Holy smoke. I cannot believe we saw the same film. Despite having experienced the Stones live numerous times, I still came away from this experience stunned and overwhelmed as never before by the sheer, uncanny power, beauty, and energy of these remarkable musicians and performers. They are a force of nature and they project more vitality and relevance than many, many "younger" artists. And Scorcese's gorgeous filmmaking puts that beautiful vision and sound right in our faces in a way that just floors us. Don't let this sour review, which wholly misses the point, deter you from going to see this extraordinary performance if you haven't already.

shane, poughkeepsie, new york

The Stones are a great band because of the sound that they manage to create together, and not as individuals. Keith and Ron can throw riffs at each other and sound as tight as ever, they make it look fun and sound great. Charlie Watts keeps the whole act together. Its the simple stuff played from the heart that makes this band last forever.

JC, Malta, Malta

I have heard the Stones play better than they did at the concert filmed for this movie, but still they played well and I admire the swagger and panache the band displays at this point in the game. I did wish for more camera time for the supplemental musicians the band employs as they are all excellent and well-known to their fellow musicians (but not at all to the general audience). There are some details only other players will notice or care about, such as Ron's use of a Gibson Firebird (a guitar associated with Brian Jones) and Darryl Jones playing a Fender Mustang bass ( an instrument associated with Bill Wyman) on a few of the songs. Really, this is a film for Rolling Stones fans, and if you are not it won't convert you to one. Speaking of current appeal, in 1972 I had to be in a lottery just to be permitted to buy tickets for their Madison Square Garden show; for the screening of this film my friend and I were the only two in attendance. Very enjoyable film!

James McGirr, Portland, ME

I'm not even a fan of the Stones, but saw the film on Sunday and enjoyed almost every minute! It is not often that I can say that about any film. When Cosmo tells us that Aguilera can really sing, I realise that he is clueless about the rock/pop business.
The greatest and most iconic artists are not necessarily the best singers. Presley and Dylan are prime examples of this.
Why no mention of Buddy Guy Mr Landesman? His contribution was a thousand times better than Aguilera's.

Brian Lockyer, Exeter, England

Regarding Mr Landesman's incisive review of Shine A Light, Keith Richards has always been sparse with his riffs. In the words of Ludwig, the architect not composer, Mies Van Der Rohe, "Less is more".

Philip Clayton, Fotheringhay, Great Britain

So, Cosmo says Mick can't sing, that's hardly the point is it. Mick would probably agree, but since when was rock music about being able to sing. I would't count myself amongst them but some people would argue that Bob Dylan, Tom Waits, Leonard Cohen, Van Morrison etc. can't sing. Their voices like Mick's are unique and instantly recognisable adding to pleasure of listening to their songs. Personally I can't say the same for Christina Aguileras nerve grating whine.
As for Keith Richard churning out the same old riffs and chords, well when I went to see the Stones at Slane last summer that is exactly what I went to hear, surely the same for entire audience judging by the reception for Satisfaction. Also, whilst watching them it is almost impossible to take your eyes off Jagger, the definition of a mesmerising stage presence. Perhaps that doesn't come across on the close inspection of film, I shall go see Shine a Light and judge for myself.

Drew McIlveen, Lisburn,

Cosmo who?

alex seymour, chichester, sussex

mick's singing is more theatrical than soulful but that is the dimension he has added to his blues roots.it is nonsense to say he can't sing ;he is in particularly good voice on this occasion and the musicianship around him is joyous and inventive for the genre.you certainly are ageist.leave it out grandad!
i'm a jazz fiend without a stones album but i would recommend this movie wholeheartedly.an exuberant couple of hours.

brian cole, london,

So Cosmo Landesman the world famous guiarist who has sold over 300 million albums thinks that Keith Richards is a limited guitarist. Who among us mire mortals could possibly disagree with that statement. It is well known to everybody in the music industry that Cosmo, who plays regulary to sell out crowds around the world and has been a member of one the most successful bands in the history of music for over 46 years, is a guitar genious. He is also known as the human riff for the various numbers of songs he wrote for the band.

