Genres

Visitors Review

Buz Flyboy 2012-05-25 14:28:56

No Stones Music, Boring, A Real Stinker

I was excited to see this film because I thought I'd be rockin' in surround sound to some early Stones music. No musiic. No compelling story. This film has dreary, one dimensional actors who give an uninspired account of the early years of the Stones. Other than a Swedish female character with a great set of cans, this film sucks major tailpipe.

Jessica Winter 2012-05-24 17:39:34

The rock hero starts out dead and so does the movie.

2012-05-22 20:59:42

Stoney Endgame - a witty, intelligent take

Stoned is an intelligent and witty take on Brian Jones's final days, whether or not it's the last word on the mystery of his drowning. Published accounts contain contradictory details, and ex-Stones employee Tom Keylock, consultant on the film, may have his own particular spin, but Stephen Woolley and scriptwriters Neal Purvis and Robert Wade have fashioned a coherent and logical story out of the available material: if his death didn't come about as suggested here, it makes sense in the context of the film.The growing interdependence of Jones and Frank Thorogood, hired to do up the Sussex farmhouse where Jones hoped to kickstart his creativity, drives the narrative; Leo Gregory, as the seductive, exasperating rock star, and Paddy Considine, the baffled but intrigued builder, are compelling in a relationship which alludes both to Joseph Losey's 60s film The Servant (scripted by Pinter) and, appropriately enough, Performance, in which Mick Jagger played a dissolute rock star with echoes of Jones. The mindgames with Frank are interspersed with flashbacks from Brian's point of view, allowing us to see key moments in the breakdown of his relationship with Anita Pallenberg (the one woman whose loss seems to have mattered), and glimpses of his slipping status in the group he once led, without sacrificing the immediacy of the central conflict. This device also creates a much-needed degree of sympathy, his constant need to pick over his past suggesting just how damaged Jones has become by this stage - it doesn't make him any more likeable, but it does explain his need to lash out at someone else for distraction.That said, while Stoned doesn't purport to be a conventional biopic - the last days, not the whole life - I wondered whether there might be too much shorthand for an audience not familiar with this star who died in the 60s. The director's commentary clarifies matters but details can whizz by in the actual viewing. It feels right that the focus is not on Jagger and Richards - this is not the Rolling Stones story - but is the brief (though powerful) scene with Brian's family enough to suggest everything in early life which shaped the man now messing with Frank's head? I also wondered whether the character of Frank was treated too gently. The biographies suggest that Jones was more scared of him than is implied here: for almost the entire film, in fact, he is more Frank's tormentor (and pretend-buddy) than victim. Similarly, the extent of Jones's continuing music-making seems downplayed, a bit of inconclusive jamming with Frank the only indication of any hope for his creative future. But this isn't a documentary, and these decisions serve to intensify the bleakness of the scenario, locking the two main characters into what might be termed a Stoney Endgame. The story's dictates may also be why we see little indication of the man capable (according to Bill Wyman's Stone Alone) of being gently supportive of Suki Potier after the death of her boyfriend Tara Browne or of spending a final, untroubled day with his parents. And it has to be said that despite the coup of persuading Janet Lawson, the nurse present on the last night, to speak she, like Brian's girlfriend Anna Wohlin, is strangely characterless in the film. But then that also seems the case in the biographies, even Wohlin's own, and this is finally a film about two men - and the absence of one woman (Pallenberg).Essentially, Stoned succeeds in making an unwieldy amount of information into a playful, inventive - and touching - story. Whether or not it's the whole truth, it has its own truth, and there are undoubted insights along the way into the psyche of "this fragile monster," as Keith Richards once described his former bandmate.

classicrockher 2012-05-22 11:36:46

Disappointed and a half.

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 alltime. I left the theater completely disappointed and almost angry thatI wasted almost two hours of my life watching this film. The acting ishorrible, not believable at all. The sex and nudity is overdone. Iunderstand 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 nosense either. And the most disappointing part was that there were only3 Rolling Stones songs in the entire film, and it wasn't even themsinging! 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 wouldsuggest skipping this one. 'Stoned' should be considered sacrilege!

