For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
noughties
This new song is better than the previous 2 new songs in the Anthology series from the 90s, IMO.
Quote
Christiaan
What I understand of the song, but tell me if I’m wrong. It is a 1978 John Lennon song. So what the @#$%& has that to do with a Beatles song?? I’m not sure of course, as I do not know much about those guys , but I don’t believe that John Lennon wrote or recorded it as being a Beatles song.
Quote
NICOSQuote
Christiaan
What I understand of the song, but tell me if I’m wrong. It is a 1978 John Lennon song. So what the @#$%& has that to do with a Beatles song?? I’m not sure of course, as I do not know much about those guys , but I don’t believe that John Lennon wrote or recorded it as being a Beatles song.
For what I understand George Harrison worked on the tapes as well, but you right this makes it not a Beatle song, for me it just sounds like a Lennon left over song.
Quote
powerage78
#1 iTunes US.
Quote
RobertJohnson
The song is simply musically weak, the lyrics another one of those countless odes to Yoko Ono from John's late period, George, Ringo and Paul couldn't do much more. What worked with Real Love and Free as a Bird went wrong here. One can only hope that this really was the last song from the Dakota Building with or without a humming fridge.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Fun project, but a mediocre song, imo. Good to hear Lennon's voice, though. Paul should have skipped the backing vocals.
Quote
Big AlQuote
DandelionPowderman
Fun project, but a mediocre song, imo. Good to hear Lennon's voice, though. Paul should have skipped the backing vocals.
Yes, I'm in agreement, unfortunately. I had a listen to Lennon's original demo, and that feels more interesting. This new reimagining of Lennon's song, feels like a bit of a dirge. Very downbeat.
Quote
RollingFreakQuote
Big AlQuote
DandelionPowderman
Fun project, but a mediocre song, imo. Good to hear Lennon's voice, though. Paul should have skipped the backing vocals.
Yes, I'm in agreement, unfortunately. I had a listen to Lennon's original demo, and that feels more interesting. This new reimagining of Lennon's song, feels like a bit of a dirge. Very downbeat.
They needed something new to promote these new releases. Its pretty obvious and its unnecessary. Its the same way as they needed something new to promote with the Anthology, and Free As A Bird worked much better. They'd kinda already lost steam by Real Love. Yes, Paul and Ringo (and George at the time) could contribute to a John Lennon song, but their participation doesn't make it a Beatles song. They have to know that more than anyone. And its painfully clear when you hear these songs. There's an interesting nugget there, and then in making it a full song and clearer they've actually made it more bland IMO.
Quote
bv
I watched the video of the new song, as the single itself is not open in my region still, for some reason. The song is nice and beautiful, but the copy and paste graphics of the now diseased Beatles members is weired. Also, there is a great and nice guitar solo there, but no guitar player seen in the video during the solo, so it is obviously not a Beatle playing it, they show the four of them ony, and the orchestra for a bit.
Quote
CaptainCorellaQuote
bv
I watched the video of the new song, as the single itself is not open in my region still, for some reason. The song is nice and beautiful, but the copy and paste graphics of the now diseased Beatles members is weired. Also, there is a great and nice guitar solo there, but no guitar player seen in the video during the solo, so it is obviously not a Beatle playing it, they show the four of them ony, and the orchestra for a bit.
It's well reported that the guitar is played by Paul ... "in George's style.."
The video changed my view of the song. To quote a posting elsewhere, it enhances the song and turns it into a great "postscript" on the whole Beatles story.
I don't think that adding in the images of John & George is in any way bad taste. Plus we get to see about 2 seconds previously unseen in The Cavern (courtesy Pete Best apparently).
Ironically, the video is stuffed full of the same insanely clever graphics manipulation that's going on in the Billboards in the Stones' "Angry" video. But in The Beatles version, there's no double breasted distraction centre screen.
Quote
CaptainCorellaQuote
bv
I watched the video of the new song, as the single itself is not open in my region still, for some reason. The song is nice and beautiful, but the copy and paste graphics of the now diseased Beatles members is weired. Also, there is a great and nice guitar solo there, but no guitar player seen in the video during the solo, so it is obviously not a Beatle playing it, they show the four of them ony, and the orchestra for a bit.
It's well reported that the guitar is played by Paul ... "in George's style.."
The video changed my view of the song. To quote a posting elsewhere, it enhances the song and turns it into a great "postscript" on the whole Beatles story.
I don't think that adding in the images of John & George is in any way bad taste. Plus we get to see about 2 seconds previously unseen in The Cavern (courtesy Pete Best apparently).
Ironically, the video is stuffed full of the same insanely clever graphics manipulation that's going on in the Billboards in the Stones' "Angry" video. But in The Beatles version, there's no double breasted distraction centre screen.
Quote
CaptainCorellaQuote
bv
I watched the video of the new song, as the single itself is not open in my region still, for some reason. The song is nice and beautiful, but the copy and paste graphics of the now diseased Beatles members is weired. Also, there is a great and nice guitar solo there, but no guitar player seen in the video during the solo, so it is obviously not a Beatle playing it, they show the four of them ony, and the orchestra for a bit.
It's well reported that the guitar is played by Paul ... "in George's style.."
The video changed my view of the song. To quote a posting elsewhere, it enhances the song and turns it into a great "postscript" on the whole Beatles story.
I don't think that adding in the images of John & George is in any way bad taste. Plus we get to see about 2 seconds previously unseen in The Cavern (courtesy Pete Best apparently).
Ironically, the video is stuffed full of the same insanely clever graphics manipulation that's going on in the Billboards in the Stones' "Angry" video. But in The Beatles version, there's no double breasted distraction centre screen.
Quote
peoplewitheyes
yet another one. Why do they bother?