Tell Me :
Talk
Interesting response on my question. But weren't the original Beatles not those who had Pete Best as drummer?
I was merely referring to how today's youngsters would "welcome" both bands first music/records (and appearence) in the early sixties, supposing there was no history of both.
Indeed Paddy, the general response on One Direction (can these guys actually play instruments?) would be comparable to that of the Beatles. So what you could say, is that streaming 12/13 year young girls (sorry, but not meant to be discriminatory) are still setting the possible future fame of bands?
Well I ask you very confidentially, ain't that sweet?
That show was the one to watch as a kid growing up in the UK in the 60’s. Nice one.
"Hey guys, how's it going?"
Outbreak of laughter from the entire pub.
Whoa nelly...2 minutes and 21 seconds seemed like eternity...
...no wonder they broke up!
Makes the Kookaburra Bird sound heavenly in comparison:
The Kookaburra
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
That's a GOOD photo. I really don't recall seeing it before. Where did you dig that up from?
--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan
What a cool clip, thank you.
Really original idea imo, plus that lead actor is super great.
his face runs the gamut of emotions in a really skillrul way as an actor.
It seemed really clever and refreshing; new ground and perspective on
what has become tiresomely repetitive in the media (for old rock and roll
fans who have followed the Invasion since the outset)....
...good steady brilliant hands at work in this passion project.
of course a short trailer clip isn't the two hour theatrical experience
and all that...but i really found it funny and engaging idea well
played by this production. at least from the clip.
I was discussing this movie with my dad (who is a much bigger Beatles fan than I am) and I raised the question: based on the trailer it appears that music has progressed to its current state in the movie, just without the Beatles. SO a young musician capitalizes on their songs to make it big. The question is: if released today would the Beatles songs have the same impact, or are they as well regarded as they are bc of the passage of time? This is not to say they are not good songs (they are, for the most part) but would today's audiences still like songs like I want to hold your hand, Yesterday, Hey Jude, Something or one of the other many Beatles hits if it weren't for constant airplay and the fact that baby-boomers still pass their music around?
It's an interesting question; and this is a movie I'd like to see.
i used to see movies all the time and keep up but have not in decades now,
with very few exceptions; i'm sure i've been missing great, super great stuff and i hope to catch something really special from time to time....but this idea intrigues me; and the actor had charm and an innocent presesence that was refreshing. at first i thought it would be another teeny 'can't buy me love' or other such sweetheart valentines (it's valentines day; quick to steve earle's valentines day song. it's a good 'un!)
.....to the dam beetles and the teeny bop cultcha...(of which i was a part at 12 i guess when the dam beets and The Rolling Stones , who were England's newest hitmakers....yessssss)
....but i digresses
...
it's hard to say; we are all so soaked with the reviews and love love love
and to some extent with grand justification; they put out some courageous
and inventive stuff; and powerful stuff with two lead vocals of enormous
character and ability from ballad to stuff approaching a harder rock;
it's true i rarely listen as an adult , and that's a longass time now,
EXCEPT for certain tracks; about an albums worth or so all in all,
that ARE cultural references and landmarks for me, and ARE extremely well written, performed and played. with invention and character....
so when Frank Sinatra, who aside from the backstories and incredible drama
thru his life in records, films and Vegas and Tv and Radio and everything else...would always in a very respectful and gentlemanly manner mention
each songwriter before launching into a tune...and often the Arranger or
Orchestra Leader too. so that my dear friends is CLASS.
he's introduce "Something" (gettin coverd by frankie is like getting covered by dylan or elvis imo)
...as a great 'lennon mcottney' song...(george wrote it frankie dohhhhh)
...but frank sinatra heard that song and wasn't probably looking for a hit
single...maybe but....i mean everyone copied them, but still. sinatra found them worthy of respect, which means something to me...
tho he's just another bloke at the end of the day i suppose?
the earliest dam beetle reviews had some writers using classical music
melodic references and detailed analysis of certain 7ths or 9ths or whatever
their little quirkly stylistic gfooves were....
certainly it's all the simple scale...
it was a grand set up when one of their biggest latter day hits "hello goodbye"
(itself a grand title andl dramatic setup in spare lyric)....
...but they musta laffed till they peed throwing a straight major scale in there during the grand 'build-up' musically...
and then SINGING IT. cheeky.
hello goodbye hello goodbye
and down again
hello goodbye
hello goodbye
repeat. lol...
...
but the little references to melodic flourishes here and there have to be
considred by me and others as 'classically' beautiful....little snips
of melody that are grounded and grounding...
i dunno; the media and hype plays so much the big part in cultural criticism
or serious musical criticism in the modern world; or post modern world!
...
i'd say their success was deserved because of the beauty in some of their material...they weren't ermans ermits , and tho I'm sure Mick is nice to Peter,
and means no harms in his own references to the Hermits as an Invasion band w big hits....but the dam beetles did have three very interesting songwriters...
