1324 replies to this topic

[amh91]

Ladies and gentlemen, I present the Four Tops who will illustrate the content of Mitch's This Morning interview through music and lyrics: 

 

[HelloSailor]

Haha...I've not seen Mitch's interview but I can only imagine 

[GoddessAmy]

Ladies and gentlemen, I present the Four Tops who will illustrate the content of Mitch's This Morning interview through music and lyrics: 

 

 

 

Haven't seen it either but this is great! Fab! I love english humour! (am italian)

Thank you amh91 so much! Amy xx will be smiling at your idea from the Heavens! 

 

[amh91]

https://twitter.com/...610112813391872

 

palimpsest |ˈpalɪm(p)sɛst|

noun

a manuscript or piece of writing material on which later writing has been superimposed on effaced earlier writing.

• something reused or altered but still bearing visible traces of its earlier form

 

...

 

You know what really upsets me most about all of this? It's the fact that, even in death, Amy's subjectivity has been almost completely erased. Even after her passing, she can't be allowed to be her own person. I mean, this tweet is evidence enough of this. Under Mitch's logic, she's either a ticket to fame, fortune, and awards or, instead, a humanitarian figurehead. These definitions, these desires have been imposed upon her, instead of occurring naturally or organically or through choice. As far as the film shows us, this was also the case when she was alive, but of course the film is nothing but a sham, right? So can someone please tell me at what point will she ever be seen as a person in her own right, free of all this bullshit? Or has the time long since passed on that?

 

It's a fucking disgrace. 

[WhoDat]

I agree. There always seems to be someone who wants to control Amy's narrative and have the last word, even after her death. They simply can't allow her to just speak for herself.

 

I also read a review of the film that touched on this issue and discussed the various antagonistic male figures in her life who engaged in a power struggle over her life, her career, and her money, with none of them taking a moment to consider what Amy wanted. I really admire Amy for being her own woman in many ways, but I think she was way too nice to these people, and allowed them to take without giving much back. I know it's easy to say that from the outside though and it seems Amy had abandonment issues that would make it difficult for her to cut out people she felt dependent on.

 

Everyone deserves to feel as though they're in the driver's seat of their own life and I'm not sure that was always the case with Amy. What I like about the film is that it's like Amy is speaking directly to the viewer. It's very intimate and it actually finally allows Amy's voice to be heard, after years of being drowned out.

 

And yet Mitch continues to try and stifle it...

[HelloSailor]

"Frankly the movie is a sham. They left lots of stuff out... Reg, her boyfriend, he was instrumental in making sure that she stayed off drugs."

 

Right... and since it was not drugs that killed her, this means absolutely nothing.

 

Reg also made mistakes by not understanding that Amy was an alcoholic. It wasn't a question of her just having another sneaky drinkypoo... this was a serious problem. 

Honestly, if Kapadia had included more of Reg in the film, it just would've made the story even sadder. 

We don't even know what he said during the interviews that was not included in the movie. Maybe it would've been more stories of how he sometimes found her drunk in the morning, or having seizures, or puking up all her meals...or how he found her texting Blake secretly, planning their reunion. Or whatever else.... Honestly, don't open that can of worms Mitch, you might not be able to handle the truth. People who are happy and 'off of drugs' for 3 years don't suddenly accidentally die. It's not like she was run over by a bottle of vodka!

 

And also, other possibility, maybe Asif didn't include much of Reg in the movie because he sensed a phony. If Reg said the same old stuff he's been saying in interviews (and based on the fact that Mitch sides with him), I'm guessing he left out a lot of the truth, trying to manipulate the narrative of her last couple of years.

Considering the amount of people they interviewed and the cross-referencing, it's possible that the image Reg painted of her just didn't add up.

[GoddessAmy]

http://www.dailymail...nomination.html

 

This comment stood out to me as I made the same observation while watching the documentary.

 

"The one thing I noticed in the documentary was when Amy won an award and her dad got up to hug her, but you could plainly see that he was looking to where the camera was to make sure it captured him. That spoke volumes about him as it was Amy's moment to shine, not his."

 

Thank you so much Chris! I am so appalled the platform the program gave him…however..as often truth comes up…in fact the waves of twitter fans comments speak by itself, this common & its reply  on the article you pointed out stood out for me..

