Beatles - Let It Be - DVD

What would be interesting to know is if it was the original version restored or if it was a new edit.

 

Original cut. I think he said that he was able to find the original inter-neg at a film processing lab that originally made the prints. That is a good score.

 

And he would not have to you even if you asked. So why bother saying you wouldn't have asked him?

Ok so he would not say (of course not) and you didn't dare ask (as you'd have been rejected fat out), so who was this source of no information?

 

It was one of the guest speakers at that year's convention. He offered the explanation/reason I quoted, so I didn't ask him further. I was grateful for his time and attention (as he was very busy and in demand); it was obvious that he wasn't going to name the individual who was digging his/her heels in. As far as ''source of no information'', the information that it was not the person most people would suspect of vetoing the project is rather informative to most people, wouldn't you think, especially as most people would likely think of the 'culprit' of being Japanese?.

 

According to an article in 'Beatles Monthly' just after 'Anthology' had its TV premiere, the film (along with the 'alternate' version) had been reconstructed frame-by-frame, shot-by-shot from the original individual camera negatives.

 

AND David Bowie AND the Doors.

 

I'm sticking with my theory in post #239.

 

Just a guess here:

The fact that the "Let It Be" movie still remains officially out of circulation in 2015 tells me that the four parties who compose the Beatles these days are just as concerned about the legacy of Beatles as people as they are about the band's musical legacy.

I find that so unfortunate -- 50 years from when most of us here have turned to dust and there is not one living person left who actually "experienced" the Beatles firsthand, no one will actually care "what Paul said," "what John did," "what George looked like." etc.

The music is all that will remain -- and "Let It Be" show an important part of the creation of that.

The Beatles as one of the most important musical and cultural forces of the 20th century is set in stone at this point -- nothing will ever change that... surely not a few reels of celluloid showing these four mopes at times being bored as hell, lashing out at each other, lookin' dirty, ordering Mal around as though he's a thick flunkie, jamming without inspiration, etc., all while they construct some classic songs.

If anything, it'll remind future generations that this cultural/musical phenomenon was composed of actual humans.

 

Forgot about those two; I suppose it's an inevitable consequence with acts like The Stones and Costello swapping labels. The new label will ALWAYS want the back catalogue and new remasters. It'll probably never end, I suppose. I'm just glad I'm not a Costello collector.

 

Apple had no problem releasing "Meet the Beatles" (running time 26:51) in 2014 at an 18.98 list price. They could always make Shea a two-fer with the '66 Japan concert.

The BBC Vol. 2 was nice to have but there are bootlegs floating around that put it to shame. The Red/Blue albums? Nice but not essential- they haven't released "Rock and Roll Music" or "Love Songs" two comps I have a fondness for but would never buy on CD.

Where is a compilation of the Beatles promo clips? That, even more than "Let It Be", is the most glaring omission in terms of reissues/product.

 

And there is nothing preventing a "Beatles Live!" release that put the Beatles portion of Shea with other live footage.

Or a Beatles video collection with promos, Shea, Washington, TV appearances, etc.

 

I've finally given up hope for a Let It Be official video release.

 

I bought the Magnetic Video Laserdisc from eBay a few years back. I've just conceded that this technologically primitive release, will be the best version of Let It Be I'm ever going to own for a long while.

With respect - I found Neil's comments about not release the film and the outakes because they are too " controversial" a little weak. A simple search on YouTube and you can see and hear audio and video of the infamous "Commonwealth Song", the Peter Sellers scene and few other out bursts.



The fight between Paul and George was replayed on the Anthology without incident and that's the most controversial part of the film. Sorry Apple, Beatles fans already knew the Beatles fought and broke up.

My own personal thoughts on the film is that it's patchy. Let's be honest; if you had no idea of The Beatles history (yes music fans - these people exist ), you would have no idea of what was happening. Without knowing the back history of the project, this is what you would get out of watching Let It Be:

-----------------

LET IT BE - THE PLOT FOR THE CASUAL MUSIC LISTENER

A band called The Beatles are jamming on a sound stage. The bearded guy and the guitar player have an argument. It then cuts away to more jamming, the other guitarist and his girlfriend start waltzing and it cuts away to a terrace house. The band enters the house like rock stars and we cut to the same guitarist from before playing a song. With all the microphones about it seems like they're recording the performances. After a few more performances and the drummer showing the guitarist his new song about an octopus - the bearded one returns and its everyone look busy time. Later we get a performance video of some of the songs played in the film (now in the complete form). Then the band take to the roof top, play a concert that angers the police and a random old lady, freeze frame and the film's over.

-----------------

Seriously. No subtitles explaining location. Heaps of narrative cut out of the film. See the Anthology - there's a scene were the Beatles are meeting in the Apple board room to discuss the ending of the film. That explains the whole rooftop concert! I would suspect that the 210 minute rough cut would have made more sense too. OK, the finished film would have never been that long, but the footage is there to provide the narrative the finished film lacks.