...and when the first two were working together im the early days....
similarly to Mick and Keith writing together in the early days upon
Andrew's direction (who had come from the beetles dam organizations)
....
there was very simple beautiful melodies that i found indelible.
and when i do listen to those beetle tracks i go for, it's very often
the very Early Beatles LP selections....and up to the Rubber Soul Revolver
period; tho there is obviously startling good stuff like Skelter and others to come.
i think they deserve the praise and "love love love' they tried to ace
as a result of a fame they themselves rather quickly found disturbing
and disconnecting.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-02-14 19:22 by hopkins.
The boots are ... special!
__________________________
May be like "Goodnight Sweetheart" but it's a LOT like this!
[www.theguardian.com]
Ouch!
--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
georgie48
()
Date: January 31, 2019 06:28
Quote
tattersQuote
georgie48
Today it is 50 years ago that the Beatles (already after several years without live concerts) gave their final live performance.
It's mind boggling that 50 years ago The Beatles were already winding down, but in a weird way, you could say they were together longer than the (original) Rolling Stones. Even before The Beatles played on the roof, Brian had already played his last show with the Stones, and even before The Beatles had put the finishing touches on Abbey Road, Brian was dead.
Interesting response on my question. But weren't the original Beatles not those who had Pete Best as drummer?
I was merely referring to how today's youngsters would "welcome" both bands first music/records (and appearence) in the early sixties, supposing there was no history of both.
Indeed Paddy, the general response on One Direction (can these guys actually play instruments?) would be comparable to that of the Beatles. So what you could say, is that streaming 12/13 year young girls (sorry, but not meant to be discriminatory) are still setting the possible future fame of bands?
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
marianna
()
Date: January 31, 2019 08:22
It's not comparable because the Beatles and Stones were liked by boys as well as girls, and a wider range of ages. One Direction didn't inspire a large number of teenage boys to start their own bands. The British Invasion bands had a wider impact on the culture than later boy bands.
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
Deltics
()
Date: February 5, 2019 21:41
This probably won't mean much to anyone outside the UK.
Sir Paul McCartney adds gold Blue Peter badge to awards haul
[www.bbc.co.uk]
"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"
Sir Paul McCartney adds gold Blue Peter badge to awards haul
[www.bbc.co.uk]
"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
ycagwywpmd
()
Date: February 6, 2019 00:44
Quote
Deltics
This probably won't mean much to anyone outside the UK.
Sir Paul McCartney adds gold Blue Peter badge to awards haul
[www.bbc.co.uk]
Well I ask you very confidentially, ain't that sweet?
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
KingmanBarstow
()
Date: February 6, 2019 09:50
Quote
Deltics
This probably won't mean much to anyone outside the UK.
Sir Paul McCartney adds gold Blue Peter badge to awards haul
[www.bbc.co.uk]
That show was the one to watch as a kid growing up in the UK in the 60’s. Nice one.
Re: OT: Fashion flash: Everybody will be wearing Beatles gear
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: February 6, 2019 12:35
"Hey guys, how's it going?"
Outbreak of laughter from the entire pub.
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
hopkins
()
Date: February 7, 2019 05:16
[www.nme.com]
How Peter Jackson’s new version of ‘Let It Be’ will shatter your view of The dam beetles i hate them
Read more at [www.nme.com]
The Lord Of The Rings director is set to release his own version of the classic Beatles film, documenting studio days Paul McCartney has described as “hell… the most miserable sessions on earth”
If we’ve learnt anything from reality TV, it’s that if you put cameras anywhere – a restaurant, an Ibiza rep pub crawl, a village bake off, even the most arse-scratching sofa telly sesh – the egos involved will explode. So put a film crew into the most hot-house environment outside of Theresa May’s emergency supplication lessons – The Beatles on the brink of collapse in Twickenham Film Studios, January 1969 – and it’s no surprise that tensions were amplified.
That’s what makes Let It Be project the one that the Beatles machine is most reluctant to revisit. After all, when you’re flicking through old pictures of a relationship, you tend to skip over the ones of the tense final meal that ended with the bill being rammed down your throat.
So fans are getting understandably excited by the news that Peter Jackson is set to direct a new version of the film from the 55 hours of original footage and 140 hours of audio recordings, including the 42 minute film of the band playing on the roof of Apple Corps, the original guerrilla gig. Unless he somehow contrives the notion that the Beatles split was down to in-fighting over some manner of magical ring, it promises to be the most revealing new Beatles project in decades. Here’s why…
Let It Be is a semi-lost film
For such a high-profile slice of rock’n’roll history, Let It Be is surprisingly obscure. It’s been unavailable on any non-defunct technology since the last VHS copy got chewed up in the 1980s. There’s never been a DVD or Blu Ray release of the film, and you won’t find this baby on Netflix. It’s almost as though the remaining Beatles were happy to let it fade into antiquity – after all, it didn’t paint McCartney in a particularly favourable light…
It might include more hints about the split
The original film contained the barest of traces of dissent in The Beatles ranks – when McCartney criticised Harrison’s guitar part on ‘Two Of Us’ and George curtly replied “I’ll play whatever you want me to play, or I won’t play at all if you don’t want me to play. Whatever it is that will please you, I’ll do it.” McCartney has called the sessions “hell… the most miserable sessions on earth” and George actually walked out of the sessions – and the band – a few days into filming, but that event didn’t make it into director Michael Lindsay-Hogg’s original version.
