One thing I would add to the news of this footage being released over fifty years later is this. The musical acts from this period made most of their revenue by playing live. It was a straightforward deal: perform a gig at a specified venue for a set fee, and maybe a percentage of the gate. This certainly worked for Zeppelin from 1968-1973, when they were almost constantly touring. Income from record sales, even for successful (and now classic) albums, took longer to filter down from the record companies to the artists, and potential revenue from films was even slower to be realized, especially after the costs of production and distribution were factored in. This is why Peter Grant called TSRTS "the world's most expensive home movie," or words to that effect. In other words, filmed performances of a concert are great for fans to see decades later, but the filming process didn't seem to matter much to the acts themselves, and often the original footage goes missing or is the subject of long copyright / ownership battles. Shit, you can barely find clips of the Beatles' 1965 performance at Shea Stadium online, and it was only recently that Netflix has put up CCR's 1970 Albert Hall show. If the film itself is a landmark work that captures a historic moment (like D.A. Pennebaker's Don't Look Back or the Maysles Brothers' Gimme Shelter), it might have been released when the musicians were still active. But from what I've seen, this raw Bath film is just haphazard coverage of an English rock festival that the band, management, and the filmmakers themselves seemed to have forgotten shortly after it was shot. It's definitely cool to see some rare live Zeppelin from this period and it will be even cooler once a proper soundtrack is synched up. On the other hand, I can understand how completing and exhibiting this or any film was not a priority for the band back when they were regularly playing and recording. To me, the Holy Grail of Led Zeppelin material is in the music we already have.

What's really revealing here is how low-key everything is backstage - just another bunch of early-70s hippie Brits hanging out before their gig. No security, no entourage, no press (except for the person shooting the film). Compare this to the 2007 O2 show, when LZ had long become permanent legends and the event was treated like the Second Coming of Christ. Looks like Rock Gods were once ordinary mortals. Thanks for sharing this.

"She Loves You," released 1963. Sounds almost Beatlesque. Seriously, by now I can't think of any LZ songs that nobody knows about...Some are certainly underappreciated (I'd cite "Tea For One," "The Rover," "I'm Gonna Crawl," and "Bron-yr-Aur"), but after fifty years and around 300 million records sold, Led Zeppelin will never qualify as a cult band.

Would the flamenco licks in "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You" count? And I can hear acoustic guitar leads, or at least clean electric soloing, in "All My Love."

This is not quite on point, but I find it interesting how this debate is taking place among fans of a classic rock 'n' roll band - and where many of the rock 'n' rollers are at politically. Pardon the plug, but I write about these issues, and this very forum, in my latest book: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08X4WD5SV/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_taft_p1_i1 Now, back to the debate.

Definitely a good trade.

I think the occult rep is inextricable from LZ's appeal - and I say that as someone who's closely analyzed the mechanics of their live and recorded music, and who likes to play their songs on my guitars. Maybe today someone new to the band wouldn't know or care much about all the theories, speculation, and enigma that circled around them in their prime years and after, but for fans who got into LZ in the 1970s and 80s, it would have been almost impossible not to know about Crowley, back masking, soul-selling, etc. I know I've plugged these here before, but I go into some detail about this question in two of my books: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07NCR1TS6/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i4 https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B016MVX5ES/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i1

I'm reluctant to weigh in on this topic without any personal connections to the people involved, but I'm thinking: Jimmy Page occasionally spoke of his parents and upbringing during the Zeppelin years and after. I don't know when the parents were alleged to have split, but assuming Page Senior remarried no earlier than the mid-1960s (and Jimmy Page said he was still living at his parents' home during his session player days of 1962-65), Karen Page Errington would have been a young teenager in 1980 when Jimmy Page signed the tour sweater, and in her fifties today. Certainly possible, although it's at least a twenty-year age gap between the half-siblings. I also see on KPE's FB page the introduction, "Sister of James Patrick Page Led Zeppelin," which is an unusual way to identify yourself. It could well be that the claimed family connection is legit, even with the celebrity factor (John Lennon's half-sister wrote her own book in 1988), but, like the Lori Mattix story that someone recently deconstructed here on the Forum, I'd like to have a bit more authentication before this gets widely accepted by the fan community. Similarly, I keep hearing that JPJ was born John Richard Baldwin, even though I'm pretty sure he once told an interviewer (Steve Sauer?) that was originally just John Baldwin, and that it's not an uncommon thing to have no middle name. This is all extreme trivia, but still...

At least the article noted that the froggie was at risk of being Trampled Underfoot...A true Misty Mountain Hopper. There must be other LZ - reptile jokes to add here.

Isn't that also Chris Spedding beside Jonesy? This isn't really one of Macca's better moments...Which means it's still better than three-quarters of anybody else's music.

Hi Zep people, Just wanted to give a heads-up on my latest music-related title, Takin' Care of Business: A History of Working People's Rock 'n' Roll. It's heavy on the AC/DC, Skynyrd, and Springsteen, but there are numerous LZ references scattered throughout, and I was fortunate enough to get a useful quote from LZ.com's own Sam R, about the diverse community of fans logging in and opinionating here on the message board. It's out in ebook right now and a print copy will be available in a couple of weeks. I hope some of you Simple Men (and Women) will take the Highway to Hell and check it out...During these polarized times, it might be Just What the Doctor Ordered: Takin' Care of Business

I-like-the-hyphen-It-gives-off-an-old-timey-vibe-that-works-for-LZ...sort-of-like:

Just wanted to pay tribute to this graphic designer - you may not have heard of him, but I guarantee all of us here have appreciated his work, which has helped define the Led Zeppelin identity for decades. The author of this linked article consulted me on Bush's ties to the Hipgnosis firm: http://www.eyemagazine.com/blog/post/in-memoriam-bush-hollyhead

Why, why, why? I prefer my LZ remote, mysterious, unhyped, and uncommercialized. They can't need the money the licensing of their name and iconography brings in, and I doubt the surviving members would have sold off their rights to approval of stuff like this. 😞

Nice to hear Mick and Jimmy talking - pretty discreetly, I'd say - about Stones and Zep history. And now I know that morning radio shows are as inane in the UK as in Canada and the US.