Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Peter Jackson: Get Back sneak preview

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #26
    Thanks for the suggestions folks.

    Comment


      #27
      Just thinking a bit more about this video, almost all of it is at Apple Studios, isn't it, after the abortive filming at Twickenham Film Studios. So most of what we're seeing here is after they've been through a pretty sobering bust up. They're trying to make the best of it, here. Which isn't to say it isn't genuine and moving in its own way. I certainly get the feels watching it.

      Comment


        #28
        So just to understand correctly, the fifty-six hours of footage Jackson is using, is the full footage filmed by Michael Lindsay-Hogg’s crew for Let It Be, which was originally to be titled Get Back? In which case that’s fascinating and I wonder if watching the two consecutively might be a worthwhile exercise.

        Comment


          #29
          Originally posted by Sits View Post
          I don’t know if this is the place, but assuming a fair number of OTFers are reading this thread: what would you consider the best, most objective biography/history of the band?

          Mind you the Emerick book Sporting describes sounds interesting. Although I assumed Ringo just wanted everyone to be friends and loved being in the band.
          Really enjoyed You Never Give Me Your Money by Pete Doggett for the story of the aftermath - focuses more on the business side than the musical side but still interesting.

          Comment


            #30
            Great idea for a book, that. It's still on my shelf, shamefully unread, for no good reason.

            Comment


              #31
              That's a great book, fascinating for someone like me, with no idea how high finance works.

              Comment


                #32
                Originally posted by Walt Flanagans Dog View Post

                Really enjoyed You Never Give Me Your Money by Pete Doggett for the story of the aftermath - focuses more on the business side than the musical side but still interesting.
                Yes, it's very interesting (although keeping up to speed with who's suing who was a bit of an effort).

                Comment


                  #33
                  Love the clip and I’d like to see the film.

                  I don’t have objective books on the Beatles, I love Lennon Remembers (and I have Cynthia’s book).
                  LR obviously his own view, but still revealing.

                  One of the things JL said about GH was that it must have been hard for him being in a band with two geniuses, and he wasn’t a bad musician himself. May sound mean but is probably spot on .

                  Comment


                    #34
                    I read an interview with McCartney where he says that the 'Revolution in your Head' book is a bunch of bollocks and that he'd like a word with the author (this was before McDonald died, obviously). I thought it was a good enough read, but was irritated by his presentation of subjective views on individual songs as fact.

                    I don't think I've ever read another book about the Beatles - never seemed necessary given that in Britain you're more or less born knowing their story (or, you were if you were born in 1965).

                    Comment


                      #35
                      Mc Cartney didn't like Shout either because of Norman's alleged bias towards Lennon. And he hated The Rutles, even though it's relatively mild teasing and Harrison produced it, and has a cameo in it.

                      Comment


                        #36
                        Originally posted by elguapo4 View Post
                        And he hated The Rutles,
                        Is this documented?

                        Comment


                          #37
                          Originally posted by Sporting View Post

                          Is this documented?
                          In fairness, the only time I found it was a quote on another message board a few years ago, that Paul and Ringo were invited to the premiere, Ringo went but Paul turned it down, saying it was disgraceful ,so it is unproven.

                          Comment


                            #38
                            McDonald's absolute hatred of Helter Skelter in Revolution in the Head made me question his judgement. An incredible book though.
                            Last edited by Lang Spoon; 27-12-2020, 12:33.

                            Comment


                              #39
                              Lang Spoon, that's a very astute observation regarding McDonald's hatred of “Helter Skelter”. His angle on The Beatles, which is that they were best as a tight R&B band, approaches the level of fanatical ideological dogma. As did many things for McDonald. But, I think as long as you know that, and know your own mind, it doesn't harm the book, far from it. It's often illuminating to discover unexpected tracks he rates, for instance, he considers "I Am The Walrus" one of the great achievements of 20th century modernism, more or less.

                              Comment


                                #40
                                Good thread thanks all.

