I believe you forgot George masturbating in the corner while everyone else argued.

Yeah those were some shortcomings of the original.

McCartney was the only one interested in what was going on, and it was annoying for Yoko to be around every waking minute.

Still, the story I heard was that they'd start the shoot early in the morning when the Beatles for the most part were still half-asleep.

You'd think that their being superstars would pull some weight. Like make the movie in the middle of the night, muthafarka...

They should really just let it be.

Let It Be in a nutshell:

Paul has taken it upon himself to micromanage the group after Brian Epstein's death, John and George get butthurt about it, and Ringo gets tired of playing peace-keeper all the time.

What a farking waste.

BKITU: Let It Be in a nutshell:

Paul has taken it upon himself to micromanage the group after Brian Epstein's death, John and George get butthurt about it, and Ringo gets tired of playing peace-keeper all the time.

What a farking waste.

Yup, that about sums it up. The only part worth watching is the rooftop concert(clickity poppity).

eqtworld: Have you seen it?

Yes. This would be a re-release.

eqtworld: What the hell is everyone biatching about, it's out?

It hasn't been released on home video in 15 years or so. If there's a torrent, it's of someone capturing an ancient VHS. If one exists, it probably sucks and isn't popular.

Paul and Ringo's objection is that it somehow sullies the image of the Beatles because lots of the footage shows them arguing.

Because, you know, they didn't break up in a mirror universe that's overlapping with our own, or something.

I had no idea "Let It Be" was no longer available. That's insane.

I must have watched that movie 100 times when I was young, I thought it was great. Watching the four of them barely able to stand to be in the same room was just terrific.

/oh dirty maggie mae...

Saw it in a theater when I was a kid. Just liked the Music.

Would not mind seeing it again.

So Ringo, Paul .... Let it Go !

I have a DVD of Let it Be pulled from a Laserdisc release. The quality isn't too good, but you see and hear it clearly, which is really all that is important.

The movie is really significant only as a study the events which lead to the band's breaking up. And the rooftop concert is cool too. But don't think you're missing out on the "great lost Beatles film".

That said, the film should be available to be seen by anyone interested. Anything else is just an attempt at revisionist history.

I'll play if you want me to play, I won't play if you don't want me to play. Whatever it is that will please you, I'll do it.

The movie does have a fantastic bit where George plays acoustic "While My Guitar Gently Weeps".

Paul and Ringo's reasoning sucks. Any Beatles fan knows what was going on at the time, it's not a big secret that they were at the end of their rope with each other. John wanted to leave after Sgt. Pepper, George had wanted to leave forever, Ringo quit during the White Album sessions and came back; it was only kept together by Paul. Not a great way to end an amazing run, but for fark's sake, it's not 1965, we're not 14, we can handle the truth. Gimme some truth, Paul and Ringo, mkay?

John was only too happy to have it come out and show what was going on, and kill the myth.

Notice how the cameras were on Paul most of the time. He had set it up that way, and stupidly exposed himself for the douchebag he had become. Like they say, pride comes before a fall.

eqtworld: El Freak: Let It Be in a nutshell:

Yup, that about sums it up.

Have you seen it? I have not even heard of an unreleased Beatles documentary with unseen footage.

My assmptions:

1: torrents exist

2: this film exists

:therefore- at some point this film will be seen by anyone who desires to see it.

True. If anyone wants to see it, they would have seen this movie by now. Its not THAT hard to find....hell, you can find pretty much ALL of the recording sessions of Let it be now if you search hard enough.

If it was ever released, which it was, people have seen it and will still be able to see it.

And banning it only puts them in a worse light than if they had just let it go ahead. It only makes people curious as to what it is they are hiding from or embarrased about and even more determined to search around and pick up a copy. So they are only fuelling demand with this stunt.

I thought these guys were supposed to be smart?

Well, this is a disappointment. Saw it in college a couple of times not too many years after its release -- everybody booed whenever Yoko appeared on-screen. I've been waiting for its DVD release for some time now... guess I'll have to wait a little longer. Pity that. A shame Paul and Ringo won't just embrace it for what it is; bet a commentary by the two of them would be really interesting.

I liked it when Davey Jones played at Marsha Brady's prom.

It was released on both VHS and laserdisc back in the 80's. The laserdisc is the source of most of the very plentiful bootleg copies that are available. People have been anxious for a legit DVD release thinking there might be extra footage and such like there has been with the Hard Days Night and Help rereleases.

The film isn't much fun to watch. Paul pretty much dominates everything while the rest just kinda go along with it. There is one very telling scene where John, George and Ringo are jamming on "For You Blue", then Paul shows up and it's like "Ok..fun's over..time to play "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" again."

