Was Mick Jagger in the Movie Let It Be..Plus do we know when the song Let It Bleed was written?

Yes I am trying to figure out of the title Let It Bleed was in response to the Beatles Let It Be.

He isn't in Let it Be. At least the officially released version. There may be outtakes. I would have to look through the reference book, Let it Be the Unautherized Transcripts, that gives a synopsis of the entire sessions by day. I have read it, ages ago and never read a reference to Jagger being there. Peter Sellars was there trying to score H from Lennon and visiting Ringo (they were both filming the Magic Christian). They began recording it on Jan. 3, 1969 (although McCartney started composing it during the recording of The Beatles aka The White Album). I blieve the Stones started working on Let it Bleed Feb. of 1969. So it is hard to say. One cross over could have been George or John talking with Mick about the project. Or Mick talking with John about Let it Bleed. It is hard to say. They both were started within the year of each other. Interesting question.

If George and/or John had spoken to Mick or any of the other Stones about the project, they wouldn't have been referring to it as "Let It Be", since the working title at the time was "Get Back", the title of the first single released from these recordings that year and the title of the unreleased 1969 album taken from the sessions that was mixed by Glyn Johns. The whole idea was for the band to "get back" to a more grounded, basic sound and state of mind, like they had in their early days -- one of the reasons they resurrected their old song One After 909, which was an outtake from album sessions done in 1963.

FWIW, here's what Keith had to say about it in 1971, a kind of yes and no response:

"(It didn't have) a thing (to do with the Beatles' Let It Be). Just a coincidence because you're working along the same lines at the same time at the same age as a lot of other cats. All trying to do the same thing basically, turn themselves and other people on. Let It Bleed was just one line in that song Mick wrote. It became the title... we just kicked a line out... We dug that song so... maybe there was some influence because Let It Be had been kicked around for years for their movie, for that album. Let it be something. Let it out. Let it loose."

Well there you go, and an interesting comment about Let it Loose! I have always thought Keith was influenced by George's Leslie tone on Let it Be and all over All Things Must Pass. Yes, you are correct it was the working title of Get Back (Feature Don't Let me Down and ...") It seems like from Keith it is posibble that there was some discussions. I mean they were friends, talking and would probably share some tidbits of what they were working on. McCartney was one to brag quite a bit and often would play stuff for anyone who would listen (great story of him going to Haight Ashbery and playing a tape of Day in the Life to Jefferson Airplane and David Crosby, Stills, and Nash at the Filmore). So it wouldn't be out of the relm of possibility. And if the Stones heard McCartney's sweet Let it Be, I can totally see Mick wanting to sneer at it with Let it Bleed. And know how The Beatles were fighting and really bitching about each other, combined with all the fighting in the streets, Let it Bleed is a perfect sardonic kiss off to the sixties.

Bootlegs of the unreleased Get Back album, which included the song "Let It Be" were circulating widely by the autumn of 1969. The Stones would certainly have heard it or heard of it prior to the release of their own Let It Bleed LP, though that doesn't answer the question of when the song "Let It Bleed" was written.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-12-31 04:14 by tatters.

Quote
tatters
Bootlegs of the unreleased Get Back album, which included the song "Let It Be" were circulating widely by the autumn of 1969, prior to the release of the Stones Let It Bleed LP, though that does not answer the question of when the song "Let It Bleed" was written.

Let it Be was recorded in Jan 1969. The recordings were engineered by none other than Glyn Johns, who also engineered the Let It Bleed sessions later that year. Johns was bitter that his mix of the album was rejected and the project was eventually famously handed over to Phil Spector.

It is quite feasible that Johns could have played the track for The Stones at some time before Let It Bleed was written. Although there is no evidence, it is possible that the similar title was a cheeky dig. I always hoped so, it is kind of funny!

Yup good points! I agree Johns very well could have played some to the Stones while working on Let it Bleed, and like I wrote, it would be highly likely Mick heard a version from Paul, from him playing guitar or on piano.

Quote
whitem8
Yup good points! I agree Johns very well could have played some to the Stones while working on Let it Bleed, and like I wrote, it would be highly likely Mick heard a version from Paul, from him playing guitar or on piano.

Yup! The point is, there were multiple opportunities for Mick to have heard Let It Be in plenty of time to to write the bawdy song with a parody title that was the polar opposite of the hymn-like Let It Be.

But, no one has ever owned up to it, and it has been repeatedly denied, so we will likely never know if there is actually that connection.

Maybe Stanlove is confused by Mick's appearance in The Rutles?

Easy mistake to make.

--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan

Let it be sessions took place on January 27; 12 version of LIB were played; Preston was there.
download this video
[fastfocus.org]
I am not sure about the guy in the vdo at 2,13; but if he is the one I think, you have the answer to your question.

