, though, and I intend to bring it up when I see him again*. So I was wondering if anyone might be able to sway me towards his position, or strengthen mine.

He says that David allows Janine’s dumb ideas to not only be heard, but carried out, because David knows that his looks are long gone, his money is going the same way, and he has no status except with a handful of groupies, of which Janine is one.
He feels lucky to be with her: she’s a cute little piece, and although she’s not smart, she’s personable and resilient enough to be his spokesperson and take care of him. She’s a low-maintenance chick: that’s invaluable to a rock musician. So why not let her help with the band, and therefore (he thinks) keep him financially solvent? After all, she didn’t hook up with him because he had bushels of money, but she’s sure to leave if there isn’t any.

I say that this has more to do with Ian’s shortcomings. Sure, Janine has no business managing a rock band, but Ian hasn’t been cutting the mustard lately either. David no longer respects Ian enough to blindly obey his orders, and Janine’s orders are easier to take. Ian barks, Janine is bright and chipper. Ian offends people right and left; Janine charms everyone (well, except for poor Nigel). Ian threatens David with a cricket bat; Janine goes down on him. (David, I mean!) And if Ian were as formidable as he thinks he is, he would have overruled Janine’s very first suggestion. Sputtering because she mispronounced a word does not reestablish him in the top spot; it merely highlights his frustration and powerlessness. That’s the kind of person who’s calling the shots now, but is he doing anything about it? Maybe he can’t, even.

So what d’y’all think?
*We analyze movies down to a nub, and this wouldn’t be the first time we carried over a discussion. The Dr. Strangelove debate concerned whether Slim Pickens’ character chose to ride the bomb because he was insane (his opinion), or if he might have done it in sound mind because he was military: he’d faced death before, and this was a noble cause if anything was (my opinion). Although I admit that he might have lost his sanity on the way down.

Surprisingly, we’ve never discussed Mulholland Drive beyond an appreciation for the visuals. I think we both know that seasons would change before we finished.

2

I just thought it was a John Lennon/Yoko Ono thing going on.

3

Yep, that’s what I picked up on too…a famous talent who has been whipped and demoralized without knowing it by his woman, who insists on having a say in running his life and making his creative desicions, a woman who at one point was probably just another groupie…definately Lennon/Oko.

4

That supports my theory, Banger. When John met Yoko, Brian Epstein only had a few months to live. After his death, McCartney took control by the simple means of assuming it. He really doesn’t get enough credit for that. I mean, yeah, Magical Mystery Tour was a huge mistake, but at least he was being ambitious. And even after that debacle, he gave everything and his left nut to Apple Core. Not saying he was terrific at that either, but again, at least he was taking responsibility.

And Lennon was a fool to oppose him when he wanted to hand the reins over to Lee Eastman. That scuzzy Allan Klein was the worst thing that ever happened to the band, and the last. But Lennon no longer respected McCartney, which is like David with Ian. John and Paul had always had equal standing, then suddenly his mate and fellow band member thought he had authority over him. Didn’t go over too well.

Keith Berry: Yoko was never a groupie. She barely knew who the Beatles were before she met Lennon. She was initally only looking for someone to sponsor her art pieces; he’s the one who pursued her. He was not “whipped and demoralized” by her, either. For one thing, the last two years of the Beatles were the first two of their courtship. For another, Lennon was not dependent on her; he felt empowered by her to make his own decisions and take his own risks. Just a short while ago, he’d been in a rut because it had seemed that there were no worlds left to conquer. Yoko inspired him to think beyond three-chord melodies and his next Scotch and Coke.

He wasn’t the only one who was drifting away, either. He had Yoko and their “conceptual art” trip, but Harrison was hanging with Clapton and Shankar, and Ringo was simply going to hearth and home at night, and made it clear that he was happy to stay there permanently if it became too unpleasant in the studio. John wanted Yoko with him at all times, because of his then-overwhelming insecurity, and he was focused on her and tuning out McCartney. But contrary to the propaganda you’ve probably heard, about her piping up every five minutes with a suggestion, and giving orders to Lennon, she did not, in fact, try to contribute much of anything. “Revolution 9” was recorded on her and Lennon’s own time, and apart from that, she sat quietly and only spoke to Lennon, and occasionally to Harrison. (He was the only one who tried to be a little bit nice.) Her influence on Lennon was not overwhelming. It was his choice to do experimental music; it was his choice to do solo projects, and he changed because…he was changing. If he hadn’t been, he wouldn’t have been attracted to her in the first place.