 

MITCH IS JUST A GRIEVING DAD BLESS THEM BOTH

 

 

No, he isn't. The only grief he felt was the loss of income. That was quickly alleviated when he realised how many talk shows would want to interview him after she died. He was a terrible father when she was alive with Amy herself feeling like he was using her. Before her fame they had a poor relationship which he desperately tried to plaster over after she became famous. The only reason he was able to get away with it was because poor Amy was so desperate to have a proper relationship with her father. Anyone else would have disowned him and changed their name.
 

 

 

[HelloSailor]

MITCH IS JUST A GRIEVING DAD BLESS THEM BOTH

 

 

No, he isn't. The only grief he felt was the loss of income. That was quickly alleviated when he realised how many talk shows would want to interview him after she died. He was a terrible father when she was alive with Amy herself feeling like he was using her. Before her fame they had a poor relationship which he desperately tried to plaster over after she became famous. The only reason he was able to get away with it was because poor Amy was so desperate to have a proper relationship with her father. Anyone else would have disowned him and changed their name.
 

 

Well I can't agree with that, relationships are never binary, they are much more complex. You can still be a narcissistic and a loving father. Mitch can still be grieving and wanting media attention. Amy was still able to adore her dad and be pissed off at him for bringing the film crew to St Lucia. 

 

"The only grief he felt was the loss of income" is a despicable comment. Come one. He lost his daughter for god's sake, even if he can be quite the dickhead sometimes. One does not negate the other.

 

Let's not forget that in the beginning, Amy very much dragged him into the limelight by bringing him to interviews, concerts, award shows and TV appearances. Sure, she mostly did it to please him because she was desperate for his recognition and love (typical of abandonment issues and absent father syndrome).

We feel angry at Mitch for always wanting to talk about Amy and the Foundation in the news all the time, but she talked about her dad a lot! Think of any other pop star, how often do they slip in a little mention of their dad? Daddy's Girl indeed.... and yeah, that's painfully obvious to most of us that she suffered from him not being there in the early years, but he didn't intend on harming her like this. If he had any inkling that his behaviour when she was a kid would have such drastic, tragic, effects on Amy as an adult, trust me, he would've done things differently. 

And if any of us had any idea how we affect family and friends through our actions, there would be no need for shrinks! 

 

Just because Mitch's actions had an affect on Amy does not mean that a) he was aware of it and that they were deliberate. Amy knew that. Amy understood the complexity of relationships. Same can be said about her relationship with Blake. It's never one-sided. Amy even said herself she was an asshole to him too, why wouldn't we believe her?

 

Come on people, let's show Amy some respect. Let's show her we understand things are really fucking complex. I don't even have a clear-cut understanding of why I am the way I am, even knowing everything I know (because I'm me). I have some clues, and there are some things I think I know or understand, but I will never be able to piece the puzzle completely. So I don't expect to be able to do so with other people for whom we know so little about in reality...

 

Sorry for the rant. But I hate people who over-simplify things.

[Ava_Grace]

Well I can't agree with that, relationships are never binary, they are much more complex. You can still be a narcissistic and a loving father. Mitch can still be grieving and wanting media attention. Amy was still able to adore her dad and be pissed off at him for bringing the film crew to St Lucia.

"The only grief he felt was the loss of income" is a despicable comment. Come one. He lost his daughter for god's sake, even if he can be quite the dickhead sometimes. One does not negate the other.

Let's not forget that in the beginning, Amy very much dragged him into the limelight by bringing him to interviews, concerts, award shows and TV appearances. Sure, she mostly did it to please him because she was desperate for his recognition and love (typical of abandonment issues and absent father syndrome).
We feel angry at Mitch for always wanting to talk about Amy and the Foundation in the news all the time, but she talked about her dad a lot! Think of any other pop star, how often do they slip in a little mention of their dad? Daddy's Girl indeed.... and yeah, that's painfully obvious to most of us that she suffered from him not being there in the early years, but he didn't intend on harming her like this. If he had any inkling that his behaviour when she was a kid would have such drastic, tragic, effects on Amy as an adult, trust me, he would've done things differently.
And if any of us had any idea how we affect family and friends through our actions, there would be no need for shrinks!

