RockDocs: Super Duper Alice Cooper

There has already been an “official” Alice Cooper documentary. It’s called Prime Cuts, and was released on VHS in the early 90s. However, although it was labelled a documentary, it wasn’t really. It was basically akin to an ITV clip show, except it didn't have pointless talking heads from people on other ITV shows.

So, now we have this - Super Duper Alice Cooper, from the people who brought you such acclaimed films as Rush: Beyond The Lighted Stage, Metal: A Headbanger’s Journey and the excellent TV documentary series Metal Evolution.



I attended the “one night only” cinema screening of the film last night. So I haven’t had long to digest it yet, but here we go anyway…

First of all, I do take slight issue with the press release which proclaims this to be the first ever “doc opera”, due to the presentation style which is actually just a re-imagining of the 2009 film American: The Bill Hicks Story. But with a more prominent soundtrack. I guess I can’t blame them for hyping it a little, but on the other hand I can and will. It is a cool style, though, and it does manage to keep an air of mystery about the Alice Cooper mythos, despite being told everything as we go along. Rather than having the usual talking head inserts, the whole film is told with a mixture of animation, clips, photographs, and some parts are illustrated with old horror movies.

Unlike Prime Cuts, the focus here is very much on story rather than music. It chronicles less of Alice’s career, but more of his life. His formative years are told pretty well, but perhaps goes on a little long. As a narrative, it really takes off when The Spiders (as the band were then called) go to LA. That’s where they meet Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, Frank Zappa etc. It’s also where they finally adopt the Alice Cooper persona and start writing in that style. Badly.

But, as a band, things don’t take off until they go back to Detroit. The creators of shock rock, they’re the most hated band in LA. The hippies of the flower power generation didn’t like a scary bunch of motherfuckers interrupting their acid trip. But in Detroit they find a home with The Stooges and the MC5 as their contemporaries. From here, they go from success to success, doing something nobody had ever seen before. But then the wheels come off as the Alice Cooper band are shoved aside for the Alice Cooper character.

The difference between Alice Cooper and his creator, Vincent Furnier, is referenced throughout with Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde being used as a motif. Footage from a silent movie adaptation of Jekyll and Hyde is played often, the metaphor presumably being that the potion Vincent Furnier drank to become Alice Cooper was alcohol. The concept works, especially given the macabre imagery Coop has used throughout his career. They all fit the classic Alice Cooper iconography and tell you about the genesis of the character without having to explain in to you like you‘re a total bonehead (they leave that type of thing to ITV, thank you very much).

As the film continues - and the original band breaks up - less emphasis is put on Alice’s career and more on his deepening substance abuse. At first, his only vice is alcohol. He is treated for that in a mental institution (why not?). When he gets out, he decided to replace alcohol with cocaine (why not?). Then, he starts freebasing (why not?).

Now, I have read many interviews with Cooper and watched quite a few documentaries and TV pieces on him, and I never recall this information being used before. In fact, from what I have seen Alice has implied over the years that the only vice he ever indulged in was alcohol. In fact, the only time I recall it even been suggested in passing was a brief line in the Motley Crue book The Dirt. So, this was kind of new information for me. And I do consider myself a fan of Coop’s, so I found it weirdly refreshing, and it especially explains his gaunt appearance at the time, and preferable to hearing him re-count the infamous chicken story for the forty four billionth time.

Oh, yes…we do get it, by the way. This is the story Alice tells on every single talk show he is ever on. I am SICK TO SHITE of this story. I knew it would be in there. But after the screening of the film, there was a Q&A with him…and he told the fucking story AGAIN. I CAN’T TAKE IT ANYMORE!

If you don’t know the story, here it is being told to that great rock n roller, Bill Oddie...



The film ends with his (sober) comeback in the late 80s. Although it may seem like an odd cut off point, the film wouldn’t have really worked going beyond that. It was probably the last truly commercially successful period in his career and ends the film on a high note. As interested as I, as a fan, may be in latter day albums like Brutal Planet and The Eyes of Alice Cooper, they don’t really fit in with the story that has been told.

