Vince, it has been well Documented and is well known that ray and stone had a bust up so to speak regarding the movie, i was wondering could you share your detailed insight into this and your views?.
As Much as i cant stand Manzarek, i do agree with his views on the doors film.
Ray And Oliver Stone
Moderator: The Freedom Man
-
vince
- Senior Member
- Posts: 636
- Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:37 pm
- Location: Kimpo City, Korea
RAY RAN INTO STONE
Ray, as many of you know, went to UCLA Film school. There he met Jim and so on... The rest is history.
For a long time Ray wanted a movie about Jim to be made. It would promote record sales ($$), it would revive interest in the Group generally ($$), The various books would sell and in some cases provide roylaties ($$), and it would further the myth of Morrison, with whom Ray was quite impressed. At least one would think based on a five minute conversation with Ray.
Now there is nothing wrong with any of this and I do not imply anything of the sort. Ray and Jim were fast friends and, for a time, housemates. It is natural for Ray to want to tell the story of Jim and his relation to and wth, the Doors. But unfortunately, the story of the Doors rapidly becomes hero worship of Morrison.
After a great deal of time and a lot of false starts, people agreed to provide $$ for the movie and it was time to pick a director. Unfortunately, they picked Stone.
I AM GUESSING - But Stone was a Morrison worshiper and it may be that he got the $$ together to do the movie. So it is natural that he would be the director.
Ray wanted to be the director event hough he had never done a feature film before.
The $$ people were not going to trust millions of dollars to an untried Director and hope for a winner. They chose Stone over Ray. It was like the Doors choosing Bill over me as Manager.
The problem started small. When Stone informed Ray of his version of who and what Jim was, Ray was justifiably upset. He tried to reason with Stone to change the direction and concept that the Movie was taking. He was really upset when Stone let him know that
A - He was the Director
B - He would do the movie as he saw fit.
Now everyone, including myself wanted to do a film. BUT - had John, Robby or myself had the say-so, I think it would have been more balanced and less focussed on Jim as a hero and more as the development of progress of the band leading to Jim's untimate demise. That would have been a smash hit. But Stone wanted "Excitement and he got boredom.
Let me modify that - I would have written it that way and I THINK John and Robby, and even Ray, would have gone along.
Most important, we (John, Robbie and I) would have been Very careful to provide the true versions of the 3 serious incidents in their career, New Haven, Amsterdam and Miami and possibly New orleans which is what brought the group to a performing end.
What would Ray have done. Lutie likely he would have done pretty much the same but the focus would have been on Jim.
In the approach to the movie what would have been different. Ray's version would have bordered on the true story of a hero. Robby's version would have been about a group with a Mad lead singer.
OK, the die was cast. Stone was the Director, Ray was a former Door and a consultant on the Stone version of a day in the life of Jim Morrison - Stone's version which was a dreamworld distortion of the mythological vision of Morrison created by Sugarman based on the extensive, dedicated, and objective research done by Jerry Hopkins.
Ray was leading the Doors team in an effort to convince Stone to give the true story (And to let him Co-direct). I joined that effort when I was called in as Technical Advisor. The difference between Ray, on the one hand and John, Robbie and to a lesser degree myself, was that Ray became very vocal, very public and very nasty about the overall situation.
He cut himself out of the picture, He and Stone had a public battle of words which got pretty nasty. Ray, in reality, put himself on the outside.
He phoned me a couple of times during the early stages of the movie and pleaded his case. He bagged me, quite literally to try my best to get things right. May I quote. "Vince, it's like we are on a train to Boston, Man, and somehow it got on the track to New York. You gotta get it back to Boston, Man. We can't let this happen."
16 years ago and I remember Rays voice. He was deeply hurt about the direction the movie was taking. He had every right to be. He was justifiably angry with Stone and what he was doing.
The tragedy of it all was that Stone had the golden opportunity to tell a story everyone wanted to know, to tell the truth about Miami, if nothing else, and try to give a logical explanation of Jim's demise.
Instead he turned everyone into leather wearing, biker oriented (The Doors feared biker gangs) drones and created an imaginary world around Jim and his loving companion, Pan. (ho,ho,ho)
Val Kilmer did a really good job of portrayal and perfect match for the singing. The characters as given by the various other actors were pretty good. I don't mean mediocre, but they were overshadowed by Val as a result of Stones direction.
In the end, you know the result. About the only part of the story, as told by Stone, that is true is the name, the number of musicians and the writing of LMF. The rest is all imagination.
