I fall in the camp of "the truth lies somewhere in the middle". However, as the only other currently living member of the Band, Robbie should be ashamed that Garth is living in poverty (if that is true). Given what Garth meant to the Band, Garth should not be wanting and on food stamps at this point in his life. Robbie owes it to him. It's the right thing to do. Or. Maybe Robbie has helped him in the past and Garth didn't use it wisely. Who knows.
Here's the full accounting according to imdbpro: Original Release: $340,687 ($1,343,978.86 in 2019 dollars) 2002 Re-release: $321,952 ($460,303.67 in 2019 dollars) 2011 Re-release: $3,602 (4,118.73 in 2019 dollars) Total Box Office Gross for The Last Waltz in 2019 Dollars: $1,808,401.26
I remember them on the cover of Time magazine and I believe the term new Beatles was used. I love the Band and their music was new, fresh, so different at the time compared to all the other groups. So much potential, I'm glad we were left with some really good albums.
Regarding Garth and the others, here is an excerpt from the 2013 RS article about Garth's landlord (Piazza) selling off his belongings (which supposedly included a $26k check dated 1979 from EMI!!) after years of non-payment. "Piazza had also attempted to partner with Hudson’s former bandmates Robbie Robertson and the late Levon Helm to sell the items as a fundraiser, but Piazza said neither showed interest." Well. That doesn't paint either Levon or Robbie in a good light. Eff 'em.
Seems to me if the Band were just Robbie's backing band similar to Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers there would be no discussion on this. However because they were a band it's viewed differently by some. It sounds like Robbie was the driving force of the Band. There are a lot of artists that have an initial strong output of music and then things slow down. The amount of artists that explode with great songs and than they taper off is huge. I always find it interesting to hear of the artists that the first two albums were written before they recorded the first. Then when the third album comes around they struggle to get enough songs. The slow down for the Band for me was right after Stage Fright with the Band being the peak. There was still some good music just not what it was. I personally really enjoyed his first two solo albums as well far more than anything after Stage Fright. Interesting to read the perspectives of many of the posters. Not sure where the truth lies. Robbie was definitely the leader however.
Well, if Garth had a check for $26k in 1979 that he didn't even bother to cash, that sort of puts the lie to the notion that the Band weren't millionaires in the 70s. Without knowing the whole story, you can't really criticize Levon and Robbie here. Who knows what anyone has done to try to help Garth over the years?
"All net worths are calculated through the combination of a robust methodology and a proprietary algorithm. The results are fact checked and confirmed by a team of editors and industry insiders. We work diligently to ensure that our numbers are the most accurate celebrity net worth data you will find anywhere on the internet." "Did we make a mistake? Submit a correction suggestion and help us fix it!" If their combination of "a robust methodology and a proprietary algorithm" is so effective, why should they make any mistakes ?
1. Net worth just means your assets exceed your liabilities, it doesn’t mean you have liquid cash. 2. As noted, there is a closed thread on this site discussing Garth’s financial issues, including contributions from people who actually know and have worked with the man, and the basic consensus is that he’s a sweet and enormously talented man who exists in his own corner of the planet Twylo that doesn’t receive any radio waves from Earth and marches in all things entirely to his own drummer.
They called Garth "Honey Boy" for a reason though. He sweetened up the songs with his playing and muscial training and talent . I think Robbie was the driving force but I'm not ready to call the rest of the members just a backing band, at least in the beginning. They'd been a backing band for Ronnie Hawkins and they all knew how that felt and were ready for more. The other members even questioned about backing Dylan at first. Just my thoughts, don't know if there's right or wrong on the topic only my opinions formulated from reading about them.
They should've had a far more low-key marketing strategy applied. I try to figure out what their reaction have been when they saw the cover and the pressure it put on them all and especially on Robertson. Maybe this and other things might explain his writer's block...
Remember they were a rock and roll band, and Dylan was (until just a few months before they got together) a folkie. In the sixties, they tended to hate each other. That's why I've always suspected Levon did talk to a lawyer at some point, who told him he had no basis on which to sue Robbie.
Levon was on record saying that the reason he quit touring with Dylan in Nov. 1965 was that he didn’t like / couldn’t handle the booing and that he had never liked Dylan’s music in the first place. He went to Texas and only returned nearly a year later because the (the still to be named) Band were getting serious feelers for a record deal of their own i.e. there was money on the horizon.
They did have a low key approach. They did their best to remain anonymous behind the name The Band. They didn’t start touring until they absolutely had to (although their touring had been delayed due to various car crash episodes) and even then they weren’t doing long tours. The cover of Time was an illustration and heralded them as “the new sound of country rock.” Not the saviors. Not “the next big thing”. Just that they were bringing in a new sound. And no mention of the Beatles.
Robbie in his book says specifically that he bought Rick and Richard’s publishing in the early 1970s, before the Last Waltz, had to borrow the money to do it, because they came to him and said they needed quick cash.
I also wonder about the mental state of someone who lets a large check like that (worth about $100k today, so pretty significant) go un-cashed. Was it meant as an "f-u" to the record company? Was it lost in the detritus of a hoarder's life? You're right about not knowing what they had done in the past to help Garth.
I really don't know how you can call the cover of Time magazine a "low key approach"... The cover of the Kalamazoo Gazette would've been more appropriate IMO... The best way to stay anonymous should've been not to tour at all. The fact that they didn't tour much has IMO nothing to do with a supposed "low key" deliberate strategy, it seems to have much to do with some compromise between members who wanted to tour a lot (Helm, Danko) and others not much (Robertson) and the fact that Manuel was less and less able to play on stage... but i can be wrong. Edit : after 1972, they reached the "anonymous"status by stopping touring for two years...
It actually paints Levon and Robbie in a good light - not participating in the legally questionably sale of a bandmate’s possessions. This situation got a lot of press coverage at the time (including the NYT) and there was a concerted effort to save Garth’s memorabilia and possessions from being sold out from under him. I know folks in the Kingston / Woodstock area and over the years there were a lot of behind the scenes actions taken to bail out Levon (his place was in danger of foreclosure - when the bailouts stopped, the Rambles started) and Garth (storage unit rental not paid). There was a huge hue and cry over Garth’s situation. Levon and Robbie were right not to work with the landlord.
You don’t get to choose whether or not you’re on the cover of Time. As far as that goes though, it was low key. They didn’t get the Springsteen / savior of rock treatment.
The Band and his management surely had their say and could have refused it, Remember that Grossman was one if the biggest folk and rock manager of the day, he had Dylan, Janis Joplin, The Band, Gordon Lightfoot etc. He had connections everywhere. At least they should've refused this yellow banner... I suspect Grossman was aware of the cover before it was published and led things happen without telling the guys much about it... Edit : According to an article of The Los Angeles Times of december '69, Capitol engaged a 120 000 $ promotion campaign and The Band even had their billboard on the Sunset Strip, like The Doors or John Lennon... The billboard on the Strip, low key or not low key ?
