The Beatles are fucking good.

[Satchmo Distel]

Get Ram instead of a Wings compilation. I only heard it for the first time this year and it's quickly become my favourite non-Beatle's Beatle thing ever.

Fully agree. Paul sounds like he's enjoying making music, which can't always be said of John and George's work (despite its greatness in other ways).

[Replies From View]

Percy Thrillington as a one-off curiosity, then never again

[markburgle]

I'm don't get why people think this show gives a whole new perspective on the Get Back project. We see exactly what we were always told happened - they meet in Twickenham, shambolically run through a bunch of ideas, nothing catches fire because they're tired of the band and each other, and George has such a bad time he quits. Things only get good when they bring in an outsider who perks them up by giving them a non-Beatle to bounce off of, and whose presence puts them on best-behaviour.

Maybe people had imagined more out-and-out aggro, so the lack of that seems revelatory - but I put it to you, your honours, that its quite possible to have a laugh with your mates, especially in the presence of a visiting mutual friend, while at the same time inwardly feeling creatively dissatisfied and checked-out. The amount of dicking about and mocking covers of their own earlier material are evidence of this. Earlier Beatles would have knocked these songs into shape in a 3rd of the time.

As for Beatle books:
Shout is a good because you can have the pleasure of reading it (its well-written), then the further pleasure/surprise of having its myths debunked afterwards. Philip Norman is a laughable character, who spent most of his career slagging Paul (including a self-important op-ed addressed directly to him, as if sure Macca would be hanging on his verdict of him), before doing a 180 and publishing a fauning biography of him in the 2000's and claiming his past attitude had been based on jealousy or something (a claim which is pathetic whether you believe it or not).

There's a book called Get Back: The Beatles Let It Be Disaster by Doug Sulpy which is meant to be a very good dissection of the same stuff covered by the doco. Ought to be a good companion piece but I haven't read it meself.

Also a random mention for Here There and Everywhere, by one of their engineers Geoff Emerick. Another very good - but widely discredited - read. One of their other engineers Ken Scott was very critical of it, which seemed like sour grapes until he linked to an hilarious fanzine interview with Emerick from the 70's all about his studio work with the Beatles, in which his answer to almost every question was "Sorry, I can't remember". Wish I could find it now. The book's co-author apparently had interviewed Scott and various other people from back then, and their recollections were presented as Emericks, with any remaining the gaps filled with invention.

[BJBMK2]

Also a random mention for Here There and Everywhere, by one of their engineers Geoff Emerick. Another very good - but widely discredited - read. One of their other engineers Ken Scott was very critical of it, which seemed like sour grapes until he linked to an hilarious fanzine interview with Emerick from the 70's all about his studio work with the Beatles, in which his answer to almost every question was "Sorry, I can't remember". Wish I could find it now. The book's co-author apparently had interviewed Scott and various other people from back then, and their recollections were presented as Emericks, with any remaining the gaps filled with invention.

In a slight inversion of Philip Norman, he has nothing but nice words for Macca, the "immaculate professional", but wastes no time slagging off George every chance he gets.

[BJBMK2]

Seconded (or thirded) the mentions already for Revolution In The Head, and You Never Give Me Your Money. There was also this I dug up recently, when I went home for Christmas.



Anyone had a gander of this? An account of Lennons final decade, which as the cover boasts, is based on his diaries, which the author claims to have read, but can't publish them as is, obvs due to Yoko's lawyers having a word.

While not a complete demolition of Lennon, like the Albert Goldman one, it does contain a lot of salacious and embarrassing stories about his sex life, his drug life, and particularly his family life, which don't paint him in the best light. Not to say that it's any less true, I think it's well accepted that the "baking bread and looking after Sean", stay at home dad image, John projected in his final few years, was not quite at idealistic as he made it out to be.

Oh, and the author clearly fucking hates Yoko, which is not an entirely original viewpoint amongst Beatle scholars, but one can't help if that colours his account of there admittedly, volatile and fractious marriage.

[markburgle]

Seconded (or thirded) the mentions already for Revolution In The Head, and You Never Give Me Your Money. There was also this I dug up recently, when I went home for Christmas.



Anyone had a gander of this? An account of Lennons final decade, which as the cover boasts, is based on his diaries, which the author claims to have read, but can't publish them as is, obvs due to Yoko's lawyers having a word.