Quote
whitem8
He isn't in Let it Be. At least the officially released version. There may be outtakes. I would have to look through the reference book, Let it Be the Unautherized Transcripts, that gives a synopsis of the entire sessions by day. I have read it, ages ago and never read a reference to Jagger being there. Peter Sellars was there trying to score H from Lennon and visiting Ringo (they were both filming the Magic Christian). They began recording it on Jan. 3, 1969 (although McCartney started composing it during the recording of The Beatles aka The White Album). I blieve the Stones started working on Let it Bleed Feb. of 1969. So it is hard to say. One cross over could have been George or John talking with Mick about the project. Or Mick talking with John about Let it Bleed. It is hard to say. They both were started within the year of each other. Interesting question.

Interesting whitem8, here is what Paul said about the origins:


I was going through a really difficult time around the autumn of 1968. It was late in the Beatles’ career and we had begun making a new album, a follow-up to the “White Album.” As a group we were starting to have problems. I think I was sensing the Beatles were breaking up, so I was staying up late at night, drinking, doing drugs, clubbing, the way a lot of people were at the time. I was really living and playing hard.

The other guys were all living out in the country with their partners, but I was still a bachelor in London with my own house in St. John’s Wood. And that was kind of at the back of my mind also, that maybe it was about time I found someone, because it was before I got together with Linda.

So, I was exhausted! Some nights I’d go to bed and my head would just flop on the pillow; and when I’d wake up I’d have difficulty pulling it off, thinking, “Good job I woke up just then or I might have suffocated.”

Then one night, somewhere between deep sleep and insomnia, I had the most comforting dream about my mother, who died when I was only 14. She had been a nurse, my mum, and very hardworking, because she wanted the best for us. We weren’t a well-off family- we didn’t have a car, we just about had a television – so both of my parents went out to work, and Mum contributed a good half to the family income. At night when she came home, she would cook, so we didn’t have a lot of time with each other. But she was just a very comforting presence in my life. And when she died, one of the difficulties I had, as the years went by, was that I couldn’t recall her face so easily. That’s how it is for everyone, I think. As each day goes by, you just can’t bring their face into your mind, you have to use photographs and reminders like that.

So in this dream twelve years later, my mother appeared, and there was her face, completely clear, particularly her eyes, and she said to me very gently, very reassuringly: “Let it be.”

It was lovely. I woke up with a great feeling. It was really like she had visited me at this very difficult point in my life and gave me this message: Be gentle, don’t fight things, just try and go with the flow and it will all work out.

So, being a musician, I went right over to the piano and started writing a song: “When I find myself in times of trouble, Mother Mary comes to me”… Mary was my mother’s name… “Speaking words of wisdom, let it be.” There will be an answer, let it be.” It didn’t take long. I wrote the main body of it in one go, and then the subsequent verses developed from there: “When all the broken-hearted people living in the world agree, there will be an answer, let it be.”

I thought it was special, so I played it to the guys and ’round a lot of people, and later it also became the title of the album, because it had so much value to me, and because it just seemed definitive, those three little syllables. Plus, when something happens like that, as if by magic, I think it has a resonance that other people notice too.

Not very long after the dream, I got together with Linda, which was the saving of me. And it was as if my mum had sent her, you could say.

The song is also one of the first things Linda and I ever did together musically. We went over to Abbey Road Studios one day, where the recording sessions were in place. I lived nearby and often used to just drop in when I knew an engineer would be there and do little bits on my own. And I just thought, “Oh it would be good to try harmony in mind, and although Linda wasn’t a professional singer, I’d heard her sing around the house, and knew she could hold a note and sing that high.

So she tried it, and it worked and it stayed on the record. You can hear it to this day.

These days, the song has become almost like a hymn. We sang it at Linda’s memorial service. And after September 11 the radio played it a lot, which made it the obvious choice for me to sing when I did the benefit concert in New York City. Even before September 11th, people used to lean out of cars and trucks and say, “Yo, Paul, let it be.”

So those words are really very special to me, because not only did my mum come to me in a dream and reassure me with them at a very difficult time in my life – and sure enough, things did get better after that – but also, in putting them into a song, and recording it with the Beatles, it became a comforting, healing statement for other people too.

Quote
straycat58
Let it be sessions took place on January 27; 12 version of LIB were played; Preston was there.
download this video
[fastfocus.org]
I am not sure about the guy in the vdo at 2,13; but if he is the one I think, you have the answer to your question.

That's not Jagger,

Quote
Koen

Quote
straycat58
Let it be sessions took place on January 27; 12 version of LIB were played; Preston was there.
download this video
[fastfocus.org]
I am not sure about the guy in the vdo at 2,13; but if he is the one I think, you have the answer to your question.

That's not Jagger,

"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

I remember distinctly when the Let it Bleed album hit the stacks for sale, thinking the title was in response to the Beatle's title Let It Be. Let It Be must have been in the air. I know the single was released long before the album.

Quote
24FPS
I remember distinctly when the Let it Bleed album hit the stacks for sale, thinking the title was in response to the Beatle's title Let It Be. Let It Be must have been in the air. I know the single was released long before the album.

Some facts...................