                                George H's grumpiness partly due to taking the blame for them being kicked out of Hamburg in 61. Officially as he was under age, but really following the incident setting fire to Pete Best"s underpants.

                                Lewisohn, Norman and co disagree on whether he was wearing them at the time

                                Comment


                                  #41
                                  Well, it's out. It's now a six-hour film on Disney + in three parts. Reviews are positive.

                                  Can you sign up to Disney + just for the month? Or should I wait for the DVDs?

                                  Comment


                                    #42
                                    Originally posted by Sporting View Post
                                    I don't agree with the comments about Harrison's guitar playing being mediocre, though.
                                    He was not mediocre, but—for the most part—I'd rate him as decent. But yes, he did improve. By the time of Abbey Road and Let It Be, I think he was very good indeed. The solos in Something and Let It Be are terrific.

                                    Comment


                                      #43
                                      Does anybody watch "pop goes the 60s" on YouTube. If not, I highly recommend it and the multiple videos analysing the Let it Be sessions.

                                      ​​​​​​I've watched the Let it Be movie countless times and wonder what the Peter Jackson film can contain, as Let it Be does a good job of being a fly on the wall at the sessions.

                                      I've always seen Paul as the hero and George as the villain. George is just being seriously naive after his time jamming with Dylan's and The Band at The Big Pink. He stupidly thinks he can get The Beatles to play that way, and "All Things Must Pass" is painful in its first incarnations, and I think George realises this. When you listen to the takes, Lennon really whips it into shape, but George just doesn't have the guts to pursue it and refuses to play any of his songs in the live show.

                                      He was younger than the others and this comes through in his behaviour at that time. Doesn't make him a wanker, far from it based on that really long biographical movie about him.

                                      The naked version of Let it Be is my favourite Beatles album, it's incompatible to the original, which is horribly over produced. I think it's a crying shame the split at this time, there was so much more they could have done and should have done, probably without Harrison.

                                      Comment


                                        #44
                                        I've never watched the Let It Be movie. But we know that documentaries (and films generally) are created in the editing room and the question is whether Michael Lindsay-Hogg's edit was representative of the 60 hours of footage (plus the 120-or-so hours of audio) that was shot.

                                        And Peter Jackson had refused to take on the job until he'd watched everything, by which time h'ed changed his mind about the orthodoxy that this whole period was generally miserable. Additionally, Jackson also managed to isolate the conversations that the band members tried to hide from the film-makers, making the exercise much more honest.

                                        So I'm of the opinion that Jackson's six-hour edit will be a much more balanced portrait than Linsday-Hogg's 80-minute version.

                                        Comment


                                          #45
                                          A negative review:

                                          https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-r...ns-your-sanity

                                          Comment


                                            #46
                                            The review seems rubbish to me, by the way, as it ignores pretty much why the film was made and its target audience.

                                            Comment


                                              #47
                                              He gives his explanation of why it was made. He thinks it's a whitewashing exercise. He may be right but I will wait and see.

                                              Comment


                                                #48
                                                Originally posted by Satchmo Distel View Post
                                                He gives his explanation of why it was made
                                                Yes, true.

                                                He complains about the length, but fans would want 80, let alone 8 hours of footage!

                                                Comment


                                                  #49
                                                  Originally posted by Satchmo Distel View Post
                                                  He gives his explanation of why it was made. He thinks it's a whitewashing exercise. He may be right but I will wait and see.
                                                  But you said on the previous page it was a whitewashing exercise.

                                                  Comment


                                                    #50
                                                    Well, early signs are that I was wrong. I've not seen it yet but from the Steve Hoffman site, the films covers Commonwealth/No Pakistanis (with explanations) and George's walk-out in depth. No whitewash.*

                                                    The original 1970 film misrepresented the sessions because it was edited to make it look miserable for the whole time. This is a correction.

                                                    *See post #3174:

                                                    https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threa...04733/page-127

                                                    I won't get to see it for 10 days or so because of travel then work. Weekend of 3-5 Dec for me.
                                                    Last edited by Satchmo Distel; 25-11-2021, 11:11.

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X