I don't think Lennon says more than five words throughout the entire film. The music (even his) is boring as hell.

I would like to go ahead and address the inevitable "Ringo sucked"
direction that all Beatles threads end up going:


If you claim "Ringo sucked" we will require that you cite any/all examples. Song names,live recordings,concert footage etc...
We will need specific examples of Ringo skipping a beat or losing tempo or any provable musical screwup directly attributable to his drumming. Unless you can provide/prove some actual example of Ringo "suckage" you must S T F U !

Is there really anything particularly revelatory in that article or even the film?

It's not like it's some massive, arcane secret that the Beatles broke up due to the well-known tensions and squabbles. Nothing new here. All this is going to do is increase the number of torrent dl's of the film.

Have a nice clean copy on the DVD shelf in the Beatles section.

Block that.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but at that point in their career wouldn't it be more likely to see John nodding off all messed up on heroin than it was to see him mooning over Yoko?

Yeah, geez, I wish there was somewhere we could all See it.

I assume since they aren't mentioned in TFA that Yoko and whoever runs George's estate are okay with the film's being re-released? Just curious.

It's really unfortunate that they're still engaging in this sort of revisionism. Just like the Anthology series - excellent, comprehensive documentary, with the glaring flaw that it glosses over both the role of drug use in the band's evolution and a good portion of the internal squabbles toward their dissolution. I'll still love "Eleanor Rigby" if I see you give Yoko a dirty look, Paul, I promise.

One thing that might be playing into it as well is that there are some moments in the film where their playing is absolutely atrocious. There are murderous versions of "I Dig A Pony" and "Don't Let Me Down" that even the biggest Beatles freaks have to admit sound horrible.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The wrong two Beatles died first.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember a film showing all of that. Now what was it called...?

Why can't everyone just agree that "Give My Regards to Broad Street" is what really needs to remain unreleased?

The gist of it
Link (new window)

Confabulat: I had no idea "Let It Be" was no longer available. That's insane.

Me neither. I feel very old.

/Paul re-recording Ringo's drums without Ringo knowing FTW!

mofomisfit:

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but at that point in their career wouldn't it be more likely to see John nodding off all messed up on heroin than it was to see him mooning over Yoko?


I think the two of them may have dabbled with it a little bit around this time, but it was a few years later when John was using it much heavier.

whidbey: Yeah those were some shortcomings of the original.

McCartney was the only one interested in what was going on, and it was annoying for Yoko to be around every waking minute.

Still, the story I heard was that they'd start the shoot early in the morning when the Beatles for the most part were still half-asleep only half-stoned.
.....,


ftfy

correct me if I'm mistaken, but ....

who cares?

Arpeggi760: I've said it before and I'll say it again: The wrong two Beatles died first.


DIAF


/Paul will never die

whidbey: Yeah those were some shortcomings of the original.

McCartney was the only one interested in what was going on, and it was annoying for Yoko to be around every waking minute.

Still, the story I heard was that they'd start the shoot early in the morning when the Beatles for the most part were still half-asleep.

You'd think that their being superstars would pull some weight. Like make the movie in the middle of the night, muthafarka...

Apparently, the shooting schedule was dictated by the stringent British film technicians union. Not even the Beatles' superstardom could overcome that.

Arpeggi760: I've said it before and I'll say it again: The wrong two Beatles died first.

The reason you keep having to say it is because no one agrees with you. The reason for that is because the things you say make people think you're a jackass.

I probably haven't seen Let It Be in about ten years, but I remember it being really depressing. Paul clearly wants to emerge as the frontman of the group, Yoko hovers over John like a farking vulture, George and Ringo... don't do much of anything. It's like watching four unfriendly schoolchildren try to work together on a forced collaborative project.

It's really unfortunate that Paul and Ringo are in denial about the whole thing. Anyone that has wanted to see, has seen it already. I personally enjoy watching it. It's the reality of the breakup caught on film, with minor glimpses of them still clinging on of what's left of themselves as a group.

Oh, and Paul being pissed off at Yoko being there is great. John no longer cared for the No-Chicks-In-The-Studio rule.

Bros Before Hos. Learn from that.

craigdamage: I would like to go ahead and address the inevitable "Ringo sucked"
direction that all Beatles threads end up going:


If you claim "Ringo sucked" we will require that you cite any/all examples. Song names,live recordings,concert footage etc...
We will need specific examples of Ringo skipping a beat or losing tempo or any provable musical screwup directly attributable to his drumming. Unless you can provide/prove some actual example of Ringo "suckage" you must S T F U !