"Let It Be" is a song by the English rock band the Beatles,released in March 1970 as a single
Let It Be was LP was released on May 8, 1970

Let It Bleed was released on December 5, 1969

__________________________

Quote
24FPS
I remember distinctly when the Let it Bleed album hit the stacks for sale, thinking the title was in response to the Beatle's title Let It Be. Let It Be must have been in the air. I know the single was released long before the album.

The "Let It Be" single didn't come out until March 1970, whereas the Let It Bleed album came out in Dec. 1969.


I don't remember seeing Mick in the movie Let It Be (although he can be found among the singalong crowd in the worldwide telecast of "All You Need Is Love.")

Lennon filmed his introduction of The Rolling Stones for The Rock N Roll Circus while the Let It Be movie was being made.

The Let It Be single was released in March 1970, but the Glyn Johns mix of album tracks was leaked to radio stations and broadcast around Sept '69.

Recordings of Let It Bleed, the song,began in March of '69. Glyn Johns was jumping back & forth between the Abby Road and Let It Bleed sessions at the time. I can't imagine him NOT playing the Let It Be tapes for the Stones!

Keith talks about cooperating with the Beatles in the early days making sure their single releases didn't "clash".
Being as friendly as they were with each other, I'm sure they were well aware of what the other was doing even up to the time of Let it Be.
Keith Richards - Friends with The Beatles




_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
Hairball
Keith talks about cooperating with the Beatles in the early days making sure their single releases didn't "clash".

I think that is nonsense though.

John Lennon on The Rolling Stones Imitating The Beatles and Mick Jagger's Jealousy :[www.youtube.com]

Thanks everyone. I was talking to a Beatles fan about this subject and he claimed that Jagger was in Let It Be and that obviously Let It Bleed was in response to Let It be.

My position is it could be but there is no proof of it and i wouldn't bet a ton either way. His position was I was just being stubborn to not admit the obvious.

Was looking for more information

Quote
Deltics

Quote
Koen

Quote
straycat58
Let it be sessions took place on January 27; 12 version of LIB were played; Preston was there.
download this video
[fastfocus.org]
I am not sure about the guy in the vdo at 2,13; but if he is the one I think, you have the answer to your question.

That's not Jagger,

That's Tony Bramwell. Jagger didn't even had that kind of haircut in january 1969.

Quote
stanlove
Thanks everyone. I was talking to a Beatles fan about this subject and he claimed that Jagger was in Let It Be and that obviously Let It Bleed was in response to Let It be.

My position is it could be but there is no proof of it and i wouldn't bet a ton either way. His position was I was just being stubborn to not admit the obvious.

Was looking for more information

Jagger is not in the film.

Also, he may not have even been in the country when it was filmed. He might still hav been in South America with Marianne, Keith and Anita.

Quote
loog droog


Lennon filmed his introduction of The Rolling Stones for The Rock N Roll Circus while the Let It Be movie was being made.

Rock'N'Roll Circus was filmed in December 1968.

Let it Be was filmed in January 1969.

--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan

Quote
Blueranger

That's Tony Bramwell. Jagger didn't even had that kind of haircut in january 1969.

That's weird though, he does kind of look like a blurry version of Mick.

Quote
CaptainCorella

Quote
loog droog


Lennon filmed his introduction of The Rolling Stones for The Rock N Roll Circus while the Let It Be movie was being made.

Rock'N'Roll Circus was filmed in December 1968.

Let it Be was filmed in January 1969.

Yep, but Lennon's introduction was made in january.
It's well documented on the Beatles bootlegs from the Get Back sessions, that he made it there. One can even hear him making a couple of takes.

The first recording sessions for AUTOMATIC CHANGER in 1969 started and ended 9th February - 31st March. These sessions included the recording of Let It Bleed.

[www.nzentgraf.de]

Therefor, one can figure that Let It Bleed was written before or during the sessions, obviously, and therefor has zero to do with a Beatles album that was released in 1970.

They did another take of it that is the LP version from April to July along with a ton of other tracks.

(It didn't have) a thing (to do with the Beatles' Let It Be). Just a coincidence because you're working along the same lines at the same time at the same age as a lot of other cats. All trying to do the same thing basically, turn themselves and other people on. Let It Bleed was just one line in that song Mick wrote. It became the title... we just kicked a line out... We dug that song so... maybe there was some influence because Let It Be had been kicked around for years for their movie, for that album. Let it be something. Let it out. Let it loose.
- Keith Richards, 1971

[timeisonourside.com]

They actually started recording for a new album/single whatever in November 1968.

Quote
His Majesty
They actually started recording for a new album/single whatever in November 1968.

Yes, YCAGWYW and Memo From Turner but the LP title didn't come along until much later.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
His Majesty
They actually started recording for a new album/single whatever in November 1968.

Yes, YCAGWYW and Memo From Turner but the LP title didn't come along until much later.

Maybe more.

Anyway, for the many Beatles fanatics that can't see or hear past the walls of Abbey Road, no reasonable explanation or evidence will change their opinion that Let It Bleed is the stones copying the Beatles.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-01-02 19:25 by His Majesty.