2012-05-21 19:21:02

Could of been better...

It was really confusing for me because some of the flashbacks didn't make since in that particular time in that particular scene. Also I didnt get the reason if frank drowned brian by accident or on purpose and if in fact why did he do this. I've been told that the hallucinogen LSD, makes you see demons and monsters and at one time ur totally happy but then it only last for a short amount of time until the extreme anger kicks in and ur very strong too. So maybe that's why it made Brian tick i guess. Because the movie, it made it seem like Brians life was totally fine before met Anita. It seemed like destruction at first site rather than love at first site. I just don't know but to me, the movie had an amazing plot, but should of explained it more...

2012-05-21 10:05:32

Not bad, just not very good

"Stoned" is one of the strangest movies I've seen in a while, and I came to it better-prepared than most people. Back in 2005 I read a glowing preview of this film in the British magazine "Uncut" and - given that the director had produced "The Crying Game," "Mona Lisa," "Backbeat," "Interview with the Vampire" and several other films that either I liked or knew had a solid critical reputation - I hoped for a well-done, low-budget docudrama about the last days of Brian Jones. Instead, what could have been a pretty gripping movie was done in by a confusing directoral style in which incomplete flashbacks predominate. Rather than really being a film about Brian Jones, this is more about how Brian Jones, in his last weeks, sucks a building contractor named Frank Thorogood into his debauched world and proceeds to play cruel and taunting mindgames. It's certainly disturbing, and falls into the "decadent British millionaire on secluded estate torments and corrupts a flawed outsider" genre.I wasn't fooled by the marketing at all, because I knew a film about Brian Jones had to be dark. But the advertising for this film (including the DVD cover) almost makes it look like a lighthearted Austin Powers-style sex romp/stoner comedy. This isn't the case - this is a film that has some very graphic scenes, because it is the unrated version, and there really isn't anything funny about a gifted musician's downfall. I also knew there was no way on earth any of the surviving Rolling Stones would have anything to do with this, so I wasn't surprised that not a single Jagger/Richards song appears on the soundtrack and that the characters based on the Rolling Stones would barely be given more than cameos. (Jagger and Richards come across like bland, low-key nice guys when they are given anything to do but stand in the shadows.) If you had a dime for every Rolling Stones fan who rented or bought this DVD thinking it would be about Brian's relationship with the Stones, you'd have more money than this movie earned in its limited release. We do hear soundalike versions of "Little Red Rooster" and "Not Fade Away" and get to see the actors mime the early 60s Stones fairly convincingly, but that's about it. Not even the Nanker/Phelge quasi-instrumental "Stoned"! My main problem with the film is that it almost completely lacks focused storytelling. If I didn't already know quite a bit about Brian Jones, I would not have been able to follow this movie at all and I also would not have cared about a character that comes across as an exceptionally meanspirited misognistic bully. It's also hard to have any sympathy for Frank Thorogood as the character seems to be just a middle-aged working class bloke of minimal motivation. Brian's rapid decline and sudden death could have made a compelling character-based film, but this is just a period piece that tries to stretch its thin budget as far as it can go. I was really, really disappointed in this despite what I thought was a spot-on portrayal of Brian Jones in his last months. I wish I could recommend this without caveats, but I can't.

justincward 2012-05-17 02:50:10

It's not supposed to be about the Stones!

