On the "Let it Be" movie ...

I just watched it. John doesn't look high at all - he looks positively clear eyed and alert. Perhaps you're remembering George from that clip? His head is down with his hair covering his face through the entire number (although that's because he was concentrating on the fairly complex bass line).

 

I think he looks stoned during the whistling bit. Of course none of us were there to know with metaphysical certitude. Can we at least concede that he wasn't in a very good place at that point in time?

 

The Beatles weren't in a very good place at the time. The film in a nutshell.

 

The fact that John is not being assertive is evidence of elsewhereness. He was not a passive man when in his normal state.

 

At this point, they may be preparing a Blu-Ray 4K version with Dolby Atmos

 

...only because you knew what was going on ahead of time.

 

Thank you, Amsterdamman.

 

His company with Yoko made him a much more passive man. Almost gentlemanly and he dug it.

 

According to some around him, the drug taking actually made him nicer and less assertive; calmer, less aggressive. Of course, this can be taken any number of ways but as far as the movie-regardless of how we perceive his state of mind-he sure seemed to get it all together for the rooftop performance. Someone who was in *that* much of a stoned haze couldn't have performed with such energy and accuracy.

 

Maybe. When I look at other J@Y video moments, like Mike Douglas, John is way more... John. But I have no evidence he was stoned. Just that he didn't often seem to care very much.

 

He did forget the words to his own song. But yes, when the red light went on to actually perform he did show up.

 

I do appreciate the responses in this thread, I have a better idea of why folks want this movie out, and I haven't seen a one that isn't a valid reason.

Again, I hope it is released. Again, I have my serious doubts that it will be.

Will I buy it if it comes out? Maybe, maybe not. I no longer buy everything, or seek out everything, concerning/involving the Beatles, although I have been a fan of them basically since before I started to grammar school, basically since Day 1 when they hit in the U.S. I had teenage aunts, they introduced me to them, I was hooked and I had "Meet the Beatles" and "The Beatles Second Album" (still my favorite Beatle album) and actually won a radio contest to see "A Hard Day's Night" first run at the theater at age 6 in 1964.

Why? It has to do with Sandy Koufax. (I've not lost my mind, bear with me.)

I'm also a massive baseball fan and Sandy Koufax is my favorite player, ever. If my life, and the lives of my family, were riding on the outcome of a baseball game, and I could pick any pitcher, ever, to pitch that game for me, it would be Sandy Koufax circa 1963.

I also belong to some groups that study sabermetrics, the analysis of baseball statistics. Not surprisingly, we tend to debate who the greatest players, pitchers, etc., were at all time.

Lots of people think Koufax was the GOAT (greatest of all time). Sports Illustrated once did a cover story on him titled "The Left Arm of God."

The thing is, he wasn't the GOAT. He had a few super-duper-outstanding seasons, like a comet flashing across the sky, then his elbow went bad and he was gone. But there was always a mystique and a magic about him ... which had as much to do with the time and place in which he performed, which also was the time and place in which the Beatles performed, as it did with his accomplishments on the field ... which colored people's opinions of him and drove people to obsess about him and about what made him tick and caused people to try to ferret out every microscopic bit of minutiae about him. (He's become kind of a recluse over the years in response to that.) As the years have passed, I've stopped letting that mystique and magic drive my opinions of him. He's still my favorite player, I don't obsess over his every grunt from the mound or rate him higher than he belongs out of hero worship.

The Beatles actually were the GOATs, but as the years have passed, I've lost the sense of magic and mystique where they're concerned, and I don't obsess over seeing every image of them that was ever made, or listening to every note, burp or fart that they committed to tape at Abbey Road, Twickenham, the BBC or various concert stages.

I'm not going to criticize anyone who does ... we all have our respective canoes to paddle in our own respective ways ... but I just don't anymore.

 

I would love to see the complete rooftop concert re-edited without all the cutaways to the people on the street.
I wonder if all the original footage is still available. Maybe release the 16mm full frame which I think was cropped once for widescreen theatrical release, then that print cropped again on the sides for home video release to fit the TV screen.

 

It's The Beatles

 

Let It Be is part of the band's heritage and should be commercially available along with the other films. I wouldn't watch it every week, but the same goes for their other movies.

The original audio survives, but I believe the TV special is all that remains of the film - the other footage was scrapped. (A common fate in the days before anyone conceived of home video and expanded director's cuts.) I'd favor a DVD/Blu-ray with alternate audio tracks - both original and with the Beatles' 1966 overdubs, perhaps with a stills gallery to accompany the couple of songs for which no footage exists.

I like the idea of releasing the original film plus a new, extended edit, possibly with individual songs as standalone elements. I would love complete takes of "Suzy's Parlour" and the electric arrangement of "Two of Us." A deluxe box could include Glyn Johns' construction of Get Back.

 

As others have noted, the original edit of the film is a mess. There should never be audio & video from different performances put together to fool the audience, but there's a lot of it in the LIB film, apparently because the director didn't film entire songs until late in the process. I'm sure a great film could be made out of this period, so if LIB ever is re-released, I hope we get a box set with the original film along with a completely new version.

 

Saw it in a theater when it came out. I'd like to have it in my collection.

 

It deserves release in both original, and directors cut.

Lots of extras would be nice too.

 

Thanks to Amsterdamman2015 I also dove in to watch. It's been awhile.

I didn't remember the editing being so awful, yikes.

 

too bad the Beatles weren't poor....we would have had this years ago.

 

maybe they are?

 

Let It Be BD in a huge Box Set for Christmas...nice ring to it, eh?

 

I have a ton of outtakes from the film that circulate on torrent sites...
I don't think it can be made into anything much better than it is...
For a Beatles fan the film is important, but that doesn't make it good.
The Beatles were uninspired and playing well below their talent level,
I don't think any outtake footage can put a positive light on it.....

My DVD burner is shot or I'd offer to send out some stuff for P&B..

 

Agree totally. Still have a soft spot for this flick because I went to see it in the theatre during original release (double billed with "The Magic Christian") when I was 13 - and while my main reaction at the time was "who are these hippies who once used to be the Beatles?" (after all, I was 13 ya know), some of the music stuck with me, and it ended up reigniting my interest in the band. Overall, I still find it the most interesting and compelling Beatles film for the very reason that it has the courage to show them as who they were at the time, warts and all. Spruce it up a bit, add some more of the good stuff, and I would definitely be interested in checking it out again.

 

FWIW, I first saw the film as a teen at a midnight show. I was too young to drive, and my parents wouldn't take me, so I snuck out and bicycled a few miles to the theater. 3am or so I faced the firing squad back home. But I had seen the rooftop show, finally