Ron Howard's Beatles Documentary Feature Film About The Band's Touring Years, "Eight Days a Week"*

Nope.

Hard to believe it, but The Fabs themselves are doing far more damage to their legacy than anything Capitol or EMI ever did.

 

I think the Howard film was good for what it was but what it wasn't, was what it purported to be: a comprehensive film about the band on stage. It was more of an Anthology "redux" than a film on their live performance career.

But can you be a bit more specific as to how this film is damaging their legacy?

 

Getting a hack like Opie to take on the immensity of a Beatles documentary sounded ridiculous on paper, can't say it's a surprise it turned out poorly.

 

Strongly disagree. He's produced some great films.
This just wasn't one of them.

 

Name one.

 

Opie needs to bring Joanie Loves Chachi to the silver screen. That's a project he can handle. Plus it's box office gold.

 

Cocoon, Apollo 13. A Beautiful Mind, which won him an Oscar.
I'm sure none were appealing to you.

 

Those movies don't meet my vigorous quality standards.

 

"Willow" was pretty good.

 

All kidding aside I have seen a few of his films over the years but never thought any of them were above just average.

 

I think "Apollo 13" is the closest thing to a "great film" Howard has made, and even that doesn't really qualify as "great", IMO. It's very good, and very entertaining, but I don't think I could put it up there with all the truly great films.

Howard has proven to be an extremely diverse director, and to be honest, I think that's his biggest problem. He dabbles in so many genres that he never masters any of them.

Most directors - just like most writers and most musicians - are best suited for one or two genres, and anything outside of those areas tends to encounter problems. Howard has always been a competent, workmanlike director but not one who displays particular flair or skill - again, I think that's because he works in so many different genres. If he'd focused on one or two, I think he could've developed into a stronger overall director...

 

All very valid points. The Richie Cunningham persona translates into his directing, there's just a generic, Americanism to his films that to me never gets over the bar of just average entertainment.

 

I really think if Howard had focused on comedy, he would've made a lot of really good movies. Would he have won an Oscar? Probably not, but I think he would've enjoyed a much higher "hit to miss" ratio if he'd stayed with what he knew.

The man grew up in sitcoms - how could comedy not be his natural genre?

He also could've done well with the kind of earnest, semi-Capra "genre" into which "Apollo 13" fell. As you note, there's a certain "American" feel to him, so if he'd stuck with films that matched his personality in that way, he would've been fine.

On one hand, I respect his refusal to be pigeonholed - it takes guts to stretch into as many genres as Howard has.

Unfortunately, he just can't do most of them well, IMO...

 

Wasn't Used Cars one of his early films? That one actually had some grit to it and was a comedy.

 

Nope - "Used Cars" was Robert Zemeckis's 2nd film.

You might be confusing it with Howard's "Night Shift" - I think that's Howard's only "R"-rated comedy...

 

You got me there. I should have known. That had to much swearing to be an Opie film.....

 

Hey, there's lots of profanity in "Backdraft", one of Howard's 10 or so "R"-rated films!

"Night Shift" got its "R" mainly due to sex - after all, it's about prostitution!

Other than "Night Shift", all Howard's "R" movies are dramas or action-related...

 

I think he wants to be like Scorsese, doing documentaries of classic rock artists.

 

I think Ron is as good a director as he was an actor.

 

Gung Ho is a great film.

 

I've seen Peter Graves narrate more engaging rock biographies on A & E.

 

It is what it is; a documentary for the masses who aren't familiar with the story and aren't big enough fans to know of Anthology's existence, leave alone the patience to sit through so many hours of it. For those who's Beatles catalogues consist of either 1 or the Red & Blue compilations (at a push).

 

Opie's made lotsa popular films in his time, but great? Meh.
And this one was not only not great, it wasn't even good. Kinda like his career of late---he's coasting on his laurels.

 

Back to documentary:
I don't think it is bad in a vacuum. It is just that we have seen a lot of it before. I think a lot more was expected for a major theater released documentary.
So - considering all the other documentaries out there and the hype, it gets a "C".
Always nice to watch a Beatles documentary (in my case borrowed from the library).

 

I've seen more depth and substance in VH1's Behind The Music.