I was in China at the initial screening. I saw the Movie on TV in Hong Kong. I am glad that I did not go to the Screening and more than happy that I did not pay to see it. I regret that I saw it at all. It was disgusting. it was an insult to Jim, to the the Boys, and to the value, quality and history of the musical group - The Doors.
There was a lot of wild events that plagued that group. Jim was a distressed and disruptive person. That does not mean that he was not human, had feelings and at times was a very nice guy. His death was a tragedy. His life was chaotic. He hurt people and himself, He was still a human being. I have said some hard things about him. Now let the good be said. I liked him, after a fashion. He was always polite, respectful, courteous, somtimes condecending, toward me. We Never, not once ever, argued or had a professional disagreement - never. We did have different ways of seeing things, but one cannot be condemned for a difference of opinion.
I can say the same for the rest of the Boys as well. That I did not agree with some of their decisions was of no matter. After all, it was their group, their business and I agreed to work with them on their terms.
I might add that the glowing personal statement provided by a "New Manager" as to Siddons character was based on current knowledge and status. This Manager was not present or a part of the Doors in any way shape or form during the 5 years when Siddons was their puppet manager. His glowing affidavit is based purely on minimizing the shocking revelations made by myself.
Further, Bill is NOT a bad guy, This review given by the current Manager is provided when Bill is a grown man, having added years of experience and maturity and is most certainly not in a situation of trying to manage a man much older than he and somewhat deranged.
It is likely that Bill is now a good and competent manager and doing his absolute best for his clients. 38 years will change a man and I am sure that Bill Siddons, like all of us, has changed - much for the better. The time I speak of is in the past for Bill and myself. The present is a different time and place. We are both different people and you, readers of my commentary MUST, in all fairness to Bill Siddons, remember this.
When I speak of Bill, I speak of my personal experiences with him when he was a very young and immature surfer boy turned manager. One MUST regard my experiences in that light and not judge Bill as he may be today by what happened to him, to me and between us at that time. Remember that Bill was also a victim of Jim's erratic nehavior.
To that end, I hope you take the current Doors manager's statment, regarding what a nice guy and how competant Bill is at this time; in the context and time frame intended. There was a "THEN" and there is a "NOW". If I have said anything that is not true, I sincerely appologize to Bill Siddons and the Boys. If I have said anything inaccurate, I stand humbly corrected. Notice, however, that no one has denied anything I have said or asked for an appology.
I note also that in every recent interview with people around the Doors, I have been excluded. I am, possibly, aside from Leon Bernard, and the Former secretary, the only person directly connected to the Doors, that has not exploited my position to make money, gain status or move into an entertainment industry position. True or False Mr. Current Doors Manager?????
Yet, which I tell the truth about how Siddons was made manager, and why; when I mention some pretty bad treatment at his hands, when I tell the truth about things that happened and decisions made within the group - I, who have never exploited my position, am made out to be the bad guy.
And trust me, I have not told all there is to tell. By the way, Don't ask. I have not intention of becoming a tabloid expose of the personal and private lives of the group. There are some things that are, and should remain, private. Do not ask me about the personal lives of any member of the group.
Read the current Managers statement to see who is in on the inner circle in these days. And one of these guys sued the Doors. Now he is Mr. Nice guy.
My, how the worm turns. So much for the current managers knowledge of the history of the Group and relations of those who had anything to do with it.
OK - Enough said. Thank you for your insightful question. It did unleash the dam of information, prompted by the same frustration Ray felt when he saw that Train go to New York.
For a long time Ray wanted a movie about Jim to be made. It would promote record sales ($$), it would revive interest in the Group generally ($$), The various books would sell and in some cases provide roylaties ($$), and it would further the myth of Morrison, with whom Ray was quite impressed. At least one would think based on a five minute conversation with Ray.
Now there is nothing wrong with any of this and I do not imply anything of the sort. Ray and Jim were fast friends and, for a time, housemates. It is natural for Ray to want to tell the story of Jim and his relation to and wth, the Doors. But unfortunately, the story of the Doors rapidly becomes hero worship of Morrison.
After a great deal of time and a lot of false starts, people agreed to provide $$ for the movie and it was time to pick a director. Unfortunately, they picked Stone.
I AM GUESSING - But Stone was a Morrison worshiper and it may be that he got the $$ together to do the movie. So it is natural that he would be the director.
Ray wanted to be the director event hough he had never done a feature film before.