'Stoned' is a Brit docu-drama in the mould of 'Scandal' or even '10Rillington Place' about the final weeks of Stones founder Brian Jones'life - and it purports to give the explanation of how a strong swimmerwho had been coming off drugs drowned, when he shouldn't have.Good points: It's very low budget, but for all that never feelsset-bound, and the main location is fantastic; the sixties feel isauthentic, and the use of contemporary cameras to film the flashbackscenes works. The feel of how Brian alienated himself from the band,and how he was both exploited by and dependent on hangers-on likeThorogood and Keylock is well expressed. I didn't find it boringbecause maybe I am aware of the background - 'Stoned' starts with afair amount of exposition of who Jones actually was, which must be newsto those who discovered the Stones after 'Angie'. The relationshipbetween Jones and Thorogood is the key, and 'Stoned' makes thiscompletely credible.Not so good points: I'm afraid that Leo Gregory never persuades me thathe is the super-charismatic Cheltenham boy who founded the world'sgreatest rock'n'roll band. I kept thinking he was supposed to be PeterFrampton. Brian Jones was one of those people whose sexy, defencelesssmile made people forgive him just about anything - Leo Gregory nevercaptures the vulnerability or the extreme arrogance that would havedriven Thorogood to murder. He seems to leave it to the script. I wouldalso have liked more about how Thorogood allegedly 'confessed on hisdeathbed'. This is left as a footnote at the end, which kind of dilutesthe fact that this was a big mystery at the time, and is actually thewhole point of the film. It's what we want to know.If you like docu-dramas, 'Stoned' is an unusual one and definitelyworth your time if you know anything about the early Stones. If youdon't, it won't tell you much, and in that it falls short. I've givenit a nine to balance the unreasonably low scores given elsewhere byMick Jagger fans. It's an intelligent film, but not over-intelligent.

Matthew Turner 2012-05-16 21:45:37

In short, Stoned tells an interesting story and is worth seeing, although it's not quite as good as it would have been if the Stones had coughed up the music rights.

2012-05-10 05:03:21

A well done movie.

I am a big fan of the Rolling Stones and I found this movie to be very well done. Some are disappointed the movie doesn't have more Stones music or show Brian in his prime. If you accept the movie is focusing on the end of Brian's life, you will be interested for what it shows rather than omits. What it shows is how Brian could be cruel, self-centered, and self-destructive. I found it interesting that a man who could have so much fame and money could be so miserable and feel the need to turn to drugs. The actor playing Brian does a very good job! I think people who have some knowledge of the Rolling Stones will find this movie to be entertaining. Perhaps, having the life of a rock star comes with more temptation and pressure than most imagine. The decline of Brian shows how the envy of others, mixed with Brian's own lack of self-discipline led to his tragic early death. The movie portrays a morbid depressing atmosphere mixed in with luxury and wealth.

2012-05-09 15:14:13

Dissapointing...