Considering various members convinced Lindsay-Hogg to remove other contentious scenes, it’s not unfair to consider the original film as The Whitewash Album. So there’s great potential for a more warts-and-all version that spotlights the divisions, like footage of open-band surgery. Or will Macca want Jackson to erase all of his narkiness and concentrate on delivering a forensic study of the musical construction process? Actually, we’re not sure which we’d find more fascinating.
We haven’t seen half the rooftop concert yet
The last ever Beatles gig is amongst the most legendary live performances ever, yet of its 42 minutes the original film included just 21. OK, so most of the remaining footage consists of another three or four runs through ‘Get Back’, but at this point, we’ll take anything we can get. Jackson’s film had better include every second of footage from when they step onto the roof to when the filth drags them off, or we’re calling the police again.
We might get to hear the lost post-Beatles album (sort of)
There’s always been a haze of mystery around the solo records that the various Beatles made during the life of the group, as John, Paul and George slunk away to let off their own individual creative pressure valves. In fact, many songs that ended up on solo albums were played during the Let It be sessions, so with astute editing we might get to hear what ‘Every Night’, ‘The Back Seat Of My Car’, ‘Gimme Some Truth’, ‘Jealous Guy’ and ‘All Things Must Pass’ might’ve sounded like on a record together, played by the Fabs. Sigh.
And a ‘preview’ of ‘Abbey Road’
Besides the solo songs, several ‘Abbey Road’ tracks were worked on during the sessions, but didn’t make the cut for the movie. So here, hopefully, will be our chance to imagine what ‘Let It Be’ could’ve been like with ‘I Want You (She’s So Heavy)’ and ‘She Came In Through The Bathroom Window’ in place of ‘Dig It’ or ‘Maggie Mae’. Plus there’s a chance we might get to hear Lennon singing ‘I Lost My Little Girl’, the first song McCartney ever wrote aged 14, another lost cut.
The original film is set for reissue too
For the purists, a reissue of the original Let It Beis due to follow Jackson’s film in 2020, to mark its 50thanniversary. Let It Be marathon it is, then.
---
this starts off with yoko. singing. sorry. i def wouldn't click on it.
i did. trust me here.
[www.youtube.com]
-------------------------------------------------
How Peter Jackson’s new version of ‘Let It Be’ will shatter your view of The dam beetles i hate them
Read more at [www.nme.com]
The Lord Of The Rings director is set to release his own version of the classic Beatles film, documenting studio days Paul McCartney has described as “hell… the most miserable sessions on earth”
If we’ve learnt anything from reality TV, it’s that if you put cameras anywhere – a restaurant, an Ibiza rep pub crawl, a village bake off, even the most arse-scratching sofa telly sesh – the egos involved will explode. So put a film crew into the most hot-house environment outside of Theresa May’s emergency supplication lessons – The Beatles on the brink of collapse in Twickenham Film Studios, January 1969 – and it’s no surprise that tensions were amplified.
That’s what makes Let It Be project the one that the Beatles machine is most reluctant to revisit. After all, when you’re flicking through old pictures of a relationship, you tend to skip over the ones of the tense final meal that ended with the bill being rammed down your throat.
So fans are getting understandably excited by the news that Peter Jackson is set to direct a new version of the film from the 55 hours of original footage and 140 hours of audio recordings, including the 42 minute film of the band playing on the roof of Apple Corps, the original guerrilla gig. Unless he somehow contrives the notion that the Beatles split was down to in-fighting over some manner of magical ring, it promises to be the most revealing new Beatles project in decades. Here’s why…
Let It Be is a semi-lost film
For such a high-profile slice of rock’n’roll history, Let It Be is surprisingly obscure. It’s been unavailable on any non-defunct technology since the last VHS copy got chewed up in the 1980s. There’s never been a DVD or Blu Ray release of the film, and you won’t find this baby on Netflix. It’s almost as though the remaining Beatles were happy to let it fade into antiquity – after all, it didn’t paint McCartney in a particularly favourable light…
It might include more hints about the split
The original film contained the barest of traces of dissent in The Beatles ranks – when McCartney criticised Harrison’s guitar part on ‘Two Of Us’ and George curtly replied “I’ll play whatever you want me to play, or I won’t play at all if you don’t want me to play. Whatever it is that will please you, I’ll do it.” McCartney has called the sessions “hell… the most miserable sessions on earth” and George actually walked out of the sessions – and the band – a few days into filming, but that event didn’t make it into director Michael Lindsay-Hogg’s original version.
Considering various members convinced Lindsay-Hogg to remove other contentious scenes, it’s not unfair to consider the original film as The Whitewash Album. So there’s great potential for a more warts-and-all version that spotlights the divisions, like footage of open-band surgery. Or will Macca want Jackson to erase all of his narkiness and concentrate on delivering a forensic study of the musical construction process? Actually, we’re not sure which we’d find more fascinating.