While not a complete demolition of Lennon, like the Albert Goldman one, it does contain a lot of salacious and embarrassing stories about his sex life, his drug life, and particularly his family life, which don't paint him in the best light. Not to say that it's any less true, I think it's well accepted that the "baking bread and looking after Sean", stay at home dad image, John projected in his final few years, was not quite at idealistic as he made it out to be.

Oh, and the author clearly fucking hates Yoko, which is not an entirely original viewpoint amongst Beatle scholars, but one can't help if that colours his account of there admittedly, volatile and fractious marriage.

Interesting, the Robert Rosen book makes the same claim (of being based on the diaries), only in his case the story is he was given access by Yoko, read them all, she changed her mind and confiscated them, then he waited 20 years before trying to reconstruct them from memory. You're left wondering how accurate and complete his recollection can be, would be interesting to cross compare the 2 books and see where the claims match up.

The extract I read described his lucid dreaming experiments, which he used as essentially full-immersion pornography, days passing in a "blizzard of wanking". He would sometimes lose control of the dreams and they would take distressing turns, in one case Paul McCartney turning up. Also that his endless TV watching at one time took in televangelist Billy Graham and he ended up converting to full-blown evangelical Christianity, before losing interest after a couple of weeks. Sounded much more Howard Hughes than contented-house-husband

[BJBMK2]

Interesting, the Robert Rosen book makes the same claim (of being based on the diaries), only in his case the story is he was given access by Yoko, read them all, she changed her mind and confiscated them, then he waited 20 years before trying to reconstruct them from memory. You're left wondering how accurate and complete his recollection can be, would be interesting to cross compare the 2 books and see where the claims match up.

The extract I read described his lucid dreaming experiments, which he used as essentially full-immersion pornography, days passing in a "blizzard of wanking". He would sometimes lose control of the dreams and they would take distressing turns, in one case Paul McCartney turning up. Also that his endless TV watching at one time took in televangelist Billy Graham and he ended up converting to full-blown evangelical Christianity, before losing interest after a couple of weeks. Sounded much more Howard Hughes than contented-house-husband

I mean, let's face it, who HASEN'T had a dream about

Spoiler alert

George Harrison sucking them off?

[close]

It's like the one where your falling, or your at school again.

The story Giuliano gives is that he was given a copy of the diaries by Harry Nilsson (I don't think he explains how Nilsson got them).

[studpuppet]

Guiliano has a REALLY bad reputation, not only with Beatles fans (see THIS post from a Harrison site that gives a fairly comprehensive run-down) but he also inveigled his way into Viv Stanshall's family (ex-wife and daughter) who have since disowned their part in book he wrote on Viv.

(As an aside, he's also weirdly one of the cast of Squid Game...)

[Video Game Fan 2000]

Get Ram instead of a Wings compilation.

God damn is "Back Seat of My Car" a brilliant song. Its a mini Abbey Road side two.

[studpuppet]

By the way, the boys from the Nothing Is Real podcast have fashioned this, so you can watch Get Back each day in real time from today.

[the science eel]

God damn is "Back Seat of My Car" a brilliant song. Its a mini Abbey Road side two.

It's stunning, isn't it? I think I prefer it to the AR medley

[Video Game Fan 2000]

It floored me when I first heard it. I think its the most Beatles in spirit post-Beatles thing if that makes sense.

[DJ Bob Hoskins]

I'm don't get why people think this show gives a whole new perspective on the Get Back project. We see exactly what we were always told happened - they meet in Twickenham, shambolically run through a bunch of ideas, nothing catches fire because they're tired of the band and each other, and George has such a bad time he quits. Things only get good when they bring in an outsider who perks them up by giving them a non-Beatle to bounce off of, and whose presence puts them on best-behaviour.

Maybe people had imagined more out-and-out aggro, so the lack of that seems revelatory - but I put it to you, your honours, that its quite possible to have a laugh with your mates, especially in the presence of a visiting mutual friend, while at the same time inwardly feeling creatively dissatisfied and checked-out. The amount of dicking about and mocking covers of their own earlier material are evidence of this. Earlier Beatles would have knocked these songs into shape in a 3rd of the time.