- I'd like to load a video of me doing an impression of him dancing to "It Don't Come Easy" or something more recent like that, on stage with his peace signs and bland voice and whatnot, generally being boring. But, I have no one to film me and webcam is too grainy.

I have it on VHS and would welcome a DVD re-issue. One consolation (and probably one that Paul and Ringo use to justify their position) is that we already have Let It Be Naked, the remastered songs on CD. There isn't anything in that movie that is more worthwhile than the tracks on this CD, so really, what's the loss?

Nevertheless, we'll just have to settle for the second half of This Is Spinal Tap, which covers the same ground and is far more entertaining. Tap even has their own version of Yoko (Janine).

/second place -- the Rutles' All You Need Is Cash DVD, which is still available too.

The part that really sucks is that the VHS rip out there is really cropped.

From what I've heard, the doc was filmed with 4x3 aspect ratio. This was then cropped to 1.85 for the theatrical release. (cutting off the top and bottom)
Then, for the home release, they cropped the theatrical film down to 4x3. (so now you've cutting off the left and right sides to an image that was already trimmed top and bottom)
So it's like you're really looking through a keyhole.
A really grainy keyhole.

The reason you keep having to say it is because no one agrees with you. The reason for that is because the things you say make people think you're a jackass.

Excellent argument you got there asshat!

angryred Quote 2008-07-31 02:19:23 AM
I'll play if you want me to play, I won't play if you don't want me to play. Whatever it is that will please you, I'll do it.

Best line in the film...and that was George letting Paul "have it" on camera...who knows how much more footage exists that didn't make the movie of them really cussing Paul out?

It was three against one by that time. George, John and Ringo wanted Klein to be their manager, their new Epstein; Paul wanted an Eastman, for obvious reasons...plus Klein was an American...

I think Ringo got it from Paul in the end, when he was sent alone in a last ditch attempt to get Paul to sign the agreement with Klein. Paul say he called Ringo every name under the sun, and when it almost came to blows, literally threw him out of his house.

The Beatles are human beings. People should be able to finally see that in Let It Be. For goodness sake, it happened 35 or so years ago!

Unhip1: It was three against one by that time. George, John and Ringo wanted Klein to be their manager, their new Epstein; Paul wanted an Eastman, for obvious reasons...plus Klein was an American...

....and one of the biggest scumbags ever in the music business and that's saying a lot. Paul rightly saw that Klein was a parasite who was going to screw them all--those idiots Jagger and Richards fell in love with Klein and as a result they don't have any control of any of their 1960's catalog.

From Keith Richards: Satisfaction by Christopher Sandford (Carroll & Graf Publishers, 2004), p. 160:
"On 30 July [1970] the Stones formally announced that they'd terminated their contract with Allen Klein, who therefore had 'no authority to negotiate' on their behalf. Two years of bitter litigation followed. In 1971 the band sued for $30 million back pay, alleging Klein had used his position for 'his own personal profit and advantage'. Eventually they dropped this part of their claim, and Klein wound up with the rights to all Richards-Jagger songs through Let It Bleed. On 9 May 1972, the Stones confirmed 'settlement of all outstanding difficulties' after thirty-six hours of continuous haggling in a New York lawyer's office. The bottom-line, Jagger told the press, 'is that Allen Klein never has anything else to do with us'."

Ringo and John and George's heirs should kiss Paul McCartney's feet twice a day --he won't be wearing shoes, of course-- for saving them all from Allen Klein.

I get the Paul hate, I don't like the schmaltzy stuff either, but damn, if it wasn't for him, The Beatles would have never really progressed beyond Beatles for Sale. While the other three were living decadent lives out in Surrey, going on week-long acid binges, Paul was in London mixing with all the avant-garde people around at the time and bringing that to Beatles sessions. He's easily the best musician of the four and for his work from 1963-1969 alone, deserves more respect than he gets.

Henry Holland While the other three were living decadent lives out in Surrey, going on week-long acid binges, Paul was in London mixing with all the avant-garde people around at the time and bringing that to Beatles sessions. He's easily the best musician of the four and for his work from 1963-1969 alone, deserves more respect than he gets.

Even though you are 100% correct, and intelligent Beatles fans have always known this to be true, are you prepared to get tarred and feathered (wrongly) here on Fark?

/maybe not...this thread is getting cobwebs by now

Henry Holland: Unhip1: It was three against one by that time. George, John and Ringo wanted Klein to be their manager, their new Epstein; Paul wanted an Eastman, for obvious reasons...plus Klein was an American...