On preview

5

Disregard those last two words…

6

“Yoko was never a groupie”

She was too high-priced to be a groupie.

7

What the heck do you mean by that, partly_warmer?

8

Its a dig at Yoko Ono and Sharon Osbourne.

(Both of whom probably know what dobly is).

9

My feeling about Yoko is that she was a good wife, but an indifferent artist who bought her way into a NYC social scene where she could meet people like John. (Her family’s incredibly wealthy as I recall.)

The “high price” was a round about way of implying she’s a whore.

10

Of course, Nigel and Dave are both gay, so they obviously feel threatened by Ian’s huge English “cricket bat”. I think the use of metaphor is particulalarly telling in the “cucumber” scene. And the semiotics of the “below the puppet” billing counterpoints the use of the “midgets on stage” device.
On a symobolic level, the structure if the film bears a striking resemblence to the an early Orson Welles (although a later Welles would disagreed).
If you noticed the lighting in scene 24, then you’ll be struck by the…
Come on, it was Rob Reiner’s first film. It had almost no budget and no script. We only see less than two hours of the eight hour original. Any analysis of this sort of film only tells us about ourselves, not the film. Note how the thread has changed into a John/Yoko discussion rather quickly.

11

What is undoubtedly true is that all english rock bands think its about them.

Obvious bits:

the violin playing the guitar - Led Zeppelin

Stone Henge - Black sabbath

“suck my love pump” - Deep purple

The flower people etc - status quo

The balck album, smell the glove etc - ac/dc

12

Um, AC/DC aren’t English. They’re Australian

I think it’s a dig at aging heavy metal bands in general.

13

I know that cobber. But they were based in britain at the time of the film.

I am always reminded of UFO and the Scorpions (and yes I know…)

14

Were Sharon and Ozzy married when the movie came out? Even if they were, Mrs. Osbourne wasn’t known, at least not the way she is now.

15

Pretty sure she was, and she would have been well known in the business as Don Arden’s daughter.

16

Both of youse guys are giving David too much credit. David is in love and this is what makes all of Janine’s obsviously ridiculous ideas seem so great to him. He actually believes in her and can’t understand why no one else does. I don’t think there’s supposed to be any calculation there. As for Ian, he’s supposed to be a characterization of Led Zep’s manager, forget his name. Only Ian’s bush league. He was never shrewd enough to manage the big boys- witness his sucking up to the big rock star (terribly miscast, I think). Still, Ian knows the business and is doing the best with what he’s got. His competance is made clear when Janine takes over the magement of the band and books them at an air force dance.

Janine herself is the cold, calculating one. She’s not really so much in love with david, she just pretends to be so that she can take over his career. When Nigel lets it be known that he sees through her, she drives a wedge between Him & David. Of course its supposed to be a Yoko thing. Only real difference is that for some reason many people through the years have actually, somehow believed that Yoko posseses a modicum of talent. Now that’s the real mystery, right there.

17

wikkidpis has it in regards to David and Janine.

18

I still have this niggling feeling that it’s really all about Sir Denis Eaton-Hogg’s School for Pale Young Boys. The tour of America was to pay for the new Massage Hall, and the Japanese Tour was to finish off the last touches of the newly renovated Steam Baths.

What?

WHAT???

:stuck_out_tongue:

Great short tale here. I took a gaggle of kids from the Cleveland Institute of Music Orchestra to see Spinal Tap in NYC when they were in town for a concert at Lincoln Center. It was almost ENTIRELY lost on them, until the moment when the violin strokes against the electric guitar.

THAT sent them into gales of laughter. I swear, I gotta pick my movie viewing mates a bit more carefully.

Cartooniverse

19

I’m with wikkedpis: you’re giving David entirely too much credit. I do think some of what you’re saying is true on a subconcious level: he’s getting old, he’s not popular, and he’s just not getting the groupies he used to. So when Janine comes along, he clings to her like a life saver. Being intensely stupid, he’s incapable of seeing how bad her ideas are, and so goes along with whatever she says out of fear that opposing her will make her leave.

20

Yes, but this goes to 11.

Oops. Sorry, wrong debate.