In 1966, producers Bert Schneider and Bob Rafaelson come up with the idea of creating a TV show that would feature the American answer to the Beatles, The Monkees. Eventually, four young men are chosen for the roles, Mickey Dolenz the former child TV star, the stage actor Davey Jones and the musicians, Mike Nesmith and Peter Tork. With the aid of a successful music producer and able TV promotion, the Monkees become a sensation. However, that success is tainted, to the chagrin of the band, as they find themselves labeled as talentless phonies. This film covers the band's frustrating struggle to prove their detractors wrong as they struggle to earn some artist legitimacy. Whether it's by learning to excel as a band or experimenting with wild ideas for their show and film, Head, nothing seems to work. Meanwhile the band have their internal tensions as various members struggle to decide what is really important to them, simple material success, or having real artistic respect for their ... Written by
Kenneth Chisholm <firstname.lastname@example.org>
One scene shows a person using Liquid Paper to correct sheet music. Liquid Paper was invented by Michael Nesmith's mother. See more »
"Headquarters" was originally released on the Colgems label, but the copies passed around in the record-store scene are plainly Rhino Records reissues. See more »
I don't know if I like being the only girl in the middle of all this guy talk.
It's just love, Phyllis. We need all the love we can get. There's so much anger in the world these days.
See more »
"Monkees: Daydream Believers" was a major disappointment. The beginning scene, presumably set in the late 90's or 2000, was weak and added no interest to the show. The best part of the movie was in the early scenes when they were casting the show. It went downhill from there. While it purported to portray the Monkees' story, the plot was weak or nonexistent. The movie didn't go anywhere. The Beatle segment was interesting, one of the few bright spots in an otherwise drab film. There was no real sense of place or time, no sense of the 60's, and it did not accurately portray the sheer hysteria that surrounded the group. I sat through it once because I lived in that era, but it is not worth a second showing.
6 of 8 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?