This film was a huge let down for me. I'm a big fan of classic rock, along with biopics, and I really enjoyed movies like "The Doors", "Ray", and "Walk the Line". So recently while browsing the video store I saw this film. "Stoned" it was called, it claimed to be the story of Brian Jones and the Rolling Stones. I was immediatley interested, and although I am a Stones fan I knew almost nothing about founding guitarist Brian Jones save for the fact that he died at age 27 just like Morrison, Joplin, Hendrix, and Cobain. The quotes on the back told of a "truly terrific biopic that perfectly captures the 60s revolution". I don't know if that reviewer happened to be the director's best friend, but they couldn't have been more wrong."Stoned" begins as you might expect: a young, 1963 Rolling Stones playing the blues at a smoky concert somewhere in Great Britain. Now, what you would hope for with this kind of film would be an enticing look into the creation of the band, the contributions of the late-great guitarist, and thier profound effect on the turbulent culture of the time. The movie did none of the above. We never get to learn how the Stones came to be or how the boys met. We never watch their rise to the top as musicians in such a diverse era, or see them progress and grow as a band. The movie never shows us what a profound musician Jones was, what he did for the band, or even was his life was like before practically 3 months before his death. I would wager that the characters of Kieth Richards and Mick Jagger have about 20 lines in the entire movie, while any other band mates have none what so ever.What "Stoned" does show us, however, is as I mentioned the last 3 months of Jones' life. At this point in his life, Jones had virtually no relationship with the band, who was at the time touring in the States without him. We get to watch an an hour and forty minutes of him wollowing around, with a few flashbacks to the earlier days. These flashbacks, however, do not give us any more insight into the band or their heyday with Jones, they merely give us more evidence of what we already saw: Jones doing lots of drugs, having lots of sex, and his failed relatoinship with his ex Anita. What is so ridiculous about the film is that it makes crystal clear why the Stones kicked Jones out shortly before his death, but it never gives any reason why he was a part of the band in the first place. We never see Jones talent, his good side. In fact, save for the aforementioned opening blues number, Jones plays virtually no music in the whole movie. And not once do we see the rest of the band performing. No, we watch Jones in his paranoid, drug heavy last days. This could be fine as say, the last 20 minutes of a REAL biopic, but not as the entire film. At the end of the movie, Jones dies, apparently murdered by a hired builder he had befriended (kind of). Then we get a brief clipping of the Stones tribute concert to Jones, and a couple of minutes of Jones discussing his chaotic days with a friend in the afterlife. And that's it. The viewer is left feeling a huge lack of completion. Do you now understand the Rolling Stones more, who they were, what they were like back in the day, and how they came to be such enormous stars? No way. Do we have a better look into the tornado of a time that was the wild 60s? Nope. Do we at least have a good idea about the life of guitarist Brian Jones? Barely. The only good thing the movie has going for it is it will make you curious about this Brian Jones. What was his life like before those last 3 months? Well since "Stoned" didn't even attempt to answer that, you will probably want to find out for yourself.It's unfortunate that this movie was, quite frankly, terrible, as Brian Jones does seem like he would've been an interesting person, and perhaps a better director and screenwriter could've given us a better idea of his life and character.If you are looking for a REAL biopic about rock n' roll and the 60s, pick up The Doors (Special Edition), by Oliver Stone. It chronicles the life of Jim Morrison, from his life changing experience at age 5, to the formation of the band, to their rise to the top, and eventually, Jim's decline and death. "The Doors" stands apart from "Stoned" in so many ways. We really get a sense of who Jim was, from the beginning to the end. Not only that, we get to know ALL of the band, Jim's girl friend Pam, his friends, and many more characters. We get a good look into the 60s, how chaotic it all was, but we see how well the Doors fit into that era. The audience can really get a feel of how Jim and the Doors changed the world, and we can really watch the rise and fall of four rock gods.All in all, "Stoned" gets maybe a 2/10, like I said its not all terrible, but almost. The main actor does a pretty good job being a nuerotic, paranoid, druggy, but its unfortunate he couldn't show us the inner genious this Brian Jones apparently was. So next time your in the video store, pick up the Doors, you won't be dissapointed. Leave "Stoned" right there on the shelf.

2012-05-06 13:10:34

Great Movie

Quite educational if you are a fan of the Rolling Stones....and I am

Matt Pais 2012-05-05 17:41:13

Jones comes off like a hedonistic burnout whose history is no more gripping than any other rock 'n' roll cautionary tale.

Frank Ochieng 2012-05-05 10:19:44

...a lacking rock-n-roll biopic that has more disjointed disillusionment than a muddy Woodstock hippie.

thebinman 2012-05-04 14:04:34

Missing the Point

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

Desson Thomson 2012-05-04 13:48:41

A flat riff on Jones's short life. You'll get the highlights but no sense of what made him special -- or what really haunted him.

Saint Barbie 2012-05-04 00:53:03

Brian Jones: the boring years

So much is wrong with 'Stoned', it's hard to know where to begin. Thecinematography is a hideous, vomit-inducing mess. The performances arelaugh-out-loud dreadful. The screenplay is excruciating. The editing isconfusing. The direction is absent. Worst of all, the entire thing isso achingly boring that you may well find yourself willing Brian Jonesto hurry up, get into the pool and die from about five minutes in. The actual story of the Rolling Stones is, surely, some sort ofmind-blowing, smack-addled, adventure-filled Technicolour romp full ofwild sex, drugs, devil worship and The Blues. So how, and why, hasStephen Woolley spent ten years researching it and produced thistedious heap of tosh? Every so often, I see a film that makes me wonderhow on earth the producers had the chutzpah to say 'Yes, this is afinished work, and I feel we can demand money from the general publicto view it.' Stoned is an exemplar of this genre. One can only imaginethey thought they'd have a Rolling Stones-style party making it - butthe overriding impression is one of grinding drudgery.This is a truly abysmal mess of a film, with really no redeemingfeatures. Whether you're a Stones fan, or you loathe every note they'veever played, there's nothing here that could feasibly be of anyinterest whatsoever.

