I thought the Anthology revamp was fantastic! There is a lot of added bits of interviews and enhanced video and audio quality, particularly on the live stuff. WOW! The full performance of Some Other Guy is stunning. The stuff from Australia at Webster Hall is amazing! They really did a great job and re-edited it so the flow is much better, particularly in the early episodes and episode 1. Also, more about The Beatles (White album)! And a lot more unreleased pictures from their personal archives. The ninth episode was really great too, with the focus on the making of Free as a Bird, Real Love, and Now and Then. One can really see the myth building by the Threatles and Jeff Lynn, but it is hard not to recognize how much George was over it all and wanted to be done.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-12-03 22:24 by whitem8.

The ninth episode was cute. Certainly milking as much blood from that stone as they can, and a lot of stuff I hadn't seen, but I guess they can be forgiven because they're the Beatles. I wouldn't say its entirely necessary, but anything new from them is usually pretty entertaining, which is why they keep exhausting anything they can find.

I'm looking forward to watching the Anthology all the way through over Christmas break. I've heard they've done a really good job with the minor tinkering on this one, and I have seen the original in awhile (I think maybe beginning of Covid).

I disagree, those three songs are beautiful and great to see it all close out that way. Lovely.

Different strokes for different folks. I do think they did a really good job with Free As A Bird. Its more of an idea than a song, but its the one they best tried to make a full fledged song and I think their contributions were well done. A fitting continuation of the legacy. As Ringo I think says "it sounds like The Beatles!" And a really great George guitar solo in there. Their importance of it does feel a bit overblown, but I get it its your big coming back together moment so feel free to milk.

Oddly enough, I'd say Real Love was the opposite. It was actually more a fleshed out song in the Lennon demo version and, I believe as they've self admitted, they didn't have much to really add to it. They did fine, but overall its a beautiful little track that I think John nailed better alone in a demo form than what they could come up with to expand it. It didn't really need much expanding so its the Beatles on a John solo track.

Now and Then I just don't think is a good song and I don't think people would think it is either if it wasn't listed as The Beatles, and I think they were right to abandon work on it in the 90s, but that's an opinion that sounds more loaded than it is. If people like it, power to them. I don't and the video really sealed my opinion of that.

The Threatles IMHO were a flaw from day one

I listened Free As A Bird with open mind but was send back immediatly to reality :
they had worked on subpar material and with that you can't achieve something of the level of the Beatles.
It was just an impossible task.

Free As A Bird and Real Love for me are at the top end of my favourite Beatles tracks - I think they are great songs. I was never massively into them though.

Quote
ds1984
The Threatles IMHO were a flaw from day one

I listened Free As A Bird with open mind but was send back immediatly to reality :
they had worked on subpar material and with that you can't achieve something of the level of the Beatles.
It was just an impossible task.

I don't even necessarily think its "subpar" material, but its funny that the whole Anthology is about their collaboration and then they come back together on something they really can't collaborate around. Sure, they added bits and pieces there and made it a "song" from just fragments of a demo, but they were inherently limited from the start because you couldn't really change the base or initial structure of the song, you can only work around it. Which was never how the band worked. Its a valiant effort, and again, Paul's "we just said John was off on holiday and we were meant to finish it" is cute, but its funnily like exactly the opposite of how The Beatles worked. They improved on each other's work, even if it was more individual in the later years, but they weren't really ever simply plugging in and adding on to a basically finished track (which again, the flaw with this is it isn't that. Its a fragment that almost has to be treated as a finished track).

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
ds1984
The Threatles IMHO were a flaw from day one

I listened Free As A Bird with open mind but was send back immediatly to reality :
they had worked on subpar material and with that you can't achieve something of the level of the Beatles.
It was just an impossible task.

I don't even necessarily think its "subpar" material, but its funny that the whole Anthology is about their collaboration and then they come back together on something they really can't collaborate around. Sure, they added bits and pieces there and made it a "song" from just fragments of a demo, but they were inherently limited from the start because you couldn't really change the base or initial structure of the song, you can only work around it. Which was never how the band worked. Its a valiant effort, and again, Paul's "we just said John was off on holiday and we were meant to finish it" is cute, but its funnily like exactly the opposite of how The Beatles worked. They improved on each other's work, even if it was more individual in the later years, but they weren't really ever simply plugging in and adding on to a basically finished track (which again, the flaw with this is it isn't that. Its a fragment that almost has to be treated as a finished track).

All of that you said is true. However, it's what happened. I dig the work. It's not 1969 Beatles. No one has to listen to it.

