Random Observations Re: 3SL Video

Beware:  to most people the following ramblings will be trivial or utterly inconsequential, so I am only writing this for the truly bored who may be interested in what I thought of the 3SL video I bought recently.  For a change I thought instead of doing a regular review I would simply list what I liked/noticed as I was watching it, in no particular order.

First off, on amazon UK one customer review claimed that Genesis used different audio tracks from the video tracks and that sometimes Phil's mouth would not match with the singing voice.  I found that incredulous and checked very carefully myself.  But apparently we must be watching two different videos, as no matter how hard I tried I could not spot a single video/audio mismatch.

Phil's stage presence was very curious to say the least.  Unlike any other rock star, he came off resembling a cross between a walking teddy bear and a kid with Attention Deficit Disorder.  Inexplicably women find this strange mix intoxicatingly cute, I should know as I count myself as one of them. 

Phil's bizarre/goofy antics during songs were almost reminiscent of Peter's miming during his days with Genesis, yet somehow have a completely different feel to them.  In a way some of the gestures seemed less rehearsed than those of Peter.  Many hand movements seemed rather spontaneous and not very coordinated.  Some notable bits:   
1. "King Tut" impression during "Turn it on Again"
2. The early beginnings of "the walk" at the start of "No reply at all"
3. Dancing with an imaginary partner in the middle of "Me and Sarah Jane"

Tony's famous (or infamous, whichever you prefer) stripy rugby outfit was hard to miss.  Maybe this was an attempt to make up for lack of expressions with bold colors.

Mike looked like a St. Bernard with his gruffy hair and beard.

As usual, the band didn't like to show or focus on the audience.  Most of the time they played self-absorbingly in the dark or with partial lighting which actually looked kind of cool.  Audience could be heard roaring at the start of the
Slippermen?segment of the medley.  The crowd was also shown a few times during the last song "Turn it on Again" waving balloons.

The band's tour bus was crowded with wives and kids.  With all the mingling I had a hard time identifying who was who, with the exception for Chester's son for obvious reasons.

Criminal omissions:  "Me and Sarah Jane" and "Man on the Corner" both got cut off by interviews.

"In the Cage" not surprisingly provided the highlight of the entire program.  Some observations during this medley: 

1. The song started off with Phil staring blankly into space with eyes growing wider and wider until they looked like a pair of eggs (for a second I thought he was going to have a seizure). 
2. During the first extended instrumental break smoke filled the stage, when it finally cleared we found Phil had stripped his own shirt off, and the shirt stayed off for the rest of the song.
3. Tony shined during the keyboard parts.  The camera was focused on his hand a great deal of the time.  His flying fingers were magical and highly exciting to watch.  However, all of this was pretty much canceled out by his perennial stony face.  I checked, there was never so much as a single twitch at the corner of his mouth.  Of course this was in direct contrast with Phil's hyperkinetic face. 
4. "Afterglow" was apparently a song that Phil could understand.  His facial expressions during this song were exquisite.  He was immersed in character and appeared to be in real anguish.  For once he did not distract us simultaneously with some strange comical gesture.  Then we cut to a snapshot of Tony with his Poker face again.  I have to believe that he must be somehow "moved on the inside" though, after all he was the maestro behind all that passionate music and lyrics.

Lastly, during the crowd favorite (NOT!) "Who Dunnit" the band definitely enjoyed confusing/shocking the audience by looking and sounding like an entirely different act.  Call me crazy, but I never hated the song and actually liked this live version.  It sounded almost techno to my ears.


--- In paperlate-genesis@y..., "lulu_lioness" <lulu_lioness@y...> wrote:
> I also highly agree with one specific comment you made in your review,

I think I have a pretty good idea of which comment you were referring to :) 

> except I'm not going to talk about it because I don't want to be told that I should leave here
> and go to Sussudio :)

LOL!  No fear, my friend.  Judging from the deafening silence that greeted me in response to that post, I suspect that many on the list secretely wish that I would just leave and go to Sussudio.  Too bad I consider it my job to provide the occasional unabashed gushes over our beloved band, no matter how embarrassing these may appear to everyone else.  It has always been my opinion that a certain amount of blind worship/overenthusiasm is healthy and even necessary for every fan forum (although obviously not so rampant as on Sussudio).  Of course, ultra-serious discussions about music history or technique can be both fun and informative, but not when they go on endlessly.  For instance currently I think I might be suffering from severe migraines triggered by music critique overload.  Objectivity can be too much of a good thing you know.

Lily

Index Page

Next Post