 

I think the real answer as to this is not going to have an imminent release follows your comments above.

At the end of the day this is a film of the Beatles jamming without much enthusiasm.

As much as I love sir Paul it is clear that John is checked out from this project and Paul's attempt to keep things going just added to a deteriorating group vibe. And some biographers indicated that john was strung out if you get my drift.

 

The other thing is that there were plenty of genuinely lovely moments during the Get Back sessions which would show them in a positive light, if they were to release the missing footage. It wasn't all doom and gloom, and even when things were bad, I feel like it only deepened my love for them as people because it made me realise how much pain they went through. I really cared about them like they were my friends, rather than seeing them as untouchable Gods or cartoon characters. I think putting them on a pedestal is actually more harmful to their reputations because it has made younger generations resent them.

 

It's a real documentary---some good parts, some not-so-great parts. If you want fantasy happy 24/7 Beatles, go watch Hard Day's Night. Although, Ringo had a dejected scene there too...nobody seems to mind that.

 

Let It Be could've been a better film had they included more. Seek out the complete Twickenham recordings, they're all over the web. (Check YouTube) They cover the first two weeks of the sessions, but there are two days you should listen to: the day George left and the day after.

The day he left is a little hard to make out, but it plays like surreal drama.

The next day is completely different. They don't play a whole lot because only Ringo bothers to show up on time, and it's worth hearing the conversation he has with the director. Even better is when Paul and Linda arrive, because they're very upfront about the mess they're in. ALL of this should've made the film.

 

I'm not sure if you were replying to the post above yours or not, but I've said the same thing for quite a while. The film, in my opinion, purposely went for a doom and gloom approach. It doesn't show the boys joking and cutting up much, but if you listen to the bootleg recordings from these sessions there were LOTS and LOTS of joking and good humor about. No doubt there really were issues, but I think the movie made things look worse than they were by not showing us much of the lighter side. Heck, if I was a Beatle and I saw the final cut of the movie it would depress me too! I'm all for a Let It Be 2015 edition sporting a new cut of the movie.

 

They do have more but not by large amounts. They didn't film that much at Twickenham. They thought they were making a documentary about the beatles return the stage. Only much later did it turn into a movie.

 

Yet they had no problem putting the movie out for the world to see in 1970. If it was valid then, it is certainly valid now. The movie showed, indirectly, a band about to break up. Then they did break up. It's one of the most honest films ever made, IMO. The problem is, nobody wants honesty in 2015....it's like being embarrassed now by the home movies of your first birthday party.

 

The Beatles these days could use LET IT BE to come out and show some of their rougher edges and warts. I think the LOVE project (and other such "la de da" type feel-good things) tend to "soften" or "sugarcoat" The Beatles too much.

 

Neil's stock phrase. YES obvious, as in that is what the fans want. Still can't figure out why they're waiting. First and second generation fans aren't getting any younger.

 

The documentary that could be made today from the same pool of footage that begat the original "Let It Be" would be fascinating. Interests both scholarly and voyeuristic from around the world want to know the real story of what happened during this period, and what better way to tell the story than with the actual events captured on film - many moments and conversations that were never considered at the time now carry a significance. This is unlikely to ever happen, and if it does, it will be years down the line when all of the delegated decision makers for Apple are no longer of the same generation as those who participated in the recordings under their control.

 

Ron was one of the main archival mastering people involved with the Anthology project from 1993-1995, and Let It Be was part of that. My impression is that there's far more footage in the Beatles' archive than anybody would ever want to see, but it's all in reasonable shape. Neil Aspinall spent decades locating footage, videotape, film, and all kinds of material and keeping it in the vault for the eventual day when the Beatles would want the documentary made, and it eventually paid off.

 

Don't forget that Scorsese also used it in his George Harrison doc several years ago.

I always trot out this 2007 Wikipedia quote from Neil Aspinall as to whether the film will ever be reissued:

In February 2007, Apple Corps' Neil Aspinall said, "The film was so controversial when it first came out. When we got halfway through restoring it, we looked at the outtakes and realised: this stuff is still controversial. It raised a lot of old issues."

An anonymous industry source told the Daily Express in July 2008 that, according to Apple insiders, McCartney and Starr blocked the release of the film on DVD. The two were concerned about the effect on the band's "global brand ... if the public sees the darker side of the story. Neither Paul nor Ringo would feel comfortable publicizing a film showing The Beatles getting on each other's nerves ... There's all sorts of extra footage showing more squabbles but it's questionable if the film will ever see a reissue during Paul and Ringo's lifetime."

I think now that McCartney and Ringo are in their 70s, they realized now the only thing to worry about is their legacy, and they would rather not have that legacy show how much fighting went on in the last year the group was together... even though that was partly true.