The $$ people were not going to trust millions of dollars to an untried Director and hope for a winner. They chose Stone over Ray. It was like the Doors choosing Bill over me as Manager.
The problem started small. When Stone informed Ray of his version of who and what Jim was, Ray was justifiably upset. He tried to reason with Stone to change the direction and concept that the Movie was taking. He was really upset when Stone let him know that
A - He was the Director
B - He would do the movie as he saw fit.
Now everyone, including myself wanted to do a film. BUT - had John, Robby or myself had the say-so, I think it would have been more balanced and less focussed on Jim as a hero and more as the development of progress of the band leading to Jim's untimate demise. That would have been a smash hit. But Stone wanted "Excitement and he got boredom.
Let me modify that - I would have written it that way and I THINK John and Robby, and even Ray, would have gone along.
Most important, we (John, Robbie and I) would have been Very careful to provide the true versions of the 3 serious incidents in their career, New Haven, Amsterdam and Miami and possibly New orleans which is what brought the group to a performing end.
What would Ray have done. Lutie likely he would have done pretty much the same but the focus would have been on Jim.
In the approach to the movie what would have been different. Ray's version would have bordered on the true story of a hero. Robby's version would have been about a group with a Mad lead singer.
OK, the die was cast. Stone was the Director, Ray was a former Door and a consultant on the Stone version of a day in the life of Jim Morrison - Stone's version which was a dreamworld distortion of the mythological vision of Morrison created by Sugarman based on the extensive, dedicated, and objective research done by Jerry Hopkins.
Ray was leading the Doors team in an effort to convince Stone to give the true story (And to let him Co-direct). I joined that effort when I was called in as Technical Advisor. The difference between Ray, on the one hand and John, Robbie and to a lesser degree myself, was that Ray became very vocal, very public and very nasty about the overall situation.
He cut himself out of the picture, He and Stone had a public battle of words which got pretty nasty. Ray, in reality, put himself on the outside.
He phoned me a couple of times during the early stages of the movie and pleaded his case. He bagged me, quite literally to try my best to get things right. May I quote. "Vince, it's like we are on a train to Boston, Man, and somehow it got on the track to New York. You gotta get it back to Boston, Man. We can't let this happen."
16 years ago and I remember Rays voice. He was deeply hurt about the direction the movie was taking. He had every right to be. He was justifiably angry with Stone and what he was doing.
The tragedy of it all was that Stone had the golden opportunity to tell a story everyone wanted to know, to tell the truth about Miami, if nothing else, and try to give a logical explanation of Jim's demise.
Instead he turned everyone into leather wearing, biker oriented (The Doors feared biker gangs) drones and created an imaginary world around Jim and his loving companion, Pan. (ho,ho,ho)
Val Kilmer did a really good job of portrayal and perfect match for the singing. The characters as given by the various other actors were pretty good. I don't mean mediocre, but they were overshadowed by Val as a result of Stones direction.
In the end, you know the result. About the only part of the story, as told by Stone, that is true is the name, the number of musicians and the writing of LMF. The rest is all imagination.
I was in China at the initial screening. I saw the Movie on TV in Hong Kong. I am glad that I did not go to the Screening and more than happy that I did not pay to see it. I regret that I saw it at all. It was disgusting. it was an insult to Jim, to the the Boys, and to the value, quality and history of the musical group - The Doors.
There was a lot of wild events that plagued that group. Jim was a distressed and disruptive person. That does not mean that he was not human, had feelings and at times was a very nice guy. His death was a tragedy. His life was chaotic. He hurt people and himself, He was still a human being. I have said some hard things about him. Now let the good be said. I liked him, after a fashion. He was always polite, respectful, courteous, somtimes condecending, toward me. We Never, not once ever, argued or had a professional disagreement - never. We did have different ways of seeing things, but one cannot be condemned for a difference of opinion.
I can say the same for the rest of the Boys as well. That I did not agree with some of their decisions was of no matter. After all, it was their group, their business and I agreed to work with them on their terms.
I might add that the glowing personal statement provided by a "New Manager" as to Siddons character was based on current knowledge and status. This Manager was not present or a part of the Doors in any way shape or form during the 5 years when Siddons was their puppet manager. His glowing affidavit is based purely on minimizing the shocking revelations made by myself.
Further, Bill is NOT a bad guy, This review given by the current Manager is provided when Bill is a grown man, having added years of experience and maturity and is most certainly not in a situation of trying to manage a man much older than he and somewhat deranged.
