The gamecock. (Columbia, S.C.) 1908-2006, June 28, 1979, Page Page 4, Image 4
Kiss, the stat
+b>?> \\ar*\c aim
By Mark Chevalier
Gamacock Staff Writar
Friday night, four masterful musicians once again
tantalized the ears and eyes of the local rock set with
an incredibly complex yet nigniy spiruec performance
before a nearly full house at the Carolina
Coliseum.
I would find it hard to believe that many of you
reading the above would think, for more than a
second or two, that I was indeed speaking of the rock
band, Kiss. In fact, the music of Kiss is so blatantly
bad, that most critics reviewing the band generally
limit themselves to only one or two degrading terms,
so as not to insult the reader's intelligence.
I also have to believe that it would take con
siuerauiy less man an cxurcmiu iu mane even iuc
most die-hard Kiss fan admit that the music is little
more than garbled noise.
So where does one begin in reviewing a concert
such as this? I was going to say, for instance, that the
concert was plagued by feedback and raspy vocals,
but who cares. It literally didn't matter. The only
thing I can think of that would hinder a Kiss performance
would be too little volume, which definitely
was not the case.
The music was loud, very loud, but it had to be; if
you pick up a guitar and strum the same three barchords
over and over, it would probably put you to
sleep. But, if you turn your amp up all the way (and
stand directly in front of it), two things will happen:
1) there will be a lot of feedback (which sounds real
neat it you uiinK it aoes); ana 2) tnere win De an incessant
rumble (which you can call energy if you
think it is).
Now what all this will do, even though it's those
same three bar-chords, is sound like a whole lot
more, but with the added bonus of making you
nauseous after the first five minutes.
This is the secret of the Kiss 'sound.'
n- ' r a - u ii : _ ti i J - ir 1 I ,i
ii 11 isn i uie music uiai iriaue iviss popular, wnai
is it? It must be the big three: the make-up, the stage
^p||H
\_-Wtr ^^BjtffjL ^MB^^BKPt!^"
?' ' --flg jl "" a
1 Htf W "- ' ME 1 M J , ffc:, Mi ^ B^t'y
2 w *f,
XV- *V ' ? yj ^
le show with B
und rumble |
stunts and the hype.
Before we consider these things, however, we must |
keep in mind one other important factor ? the age t
1/nMM/voln l?Mirlnir nirfkf'o ArAttrrl r?o nrfoH
glUUJJ rviso a^)JCdl3 IU. i' I luajf IU5111 o wunu taugvu
between 13 and 18. The smell of pot was replaced by P
the munching of chips and the downing of soda, and if ^
you weren't watching the show, you were probably g
looking over the vast array of T-shirts and posters
available in the lobby. B
^? nfortr* nkrvtir Knf on o IrinH Bali
I\ldd Id UUl JUdl d OIJUW , uuv oil t v V/Ut c* rwuiu h
of mongrel breed that sets up camp somewhere I
between a Las Vegas chorus-line and a Barnum and I
Bailey circus. In effect, the members of the band 1-1
become both the performers and the animals; they ||
swing above the audience suspended on wires, they p
breathe fire and they prance around the stage like ||
antelopes in platform shoes. ||
Then there was Kiss' sleek white stage, the colored H
lights anH thp flashing sicns Sammv Davis himself I*
would have felt right at home gliding down the lighted ?
stairs belting out 'the candy man can.'
After three of the easiest earned encores I had ever
experienced (in my day it took a resounding round of
applause to get a band back on stage, here a couple i
IriHc thfir 'hin'c' nnH hand was hark) thp
crowd shuffled out, detouring for one last look at the |
T-shirt table.
Outside, a local church group was passing out
flyers claiming that Kiss stood for Knights In Satan's l
Service. Even if this is the case, which I doubt, it
seemed an absurdly over-blown gesture on their part.
Kiss is cream-puff decadence, if that. Dylan's protest
songs of the 60's were more of a social and religious j
threat than anything this band will ever say or do.
If Kiss stands for anything, it's Kutting Into
Student's Savings. Thus it is not the moral, the
ethical, the social, the religious, the political or the
glittering pseudo-decadence that drives Kiss forever
onwards, it's the buck.
If you think it anymore than that, you're giving
them more credit than they deserve.
