Will No Manifesto appear ever? - Page 65 - Forever Delayed

Mary Chain · #**961** 12-05-2012, 18:35

Gotta agree with Cricri, International Treasures was the best I've seen the Manics perform for years

; full-throttle energy and excitement from the band and the fans. I enjoyed the O2 but it wouldn't make my top 5.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandrine

Sorry to said that but Shine A Light is a monumental piece of shit, which says nothing about the band, the audience is fake (seriously, they were models hired for the gig) and they edited so much the songs it has nothing to do with a real gig.
Whatever people think of it qualities, No Manifesto gives us an 'internal' vision of the band (as far as they agree, I am fully aware of that) and that's not that common.

You misunderstand. I haven't even seen Shine A Light. I meant No Manifesto is not directed by Martin Scorsese, it doesn't have a massive budget and lots of large-scale hype. To put it shortly, more people cared. No Manifesto could only be sold on a tinier scale in comparison, has some nice moments, but is very very out of date.

Anyway, this is probably a redundant discussion. If there was news, we'd have news.

Sandrine · #**962** 12-05-2012, 19:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mary Chain

Gotta agree with Cricri, International Treasures was the best I've seen the Manics perform for years

; full-throttle energy and excitement from the band and the fans. I enjoyed the O2 but it wouldn't make my top 5.

You misunderstand. I haven't even seen Shine A Light. I meant No Manifesto is not directed by Martin Scorsese, it doesn't have a massive budget and lots of large-scale hype. To put it shortly, more people cared. No Manifesto could only be sold on a tinier scale in comparison, has some nice moments, but is very very out of date.

Anyway, this is probably a redundant discussion. If there was news, we'd have news.

Indeed, I misunderstood, sorry

Bathtub · #**963** 12-05-2012, 19:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mary Chain

It could do with just being put online and downloaded by whoever wants it.

Leaving the people who made it with a huge loss and no chance of it ever seeing a proper release and therefore them getting any revenue from it. Why would that be desirable?

Mary Chain · #**964** 12-05-2012, 19:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandrine

Indeed, I misunderstood, sorry

Haha, no sorry, I read posts back and sound proper confrontational

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bathtub

Leaving the people who made it with a huge loss and no chance of it ever seeing a proper release and therefore them getting any revenue from it. Why would that be desirable?

I know it would be a shite deal but that's just how it is oftentimes working in film and TV. I'd go see a release but it's been so long that seems...unlikely, so in my mind having fans able to access it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. But you know, I'm not ruler of the universe yet so that was only a suggestion

cricri · #**965** 12-05-2012, 19:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by UEF

Why? Because more of the FD clique got to go to em?

Because people pissed hundreds of pounds up the wall so they could go?

I'm sorry, I don't give a fuck about who attended what and where.
And what I do with my money is hardly other people's business. There are hundreds of European fans who can't afford travelling around the world for gigs. Are we really arguing over the places where they chose to play?
Have fun.

Bryter Layter · #**966** 12-05-2012, 20:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mary Chain

It's alright, and an admirable project at the time. But hardly anyone aside from those who've made the effort to see it thus far will care. It's not Scorsese with Shine A Light or No Direction Home. It's Nicky with his compost heap and some great nostalgia (even more so now it's so old...) for those who were there or wanted to be there. It could do with just being put online and downloaded by whoever wants it.

Considering one of the filmmakers reads and posts on this forum, did it not occur to you that perhaps you might try being a little more delicate in your criticism? I would have respected your post far more if you had.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bathtub

Leaving the people who made it with a huge loss and no chance of it ever seeing a proper release and therefore them getting any revenue from it. Why would that be desirable?

Exactly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mary Chain

I know it would be a shite deal but that's just how it is oftentimes working in film and TV.

And you know this because you have so much experience working in film and TV, right? So long as there's a market, there's always a chance and in Britain, the band have a following. Your analysis is based on no specific data, only your own opinon that may or may not have been influenced by insider industry knowledge. The filmmakers on the other hand likely have research specific to this project that supports their intentions to release this film theatrically.

Takk · #**967** 12-05-2012, 20:03

It's not really out of date because it's not meant to be viewed as the story of the band over the last few years, it's a story about the band as a whole and a documentary about them....it goes all the way back. If you haven't seen it, you can't appreciate that.

Bathtub · #**968** 12-05-2012, 20:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takk

It's not really out of date because it's not meant to be viewed as the story of the band, a documentary about them....it goes all the way back. If you haven't seen it, you can't appreciate that.

Very true, I don't get the obsession with it not covering the very latest thing they've done.

The out of date business is irrelevant anyway really, being up to date is barely the hallmark of a great music doc. Dig!, acknowledged to be one of the best music docs, and a Sundance prize winner, was made up mainly of years old footage about a band very few people had heard of, and another band with one hit song off the back of an advert.

Takk · #**969** 12-05-2012, 20:29

Yeah^ the documentary is designed to be insightful, funny and to tell the story of the band in a more insightful way than perhaps previously. It won't just appeal to manics fans, and it uses the satt era as its focus, but it's not about the satt era.

Son of Stopped · #**970** 12-05-2012, 20:34

Well I'm still looking forward to seeing it at the pictures.
/threadbalance

Bryter Layter · #**971** 12-05-2012, 23:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bathtub

Very true, I don't get the obsession with it not covering the very latest thing they've done.

The out of date business is irrelevant anyway really, being up to date is barely the hallmark of a great music doc. Dig!, acknowledged to be one of the best music docs, and a Sundance prize winner, was made up mainly of years old footage about a band very few people had heard of, and another band with one hit song off the back of an advert.

Of course the timing complaint is irrelevant for the very reasons you mentioned. From what I can gather from those that have seen the film, it's not based on capturing a single moment in time, but rather the evolution of the band with extended commentary throughout by the fans.

I guess those making the arguement about how out of date the film is, don't care too much for contemporary docs made about bands/musicians who have long since broken up because that's about as current as you're going to get.

Nice plug for Dig!. It is a stellar doc even if you're not a fan of either TBJM or the Dandy's. In fact, neither band has really ever been as commercially successful as the Manics and yet this film was somewhat commercially successful and certainly critically acclaimed. Sure the Manics don't have the likes of an Anton Newcombe, but I can't see a reason why No Manifesto couldn't pull the same (or similar) rabbit out of the hat like Dig! did.

everlasting · #**972** 14-05-2012, 00:52

I'm still eager to see it even after 5 and a half years since I was interviewed for it.
How about a new trailer or a new deleted scene, or a clip from the film itself? Come on, please....
Goddamn you Sony for delaying this film.