We haven’t seen half the rooftop concert yet
The last ever Beatles gig is amongst the most legendary live performances ever, yet of its 42 minutes the original film included just 21. OK, so most of the remaining footage consists of another three or four runs through ‘Get Back’, but at this point, we’ll take anything we can get. Jackson’s film had better include every second of footage from when they step onto the roof to when the filth drags them off, or we’re calling the police again.
We might get to hear the lost post-Beatles album (sort of)
There’s always been a haze of mystery around the solo records that the various Beatles made during the life of the group, as John, Paul and George slunk away to let off their own individual creative pressure valves. In fact, many songs that ended up on solo albums were played during the Let It be sessions, so with astute editing we might get to hear what ‘Every Night’, ‘The Back Seat Of My Car’, ‘Gimme Some Truth’, ‘Jealous Guy’ and ‘All Things Must Pass’ might’ve sounded like on a record together, played by the Fabs. Sigh.
And a ‘preview’ of ‘Abbey Road’
Besides the solo songs, several ‘Abbey Road’ tracks were worked on during the sessions, but didn’t make the cut for the movie. So here, hopefully, will be our chance to imagine what ‘Let It Be’ could’ve been like with ‘I Want You (She’s So Heavy)’ and ‘She Came In Through The Bathroom Window’ in place of ‘Dig It’ or ‘Maggie Mae’. Plus there’s a chance we might get to hear Lennon singing ‘I Lost My Little Girl’, the first song McCartney ever wrote aged 14, another lost cut.
The original film is set for reissue too
For the purists, a reissue of the original Let It Beis due to follow Jackson’s film in 2020, to mark its 50thanniversary. Let It Be marathon it is, then.
---
this starts off with yoko. singing. sorry. i def wouldn't click on it.
i did. trust me here.
[www.youtube.com]
-------------------------------------------------
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: February 7, 2019 05:52
Quote
hopkins
this starts off with yoko. singing. sorry. i def wouldn't click on it.
i did. trust me here.
[www.youtube.com]
Whoa nelly...2 minutes and 21 seconds seemed like eternity...
...no wonder they broke up!Makes the Kookaburra Bird sound heavenly in comparison:
The Kookaburra
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
OT: Michael Jackson and George Harrison conversation
Posted by:
dmay
()
Date: February 7, 2019 17:55
This sounds interesting. If someone can grab it and post it here, would you please? Thanks.
[ontheradio.co.uk]
[ontheradio.co.uk]
Re: OT: Michael Jackson and George Harrison conversation
Posted by:
Deltics
()
Date: February 7, 2019 19:22
You'll be able to listen to it here shortly after broadcast: [www.bbc.co.uk]
A very short snippet here: [www.bbc.co.uk]
"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"
A very short snippet here: [www.bbc.co.uk]
"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"
Re: OT: Michael Jackson and George Harrison conversation
Posted by:
jlowe
()
Date: February 7, 2019 23:44
Ironic, in that within a few years Jacko went on to purchase the Lennon McCartney
songwriting catalogue.
songwriting catalogue.
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
CaptainCorella
()
Date: February 14, 2019 05:07
Quote
Carnaby
That's a GOOD photo. I really don't recall seeing it before. Where did you dig that up from?
--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
CaptainCorella
()
Date: February 14, 2019 05:13
New Beatles related movie coming in June 2019. Here's the trailer.
[www.youtube.com]
Any film like this runs on a narrow line, in my view, between being unbearably corny, or a delight. I hope this one is on the 'delight' side.
To save Deltics pointing it out (being an Oracle he knows absolutely everything!), the thesis of the movie plot is vaguely similar to the BBC TV series "Goodnight Sweetheart".
(I also really liked the "Across The Universe" movie. If you've not seen it and you like The Beatles, then correct that error. If you go for the DVD take the time to watch the two added out-takes of Eddie Izzard absolutely triumphantly performing "Mr Kite"!)
--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan
[www.youtube.com]
Any film like this runs on a narrow line, in my view, between being unbearably corny, or a delight. I hope this one is on the 'delight' side.
To save Deltics pointing it out (being an Oracle he knows absolutely everything!), the thesis of the movie plot is vaguely similar to the BBC TV series "Goodnight Sweetheart".
(I also really liked the "Across The Universe" movie. If you've not seen it and you like The Beatles, then correct that error. If you go for the DVD take the time to watch the two added out-takes of Eddie Izzard absolutely triumphantly performing "Mr Kite"!)
--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
hopkins
()
Date: February 14, 2019 05:28
Quote
CaptainCorella
New Beatles related movie coming in June 2019. Here's the trailer.
[www.youtube.com]
Any film like this runs on a narrow line, in my view, between being unbearably corny, or a delight. I hope this one is on the 'delight' side.
To save Deltics pointing it out (being an Oracle he knows absolutely everything!), the thesis of the movie plot is vaguely similar to the BBC TV series "Goodnight Sweetheart".
