Peter Jackson's Beatles biopic, Get Back

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Not sure how many Beatles fans frequent this forum but for those folks, you definitely should check out Get Back. This was taking from 60 hours of film and something like 180 hours of audio. They do a phenomenal job with that too.
Beatles fans, It's fucking incredible. You're a fly on the wall watching them go through their day while trying to record a new album.
Non Beatles fans - Don't bother, it'd be a slog for you to go through, especially during the duller bits, but that's the studio life.

And a warning should be issued, Yoko sings. Several times, for what seemed to last 3 - 4 thousand years each time. (if it was a whole minute I'd be surprised)

 

[lxskllr]

Heard an interview with Jackson, and it sounded pretty interesting. I'm not even really a big Beatles fan.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Heard an interview with Jackson, and it sounded pretty interesting. I'm not even really a big Beatles fan.

It's a chronological editing of the footage (audio and video). They did a spectacular job with just that. Some areas I knew the video and audio were out of sync, especially if someone's playing a guitar, and their fretting hand did not match the audio. But that's rare, and the editing was unbelievable
If it's not obvious already, I'm a huge Beatles fan. This a dream come true for me, to be a fly on a wall while the Beatles recorded an album.

 

[Thump553]

Not sure how many Beatles fans frequent this forum but for those folks, you definitely should check out Get Back. This was taking from 60 hours of film and something like 180 hours of audio. They do a phenomenal job with that too.
Beatles fans, It's fucking incredible. You're a fly on the wall watching them go through their day while trying to record a new album.
Non Beatles fans - Don't bother, it'd be a slog for you to go through, especially during the duller bits, but that's the studio life.

And a warning should be issued, Yoko sings. Several times, for what seemed to last 3 - 4 thousand years each time. (if it was a whole minute I'd be surprised)

It

One of my favorite bits in the movie was one Sunday Linda Easterland's young daughter was just clowning along in the studio while the band was jamming and all of sudden Yoko starts "singing"-the girl's eyes pop open. A few minutes later they are both singing together.

Actually though the documentary goes a fairly long way to humanizing Yoko. Personally I think she takes way too much blame for what was inevitable-each of the Beatles was growing musically and were ultimately confined by having to fit into the Beatle mold. They had a great run, but each of them did fine stuff post-Beatles as well.

One of my favorite aspects was watching the creative process live, as they composed and created songs. At one point they show the very beginning of what would become one of Paul McCartney's greatest songs. The doc goes a long way towards humanizing each of the Beatles. I was surprised how genuinely friendly McCartney and Lennon were to each other, as the common belief was that they were mostly at each other's throats all the time. I was also surprised how humorous Lennon was, because he was so dour most of the time in his public appearances.

It's long, and should be taken in doses, but highly recommended to anyone interested in music, creativity and/or the sixties pop culture.

 

[Charmonium]

At one point in time, Stones vs Beatles was the Coke or Pepsi of its day - except you could immediately tell the difference. Beatles fans all grew up to be NGO volunteers (e.g., Red Cross/Cresent, Drs w/o Boarders, etc) while Stones junkies all became actual junkies - or so I've heard . I really loved the Stones and always changed FM stations when a Beatles song came on. Not sure why. Never like any of McCartney's stuff either. Kinda neutral on Lennon.

Not a Michael Jackson fan but buying the entire Beatles library was such a dope move. $46M in 1985. F*** me. Screw Tesla, that must have been at least a 100 bagger (100 x) for him.

 

[NuclearNed]

I watched the 1st episode & plan to watch the others asap. I grew up with the Beatles, and I'm a big fan - although not as huge a fan as some, and I'm not completely aware of all their history/mythology. That said, here are some impressions based on what I've seen so far:

1. Paul was the genius behind the Beatles. Sure, John helped out a little, but at the end of the day Paul was the man.
2. George sucks. He's the real reason the Beatles broke up - not Yoko. He was obviously delusional, believing that his talent was on par with Paul's, but not so much.
3. John was much more of a normal guy than I ever thought. Before this documentary, my impression was that he was just a stoned hippie. He seems like he was a nice, quiet guy.

 

[pmv]

What I've heard is it's really only for serious fans, becuase it's so damn long and exhaustive. I mean, I like them, but I doubt I'd be up to sitting through all that.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

What I've heard is it's really only for serious fans, becuase it's so damn long and exhaustive. I mean, I like them, but I doubt I'd be up to sitting through all that.

You're right on the money, if you're not a musician or a Beatles fan, this would be a long, boring watch. However, as a guitarist, and a huge Beatles fan, this was mesmerizing. I'm hoping to watch through it again, and try to catch things I missed.