As with most rockumentaries, there is barely a critical word uttered. I guess that’s to be expected, but it wouldn’t have gone amiss when discussing the early 1980s, when Alice was making albums that he claims he was too wasted to have any recollection of recording. Rather than admit that he made some under par records, they simply gloss over it. Which is a shame, because he was scary as fuck in that period;



The only major criticism I have as a fan is that there isn’t much discussing Cooper’s music. Although his influence has perhaps been more visual than musical, this means the strength and eclecticism of his back catalogue is often forgotten. Bob Dylan agrees (he told Rolling Stone in the late 70s that Cooper is “an overlooked songwriter”). The film sort of inaccurately reinforces that, spending a lot more time focusing on the stage antics than the band probably did.

Out of the peers and famous fans interviewed, there isn’t really anyone surprising and nearly all from hard rock/punk (Iggy Pop and Dee Snider show up, and John Lydon predictably comes across as an utter twat. Again. Can‘t stand that tosser). If you’re going to reinforce the influence of the stage act, why not mention the influence he had upon other genres? Adam Ant? Boy George? Lady Ga Ga? All confessed fans and admirers and not hard rock acts. Hell, Michael Jackson stole so many aspects of Coop’s stage act that he should really be called out for it. A pre-Ziggy Stardust David Bowie was supposedly at Alice’s first UK shows. That’s huge. And Penn Jilette (of magicians Penn & Teller) claims that he counts Alice Cooper as the first “magic” show he ever saw that he actually enjoyed. I really think they missed a trick there.

Also - as an atheist - I find it difficult to swallow Alice’s “God saved me/it was a miracle” schtick when talking about his alcohol/cocaine recovery (if it was a miracle, why did you fall into cocaine abuse when you recovered from your alcoholism? Answer that one, Coop).

However, all in all, it is an interesting and fun watch. It does show where Alice went right where other similar artists didn’t; the satire, the smart humour and willingness to change with the times is the thing that bands that followed in a similar fashion, such as KISS or Marylin Manson, were greatly missing. The Alice Cooper show was as funny as it was scary, and that is made abundantly clear. Overall, it does it’s job - I went home and listened to Billion Dollar Babies.

RockDocs: Color Me Obsessed - A Film About The Replacements

The notion of making a documentary on a band without using any of their music, footage, album covers or even pictures seems ludicrous. But, then, The Replacements were a ludicrous band. Their mystique has maintained in all this time, stories continue to circulate in an “I was there when…” fashion. They were the best band in the world. They were the worst band in the world. You either got it, or you didn’t. So why spoil it now?



The opening credits reveal that this “a potentially true story”, and proceeds in a ramshackle way. The only remotely musical thing that you hear is feedback. But it works. The Replacements, and front man/chief songwriter Paul Westerberg in particular, are notoriously difficult in allowing their music to be used on any old shit. Thus, it is unclear whether the film was designed in this way, or if rights to the band’s catalogue were impossible to secure. Director Gorman Bechard insists it was designed this way. But it is typical of The Replacements that a documentary on them would not feature them at all.

This is the ultimate band of misfits (except maybe The Misfits). A “fuck you” attitude to everybody. They were one of only five bands banned from Saturday Night Live, and the only one banned for their backstage antics (given that this is a show built by out-of-control addicts, that’s quite an achievement). It wasn’t unheard of for them to end shows by literally physically fighting on stage. They had songs as painful and beautiful as Here Comes a Regular and Unsatisfied, with songs like Gary’s Got a Boner and Dope Smoking Moron providing ample juxtaposition. Their first major music video for the MTV generation featured just four straight minutes of a close-up of a speaker, with each and every video from that album being exactly the same (although, one of them was in colour). And that’s just what happened publicly.

Their spectre looms large throughout, as fans - both famous and not (including, bizarrely, Norm from Cheers)- spin stories. They almost become mythical, as fables and Chinese whispers (is that racist? I don’t know) come thick and fast; Tommy Stinson dropped out of high school by going into the headmasters office and blasting the Stink track Fuck School from a cassette player. Bob Stinson once played an entire show in a bin, which fell over during a guitar solo. They once played a sober show of all their own material that was technically very good, and it was considered one of their worst shows. Are these stories true? “Potentially”.

And all of those stories are great. They really are. They’re entertaining and funny and shocking and all the rest of it. But, the heart and soul of the movie comes from the personal experiences of the fans. The most emotional point comes from a group of fans discussing the impact the band’s songs had on their lives as teenagers. Teenagers who didn’t fit in, teenagers who were outcasts. Westerberg’s constant lyrical tightrope walk between the pain that one can feel in those situations, and the humour he can’t help but bring to the party, struck a chord with everyone who “got” The Replacements. Unsatisfied from Let It Be (yes, they had the balls to call an album Let It Be) is referenced as one of their finest, and the lyrics to that one seem particularly apt to someone of that age;

Look me in the eye
Then tell me that I’m satisfied
Was you satisfied?

