Well he didn’t have that much foresight, just ambition for the group right then and there. Pop groups were lucky if they lasted two years back then.
That’s a bummer :-( I guess it wont be long before there are imligal dvd versions you can buy though.
This advice on best VPNs for Disney + might be helpful. when-is-disney-plus-coming-to-my-country Disney Plus VPN: How to Watch Disney Plus Buffer-Free in 2021
Foresight to pick the right guy to help achieve that ambition...then persistence thru some bad luck, bad tunes, awkward moments until skills improved and luck eventually changed.
He makes some good points in his videos but it seems that he goes overboard in the other direction sometimes. There can be grey areas in these things.
I watched Let It Be this weekend, it had been awhile since I last saw it, and it was nowhere near as negative as I remembered it. Basically just the argument. It was mostly music after that point. It makes me stoked for Get Back, the movie PJ is describing as having more negatives as well as positives. Maybe we’ll be able to view the arguments and blowups from all sides.
Maybe part of Lennon's angst going into the project was that he'd be found out as, in the words of his first wife "needing them more than they need him."
Gee, thanks Scott, I'd never guessed. ))) I guess torrents will have to do initially. I will definitely buy the physical release.
I just listened to a quick 10-minute interview with Joe Hagan, the writer of the Vanity Fair article for the Get Back film. I thought the following was well worth sharing with y'all. He's seen an hour of footage from the doc. Transcribed by me. Speaking about the rooftop performance in the film: "I saw the full thing, from beginning to end, from the moment they walk out the door until they walk back down. It's f*cking amazing. ... It's not edited that much at all. You're always seeing current footage of what's happening at all moments. Sometimes he breaks it into windows so you can see what other cameras are doing, like down on the street, the split screens, but you're always able to see what's going on at every moment, even the mundane things, so you get a feeling for the reality of it. ... The camera never looks away." Speaking about the 6-hour film length (edited for redundant "likes" and "you knows" by me): "It cascaded out of the idea of them screening the rooftop sequence, that was the first thing he showed to the Beatles, the living Beatles themselves, and to the families of the deceased Beatles, and they were all saying, "Oh God, you can't cut this, every minute of this is gold," and then they realized, oh, we're not gonna cut this, let's show it all. This became the prevailing philosophy of the entire documentary. Let's just show it all. When they put the instruments down and they're sitting there, and there's nothing to say, OK, we'll cut that out, but you can show every little jam they did, any kind of funny exchange they had, and the negative exchanges, when George walks out and decides he's had it with them, and he's hurt by things Paul has said, we're gonna show all that, and we're gonna show him and the other Beatles when he says he's done, and then him coming back. It's got built-in drama, you don't even have to make a fake sequencing of this. You can show it how it happened." Vanity Fair article: ‘The Beatles: Get Back’—An Exclusive Deep Dive Into Peter Jackson’s Revelatory New Movie Podcast: Joe Hagan - A Quick Chat About ‘Get Back‘ - Beatles Books (podcast)
This sounds amazing and exactly the sort of gold I was hoping for with this. I was so happy when they decided to expand it to 6 hours and to not have any current talking heads doing superfluous voiceovers, when we could see what is going on for ourselves watching them in real life effectively.
Fingers crossed but the preview looks great, like Jackson was the perfect choice, unlike Ron Howard whose film was mostly a tedious bore.
I found the trailer fascinating, and I do like how the story arc seems to be built on the daily events. The use of the calendar with notes such as "George walks out" and then "canceled" being written over the days the original live show was scheduled tells (to me at least) that Jackson is most likely taking a very linear approach to his re-edit. That's a great move because it entirely separates it from "Let It Be" and adds a very historical angle to it. Lindsay-Hogg was just originally concerned with making an entertaining TV special that would hold the audience's attention for an hour; Jackson has the benefit of working with a tremendous legacy now, and the events on certain days have taken on such significance during the past 50 years. In a weird way, Lindsay-Hogg could become a character in this re-cut because he went from director to an actual part of the story as he tries to hammer out day after day just what all this studio filming is leading to.