It is likely that Bill is now a good and competent manager and doing his absolute best for his clients. 38 years will change a man and I am sure that Bill Siddons, like all of us, has changed - much for the better. The time I speak of is in the past for Bill and myself. The present is a different time and place. We are both different people and you, readers of my commentary MUST, in all fairness to Bill Siddons, remember this.
When I speak of Bill, I speak of my personal experiences with him when he was a very young and immature surfer boy turned manager. One MUST regard my experiences in that light and not judge Bill as he may be today by what happened to him, to me and between us at that time. Remember that Bill was also a victim of Jim's erratic nehavior.
To that end, I hope you take the current Doors manager's statment, regarding what a nice guy and how competant Bill is at this time; in the context and time frame intended. There was a "THEN" and there is a "NOW". If I have said anything that is not true, I sincerely appologize to Bill Siddons and the Boys. If I have said anything inaccurate, I stand humbly corrected. Notice, however, that no one has denied anything I have said or asked for an appology.
I note also that in every recent interview with people around the Doors, I have been excluded. I am, possibly, aside from Leon Bernard, and the Former secretary, the only person directly connected to the Doors, that has not exploited my position to make money, gain status or move into an entertainment industry position. True or False Mr. Current Doors Manager?????
Yet, which I tell the truth about how Siddons was made manager, and why; when I mention some pretty bad treatment at his hands, when I tell the truth about things that happened and decisions made within the group - I, who have never exploited my position, am made out to be the bad guy.
And trust me, I have not told all there is to tell. By the way, Don't ask. I have not intention of becoming a tabloid expose of the personal and private lives of the group. There are some things that are, and should remain, private. Do not ask me about the personal lives of any member of the group.
Read the current Managers statement to see who is in on the inner circle in these days. And one of these guys sued the Doors. Now he is Mr. Nice guy.
My, how the worm turns. So much for the current managers knowledge of the history of the Group and relations of those who had anything to do with it.
OK - Enough said. Thank you for your insightful question. It did unleash the dam of information, prompted by the same frustration Ray felt when he saw that Train go to New York.
Vince
Road Manager
The Doors
Road Manager
The Doors
-
windchime
- Registered User
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:06 pm
- Location: Florida
Re: Ray And Oliver Stone
I agree in your statement about Ray, I think he is a flake!! Although I will say that Stone himself said he "loved and missed Jim" and I am nto even sure if they ever met?? I know he at some point "refused" to set foot on the set, but perhaps it was his exclusion from the set.Stuart wrote:Vince, it has been well Documented and is well known that ray and stone had a bust up so to speak regarding the movie, i was wondering could you share your detailed insight into this and your views?.
As Much as i cant stand Manzarek, i do agree with his views on the doors film.
So much of that movie is pure B.S. There was no cocaine orgy with Keneally. Pam and Jim met at London Fog, not on the beach. Jim did not quit UCLA (but Oliver Stone did). The Doors never left Jim alone at Warhol's Factory, because they were never there to begin with. From what I have researched and read in Densmore's book (would not touch Sugarman's), the list is endless. I did find it very neat that John was the man in the control room while Jim was in the studio speaking alone.
I don't think the movie was made the way it should have been made, thanks to both Oliver Stone as well others. It was definite hero worsip on Stone's part and even he admits it to some degree. Well the die is cast now and what is done is done. Too bad the band could not have turned out more truthful than for entertainment purposes mostly alone, and sad entertainement at that. I give a lot of credit to those that portratyed the charachters though.
-
vince
- Senior Member
- Posts: 636
- Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:37 pm
- Location: Kimpo City, Korea
The New Movie
Perhaps in the event that such a movie is made, Ray, John and Robbie can see to it that there is far more truththan fiction in the result.
You are all aware that telling a story covering 7 or 8 years of history is a monumental task. You have maximum 180 minutes to do it and there is an awful ot to say. There have to be omissions. But the real meat of it are the key points.
Perhaps this time they will get it right. I for one hope so.
Maybe I could play the part of Bill's handyman Uncle. I am old enough.
You are all aware that telling a story covering 7 or 8 years of history is a monumental task. You have maximum 180 minutes to do it and there is an awful ot to say. There have to be omissions. But the real meat of it are the key points.
Perhaps this time they will get it right. I for one hope so.
Maybe I could play the part of Bill's handyman Uncle. I am old enough.
Vince
Road Manager
The Doors
Road Manager
The Doors