O dear, wait a minute that isn't you Cosmo is it? thats Keith with Mick, Ron and Charlie ie The Rolling Stones. Not some jumped up hack that is not fit to lick their boots.

You state in your review ( God forgive me for using that phrase) that the music in the Film is of their greatest hits and not so great album tracks. You have obviosly never listened to any Stones albums, or you would have known that the songs are from some of their biggest selling ever

Jim Bolton, Dublin, R.O. I

The Bigger Yawn. Millionaire rock.

Philipo, Padova, Italia

What a very sad thing to write! Nobody could suggest that the Stones are as good a band as they once were but they are still a phenomenal live act and the energy in the Shine A Light performance is exceptional.
The one comment in the review that really made me believe that the author is totally clueless is "what is the point of Ron Wood". While Ron has had his troubles over recent years he is currently back on track and playing the best guitar that he has played for a long time. I would agree that Keith is nowhere near the guitarist that he was previously, mostly caused be his own ill health (arthritus), and that is why Ron Wood in my opinion is currently carrying the band. His guitar work on Shine A Light is excellent, he really shows what an outstanding guitarist he is.
So Cosmo, perhaps you should go and watch the movie again and then write based on reality rather than churning out a review that you had quite obviously mostly written and made your mind up about beforehand!

Skelly, Glasgow,

I totally disagree. I took my 15- year-old son and 8-year-old daughter to see this. We saw The Stones last year at the Isle of Wight Festival and then at O2. They were excellent on both occasions and my children became enamoured. Both children are avid music fans and are highly critical, having seen a large number of bands play live. We all loved the film. My son commented the next morning that he almost felt that he had been to a Stones gig the previous night, such was the impact of the film. It had a great atmosphere and gave an insight of what being onstage with them is really like and the tremendous energy required. It was also very funny. As for Jagger losing his stage presence etc. - complete rubbish. The other guys are just as valuable - they are real characters, which is what makes for a great band. Did this guy really watch the film or was he in the bar?

Langley Fisher, St. Albans, UK

Dem Krazy Stones Boys STILL upsetting the over 30s brigade. Rock On Boys.

Andrew, Dundalk, Ireland

A perfectly spot on assessment of the Stones and of Keith Richards. Thank you Cosmo for having the guts ( I don't envy the letters you are going to get) to speak the truth about these so-called rock icons. The last time I saw them was in 2003 and I left in the middle of the show. The band was tired, uninspired, and Keith was out of tune most of the night and couldn't hit a lick. I thought about going to the Bigger Bang show, but when the set lists came out and I realized they didn't have the bollocks to play more than two songs from the new CD, that is when I realized they had become musically gutless and lacked artistic integrity. And yes, Mick does look like an fool when he does that little hip shake thing.

David Holler, Fallbrook, USA/CA

You are mean and have no clue...but I do agree that the movie was not up to par. No need to criticize the band. Shame on you.

Linda, Revere, MA

Hello

Everybody has an opinion. Unfortunately I do not agree with you opinion about Shine A Light. The film itself is awsome and I think that Marty as usual has done a great job of capturing the action and vibe pf the performance. With respects to the Stones being past any sort of prime you refer too, he is the real story. I'll concede the Stones have had numerous levels of success and creative moments throughout a wonderful past. But the real story is that the Sones have remained relative for almost 50 years! Lets see where all the cool bands of today end up in 42 years, will they be relative to the times or will they be all but forgotten. You make it sound like any band that wants to be active for 42 years can do what the Stones have done.....you know just cruise and rely on reputation mostly. But the fact is there are tons of people that feel your way off base considering the Stones level of popularity. I believe you made up your mind even before you saw the film.

Francesco Rizzuto, Calgary, Canada