,S-"r n-^ '"." '" '1 - -;", ,' ?'{
^rS- Jmit ' ' sPlI
- SV-^ 3 g^agSa
': ' :'-;?; VI:c\_>
m | | 1 B: ?
H^||g|H I ^,'"''s';; HggHB|
' - <tfifi&&-'.v':^^^^HraB8BlKH^9nSB^9BlnSSS^^BHH9B^^^^^^^^HK:::':-'::-':':'::.
1 Bg
: ?Jjf % & jg ?i r,?fflB " '>v-:|
in domn ? uambcock
Rin hard Dwsar
'Prophecy':
about boon
By David Baker
cnionainmani tuuur
In the standing of those whom
people frequently mistake to be
a doctor, Richard Dysart ranks
among the highest. The mix-ups
come as a result of Dysart's
being cast as a physician in
half-a-dozen or so films.
Dysart's first and most
memorable portrayal of a
/4rvn f Ar r* o m n i n D o r\
UUV. I Vi V. C* 111 v> 111 X a UU J
Chayefsky's The Hospital in
1972. As the evil-minded Dr.
Welbeck, Dysart almost stole
the film away from stars
George C. Scott and Diana
Rigg
Aiier me mm Decame a
success, Dysart began to notice
people on the street giving him
dirty looks. "I didn't know how
powerful a character can
become to people," Dysart said,
"especially one as terrible as
Welbeck "
mUxv :4: ~~ 1 * : i \
me ci iik:ui recupium uysai i
received for his role in The
Hospital led to supporting roles
in The Terminal Man uis
another villainous scalpel
swinger), The Day of the
Locust, The llindenburg and
4 LI^LI.. ? i ? r
iwu iii^niy acciauuuu mauu-iurtelevision
movies: The
Autobiography of Miss Jane
Pittman and this past season's
First You Cry.
Currently, Dysart is winning
recognition in John
Frankenheimer's Prophecy,
Paramount Pictures' hit horror
movie. He portrays Bethel
Isely, the manager of a lumber
mill which is poisoning Maine's
water supply with chemicals.
As written, Isely was a
despicable "company man"
whose only concern was money.
"But," said Dysart, "we
changed all that."
Both Dysart and
r ranKenneimer leu mat lsely
would be more interesting if
portrayed as an honest,
scrupulous man who gets
caught up in something he is
powerless to stop. "He's not a
?v\ A w* r? M ' r\fiAAM4 MA* J
P inauiiigii| l M<m.
t in 'Prophec
star happy
ning career
Whatever his motivations
are, Isely still has the dubious
distinction of being eaten alive j
by a mutant bear. The scenein
question is eliciting screams j
from audiences everywhere, !
but Dysart insists it was a fun
scene to film.
"There were two men inside
the creature," Dysart said, "so
there was really nothing to be
frightened of." "They had it in !
rliffnmnt cilflc f fir Hifff>rPnt
UUIV/1 V/ilt OlliVO ivt Utii X/. X/..V
scenes," he added, "and its face
was moved mechanically." j
Just prior to Prophecy, j
Dysart completed the role of the
U.S. Secretary of Defense in
American International's
multi-million dollar Meteor, a
science-fiction epic starring |i
Sean Connery and Natalie
Wood The film has not yet been
released.
? ?/ ! * U i ' ??/\ 'mm ni(
1 UllUfl MclllU muy It Iiuvuif,
trouble with the special ef- j
fects," Dysart said, explaining !
that Meteor's effects, strangely |
enough, were to be done after
the actual filming. "With
Prophecy," he said, "they did j
the special effects as we went j
along."
Dysart was "disappointed" ;
with his role in Meteor because, |
he said, "none of my scenes
were those involving Natalie." j
"1 really love her," he said.
Dysart's newest film is the
political comedy Being There,
wherein he will portray still
another physician. j
"When I first heard about the
role in Being There," Dysart
explained, "I said to my agent, i
'We've come to the end of the
doctors.' But when he told me
Peter Sellers and Hal Ashby j
were involved with the project, j
I said, 'Why, of course, I'd love
to be another doctor.' "
Dysart said he feels that j
Being There is going to be one of
the most important films of
next year "i ininK u s going iu
be Sellers' best work. He fought
to get the part and he's brilliant !
in it. "I like my work in it, too,"
he added, "and if my work can
I- ? 111 I I A 4 tC ?'
spean ior me, i n oe ueuer on. j