Before reaching a jaded age of kids, a mortgage and responsibility, that’s a question of most people’s minds. Add that to Westerberg’s delivery of sheer pain, which makes Mick Jagger sound positively satisfied.



Something else that strikes you is the differing opinions of everybody interviewed; The Gaslight Anthem’s Brian Fallon says that everything you love about alternative bands today is in “an album called Tim”. Somebody else thinks Tim sucks. Some say they lost it after Bob Stinson was fired, others say their first without him, Pleased To Meet Me, was their best album. Some hate that they added horns to Can’t Hardly Wait, others are offended that people didn’t know enough about rock ‘n’ roll to not expect horns on Can’t Hardly Wait. It all adds to the interest in a band who don’t care…but they kind of do care…but, fuck it, they don’t care.

The film stretches their formation, as a band formed solely to keep troubled kid Tommy out of trouble, to their onstage break up in Chicago in 1991, where towards the end of the gig, one by one, The Replacements were “replaced” by their roadies, told entirely through the eyes of fans and is possibly the best illustration of the band I have ever come across, including their records (which don’t prepare you for their shambolically brilliant live shows.

The one negative I would say is that the ending goes on a bit. As summaries and conclusions go, I think 15 minutes or so is a little too long.

If you know nothing about The ‘Mats, this may sometimes be difficult to follow. For example, discussing the front covers to Let It Be and Tim without seeing them renders the discussion moot to many. However, even for those people, the passion of those interviewed is often a heartwarming, particularly if there’s ever a band you have loved like a friend or family member. And if you don’t know much about them and you see the film…hey, you might be inspired to go check them out. If you love The ‘Mats, you’ll be digging out Hootenanny immediately after.

It's difficult to make a documentary on a band without using their music without it coming across as something from the Bio channel or E! But Bechard has pulled it off.

RockDocs: Michael Jackson - The Life Of An Icon

David Gest knew Michael Jackson. You probably already knew that, because he tells you every time he is on TV. He’ll break out an anecdote or just casually mention a time he just happened to be around. He also knows Tito.

I saw Gests’ Legends of Soul tour earlier this year. Wasn’t the best of line-ups, but Doo Wop legend Little Anthony did his first ever UK performances and Dennis Edwards - the last surviving classic Temptations lead singer - also performed. It was kinda cool when Gest wasn’t on stage. I played a game to pass the time during his lame attempts at comedy. “Let’s See How Long It Takes Him To Mention Michael Jackson”. If you are wondering: it was 45 minutes. Longer than I expected.

Gests’ masterpiece of “I knew Michael Jackson”-ness is his 2011 documentary Michael Jackson: The Life of an Icon. It got quite a large release, has deluxe packaging and runs for over 2 ½ hours. It’s gonna be epic, right?

No.



I literally JUST watched this (on Netflix, I didn’t buy it…I have standards). It is without a doubt the weirdest “official” documentary I have ever seen on musician. It comes across more as an E! True Hollywood Story-type thing. The biggest accomplishments of Jackson’s career are glossed over, whilst minor details are magnified analysed. Remember when the Jackson 5 did a disco-flavoured cover of the Supremes song Forever Came Today? Me neither. But Motown songwriter Lamont Dozier does (even though nobody mentions it was originally a Supremes song), and he would like to talk about it. At great length. How it was written, why it was written. Michael liked it too, and that’s why they recorded it. And the brothers all performed brilliantly on it. Oh, and by the way, Off The Wall was released in 1979.

Over an hour of the 2 ½ hour length are spent on the Jackson 5 years at Motown. It is very thorough, although it doesn’t quite talk to many people who were there - and Bobby Taylor who was one of the people who takes credit for the Jackson 5 seems to take way more credit than he really should. There are many clips of Jackson 5 performances (although none of the really famous ones), a lot of rare photographs that don’t seem to match the era they’re talking about; many photographs that are clearly Motown publicity pictures are used to illustrate the Jackson kids on the Chitlin circuit or at home in Gary, Indiana. Excuses are made for Jackson’s abusive father, Joseph, presumably because Gest is still a friend of the family and doesn’t want to upset anyone.