Just because Mitch's actions had an affect on Amy does not mean that a) he was aware of it and that they were deliberate. Amy knew that. Amy understood the complexity of relationships. Same can be said about her relationship with Blake. It's never one-sided. Amy even said herself she was an asshole to him too, why wouldn't we believe her?

Come on people, let's show Amy some respect. Let's show her we understand things are really fucking complex. I don't even have a clear-cut understanding of why I am the way I am, even knowing everything I know (because I'm me). I have some clues, and there are some things I think I know or understand, but I will never be able to piece the puzzle completely. So I don't expect to be able to do so with other people for whom we know so little about in reality...

Sorry for the rant. But I hate people who over-simplify things.

I agree. It'd be a disservice to Amy to blame her premature death on one person. She was far too complex for that, all humans are but people like her are especially complex. From what I can gather she was a very sensitive person, most great writers are, it's as though they take everything in, good and bad, and translate those feelings, energies into beautiful words. Her dad and everyone else didn't know how to handle her because she was something else, that's for sure. She wanted to start over again with her friends and surround herself with people that cared about her and not just her talent or the money that her talent could bring in, but the body has limits and the bulimia and alcohol were too much for her heart to take. Could he have done things differently, of course but I don't think he realized then or now the damage he may had inflicted on Amy, since Amy like most girls, keep their suffering inside. I bet her brother was more outspoken about his disappointment in the divorce, while Amy appeared calm but internally was suffering. I believe that's when the self harming began.

I actually was wondering at what age did Amy started to self harm? I know she did it before meeting Blake, but in the doc it isn't brought up other than when Blake talks about the broken bottle. I thought she started self harming as a child, if that's the case why wasn't there a mention of it?

[Love is a losing game]

She had started self-harming at 9 years old. Kapadia mentionded he omitted some medical details, I think in an interview he was specifically referring to rehabs or issues she had in between rehabs media were not aware of, that would have made the doc darker. I believe he omitted when she started self-harming to avoid highliting even more how much she suffered from Mitch abandoning the family. You see, Kapadia, if he really wanted to do what bloody Mitch accuses him of, he could have made the doc look much worse for Mitch, but he choose not to. Kapadia said in another interview Amy always self-medicated herself since she was a child, that is what self-harming is, you harm yourself to sort out inner problems you cannot face. And bulimia as well unfortunaley. She did that until the end, including alcohol withdrawal that she wanted to overcome on her own refusing any psychological/medical support, as she did previously with illegal drugs.

[Ava_Grace]

She had started self-harming at 9 years old. Kapadia mentionded he omitted some medical details, I think in an interview he was specifically referring to rehabs or issues she had in between rehabs the media were not aware of, that would have made the doc darker. I believe he omitted when she started self-harming to avoid highliting even more how much she suffered from Mitch abandoning the family. You see, Kapadia, if he really wanted to do what bloody Mitch accuses him of, he could have made the doc look much worse for Mitch, but he choose not to. Kapadia said in another interview Amy always self-medicated herself since she was a child, that is what self-harming is, you harm yourself to sort out inner problems you cannot face. And bulimia as well unfortunaley. She did that until the end, including alcohol withdrawal that she wanted to overcome on her own refusing any psychological/medical support, as she did previously with illegal drugs.

I knew she did self harming at a young age, but didn't know she started that early, fucking hell I could only imagine how difficult it was for her during her adolescence with all of the hormones. I think Kapadia omitted that part, among other stuff, out of respect to Janis more than Mitch. Janis realizes that she could perhaps done things differently and I'm not sure how early the symptoms of MS were manifesting themselves so she had her own health issues to deal with, plus she had to deal with a man who was having an affair, but Mitch doesn't think he couldn't have things differently and that's my issue with him. Like as a fan, even I feel guilty about wanting new music from her and wanting to see her perform, when that's the last thing I should have demanded from her. She didn't owe us any new music or live performances, she owed herself some time away to get better. Thanks for taking the time in answering my question.

[Love is a losing game]

You're welcome@Ava_Grace x

[Sassy]

Ladies and gentlemen, I present the Four Tops who will illustrate the content of Mitch's This Morning interview through music and lyrics: 

 

That's a good one! I always hear the "One Note Samba" when he opens his mouth.