Quote
RollingFreak
Now and Then I just don't think is a good song and I don't think people would think it is either if it wasn't listed as The Beatles, and I think they were right to abandon work on it in the 90s, but that's an opinion that sounds more loaded than it is. If people like it, power to them. I don't and the video really sealed my opinion of that.

I remember reading somewhere George felt the same way which is why he and then the others quit working on it initially, but finished it much later after his passing.

Great cover I'd never seen. I know Phil Collins irks some people but he does a great job here, with Sir George Martin working the machines:

[www.youtube.com]

Quote
kovach

Quote
RollingFreak
Now and Then I just don't think is a good song and I don't think people would think it is either if it wasn't listed as The Beatles, and I think they were right to abandon work on it in the 90s, but that's an opinion that sounds more loaded than it is. If people like it, power to them. I don't and the video really sealed my opinion of that.

I remember reading somewhere George felt the same way which is why he and then the others quit working on it initially, but finished it much later after his passing.

Yes, that’ll my understanding, too. It was originally pencilled-in for inclusion on Anthology 3.

As a life long Beatles Fan I want to say I like the song Now And Then as well as the video. I don't consider it (or the other two) to be taken too seriously. They're all nice pieces of work to honor John and The Beatles, they couldn't do anything more. This does not diminish my opinion of the band or the importance they have/had in my opinion.

Quote
Big Al

Quote
kovach

Quote
RollingFreak
Now and Then I just don't think is a good song and I don't think people would think it is either if it wasn't listed as The Beatles, and I think they were right to abandon work on it in the 90s, but that's an opinion that sounds more loaded than it is. If people like it, power to them. I don't and the video really sealed my opinion of that.

I remember reading somewhere George felt the same way which is why he and then the others quit working on it initially, but finished it much later after his passing.

Yes, that’ll my understanding, too. It was originally pencilled-in for inclusion on Anthology 3.

Correct. I believe the original plan was each Anthology would have its own "new track" which makes perfect sense.

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
Big Al

Quote
kovach

Quote
RollingFreak
Now and Then I just don't think is a good song and I don't think people would think it is either if it wasn't listed as The Beatles, and I think they were right to abandon work on it in the 90s, but that's an opinion that sounds more loaded than it is. If people like it, power to them. I don't and the video really sealed my opinion of that.

I remember reading somewhere George felt the same way which is why he and then the others quit working on it initially, but finished it much later after his passing.

Yes, that’ll my understanding, too. It was originally pencilled-in for inclusion on Anthology 3.

Correct. I believe the original plan was each Anthology would have its own "new track" which makes perfect sense.

BUT 3 Lennon tracks...
Come on guys, the Beatles were not centered toward John only.
One John song, one Paul song, one George song would have had more sense.

Quote
ds1984

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
Big Al

Quote
kovach

Quote
RollingFreak
Now and Then I just don't think is a good song and I don't think people would think it is either if it wasn't listed as The Beatles, and I think they were right to abandon work on it in the 90s, but that's an opinion that sounds more loaded than it is. If people like it, power to them. I don't and the video really sealed my opinion of that.

I remember reading somewhere George felt the same way which is why he and then the others quit working on it initially, but finished it much later after his passing.

Yes, that’ll my understanding, too. It was originally pencilled-in for inclusion on Anthology 3.

Correct. I believe the original plan was each Anthology would have its own "new track" which makes perfect sense.

BUT 3 Lennon tracks...
Come on guys, the Beatles were not centered toward John only.
One John song, one Paul song, one George song would have had more sense.

That's not what happened. It was about Lennon's demo recordings. If it wasn't for what Lennon did you wouldn't be saying that.

Nor has anyone ever said it was about Lennon. Go smoke some weed.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
ds1984

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
Big Al

Quote
kovach

Quote
RollingFreak
Now and Then I just don't think is a good song and I don't think people would think it is either if it wasn't listed as The Beatles, and I think they were right to abandon work on it in the 90s, but that's an opinion that sounds more loaded than it is. If people like it, power to them. I don't and the video really sealed my opinion of that.

I remember reading somewhere George felt the same way which is why he and then the others quit working on it initially, but finished it much later after his passing.

Yes, that’ll my understanding, too. It was originally pencilled-in for inclusion on Anthology 3.

Correct. I believe the original plan was each Anthology would have its own "new track" which makes perfect sense.

BUT 3 Lennon tracks...
Come on guys, the Beatles were not centered toward John only.
One John song, one Paul song, one George song would have had more sense.