Michael McGonigle 2012-05-03 11:04:14

This Scattershot Narrative Just Drags and Never Pulls Together..

This is the first film directed by Stephen Wooley, who is better knownas 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 wrotea couple of the Pierce Brosnan, James Bond films. The movie begins withRolling Stones founder Brian Jones being pulled out of his swimmingpool having evidently drowned.The film then scatter shoots in all directions and styles. Black andwhite for flashback scenes in the sixties and color film for trips toMarrakech. But the narrative never congeals. Perhaps if I knew moreabout the real beginning of the Rolling Stones the film would have moremeaning for me, but I never got invested in it. I found the film todrag and to only jump in fits and starts.There are some unmistakable elements of Nicholas Roeg's style here andthat's not a bad thing. At least Wooley is copying from a gooddirector, but the bottom line is he's just copying. It doesn't looklike he's learned anything. Also, I found the performances in this filma bit lax and I don't know if that's the fault of the screenplay or theless than inspired direction.Paddy Considine, who is usually quite riveting is lost here as ahandyman who is sent to do some refurbishing on Brian Jones house inthe country, and little by little gets caught up in the drugged outworld of Brian Jones. The film also shows his character murder Jones byintentionally drowning him in the pool and an end title tells us thaton his death bed, the real James Thorogood who Considine plays admittedthat he had in fact killed Jones, but there is obviously no way toconfirm that now.The actor who plays Brian Jones has a nice androgynous quality andoccasionally shows some creative spark, but again, he remains a totalmystery. There had to be something about him that people liked. Damnedif 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 ithis long schlong? That we see, but there has to be more to the guy thanthat.Is it just because he has lots of drugs around? Maybe, that we seealso, 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 ofthing here? You know, the artist against the workman? I'm not sure, ifthat was in there, it was very faint. Stoned would seem like a betterfilm if there weren't in fact many better movies about music starscrumbling under the pressures of the business.For a sublime look at that kind of story, you can't do much better thanGus 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, butunfortunately the result was a film that dragged and made me feel verybored.

2012-05-02 18:44:05

Not a bad movie

This review is from: Stoned (DVD) If you like the Rolling Stones, you may like this movie. It is not about the Rolling Stones, it is about Brian Jones and his abilities, his drug use and his 'fall from grace,' due to that drug use. All I had heard was that he had drowned in his pool. This movie presents one of at least three theories about what happened, what appears to be the most plausible, although there were no witnesses and no theories were ever proven. Briann Jones' loss to drugs, and to the music world, truly was a tragic loss.

jimmy jonhstone 2012-05-02 09:18:02

Frank did us all a favour.

Its very dubious to put at the end of the film that Thoroughgoodconfessed to the killing on his deathbed in 1993 as if its fact as itssolely based on the testimony of the only witness to that allegedstatement, Tom Keylock, and cannot be corroborated. Therefore it is notfact and should not be portrayed as such.Also if you listen to the featurette on the DVD about the making of thefilm they mention they cut the school swimming scene at the start costhe the actor (Gregory) playing Brian Jones looked too muscular andcould not pass as a schoolboy. The commentary noted he had spent 'toomuch time in Third Space' gym. Unfortunately they didn't seem to have aproblem with 'six pack' playing a junkie and alcoholic in later life.Couldn't imagine De Niro training to get a six pack if he wasportraying a waster junkie alcoholic musician. Vanity perhaps on thepart of Gregory? It also made it look a bit improbable when the skinnyConsidine (Thoroughgood) is able to push the muscular (Gregory) Jonesunder water with ease.

Dean 2012-05-01 22:46:40

I wish I was stoned

You guys, this movie sucks! I agree with one of the last reviews: A chimp could have done better! Don't waste your time or money on this movie. It is totally inaccurate and boring. It is so boring that I fell asleep after drinkin a rip it. The story goes nowhere, the acting is horrible, and had no feelings about any of the characters being portrayed. This is the worst movie about the birth of one of the greatest rock bands on earth. Totally bullcrap!