I was pleasantly surprised to see that much-anticipated segment with all of the text / quotes written out in the Get Back book that was released last week. It's fairly early in the book, too. It seemed pretty much in line with what was mentioned by Jackson in an interview, I think. The context before and after it that is included definitely makes it not as huge a blow-up as the Let It Be edit has led us to believe. Paul almost seemed apologetic in the moments leading up to the "I'll play whatever it is you want me to play" exchange. And even immediately after, with context the book provides (and soon, the 6 hour film) it just seems like maybe the kind of exchange they have had for years. I remember hearing the "One After 909" version from late '63 that's on the Anthology set and there's a little minor bickering going on even then about Paul not having a guitar pick to play that boogie bass line. And then John screws up on the next take and he gets good-naturedly lampooned by Paul. It's probably not as dark as the exchange between Paul and George in January '69, but they always felt free to just say what was on their minds the way families and siblings do.
I agree with you about the undercurrent of tension amongst the three. A lot of jealousy, is my theory. I was thinking about that quote just the other day in light of Paul's more recent comments. I wonder if he still believes what he said then? He has recently changed his mind about the lyric in Here Today, saying that he didn't mean, 'Well knowing you, you'd probably laugh, and say that we were worlds apart.' He now says he doesn't believe this was true.
Although in the late 1980 interviews (and plenty of others before), there seemed to be some thoughts in that vein, which I always thought was at least partially a reason for the comment. John did seem like he could on one day focus on the differences, and another day focus on the similarities.
Since Ringo was the outsider, I'm sure he had to make sure relations with the other three were always copacetic. And I think John kind of kept Paul at arms length since the beginning of their relationship, for various reasons. I'm sure if Stuart Sutcliffe could have sung, played, and written songs as well as Paul, John would have dropped Paul in a millisecond. A very interesting point in the Lewisohn book was that John and Paul kind of stopped writing songs together when Stuart joined the group, probably another reason why Paul didn't like Stuart.
The One After 909 on A1 mess-up has always been hilarious to me. Speaking of A1, they did that on Free As A Bird as well, joking about John's rhythm on the demo. No harm meant at all
One of the issues I - and others - have with Lewisohn is his neutral to negative portrayal of John and Paul's relationship. Lewisohn's personal interpretation is simply that and we have no idea (and neither has he) how close to the truth he gets - and there are many things that he glossed over, or put a slightly different spin on (we had a great thread analysing his work but it was removed - after about 50 pages, disappointingly). When it comes to Lewisohn's interpretation of relationship dynamics - what little there is - I am cautious, since that was not what he was aiming to do with Tune In, which I view as more of a biographical encyclopaedia of sorts. A character study it is not and never tried to be. Tune In is a valuable resource. Lewisohn is adept at the who, what, where and when. The how and why, not so much. As important as Stuart was to John, I have a hard time believing that Paul meant so little to John that he would have ditched him in a millisecond. I take your point about the period of time that they stopped writing together and I was also surprised by that - but we don't know what caused that. We can't say with confidence that that was John 'ditching Paul' for Stuart, or if that was Paul studying, contemplating working the lorries in response to pressure from his dad (which got on John's nerves massively), worried about the future, and thinking the Beatles weren't it. Some odd things happened on the first Hamburg trip as well. But after that, John and Paul seemed to get back into the swing of things. To be honest, I don't think it's at all clear if John kept Paul at arm's length, or if Paul kept John at arm's length. Their relationship is such a mystery!
We have recently "cut the cord" with our cable company, and are only subscribing to a few streaming services, one of which is Disney+. Question: Will the 3 parts be available on their designated release day whenever you want to start watching or at a prescribed time of day? (i.e. Will the first part be available starting at (let's say) 6AM on 11/25 and play continuously ... later joined by Parts 2 & 3 in rotation --- or will they begin later?) So, if you will not be home fro a good portion of the day on Thursday, can you watch anytime? Will they be available for viewing after 11/27 ... or is this a 3 day "event" and that's it?