That's not what happened. It was about Lennon's demo recordings. If it wasn't for what Lennon did you wouldn't be saying that.

Nor has anyone ever said it was about Lennon. Go smoke some weed.

I think it was important to feature all 4 of them prominently. The 3 living Beatles at the time were obvious, Lennon was the linchpin that pulled it all together. And let's face it, putting out songs by a band that had broken up 25 years prior with a singer that died 15 years prior draws attention.

They would obviously have been John songs because you could insert the other 3 living Beatles onto a demo he had made, but not the other way around. It made more sense to have them work through a John track vs. a track Paul wrote that only George and Ringo could also contribute to. To keep the "spirit of the Beatles", this was the only way to get John on a track. Otherwise I think there would have been uproar about there being songs labeled as "The Beatles" without John. Not that that never happened while the band was active, but obviously if any of them wanted to write songs and do it with the 3 of them they had solo projects for that.

Quote
RollingFreak
They would obviously have been John songs because you could insert the other 3 living Beatles onto a demo he had made, but not the other way around. It made more sense to have them work through a John track vs. a track Paul wrote that only George and Ringo could also contribute to. To keep the "spirit of the Beatles", this was the only way to get John on a track. Otherwise I think there would have been uproar about there being songs labeled as "The Beatles" without John. Not that that never happened while the band was active, but obviously if any of them wanted to write songs and do it with the 3 of them they had solo projects for that.

Proved wrong, John is not performing on Yesterday.
I stand on my point.

Quote
ds1984

Quote
RollingFreak
They would obviously have been John songs because you could insert the other 3 living Beatles onto a demo he had made, but not the other way around. It made more sense to have them work through a John track vs. a track Paul wrote that only George and Ringo could also contribute to. To keep the "spirit of the Beatles", this was the only way to get John on a track. Otherwise I think there would have been uproar about there being songs labeled as "The Beatles" without John. Not that that never happened while the band was active, but obviously if any of them wanted to write songs and do it with the 3 of them they had solo projects for that.

Proved wrong, John is not performing on Yesterday.
I stand on my point.

Clearly you do and are being very stubborn about it. I say in my post "not that that never happened while the band was active" meaning I and many others are well aware that there are multiple songs that don't include all 4 of them on the recording. That's not new, but obviously regrouping in the 90s it was pretty clearly a "in good taste" to have all 4 of them on. Otherwise, the 3 of them could play with each other on anything they'd want to outside of the Beatles. But regrouping in the 90s under the Beatles logo, it would have been in poor taste to not include John, which is why they obviously did what they did. I feel like even you know that but happy to agree to disagree.

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
ds1984

Quote
RollingFreak
They would obviously have been John songs because you could insert the other 3 living Beatles onto a demo he had made, but not the other way around. It made more sense to have them work through a John track vs. a track Paul wrote that only George and Ringo could also contribute to. To keep the "spirit of the Beatles", this was the only way to get John on a track. Otherwise I think there would have been uproar about there being songs labeled as "The Beatles" without John. Not that that never happened while the band was active, but obviously if any of them wanted to write songs and do it with the 3 of them they had solo projects for that.

Proved wrong, John is not performing on Yesterday.
I stand on my point.

Clearly you do and are being very stubborn about it. I say in my post "not that that never happened while the band was active" meaning I and many others are well aware that there are multiple songs that don't include all 4 of them on the recording. That's not new, but obviously regrouping in the 90s it was pretty clearly a "in good taste" to have all 4 of them on. Otherwise, the 3 of them could play with each other on anything they'd want to outside of the Beatles. But regrouping in the 90s under the Beatles logo, it would have been in poor taste to not include John, which is why they obviously did what they did. I feel like even you know that but happy to agree to disagree.

The bad taste were the three John's poor demo.

Quote
ds1984
The bad taste were the three John's poor demo.

Doubt John had any idea those 3 demos would be made into Beatles songs. I think he would have worked harder on them if he did. Anyhow, I like them for what they are. I don't consider them in the Beatles catalog, but why not have a little fun.

Quote
frankotero

Quote
ds1984
The bad taste were the three John's poor demo.

Doubt John had any idea those 3 demos would be made into Beatles songs. I think he would have worked harder on them if he did. Anyhow, I like them for what they are. I don't consider them in the Beatles catalog, but why not have a little fun.

ds1984 is clueless and full of errors.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
frankotero

Quote
ds1984
The bad taste were the three John's poor demo.