Then they leave Motown (an event which is for some reason soundtracked with Rockwell’s Somebody’s Watching Me), and then there is NO music from Jackson, either solo or with his brothers. No album covers, no official publicity shots. You see, the film was released by Universal, who now own Motown. My guess is they couldn’t - or couldn’t be bothered to - get the licensing for Jackson’s Sony archives. So, for example, Off The Wall is dealt with in a matter of seconds, the monster success of Thriller is glossed over, and apparently the Bad, Dangerous, HIStory and Invincible albums just didn’t exist.

Instead, we get Gest telling us that he introduced Jackson to Petula Clark. And he introduced Jackson to Paul Anka. And that he and Jackson produced a show together at Madison Square Garden that was all HIS idea. And Jackson once went to a party at his house and threw peanuts at Gloria Gaynor. And that Liam Neeson was his neighbour (yeah, by that point, it seems he’s forgotten that this is a documentary on Michael Jackson and just started talking about himself). Then, for some reason, they interview Mickey Rooney.

The remaining hour or so of the film is spent dealing with some of the controversies in Jackson’s life, and completely ignores his output throughout the entire period. The molestation charges are dealt with surprisingly well, to be fair, if expectedly one-sided, and attention is drawn the skin disorder that you may or may not believe (judging by some of the testimonies here, it’s worth believing), Jackson’s marriages and his plastic surgery - which, again in fairness, isn’t excused as much as you might think.

But there’s interesting avenues that could have been explored, and are staring you in the face, but the question is never asked. For example, when talking about Jackson’s secret addiction to prescription medication, they hark back to Jackson’s infamous Pepsi commercial, where his hair caught fire and caused serious damage to his scalp, leading to several very painful procedures, and specify that Michael never believed he was abusing drugs because he was using prescribed medication. This is not long after talking about his marriage to Elvis Presley’s daughter, Lisa Marie. Elvis, too, didn’t believe he had a drug problem, because he was using prescription drugs. Is that not an interesting parallel that is worth exploring about the dangers of extreme fame? No, apparently Whitney Houston wants to talk about Bubbles the Chimp sucking her toe in Michael’s kitchen.

There’s also some stuff that made me cringe a lot. Firstly, Jackson’s manager Frank DiLeo seems to make a bit too much of a deal about the fact that Michael “definitely wasn’t gay”. Nobody seemed to have asked the question, there is no way of knowing that this is where we were going here. He just yells it out. Why? Who cares? It’s kind of offensive that you are offended that somebody would think he was. What the fuck is wrong with being gay?

Then there’s a horribly cheesy moment at the end where Gest is sitting on a couch with Jackson’s mother. I watched it from between my fingers.

Overall, it makes me wonder how Gest made it as a producer. If this is the best he can do for someone he claims was one of his closest friends, then he really must be shit. It seems more like a tribute to himself. He even shows footage that must have been a bitch to track down, of Jackson thanking him at some awards show that Gest himself was producing (and chose Jackson personally to win that particular award). It’s an exercise in David Gest masturbating, and it’s only a little bit more unsettling than what that would literally look like. All the talking heads appear to be his “showbiz friends” who have little-to-nothing to do with the Jackson story, but Gest knows them and they’ve heard of Michael Jackson…so, fuck it, put em in there! And why is it that a man who claims to be so close to the Jackson clan not get clearance to use more footage from the Jackson archive?

All of this makes it all the more ironic when a whole section of the film is taken to have a go at people for using Jackson for their own ends.

There is a fascinating documentary to be made about Michael Jackson. His life story is too interesting, too contradictory and too widespread not to document. This ain’t it.

Until this hypothetical professional film is made, I would recommend this. This is a 100% unofficial film that was posted on YouTube. It is four hours in length, but it is extremely well executed. It’s mainly chronological, although occasionally jumps back to the lead up to Jackson’s 2005 molestation trial and doesn’t shy away from asking the difficult questions, some of which aren‘t answered and none of which are glossed over. I watched it one day when I was unemployed a year or two ago. Unlike Gests’ film, it doesn’t spend the entire duration saying Jackson was “a gift from God” or “he was the greatest entertainer who ever lived” and a “musical genius”, which is great because Jackson was none of those things (how can you possibly gauge who is the greatest entertainer who ever lived? And surely the greatest entertainer who ever lived wouldn‘t lip synch so often?).

It is very compelling, though not always comfortable viewing, and I would recommend watching it at some point if you are wanting to see a good documentary on Jackson. Kudos to the person who took the time to make this.