(I also really liked the "Across The Universe" movie. If you've not seen it and you like The Beatles, then correct that error. If you go for the DVD take the time to watch the two added out-takes of Eddie Izzard absolutely triumphantly performing "Mr Kite"!)
What a cool clip, thank you.
Really original idea imo, plus that lead actor is super great.
his face runs the gamut of emotions in a really skillrul way as an actor.
It seemed really clever and refreshing; new ground and perspective on
what has become tiresomely repetitive in the media (for old rock and roll
fans who have followed the Invasion since the outset)....
...good steady brilliant hands at work in this passion project.
of course a short trailer clip isn't the two hour theatrical experience
and all that...but i really found it funny and engaging idea well
played by this production. at least from the clip.
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: February 14, 2019 05:31
Sounds promising - I look forward to it!
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
RollingFreak
()
Date: February 14, 2019 06:46
After seeing his WWI documentary, I can't wait to see what Peter Jackson'll do with Let It Be.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-02-14 06:46 by RollingFreak.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-02-14 06:46 by RollingFreak.
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
Cristiano Radtke
()
Date: February 14, 2019 06:56
Yesterday, everyone knew The Beatles. Today, only Jack remembers their songs. He’s about to become a very big deal. From Academy Award®-winning director Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire, Trainspotting, 28 Days Later) and Richard Curtis, the Oscar-nominated screenwriter of Four Weddings and a Funeral, Love Actually and Notting Hill, comes a rock-n-roll comedy about music, dreams, friendship, and the long and winding road that leads to the love of your life.
Jack Malik (Himesh Patel, BBC’s Eastenders) is a struggling singer-songwriter in a tiny English seaside town whose dreams of fame are rapidly fading, despite the fierce devotion and support of his childhood best friend, Ellie (Lily James, Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again). Then, after a freak bus accident during a mysterious global blackout, Jack wakes up to discover that The Beatles have never existed … and he finds himself with a very complicated problem, indeed.
Performing songs by the greatest band in history to a world that has never heard them, and with a little help from his steel-hearted American agent, Debra (Emmy winner Kate McKinnon), Jack’s fame explodes. But as his star rises, he risks losing Ellie — the one person who always believed in him. With the door between his old life and his new closing, Jack will need to get back to where he once belonged and prove that all you need is love.
Featuring new versions of The Beatles’ most beloved hits, Yesterday is produced by Working Title’s Tim Bevan and Eric Fellner (Love Actually, About A Boy, the Bridget Jones series) alongside Matthew James Wilkinson and Bernie Bellew. Curtis and Boyle also produce. Nick Angel and Lee Brazier serve as executive producers.
Yesterday - Trailer
Jack Malik (Himesh Patel, BBC’s Eastenders) is a struggling singer-songwriter in a tiny English seaside town whose dreams of fame are rapidly fading, despite the fierce devotion and support of his childhood best friend, Ellie (Lily James, Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again). Then, after a freak bus accident during a mysterious global blackout, Jack wakes up to discover that The Beatles have never existed … and he finds himself with a very complicated problem, indeed.
Performing songs by the greatest band in history to a world that has never heard them, and with a little help from his steel-hearted American agent, Debra (Emmy winner Kate McKinnon), Jack’s fame explodes. But as his star rises, he risks losing Ellie — the one person who always believed in him. With the door between his old life and his new closing, Jack will need to get back to where he once belonged and prove that all you need is love.
Featuring new versions of The Beatles’ most beloved hits, Yesterday is produced by Working Title’s Tim Bevan and Eric Fellner (Love Actually, About A Boy, the Bridget Jones series) alongside Matthew James Wilkinson and Bernie Bellew. Curtis and Boyle also produce. Nick Angel and Lee Brazier serve as executive producers.
Yesterday - Trailer
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
Happy Jack
()
Date: February 14, 2019 16:39
Quote
Cristiano Radtke
Yesterday, everyone knew The Beatles. Today, only Jack remembers their songs. He’s about to become a very big deal. From Academy Award®-winning director Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire, Trainspotting, 28 Days Later) and Richard Curtis, the Oscar-nominated screenwriter of Four Weddings and a Funeral, Love Actually and Notting Hill, comes a rock-n-roll comedy about music, dreams, friendship, and the long and winding road that leads to the love of your life.
Jack Malik (Himesh Patel, BBC’s Eastenders) is a struggling singer-songwriter in a tiny English seaside town whose dreams of fame are rapidly fading, despite the fierce devotion and support of his childhood best friend, Ellie (Lily James, Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again). Then, after a freak bus accident during a mysterious global blackout, Jack wakes up to discover that The Beatles have never existed … and he finds himself with a very complicated problem, indeed.
Performing songs by the greatest band in history to a world that has never heard them, and with a little help from his steel-hearted American agent, Debra (Emmy winner Kate McKinnon), Jack’s fame explodes. But as his star rises, he risks losing Ellie — the one person who always believed in him. With the door between his old life and his new closing, Jack will need to get back to where he once belonged and prove that all you need is love.