....and one of the biggest scumbags ever in the music business and that's saying a lot. Paul rightly saw that Klein was a parasite who was going to screw them all--those idiots Jagger and Richards fell in love with Klein and as a result they don't have any control of any of their 1960's catalog.

From Keith Richards: Satisfaction by Christopher Sandford (Carroll & Graf Publishers, 2004), p. 160:
"On 30 July [1970] the Stones formally announced that they'd terminated their contract with Allen Klein, who therefore had 'no authority to negotiate' on their behalf. Two years of bitter litigation followed. In 1971 the band sued for $30 million back pay, alleging Klein had used his position for 'his own personal profit and advantage'. Eventually they dropped this part of their claim, and Klein wound up with the rights to all Richards-Jagger songs through Let It Bleed. On 9 May 1972, the Stones confirmed 'settlement of all outstanding difficulties' after thirty-six hours of continuous haggling in a New York lawyer's office. The bottom-line, Jagger told the press, 'is that Allen Klein never has anything else to do with us'."

Ringo and John and George's heirs should kiss Paul McCartney's feet twice a day --he won't be wearing shoes, of course-- for saving them all from Allen Klein.

I get the Paul hate, I don't like the schmaltzy stuff either, but damn, if it wasn't for him, The Beatles would have never really progressed beyond Beatles for Sale. While the other three were living decadent lives out in Surrey, going on week-long acid binges, Paul was in London mixing with all the avant-garde people around at the time and bringing that to Beatles sessions. He's easily the best musician of the four and for his work from 1963-1969 alone, deserves more respect than he gets.

Well put, and I completely agree with you. Macca does have some damn fine business sense, and you are right on on this one. +1

Unhip1: I think Ringo got it from Paul in the end, when he was sent alone in a last ditch attempt to get Paul to sign the agreement with Klein. Paul say he called Ringo every name under the sun, and when it almost came to blows, literally threw him out of his house.

That episode had to do with the release of "McCartney" a week before "Let it Be" came out. Ringo asked Paul to hold it off for a bit so as not to compete with the group's album. Paul, said, um, no.

Henry Holland: Unhip1: It was three against one by that time. George, John and Ringo wanted Klein to be their manager, their new Epstein; Paul wanted an Eastman, for obvious reasons...plus Klein was an American...

....and one of the biggest scumbags ever in the music business and that's saying a lot. Paul rightly saw that Klein was a parasite who was going to screw them all--those idiots Jagger and Richards fell in love with Klein and as a result they don't have any control of any of their 1960's catalog.

From Keith Richards: Satisfaction by Christopher Sandford (Carroll & Graf Publishers, 2004), p. 160:
"On 30 July [1970] the Stones formally announced that they'd terminated their contract with Allen Klein, who therefore had 'no authority to negotiate' on their behalf. Two years of bitter litigation followed. In 1971 the band sued for $30 million back pay, alleging Klein had used his position for 'his own personal profit and advantage'. Eventually they dropped this part of their claim, and Klein wound up with the rights to all Richards-Jagger songs through Let It Bleed. On 9 May 1972, the Stones confirmed 'settlement of all outstanding difficulties' after thirty-six hours of continuous haggling in a New York lawyer's office. The bottom-line, Jagger told the press, 'is that Allen Klein never has anything else to do with us'."

Ringo and John and George's heirs should kiss Paul McCartney's feet twice a day --he won't be wearing shoes, of course-- for saving them all from Allen Klein.

I get the Paul hate, I don't like the schmaltzy stuff either, but damn, if it wasn't for him, The Beatles would have never really progressed beyond Beatles for Sale. While the other three were living decadent lives out in Surrey, going on week-long acid binges, Paul was in London mixing with all the avant-garde people around at the time and bringing that to Beatles sessions. He's easily the best musician of the four and for his work from 1963-1969 alone, deserves more respect than he gets.


Thank you! Finally, some Paul love.

I mean, c'mon...John had some pretty schmaltzy stuff out there too. I want to kill myself every time I hear "Free as a Bird" or "Real Love".

If Paul had been capped in 1980 instead of John, he would have been beatified instead of knighted.

/See Paul live before you (or he) die(s). You'll never hate on him again.

Somehow I don't think George would be gung-ho about it, either. The film doesn't make him look particularly good.

John, I can see being OK with it. After all, he was OK with showing us his junk, along with his wife's goods (which I applaud, though it was very very unnecessary). And he excoriated himself in a song or two, so he's not too protective of his image.

Estates, well... a much simpler decision to make. What will fetch them more money? DVD release or no DVD release? (don't think too long about it).