Doubt John had any idea those 3 demos would be made into Beatles songs. I think he would have worked harder on them if he did. Anyhow, I like them for what they are. I don't consider them in the Beatles catalog, but why not have a little fun.

ds1984 is clueless and full of errors.

Prove it.

The good stuff was on Double Fantasy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-12-11 00:33 by ds1984.

Quote
ds1984

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
frankotero

Quote
ds1984
The bad taste were the three John's poor demo.

Doubt John had any idea those 3 demos would be made into Beatles songs. I think he would have worked harder on them if he did. Anyhow, I like them for what they are. I don't consider them in the Beatles catalog, but why not have a little fun.

ds1984 is clueless and full of errors.

Prove it.

The good stuff was on Double Fantasy.

There's really no reason to respond and it'll probably be the last time I do, but your statement makes no sense. The stuff on Double Fantasy were finished recordings. Songs that went from being demos, same as these are, to fully fleshed out songs. They are excellent, and that's what an artist does when they can continue to work on something. As mentioned, its not like John Lennon recorded these demos for the Beatles to later work on. Who knows if HE would have gone back to them or not. We'll sadly never know, but the Threatles did what they could with them. If its bad, that's not to say they were bad songs to start with. Just means they became fully fleshed out most likely in a different way John might have intended. They aren't mind readers, and again who knows how far he'd even gotten with them. Free As A Bird was essentially a phrase and that's it. They were what they had to work with in order to keep John part of these releases and they didn't have many other options. Its a reasonable idea, and the execution could only do so much for the time they were working on, the quality of what they were given. I think they are fine additions to the catalogue and certainly don't tarnish the legacy in any way.

But sure, its sad John Lennon knew he was going to die and didn't leave them a song as brilliant as Starting Over to work on 25 years later. The original statement just makes no sense.

Just watched episode 9 of the Anthology. Lots of filler from previous episodes but was still worth a watch.

I thought maybe they could have shown the 3 new song videos with the newly remixed/remastered versions. Seems like a missed opportunity.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-12-11 05:42 by kovach.

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
ds1984

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
frankotero

Quote
ds1984
The bad taste were the three John's poor demo.

Doubt John had any idea those 3 demos would be made into Beatles songs. I think he would have worked harder on them if he did. Anyhow, I like them for what they are. I don't consider them in the Beatles catalog, but why not have a little fun.

ds1984 is clueless and full of errors.

Prove it.

The good stuff was on Double Fantasy.

There's really no reason to respond and it'll probably be the last time I do, but your statement makes no sense. The stuff on Double Fantasy were finished recordings. Songs that went from being demos, same as these are, to fully fleshed out songs. They are excellent, and that's what an artist does when they can continue to work on something. As mentioned, its not like John Lennon recorded these demos for the Beatles to later work on. Who knows if HE would have gone back to them or not. We'll sadly never know, but the Threatles did what they could with them. If its bad, that's not to say they were bad songs to start with. Just means they became fully fleshed out most likely in a different way John might have intended. They aren't mind readers, and again who knows how far he'd even gotten with them. Free As A Bird was essentially a phrase and that's it. They were what they had to work with in order to keep John part of these releases and they didn't have many other options. Its a reasonable idea, and the execution could only do so much for the time they were working on, the quality of what they were given. I think they are fine additions to the catalogue and certainly don't tarnish the legacy in any way.

But sure, its sad John Lennon knew he was going to die and didn't leave them a song as brilliant as Starting Over to work on 25 years later. The original statement just makes no sense.

My opinion in 2025 is I would have prefered that the Threatles did not issue the post beatles recording.
John shot in 1980, end of The Beatles!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-12-11 12:05 by ds1984.

completely missing the point of saying John didn't perform on Yesterday. Completely different context and completely different points in the band's history. It is great the Threatles didn't release their own music and used John's demo and did what they did so many times, collaborating to complete a Beatles track brought to the group by the primary composer to fill it out and make it Beatles magic.

Ringo's 'Black Oyster Pearl' - part of the 'Jim Irsay Collection' - which will be auctioned at Christie's among hundreds of incredible objects from March 3-17, 2026.

There're also public exhibitions of selected highlights before - London (UK): January 16-22, San Francisco: February 3-7, Los Angeles: February 4-6 and Las Vegas: February 20-22 .

Oh no. Sorry but I think that particular drum set belongs in a Museum.

Quote
ds1984
My opinion in 2025 is I would have prefered that the Threatles did not issue the post beatles recording.
John shot in 1980, end of The Beatles!

Your choice to not listen to any of them.