Totally with you on this. Not to compare myself to the Beatles but I've been in bands where the dynamic was such that we could have a perfectly good time while playing together even though we'd have all rather been somewhere else because our hearts weren't in it at all.

While it was a joy to see the Fabs having a laugh together I don't think that's particularly indicative of how things were going in the wider sense. The context here is key, and it's important to remember that for all their hours of sessions they still struggled to come up with an LP's worth of decent material for the project, and even then the resulting album didn't see the light of day until after a good year and a half of Johns/Spector trying to whittle it all down to something worthy of a Beatles record. The lack of enthusiasm the band had for the project is palpable. Even the effusive McCartney's main motivation is to just try find the band some direction / something to do, since they were clearly falling apart in the post-Epstein years.

One bit I found particularly interesting was a run-through of Rock & Roll Music which cuts back and forth between the Get Back footage, and a performance from the Budokan from their infamously miserable 1966 tour. In the former clips, they're enjoying it and having a laugh but essentially going through the motions of playing old tunes because they didn't have any better ideas. In the Budokan footage, in front of a screaming crowd, they're positively fizzing with excitement. It's like two different bands.

[phantom_power]

Of course there would be a difference in energy between them pissing about in rehearsals and live on stage in front of thousands of people.

I don't think people are saying the footage completely calls into question the general narrative of the band slouching into boredom and resentment, but it does show that the specifics that have been taken as lore over the years, like Yoko's effect on the sessions and just how toxic the whole thing was, are overblown at best

[pupshaw]

It floored me when I first heard it. I think its the most Beatles in spirit post-Beatles thing if that makes sense.

I had forgotten about it before I started listening to Ram (which I avoided for years because of lukewarm reviews).
It's amazing. One of the rare songs that gets better and better right to the very end.
He doesn't even use the "We believe that we can't be wrong" line until 2 minutes in, when other songs are already starting to wind down.
And the 2 octave descending bass line here.
Why does anyone hate this man?

[DJ Bob Hoskins]

Of course there would be a difference in energy between them pissing about in rehearsals and live on stage in front of thousands of people.

I don't think people are saying the footage completely calls into question the general narrative of the band slouching into boredom and resentment, but it does show that the specifics that have been taken as lore over the years, like Yoko's effect on the sessions and just how toxic the whole thing was, are overblown at best

That's all fair.  My point was more that in 1966 - even when they were already fed up of touring and screaming crowds - they were still visibly thrilled to be performing (and playing well, at least in this instance) AND knocking out albums like Revolver. Whereas 2½ years later, when they were planning what was supposed to be their big comeback performance (and they had the freedom to do literally anything they wanted) they ended up idly knocking out covers of their old favourites, eventually settling for doing 5 new songs on the roof of their offices.

I'm not knocking Get Back, far from it. I thought it was an amazing piece of work and definitely dispelled a few popular myths (Yoko being a prime example as you said). It certainly wasn't the 'whitewash' that I had feared it might be, either. 

The reality of events were of course much more complicated than simply 'they enjoyed it' vs 'they hated it', and I think Jackson did an outstanding job of showing that. Just that a lot of the promotional press about the documentary seemed to hint that the Get Back sessions were very different from what historians would have us believe, but in the end I don't think that's the case.

I was relieved to discover the reality is very different to the myth. After reviewing all the footage and audio that Michael Lindsay-Hogg shot 18 months before they broke up, it's simply an amazing historical treasure-trove. Sure, there's moments of drama — but none of the discord this project has long been associated with.

[the science eel]

Get Back out on DVD/Blu-ray next month

https://superdeluxeedition.com/news/the-beatles-get-back-to-be-issued-on-blu-ray-and-dvd/

[SteveDave]

Yesterday it was announced that the Rooftop show would be shown in IMAX on the 30th of January. For a while London was included in the listing but when you clicked the link, there was no mention of the Beatles on the IMAX Waterloo's website. Cunts.

[Johnboy]

This thread's page numbers are very Fab-like at the moment, aren't they

[gilbertharding]

Get Back out on DVD/Blu-ray next month

https://superdeluxeedition.com/news/the-beatles-get-back-to-be-issued-on-blu-ray-and-dvd/

Fucking get in.

No 'Let It Be (1970)' cut though. I can't decide if I'm bothered by that or not.