 

[deustroop]

Not sure how many Beatles fans frequent this forum but for those folks, you definitely should check out Get Back. This was taking from 60 hours of film and something like 180 hours of audio. They do a phenomenal job with that too.
Beatles fans, It's fucking incredible. You're a fly on the wall watching them go through their day while trying to record a new album.
Non Beatles fans - Don't bother, it'd be a slog for you to go through, especially during the duller bits, but that's the studio life.

And a warning should be issued, Yoko sings. Several times, for what seemed to last 3 - 4 thousand years each time. (if it was a whole minute I'd be surprised)

Thx for the reference, hadn't seen it and now that I have, I must say the live concert on the rooftop at the end of Part 3 is an excellent showcase for Beatles talent. I even went and d/l one ( my first) of their songs (Don't Let Me Down ). Excellent .
The film documents the creative process that resulted in the album Let It Be.I once saw a Rolling Stones video of the same process, creating the song Sympathy For The Devil. Seeing the process itself, among other things, gives reflection and wonder at human creativity.

 

[Fritzo]

As a musician, it's a fascinating look at the creative process. You get to see how songs aren't just created- a lot of work, blood, sweat, and tears go into them.

 

[KMFJD]

At one point in time, Stones vs Beatles was the Coke or Pepsi of its day - except you could immediately tell the difference. Beatles fans all grew up to be NGO volunteers (e.g., Red Cross/Cresent, Drs w/o Boarders, etc) while Stones junkies all became actual junkies - or so I've heard . I really loved the Stones and always changed FM stations when a Beatles song came on. Not sure why. Never like any of McCartney's stuff either. Kinda neutral on Lennon.

Not a Michael Jackson fan but buying the entire Beatles library was such a dope move. $46M in 1985. F*** me. Screw Tesla, that must have been at least a 100 bagger (100 x) for him.

imo, on one hand you have a band challenging people with new sounds and concepts, and on the other hand you have a R&B cover band

 

[pmv]

imo, on one hand you have a band challenging people with new sounds and concepts, and on the other hand you have a R&B cover band

This thread feels like stumbling on one of those Japanese soldiers lost in the jungle on a pacific Island, still fighting a war that finished decades ago.

 

[KMFJD]

This thread feels like stumbling on one of those Japanese soldiers lost in the jungle on a pacific Island, still fighting a war that finished decades ago.

true, and i did not mean to disrespect the Stones, they are a great band with a lot of great songs and amazing longevity

 

[Fritzo]

At one point in time, Stones vs Beatles was the Coke or Pepsi of its day - except you could immediately tell the difference. Beatles fans all grew up to be NGO volunteers (e.g., Red Cross/Cresent, Drs w/o Boarders, etc) while Stones junkies all became actual junkies - or so I've heard . I really loved the Stones and always changed FM stations when a Beatles song came on. Not sure why. Never like any of McCartney's stuff either. Kinda neutral on Lennon.

Not a Michael Jackson fan but buying the entire Beatles library was such a dope move. $46M in 1985. F*** me. Screw Tesla, that must have been at least a 100 bagger (100 x) for him.

It was more of a dick move on Jackson's part. Michael and Paul collaborated on some work, and shortly after when the band's catalogue came up for sale he outbid Paul on buying it.

 

[nakedfrog]

Not sure how many Beatles fans frequent this forum but for those folks, you definitely should check out Get Back. This was taking from 60 hours of film and something like 180 hours of audio. They do a phenomenal job with that too.
Beatles fans, It's fucking incredible. You're a fly on the wall watching them go through their day while trying to record a new album.
Non Beatles fans - Don't bother, it'd be a slog for you to go through, especially during the duller bits, but that's the studio life.

And a warning should be issued, Yoko sings. Several times, for what seemed to last 3 - 4 thousand years each time. (if it was a whole minute I'd be surprised)

Thanks, hadn't heard about this.

I watched the 1st episode & plan to watch the others asap. I grew up with the Beatles, and I'm a big fan - although not as huge a fan as some, and I'm not completely aware of all their history/mythology. That said, here are some impressions based on what I've seen so far:

1. Paul was the genius behind the Beatles. Sure, John helped out a little, but at the end of the day Paul was the man.
2. George sucks. He's the real reason the Beatles broke up - not Yoko. He was obviously delusional, believing that his talent was on par with Paul's, but not so much.
3. John was much more of a normal guy than I ever thought. Before this documentary, my impression was that he was just a stoned hippie. He seems like he was a nice, quiet guy.

LOL
I'm also a huge fan, and I would absolutely rank both John and George above Paul. I don't really care for his post-Beatles work, and the Beatles songs I like the least are almost invariably his.