Featuring new versions of The Beatles’ most beloved hits, Yesterday is produced by Working Title’s Tim Bevan and Eric Fellner (Love Actually, About A Boy, the Bridget Jones series) alongside Matthew James Wilkinson and Bernie Bellew. Curtis and Boyle also produce. Nick Angel and Lee Brazier serve as executive producers.
Yesterday - Trailer
I was discussing this movie with my dad (who is a much bigger Beatles fan than I am) and I raised the question: based on the trailer it appears that music has progressed to its current state in the movie, just without the Beatles. SO a young musician capitalizes on their songs to make it big. The question is: if released today would the Beatles songs have the same impact, or are they as well regarded as they are bc of the passage of time? This is not to say they are not good songs (they are, for the most part) but would today's audiences still like songs like I want to hold your hand, Yesterday, Hey Jude, Something or one of the other many Beatles hits if it weren't for constant airplay and the fact that baby-boomers still pass their music around?
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
Deltics
()
Date: February 14, 2019 17:02
Beatles Great Yarmouth photo printed after 55 years
"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"
"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
hopkins
()
Date: February 14, 2019 18:23
[www.cheatsheet.com]
Paul McCartney: How Much Is the Beatles Legend Worth in 2019?
"Even with all the amazing acts who followed them, The Beatles still hold the record for all-time album sales. That’s only possible because their music continues selling in huge numbers every year. (During 2018, the band’s White Album cracked the Billboard Top 10 half a century after its debut.)
Of course, it doesn’t hurt that the band’s surviving members continue to record music and go on tour. While it’s been decades since the deaths of John Lennon and George Harrison, Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr still delight fans with their own music and The Beatles’ back catalog.
But of those two remaining Beatles, McCartney has been the more successful musician since the Fab Four disbanded in 1970. Whether you go by the Grammy count or overall wealth, there isn’t too much competition from Ringo. However, that’s not really a fair comparison for anyone. McCartney may be the richest musician who ever lived, and he’s certainly among the great songwriters of the 20th century. Here’s a look back at his incredible earnings and net worth in 2019. It’s incredible to believe, but Paul’s earnings (and a few other factors) have pushed him into billionaire territory. To start, you simply have to look at his wildly successful recording career. The Beatles’ 600 million album sales (plus 1.6 billion singles) speak for themselves. After the band broke up, he quickly became a force as a solo artist and with his band Wings. Musicians continued covering his songs and keeping the publishing fees rolling in, while fans kept snatching up his records by the millions. He became wealthier every decade before hitting astonishing figures in the ’90s. By the time his wife Linda died in 2000, McCartney’s net worth stood near $500 million. But it also grew substantially with Linda’s passing. She left him her entire fortune, which some estimated to be worth over $200 million. While these numbers boggle the mind, Forbes reporting that Paul earned $56.5 million in 2015-16 will fully strain anyone’s comprehension. The outlet pegged his 2010-16 earnings at $350 million. Needless to say, his fortune’s billion-plus valuation seems plausible. McCartney’s net worth estimated at $1.2 billion (!)
Once you add all the staggering figures, you can understand how McCartney’s net worth has been estimated at $1.2 billion in 2019. At times, online outlets can inflate these numbers, but it doesn’t seem like that’s the case with Paul. Stories of his 2018 tour prove that McCartney still has the power to pack fans into seats and wow the audience on any given night. There’s no sign that he’s preparing to stop recording and touring. (Ringo isn’t stopping, either.) At this point, it can’t be remotely about the money. The only other musician who has entered the billionaire’s club (to date) has been Andrew Lloyd Webber. So that makes McCartney the richest rock star to ever walk the earth, and he could soon be the wealthiest person to play music for a living."
_____________________
could one of you lurking prosefessionals pleze give macca hoppys email addie?
ty.
i don't know what got into me w all these dam beetle i hate them refersences,
cuz really they are so dam gudd. silly love songs? bring em son.
that's billion with a b right?
it can't buy you love son.
(yeh right)
....
thank you deep dam beetle fans.
not heard from gramps about pasadena either.
just sayin'....i'd really probably pay more likely to give priority status
to the first one sending money or tickets or backstage passes or a new guitar or van thanks
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2019-02-14 18:33 by hopkins.
Paul McCartney: How Much Is the Beatles Legend Worth in 2019?
"Even with all the amazing acts who followed them, The Beatles still hold the record for all-time album sales. That’s only possible because their music continues selling in huge numbers every year. (During 2018, the band’s White Album cracked the Billboard Top 10 half a century after its debut.)
Of course, it doesn’t hurt that the band’s surviving members continue to record music and go on tour. While it’s been decades since the deaths of John Lennon and George Harrison, Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr still delight fans with their own music and The Beatles’ back catalog.
