The Yesterday film, yes or no?

I liked it for what it was. Fun....

 

No reason to give this a wide berth OP. Has some wonderful moments and a must for fab four fans. It ain't The Godfather Part II but not nearly chopped liver. 6.8 on 125k+ user reviews at IMDB.

 

The Beeb just screened it. It's a "no" from me.

 

I watched this last night on the Beeb with some trepdiation but enjoyed it immensely. Rom com isn't one of my favourite genres - I generally prefer sci fi, horror and comedy - but I also enjoyed Love Actually, so I clearly have a bit of a soppy, romantic side. It was good to see Joel Fry, Karl Theobald, Meera Syal, Sanjeev Baskhar and Sarah Lancashire, who are all among my favourite actors and I thought the musical performances by Himesh Patel were excellent. Plus, I enjoyed Ed Sheeran's appearances and now feel positively inclined towards him, even if the few tunes of his I've heard aren't really for me.

Yes, the film is extremely lightweight, fluff, and like many films it stretches the bounds of plausibility, but not all art / entertainment has to be deep and meaningful. I'd happily recommend it to Beatles fans and most everyone else.

 

I watched it......kinda film you only need to see once out of curiosity. The boardroom meeting discussing album covers was funny though.....

 

HUGE YES.

Like many here I lived through Beatlemania the first time round.
I love that it reinforced what we all knew, it wasn’t just “The Boys”, it was also the songs.

To steal and mangle something from Roger Ebert, “I loved, loved, loved that movie.”
The Lennon bit broke my old heart a little.

(Love the “Hard to believe” and “stretched credibility” reviews. It’s a F***ING fantasy!)

 

I enjoyed the movie the first time I watched it. Watched it again a while ago and recently when I was bored, and enjoyed it just as much. I wonder why this scene was deleted, as it's a wonderful scene.

 

I thought it was quite good really, and I expected to dislike it.

 

I don't understand why folks liked it. I thought it was awful. Boring. Trite. Almost insulting. The amateurish renditions of the songs were so bad that they stripped them of any magic and magnificence leaving the premise of the film rather moot, and the incidental music being Ed Sheeran songs seemed to say that The Beatles songs were just some novelty of the past, which also negated the premise of the film. The Beatles were a MacGuffin for the love story, which was dull as ditchwater. And there's zero attempt to explain the time anomaly. I almost fell asleep twice, and certainly found myself distracted at times by the tediousness of it.

 

A no from me.

And the Lennon bit completely didn’t work for me.

 

who else was not crazy about the ending...predictable to say the least...

 

Indubitably!!! yes...

 

Every time I hear about this movie I cringe. The way the idea is handled seems ridiculous to me, though the original draft of the story seems interesting, before it got turned into a rom com.

 

Yesterday (no pun intended) there were 12 Beatles albums in the top 50 of Amazon's "Movers and Shakers" chart. Guaranteed that this is a result of the film being shown on BBC the previous night. Some of these may well be people discovering these tunes for the first time who then become Beatles fans.

I think that's great, and justifies the existence of a lightweight fun bit of escapism.

 

Paul McCartney and myself liked it.

 

IIRC, that scene got cut because the director thought the audience would turn on Jack if they thought he seemed anything other than totally stuck on Ellie.

There's another scene where he gets a little sumthin'-sumthin' in Russia that I think got cut for that reason.

I might be remembering only the explanation for the "Jack got laid" scene and transferring it to the "flirting on TV talk show" scene, but that's the explanation I remember for both!

 

Not seen it yet and may never see it. Don’t like Richard Curtis - in fact, everything of his that I’ve seen I’ve either hated or disliked intensely.

I HAVE seen the Lennon scene - and, no, it did absolutely nothing for me, though Lennon was well-played by Robert Carlisle (who, though a Scot, has form in portraying Scousers).

Someone online, discussing this film, came up with an even better idea: suppose Beatle music was eradicated and one person someone ‘found’ the songs and passed them off as his/her own......but nobody liked them and they were dismissed by today’s yoof as ‘camp’, ‘crap’ and (I can just imagine this scene) ‘the kind of music my Granny used to listen to, and she’s been dead for ten years.’

Not an idea that would have the investors queuing up to splash their dough, though .......

 

How about Cynthia opening the door and being asked if ‘John’s in’?

It turns out Paul is a minor haulage tycoon, based in Cheshire.

 

I finally got to see this film the other night (thank you BBC). I found it to be pleasant fun, though rather bland and twee.
As I said earlier here the 2006 French movie "Jean-Philippe" is far better. It's the same principal but if Johnny Halliday had never existed (real name Jean-Philippe Smet).

 

I can hear the penstrokes at Apple over that pitch.

 

Source? It grossed over $153 million worldwide and had a production budget of $26 million. Yesterday - Box Office Mojo

$25 million was for the rights to the Beatles songs.

 

That scene is sheer Stinking Bishop cheese. I can see why it was cut.

Also - an awful lot of people are allergic to James Corden (I’m one). How much ‘face time’ does he have in this film?

 

i wondered the same thing at the time. as discussed by Oatsdad, sounds like it was cut to make the lead more likeable. I think they should have left it in, it would have raised the stakes of the movie a bit. i enjoyed the movie at times, but the conceit that Jack can't appreciate his friend as a potential romantic partner, particularly when she's played by such a preposterously good-looking actress, just made me roll my eyes.

 

Not much. You're reasonably safe.

 

I could’ve sworn I read something about its ‘drastic underperformance’ but you’re right. Wikipedia does quote those figures.

Will delete my previous post.