Mick Jagger - Rock icon, but is the wrinkely old stone growing old disgracefully?

LordSutch

So Mick has now pulled a bird in a Zurich night club, not bad for a 70 year old, but is it right that he should be up to his naughty old ways only eleven weeks after the death of his long time girlfriend L'Wren Scott? A lot of the media seem to be tut tutting because of the very short time since L'Wren's death, but maybe its his way of coping with grief?

Just the image of him in a nightclub at his time of life chatting up the ladies has me fascinated ) I'd say Keith & Charlie are probably fast asleep after about 8pm, although Ronnie might also be out and about on the hunt 'if you can believe the media' . . . .

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=HJ.210143486709&pid=15.1

Too soon for Mick to move on?

MagicIRL

With the amount of gear flowing through those veins he should bang everything that moves because he's a ticking time bomb.

caustic 1

Hmmm I'd say Mick frequented nightclubs when his lady friend was alive. I'd imagine it to be like a way of life now rather than a now and again occurrence.

chughes

Well, he's not getting any younger, time is not on his side any more.....

KungPao

In before some lame reference to Maroon 5.

Wibbs

I say fair play to him if he can get away with it. The guy is disturbingly physically fit for any age, never mind 70. If you ever get to see the Scorsese flic of the Stones concert "Shine a light" a few years ago Jagger never stops running around at a pace that would have many 30 year olds in bits and on top of that he's singing. Regardless of the argument of whether he should be tuppin young wans, he's one helluva advert for keeping fit long after the first flush of youth.

Birneybau

KungPao wrote: »

In before some lame reference to Maroon 5.

The very fact you mentioned Maroon 5 means you got there before anyone else.

Míshásta

Can you imagine an auld fella with all those wrinkles trying to chat up young wans in the clubs around Washington St. I'd say he'd not get past the bouncers......................

.........unless he was filthy rich and famous.

SEPT 23 1989

miserable man with the few quid

Menas

I reckon it is a few decades since Mick Jagger really cared about what people think of him.

He has been a rule breaker most of his life.

That was key to the groundbreaking music the stones made in the 60s and early 70s. They were the bad boy beatles.

"I can't get no satisfaction" by the Stones was recorded at the same time as the Beatles were recoding "Day Tripper"....world of difference.

Is it insensitive to date someone so soon after your partners death? Yes IMO but I doubt it bothers him too much.

4zn76tysfajdxp

LordSutch wrote: »

So Mick has now pulled a bird in a Zurich night club, not bad for a 70 year old

Jesus it's unreal for a 40 year old, never mind a 70 year old.

mad muffin

When there are far more days behind you than in front, there's no time to mourn lost love.

Especially when there's a bevy of young bosomy cohorts looking to show you a good time.

caustic 1

Let's face it the bird he pulled was Pulled only because it was Mick Jagger. If he had been an unknown 70 yr old firstly he wouldn't have been there and secondly the bird wouldn't have been caught glancing in his direction never mind greeting him.

Wibbs

Trigger Happy wrote: »

He has been a rule breaker most of his life.

That was key to the groundbreaking music the stones made in the 60s and early 70s. They were the bad boy beatles.

Well that's what the PR dept of both bands wanted people to think. The Stones were suburban middle class boys with an image, an image they played up to and grew into later. The Beatles were actually more privately debauched. The Beatles honed their stagecraft in German brothels and stripclubs rather than jazz clubs in Kensington and were chugging uppers and downers when Keef was still drinking shandies. Lennon was a smack addict by the late 60's. At his peak of substance abuse Ringo made Keef look like a choirboy(QV his special advisor credit on Withnail and I). The joke doing the rounds in the press at the time was take the stories you hear about one group and apply it to the other.

As for groundbreaking? I love the Stones, they are a fantastic band, but they didn't come within an asses roar of the Liverpudlians as far as groundbreaking was concerned. They were very much in the shadow of them and still are. Jagger in particular felt it and had a complex about it. The Beatles could muster more range of expression and innovation across two albums than the Stones have managed in a career. That's cool BTW. The Stones are a(for the most part) a one trick pony, but it's a very good trick.

"I can't get no satisfaction" by the Stones was recorded at the same time as the Beatles were recoding "Day Tripper"....world of difference.

The latter is a song about drugs and they had kids singing it. That's how you do subversive.

Is it insensitive to date someone so soon after your partners death?

Wrong verb.

Wibbs

Dario Loud Signal wrote: »

Jesus it's unreal for a 40 year old, never mind a 70 year old.

Ah heeore. :mad: I did alright at 40

4zn76tysfajdxp

Wibbs wrote: »

Wrong verb.

Hire?