But of those two remaining Beatles, McCartney has been the more successful musician since the Fab Four disbanded in 1970. Whether you go by the Grammy count or overall wealth, there isn’t too much competition from Ringo. However, that’s not really a fair comparison for anyone. McCartney may be the richest musician who ever lived, and he’s certainly among the great songwriters of the 20th century. Here’s a look back at his incredible earnings and net worth in 2019. It’s incredible to believe, but Paul’s earnings (and a few other factors) have pushed him into billionaire territory. To start, you simply have to look at his wildly successful recording career. The Beatles’ 600 million album sales (plus 1.6 billion singles) speak for themselves. After the band broke up, he quickly became a force as a solo artist and with his band Wings. Musicians continued covering his songs and keeping the publishing fees rolling in, while fans kept snatching up his records by the millions. He became wealthier every decade before hitting astonishing figures in the ’90s. By the time his wife Linda died in 2000, McCartney’s net worth stood near $500 million. But it also grew substantially with Linda’s passing. She left him her entire fortune, which some estimated to be worth over $200 million. While these numbers boggle the mind, Forbes reporting that Paul earned $56.5 million in 2015-16 will fully strain anyone’s comprehension. The outlet pegged his 2010-16 earnings at $350 million. Needless to say, his fortune’s billion-plus valuation seems plausible. McCartney’s net worth estimated at $1.2 billion (!)
Once you add all the staggering figures, you can understand how McCartney’s net worth has been estimated at $1.2 billion in 2019. At times, online outlets can inflate these numbers, but it doesn’t seem like that’s the case with Paul. Stories of his 2018 tour prove that McCartney still has the power to pack fans into seats and wow the audience on any given night. There’s no sign that he’s preparing to stop recording and touring. (Ringo isn’t stopping, either.) At this point, it can’t be remotely about the money. The only other musician who has entered the billionaire’s club (to date) has been Andrew Lloyd Webber. So that makes McCartney the richest rock star to ever walk the earth, and he could soon be the wealthiest person to play music for a living."
_____________________
could one of you lurking prosefessionals pleze give macca hoppys email addie?
ty.
i don't know what got into me w all these dam beetle i hate them refersences,
cuz really they are so dam gudd. silly love songs? bring em son.
that's billion with a b right?
it can't buy you love son.
(yeh right)
....
thank you deep dam beetle fans.
not heard from gramps about pasadena either.
just sayin'....i'd really probably pay more likely to give priority status
to the first one sending money or tickets or backstage passes or a new guitar or van thanks
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2019-02-14 18:33 by hopkins.
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
hopkins
()
Date: February 14, 2019 19:19
Quote
Happy JackQuote
Cristiano Radtke
Yesterday, everyone knew The Beatles. Today, only Jack remembers their songs. He’s about to become a very big deal. From Academy Award®-winning director Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire, Trainspotting, 28 Days Later) and Richard Curtis, the Oscar-nominated screenwriter of Four Weddings and a Funeral, Love Actually and Notting Hill, comes a rock-n-roll comedy about music, dreams, friendship, and the long and winding road that leads to the love of your life.
Jack Malik (Himesh Patel, BBC’s Eastenders) is a struggling singer-songwriter in a tiny English seaside town whose dreams of fame are rapidly fading, despite the fierce devotion and support of his childhood best friend, Ellie (Lily James, Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again). Then, after a freak bus accident during a mysterious global blackout, Jack wakes up to discover that The Beatles have never existed … and he finds himself with a very complicated problem, indeed.
Performing songs by the greatest band in history to a world that has never heard them, and with a little help from his steel-hearted American agent, Debra (Emmy winner Kate McKinnon), Jack’s fame explodes. But as his star rises, he risks losing Ellie — the one person who always believed in him. With the door between his old life and his new closing, Jack will need to get back to where he once belonged and prove that all you need is love.
Featuring new versions of The Beatles’ most beloved hits, Yesterday is produced by Working Title’s Tim Bevan and Eric Fellner (Love Actually, About A Boy, the Bridget Jones series) alongside Matthew James Wilkinson and Bernie Bellew. Curtis and Boyle also produce. Nick Angel and Lee Brazier serve as executive producers.
Yesterday - Trailer
I was discussing this movie with my dad (who is a much bigger Beatles fan than I am) and I raised the question: based on the trailer it appears that music has progressed to its current state in the movie, just without the Beatles. SO a young musician capitalizes on their songs to make it big. The question is: if released today would the Beatles songs have the same impact, or are they as well regarded as they are bc of the passage of time? This is not to say they are not good songs (they are, for the most part) but would today's audiences still like songs like I want to hold your hand, Yesterday, Hey Jude, Something or one of the other many Beatles hits if it weren't for constant airplay and the fact that baby-boomers still pass their music around?
It's an interesting question; and this is a movie I'd like to see.
i used to see movies all the time and keep up but have not in decades now,
with very few exceptions; i'm sure i've been missing great, super great stuff and i hope to catch something really special from time to time....but this idea intrigues me; and the actor had charm and an innocent presesence that was refreshing. at first i thought it would be another teeny 'can't buy me love' or other such sweetheart valentines (it's valentines day; quick to steve earle's valentines day song. it's a good 'un!)