 

[Muse]

It's a chronological editing of the footage (audio and video). They did a spectacular job with just that. Some areas I knew the video and audio were out of sync, especially if someone's playing a guitar, and their fretting hand did not match the audio. But that's rare, and the editing was unbelievable
If it's not obvious already, I'm a huge Beatles fan. This a dream come true for me, to be a fly on a wall while the Beatles recorded an album.

IMO, The Beatles are the greatest pop group/phenomenon ever. Things are different today. Back in the 60's, particularly the early 60's recording studios were primitive. The Beatles albums were much much more like recorded live performances than you hear on modern studio recordings, particularly of majorly popular acts. The music industry has not fared well.

If you aren't super into The Beatles it's a pity (yeah, that song too)... 270 songs, and most are great, a great many way beyond great. They will never be equaled.

Thanks, hadn't heard about this.

LOL
I'm also a huge fan, and I would absolutely rank both John and George above Paul. I don't really care for his post-Beatles work, and the Beatles songs I like the least are almost invariably his.

Yeah, John and George > Paul, and I agree, Paul's post-Beatles work doesn't begin to measure up to Beatles quality, or that of John and George's, actually.

 

[Muse]

So, it's streaming...

Will it ever be released on optical disk?

What are the streaming options? I have Roku (Prime too), but don't currently pay for any streaming services (other than Prime, but I do that for the free/enhanced shipping).

 

[Captante]

Thanks, hadn't heard about this.

LOL
I'm also a huge fan, and I would absolutely rank both John and George above Paul. I don't really care for his post-Beatles work, and the Beatles songs I like the least are almost invariably his.

Idk .... 1970's Wings were pretty freaking good.... newer music I don't like a lot myself though.



(John was my favorite Beatle btw)

 

[Captante]

What are the streaming options?

I snagged a month of Disney+ for $1.99 (about what its worth!) and this was one of the VERY few things I had not previously seen that I really enjoyed.

I used to love Disney but nowadays they leave a bad taste in my mouth with all the PC bull$hit.... I will NOT be renewing this garbage. (not even if it WAS $2 a month)

 

[nakedfrog]

Oh, it's only three 2 hour episodes? That shouldn't be too hard to manage.

I snagged a month of Disney+ for $1.99 (about what its worth!) and this was one of the VERY few things I've had not previously seen that I really enjoyed.

I used to love Disney but nowadays they leave a bad taste in my mouth with all the PC bull$hit.... I will NOT be renewing this garbage. (not even if it WAS $2 a month)

I've got a bigger issue with their decision to own all media than anything else.

 

[Muse]

Idk .... 1970's Wings were pretty freaking good.... newer music I don't like a lot myself though.



(John was my favorite Beatle btw)

Wings never rocked my boat. They'll be playing Imagine in 50 years (if modern civilization doesn't collapse by then), but Band on the Run will be forgotten.

 

[MrSquished]

Disney Plus comes free with my Verizon plan and maybe it will finally come in handy for 6 hours of television.

 

[Captante]

Wings never rocked my boat. They'll be playing Imagine in 50 years (if modern civilization doesn't collapse by then), but Band on the Run will be forgotten.

If you're talking about musical significance then of course the Beatles were one of, if not the most significant rock band of the 20th century while Wings was just a great rock band led by an ex-Beatle.

Disney Plus comes free with my Verizon plan and maybe it will finally come in handy for 6 hours of television.

At that price I'd stay subbed...!


(doubt I'd watch much)

 

[Torn Mind]

At one point in time, Stones vs Beatles was the Coke or Pepsi of its day - except you could immediately tell the difference. Beatles fans all grew up to be NGO volunteers (e.g., Red Cross/Cresent, Drs w/o Boarders, etc) while Stones junkies all became actual junkies - or so I've heard . I really loved the Stones and always changed FM stations when a Beatles song came on. Not sure why. Never like any of McCartney's stuff either. Kinda neutral on Lennon.

Not a Michael Jackson fan but buying the entire Beatles library was such a dope move. $46M in 1985. F*** me. Screw Tesla, that must have been at least a 100 bagger (100 x) for him.

My understanding was that the Beatles were "acceptable" enough for the upper classers to bring home to their parents without scandal while the likes of Elvis was a bad influence.(From the novel "The Outsiders")

 

[StinkyPinky]

What I've heard is it's really only for serious fans, becuase it's so damn long and exhaustive. I mean, I like them, but I doubt I'd be up to sitting through all that.

It's a Peter Jackson production. He could easily make a five hour movie from a fortune cookie note.