[bakabaka]

This thread's page numbers are very Fab-like at the moment, aren't they

Will you still read me, will you still need me?

[SteveDave]

Tickets for the IMAX in London are now available. They're £40 each. They can fuck off.

[markburgle]

Fucking get in.

No 'Let It Be (1970)' cut though. I can't decide if I'm bothered by that or not.

No bonuses whatsover is definitely a big old pisstake though.

[daf]

I'm sure there'll be a bells and whistles bonus-filled edition available at some point - (18 hour rough cut!) - given it's from Peter "Deluxe Edition" Jackson!

[daf]

Gah! Quoted myself AGAIN!!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
(it's having 'quote' and 'quick edit' right next to each other what does it - I keep getting them mixed up, thanks to my knackered old peepers)

[kngen]

I don't think people are saying the footage completely calls into question the general narrative of the band slouching into boredom and resentment, but it does show that the specifics that have been taken as lore over the years, like Yoko's effect on the sessions and just how toxic the whole thing was, are overblown at best

The one thing I did take from it was GH's flounce seemed to be much more selfish that I'd expected it to - it was clear that John and Paul were starting to reconnect and were enjoying playing together again, and George seem to take umbrage with that, and did the whole 'My ball. My game. Going home.' bit, which seemed a bit much on Day 3 or whatever the fuck it was.

Maybe I'm missing some massive subtext there, but I have a feeling, were I in his position, I'd be feeling something more along the lines of: 'Wow, there's still a bit of mileage in this band after all.' So much for the Maharishi's 'true denial of the ego' teachings

Ringo seems like he was a lovely bloke, too - refreshing after only really being exposed his pissed-up and bitter persona for so long (well, basically my entire life.)

[kngen]

I'm sure there'll be a bells and whistles bonus-filled edition available at some point - (18 hour rough cut!) - given it's from Peter "Deluxe Edition" Jackson!

Hopefully some extended battle sequences with extra CGI.

[IsavedLatin]

Yesterday it was announced that the Rooftop show would be shown in IMAX on the 30th of January. For a while London was included in the listing but when you clicked the link, there was no mention of the Beatles on the IMAX Waterloo's website. Cunts.

I got to see it in a cinema in November and it is the fucking dog's bollocks. Travel to see it if you must! It is worth it!

Wrote the above and then clocked this:

Tickets for the IMAX in London are now available. They're £40 each. They can fuck off.

Mmm yeah, that is a pisstake. _{Still tempted though.}

[markburgle]

The one thing I did take from it was GH's flounce seemed to be much more selfish that I'd expected it to - it was clear that John and Paul were starting to reconnect and were enjoying playing together again, and George seem to take umbrage with that, and did the whole 'My ball. My game. Going home.' bit, which seemed a bit much on Day 3 or whatever the fuck it was.

That's interesting, I'd have to rewatch it (I was knackered and in-and-out of consciousness) but I thought it seemed to like an understandable response. Those few days leading up to it seemed pretty miserable. I don't know why he'd think the band had legs after a few days of kicking around listless versions of probably their least-inspired set of songs (except maybe Beatles for Sale or something)

[kngen]

That's interesting, I'd have to rewatch it (I was knackered and in-and-out of consciousness) but I thought it seemed to like an understandable response. Those few days leading up to it seemed pretty miserable. I don't know why he'd think the band had legs after a few days of kicking around listless versions of probably their least-inspired set of songs (except maybe Beatles for Sale or something)

Well, that was my take on it - I'm far from a Beatlesologist by any means, but I've been in plenty of bands (and had plenty of arguments with fellow members) and, from my viewpoint, it looked like John and Paul were finally recreating a little bit of a spark, even if it was just playing old stuff, and George seemed to take the huff because of it – being excluded, even though he must have been used to that by that point, surely! Compared to Some Kind of Monster (yes, I'm drawing comparisons between the Beatles and Metallica), where it's painfully obvious (to the point where it's actually hard to watch) that the gods of metal were just utterly creatively bankrupt, even the Twickenham misadventure showed some green shoots that could be nurtured. Obviously, Billy Preston was the Miracle-Gro in that situation, but yeah, that's how I interpreted it at the time (also knackered and occasionally dozing off, too, in my defence).