How sad is this?

Good movie but grossly overrated

Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

The film's very good in representing the bands early and mid term journey with all it's successes, failures, drugs, drink etc with candid interviews and good musical snippets. The footage is great but my biggest disappointment with the film is that basically very little is mentioned of the bands musical output post Let It Bleed. Sticky Fingers get a brief snippet, Exile on Main Street has a little more but post that almost nothing. A brief interlude of 'Angie' and how great Ronnie Wood has fit into the band - and he sure has if only they'd give him a bit more freedom to work with. But, and it's a big but, nothing - a great big zilch of their musical output through the late 70's and beyond, much of which was/has been critically underwhelming.It would also have been nice to see the involvement with the band of Ian 'Stu' Stewart and Bobby Keys recognised.In short, the film's an unpolished diamond, well worth a look to the Stones fan

This is a nice documentary but way to short. After all this is about a band that has been making music and performing for 50 years. The focus seemed to be 1969 to 1976 with some early information thrown in. I was hoping the Stones entire career would be incorporated in this film. The 1978 and 1981 tours should definitely deserved more film time. Those were great tours. The 1972 tour was ground breaking. 1969 was infamous but very entertaining. 1975 was a great show. What about after 1981? The band went on a hiatus until 1989 when they went back on tour. Why not touch on that? There were tours after that 1994/1998/2002/2005 that could have been included. An extra hour or so would have been nice. The audio commentary by the band was very effective. It's only rock and roll but I like it.

Over the years, the Rolling Stones have transformed from counter-cultural icons, and revolutionary music makers, into institutionalised pensioners, the "strolling bones" as the wags call them, always on tour but with nothing new to say. This documentary charts their first 20 years (though the band are still performing after 50); but it's fairly soft and uninformative material, a collage of old pictures and film, a little bit of concert footage, and a few throwaway comments from the band. There's a fair old Stones industry these days, but another recent documentary, about the making of their legendary album 'Exile on Main Street', was more insightful than this, which is more celebratory in tone. If you're a Stones fanatic, you'll learn little new; but even if you don't, and want to learn more about them, there are probably better places to start.

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