.....to the dam beetles and the teeny bop cultcha...(of which i was a part at 12 i guess when the dam beets and The Rolling Stones , who were England's newest hitmakers....yessssss)
....but i digresses
...
it's hard to say; we are all so soaked with the reviews and love love love
and to some extent with grand justification; they put out some courageous
and inventive stuff; and powerful stuff with two lead vocals of enormous
character and ability from ballad to stuff approaching a harder rock;
it's true i rarely listen as an adult , and that's a longass time now,
EXCEPT for certain tracks; about an albums worth or so all in all,
that ARE cultural references and landmarks for me, and ARE extremely well written, performed and played. with invention and character....
so when Frank Sinatra, who aside from the backstories and incredible drama
thru his life in records, films and Vegas and Tv and Radio and everything else...would always in a very respectful and gentlemanly manner mention
each songwriter before launching into a tune...and often the Arranger or
Orchestra Leader too. so that my dear friends is CLASS.
he's introduce "Something" (gettin coverd by frankie is like getting covered by dylan or elvis imo)
...as a great 'lennon mcottney' song...(george wrote it frankie dohhhhh)
...but frank sinatra heard that song and wasn't probably looking for a hit
single...maybe but....i mean everyone copied them, but still. sinatra found them worthy of respect, which means something to me...
tho he's just another bloke at the end of the day i suppose?
the earliest dam beetle reviews had some writers using classical music
melodic references and detailed analysis of certain 7ths or 9ths or whatever
their little quirkly stylistic gfooves were....
certainly it's all the simple scale...
it was a grand set up when one of their biggest latter day hits "hello goodbye"
(itself a grand title andl dramatic setup in spare lyric)....
...but they musta laffed till they peed throwing a straight major scale in there during the grand 'build-up' musically...
and then SINGING IT. cheeky.
hello goodbye hello goodbye
and down again
hello goodbye
hello goodbye
repeat. lol...
...
but the little references to melodic flourishes here and there have to be
considred by me and others as 'classically' beautiful....little snips
of melody that are grounded and grounding...
i dunno; the media and hype plays so much the big part in cultural criticism
or serious musical criticism in the modern world; or post modern world!
...
i'd say their success was deserved because of the beauty in some of their material...they weren't ermans ermits , and tho I'm sure Mick is nice to Peter,
and means no harms in his own references to the Hermits as an Invasion band w big hits....but the dam beetles did have three very interesting songwriters...
...and when the first two were working together im the early days....
similarly to Mick and Keith writing together in the early days upon
Andrew's direction (who had come from the beetles dam organizations)
....
there was very simple beautiful melodies that i found indelible.
and when i do listen to those beetle tracks i go for, it's very often
the very Early Beatles LP selections....and up to the Rubber Soul Revolver
period; tho there is obviously startling good stuff like Skelter and others to come.
i think they deserve the praise and "love love love' they tried to ace
as a result of a fame they themselves rather quickly found disturbing
and disconnecting.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-02-14 19:22 by hopkins.
Re: OT: Fashion flash: Everybody will be wearing Beatles gear
Posted by:
doitywoik
()
Date: February 15, 2019 07:06
The boots are ... special!
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
hopkins
()
Date: February 15, 2019 22:47
i really dig that striped dress shirt.
very cool collar! hops would def wear that. he's got style, man.
just get all that patchwork cartoon shit offa it. maybe it's packaging?
no, the model is wearing it. that stuff stays there when you wear it OURSIDE!?
bullshit.
it's a monty python thing. i call fake news.
very cool collar! hops would def wear that. he's got style, man.
just get all that patchwork cartoon shit offa it. maybe it's packaging?
no, the model is wearing it. that stuff stays there when you wear it OURSIDE!?
bullshit.
it's a monty python thing. i call fake news.
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
RollingFreak
()
Date: February 16, 2019 18:07
The Rolling Stones, In Colour.
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
NICOS
()
Date: February 17, 2019 00:37
Quote
RollingFreak
The Rolling Stones, In Colour.
__________________________
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
CaptainCorella
()
Date: February 20, 2019 07:42
Quote
CaptainCorella
New Beatles related movie coming in June 2019. Here's the trailer.
[www.youtube.com]
Any film like this runs on a narrow line, in my view, between being unbearably corny, or a delight. I hope this one is on the 'delight' side.
To save Deltics pointing it out (being an Oracle he knows absolutely everything!), the thesis of the movie plot is vaguely similar to the BBC TV series "Goodnight Sweetheart".
May be like "Goodnight Sweetheart" but it's a LOT like this!
[www.theguardian.com]
Ouch!
--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan
Re: Beatles vs Stones - and other Beatles stuff
Posted by:
marianna
()
Date: February 20, 2019 08:02
Those songs only work because of the sound of the band's voices/harmonies and personality of the band members. Cover versions of those songs have never had great success equal to the originals. It also seems like a treacly premise. Someone should have tried it with Stones songs. It might have had a more interesting plot.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Big Al , DandelionPowderman , django , marclaff , MartinB , PaintMonkeyManBlack , RisingStone , S.T.P , Stoneswolf , StonyRoad , Topi
Guests:
1807
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10