The Beatles are fucking good.

[Johnboy]

I've been planning to re read RITH but just the opening very long essay, the rest is too opinionated, I don't want him to rattle my perspective of the songs - it does plug you directly in to the songs like no other Fabs book though

[Replies From View]

I loved Revolution in the Head in the early-mid 90s.  Had the original publication from a sale in MVC or Our Price or somewhere, then the expanded volume that immediately followed the release of the Anthology CDs.  Tended to agree with most of what he said, including Helter Skelter, thought his take on all the Get Back / Let It Be sessions was essential reading, but didn't agree with him on Across The Universe, which if I recall correctly he described as a "babyish incantation" written while Lennon was fucked up beyond all hope on LSD.  I think it's a song that never had a strong release until the Anthology version, mind you, but that version is lovely.


Not read RITH since the late 90s, however.  I think it's tied too deeply into my teenage years for me to go back.




Fucking hell - just realised that more time has passed between the Anthology and now as passed between the Beatles break-up and the Anthology.  Bad.

[Satchmo Distel]

Newly discovered track from 1968 with George and Ringo very prominent:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvTItYlw0m4&ab_channel=TommyChivers

[wrec]

Fucking hell - just realised that more time has passed between the Anthology and now as passed between the Beatles break-up and the Anthology.  Bad.

Yikes. Still freaks my nut to this day that I clearly remember the 20th anniversary of Sgt Pepper('s), which seemed incredibly distant. Albums turning 20 this year: Love & Theft, Get Ready, Rings Around the World, Drukqs

[markburgle]

I'm also a Ian Campbell fanboy. RITH's genius lies in its mix of musicology, sociology and something even akin to philosophy. It's not a book that stands or falls based on whatever facts it might have gotten wrong

Yeah I'd agree, the errors aren't critical, it's just a few "who played the solo on this, oh it's George not Paul" type things.

I think I remember reading that the ePub has the extra bits in it, if you want a cheaper way of accessing it.

Not quite, the extended edition is available as two separate ebooks going for about £25 each (cheaper than the £100+ for physical one but not to the extent you'd hope).

Also very confusing for a book already called Part 1: Tune In to suddenly have 2 parts

[Jerzy Bondov]

edit: is there an app for Android that easily converts pages to high contrast black white?

Yeah, this one is great and free

[studpuppet]

Not quite, the extended edition is available as two separate ebooks going for about £25 each (cheaper than the £100+ for physical one but not to the extent you'd hope).

Also very confusing for a book already called Part 1: Tune In to suddenly have 2 parts

Nah - it's on Amazon at £25 for a single ePub file (or free off Library Genesis if you're that way inclined).

[markburgle]

Nah - it's on Amazon at £25 for a single ePub file (or free off Library Genesis if you're that way inclined).

Quoth Amazon:

"This is Part One of Volume One.
.....
The ebook of the extended special edition comes in two parts, mirroring the two hardbacks that make up the deluxe print edition. Each part is sold separately etc etc"

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B00E9VSUS0/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1636673835&sr=8-1

[itsfredtitmus]

Rubbish band!

[studpuppet]

Quoth Amazon:

Yeah - you're right, although Amazon seems to be really shit at showing both parts (I think this is the second one). £90 for the physical book seems a bargain compared to £50 for the electronic one.

[Nowhere Man]

For the most part I haven't been as bothered as many about the cgi enhancing thingy going on with the new Get Back documentary, but this, this looks absolutely fucking awful right here, like something out of The Beatles Rockband game.

[Retinend]

doesn't look that bad to me

[gilbertharding]

For the most part I haven't been as bothered as many about the cgi enhancing thingy going on with the new Get Back documentary, but this, this looks absolutely fucking awful right here, like something out of The Beatles Rockband game.

Peter Jackson's WW1 documentary using remastered colourised footage was on telly yesterday evening. Looked more convincing than that.

[Kermit the Frog]

For the most part I haven't been as bothered as many about the cgi enhancing thingy going on with the new Get Back documentary, but this, this looks absolutely fucking awful right here, like something out of The Beatles Rockband game.

Gotta love it when the remastering process makes something shot on 60s colour film stock look like it was shot on videotape in the 1980s and processed through someone spamming the upscaling and motion smoothing settings on a HDTV from 2007. Absolutely dismal.

[Rich Uncle Skeleton]

not that I insist everyone be as grumpy as me, but I really don't get why there isn't more of an outcry in the comments sections when they post these clips. it's Apple, the negatives will hardly have been rotting in a damp cupboard somewhere, surely they don't need "enhancing" like this. if it's an Apple/Disney stipulation that it can't possibly look like it was filmed in the 60s and has to be smoothed out to appeal to modern youngsters as well then what a silly move.

I was honestly hoping people would kick off the same way they did about 4:3 simpsons on Disney+ (this is arguably worse) and news websites desperate to write anything about anything would help it gain traction. but noooo

[Replies From View]

Maybe Jackson already appreciates the mistake and hopes to revisit it down the line for a physical release?

[Goldentony]

is that not just tons of DNR [digital noise reduction, hate putting this in brackets like an arsehole but in case anyone doesnt obsess over blu rays] because ther's a similar waxy look to that old Predator blu ray that went apeshit with it and removed all trace of film grain

[wosl]

For the most part I haven't been as bothered as many about the cgi enhancing thingy going on with the new Get Back documentary, but this, this looks absolutely fucking awful right here, like something out of The Beatles Rockband game.

Looks like a bad photorealist painting.  It should be teeming with lovely grain.  What a drag.

[gilbertharding]

Looks like a bad photorealist painting.  It should be teeming with lovely grain.  What a drag.

Yeah - it reeks of Guy Peellaert.

[studpuppet]

Another little clip. Looks fine to me...

[SpiderChrist]

Hmmm. John is clearly not saying "let's do the next number" or "let's do the next one" at the end of that clip. The matching of sound to visuals is one of the things that irks me about the Let It Be movie so it's disappointing to see that it might be happening here as well.

[LynnBenfield69]

Similarly in the very first shot you can tell by the way his mouth moves that the audio is from a different take than the vision. I'm a real stickler for that shit too.

[Kermit the Frog]

Another little clip. Looks fine to me...

Still looks DNR'd to fuck with weird motion smoothing and all that. In the bit where they're sitting in the recording booth their slightly out-of-focus faces look really strange when AI sharpened. Colour correction also looks horribly garish. Saw an interview with Peter Jackson where he justified removing the grain by saying that the intention was to make the footage look like it was shot yesterday. Just why bother with that, did Disney+ force his hand or something? The restored music videos on the '1+' blu ray looked excellent so fuck knows why they're letting Jackson ruin the footage like this

[daf]

He's got a track record for tinkering - didn't he try and release one of his films (The Hobbit, maybe?) at a ridiculously high frame rate - which then bombed with audiences as it looked too much like a videotaped soap opera!

Removing the grain is a bit like the high frame rate 'motion-flow' business - yes, it's theoretically closer to "real life", but why bother if it looks like a load of cheap video shit!

[Retinend]

WHEN IS THIS OUT FFS - all these clips - still no date?

[kalowski]

This Thursday

[SpiderChrist]

Gonna watch it round a mate's house with a curry. Preparing myself to be disappointed, tbh.

[SteveDave]

Part 1- 157 minutes
Part 2- 173 minutes
Part 3- 138 minutes

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[the science eel]

Gonna watch it round a mate's house with a curry. Preparing myself to be disappointed, tbh.

Fascinatingly uneventful, I imagine.

Cannot wait.

[kalowski]

Probably true. But I'll watch it and likely get a bit weepy too.