|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 16, 2016 22:38:09 GMT -5
I have three tickets in advance for Sunday night. I'll be seeing the movie at a theater with my girlfriend and my nephew. I really regret not seeing it immediately, but the best date for all involved wound up being Sunday.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 17, 2016 3:12:27 GMT -5
I can't find it in the Detroit area with an internet search. The closest is in Grand Rapids. I have Hulu so I will see it on-line today.
Just found out it is playing at Emagine Theatre in Royal Oak. Tickets $11 to $12. I might go anyway just to see it on the big screen.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Sept 17, 2016 7:39:46 GMT -5
I can't find it in the Detroit area with an internet search. The closest is in Grand Rapids. I have Hulu so I will see it on-line today. Just found out it is playing at Emagine Theatre in Royal Oak. Tickets $11 to $12. I might go anyway just to see it on the big screen. Try Ann Arbor. Old Michigan Theatre was supposed to be screening it.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Sept 17, 2016 7:47:18 GMT -5
Yes I have that but don't remember hearing on it what melody John was playing. It is in that film but it is a fluke because it is well documented that Paul came up with the intro to SFF in 1966/67 after hearing John's acoustic demonstration of the song which did not include that intro. I think it is just two or three notes that by coincidence John hits. Paul must have remembered it for three years until SFF was recorded.... Just like he remembered the gravestone of Eleanor Rigby in the Liverpool Church Cemetery for years before he wrote the song.... What a memory that man had....... Except when it comes to who did what after 36 years when your partner died.....
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 17, 2016 10:32:46 GMT -5
It is in that film but it is a fluke because it is well documented that Paul came up with the intro to SFF in 1966/67 after hearing John's acoustic demonstration of the song which did not include that intro. I think it is just two or three notes that by coincidence John hits. Paul must have remembered it for three years until SFF was recorded.... Just like he remembered the gravestone of Eleanor Rigby in the Liverpool Church Cemetery for years before he wrote the song.... What a memory that man had....... Except when it comes to who did what after 36 years when your partner died..... We're only talking about three notes.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 17, 2016 13:38:10 GMT -5
Former member here and fellow Hoosier ChuckE advised me that the only Indiana showing of Eight Days A Week: The Touring Years was in Fort Wayne. Chuck thought that Thursday was the only showing. I discovered that it was playing for three nights at Cinema Center which is 75 miles from my doorstep. I am a Beatle freak and road-warrior so I bought a ticket from Fandango.
The theater in question, Cinema Center, is an independent arts cinema and when I pulled up pursuant to my GPS device, I didn't recognize the building as a movie theater, it looked like a warehouse.
The facility sold Indiana craft brewed beer and organically grown popcorn. The place was 90% full which was nice, contrasted to when ChuckE and I saw The Concert For George with two other people in the theater.
The crowd was mostly my age or older(only three young people) although there were the obligatory Beatles Blowhards talking loud enough to let us know that they think they know everything Fab. Thankfully they shut-up once the film started.
Ah the film itself, my thoughts[SPOILER ALERT!]:
1. There is very little "live" about this film. I may be wrong but I do not think there was a complete live musical performance of a complete song and any live concert or television clips shown(and there were not many)were marred by the dreaded voice-overs!
There are much more varied concert and live television performance clips on Anthology! The lack of actual concert/live television footage in this movie is shocking and I was completely disappointed in that regard. Forget seeing four or five complete songs done by The Beatles in each touring year and much more than that exists!
I thought for sure this would start with the complete "Some Other Guy" from the Cavern but we get only a snippet and same for subsequent years. What if Ron Howard made a documentary movie about The Beatles live but forgot the live part: that is Eight Days A Week.
2. The talking heads give us nothing new or interesting. Nothing, nada, zero. Who were some of those assholes anyway? Elvis Costello tells us that he hated Rubber Soul for the first six weeks of its release but then he could not live without it. Okay. I felt that way about Flowers In The Dirt.
3. This film gives Paul McCartney yet another format to be deemed the official spokesman/elder-statesman/leader of The Beatles such as it is in 2016. Paul's contemporary appearances in the film surpass Ringo's and Paul's current commentary is used extensively as narration even when Paul is not shown.
Paul does not say anything patently offensive like he has been known to do to the media these past 36 years as to John and their respective legacies but he doesn't say much at all, certainly nothing he hasn't said before and better. Ringo is Ringo and got some laughs with his comments.
But I can see why younger fans think it is Paul McCartney & The Beatles because Paul is thrust forward as the leader by survivorship and he clearly relishes this, Paul's revenge for the Allen Klein vote!
4. It is not the end of the world if you do not see this documentary in a movie theatre with great audio/visual A lot of the footage isn't that gloriously restored. Some is the same old dodgy stuff. One should have seen The Concert For George in a HD theater with surround sound because that was filmed as such. My theater had a great A/V system but I do not feel that I gained anything by seeing this on the big screen. It will be as good at my home on my television screen through Blu-Ray.
5. I was not disinterested during the film as it is about The Beatles but it is clearly Anthology-lite and do not go thinking you will see fantastic and rare film footage of The Beatles live, you will not.
6. Shea is heavily edited in content as no helicopter shots, no lockeroom shots and no opening act shots. It starts right with Ed Sullivan introducing the band as they take the stage. The picture and sound are good but no better than what we saw on Anthology 21 years ago.
Shea is shown as an extra because the powers that be first watched EDAW and said:
"Crap, Ron Howard made a documentary about The Beatles live and he forgot to add the live stuff!! We must supplement this with Shea footage!"
7. Surprisingly there is Rooftop footage at the end and it looked pretty cool! And these were not simply clips from the LIB movie as these clips are footage of the band itself playing and there are not the cut-aways to people down on the ground, etc. For instance, we get to see John sing the:
"I'm in love for the first time, don't you know its going to last."
My memory is that in the film this is where the film breaks away to people down on the street. These clips are not complete performances either in EDAW but they are cool.
8. The film is dedicated to the memory of Sir George Martin. Neil, Mal and Derek also get memorial nods. Paul, Ringo, Yoko and Olivia were thanked for cooperating. Did anyone see a tribute to John and George themselves?! I didn't but I may have missed that! I would hope our John and George get a memorial nod since those other well-deserving men did.
If convenient, go see this film in a theater but if you don't you did not miss a thing, it will look and sound just as good on your home systems. It is clearly interesting if not profound to us fans. I am bewildered though about the emphasis on the Beatles live in the title and promotion when we get so little of that in this film.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 17, 2016 14:24:15 GMT -5
Nice review John.
Looks like the Live is misleading. Glad they put the Shea Stadium concert in with this release. What about the quality of the sound on both films. Can you actually hear them play more clearly over the screams than in the past? Or was that just done for the Hollywood Bowl release?
Also, what songs did they show clips of?
Though we long time Beatlemaniacs may not be impressed, do you think this would have more impact on the casual fan?
Thanks for the review.
I called the theater where I will see the movie which is the Emagine Theater in Royal Oak, Michigan. They said the movie has been doing great--selling out almost every performance.
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Sept 17, 2016 16:44:52 GMT -5
The local cinema here has actually decided to extend the showings until the end of September due to popularity (but now excluding the weekends). Tickets are also only £8 (which is about $10-11 US. However after JSD's critical review then I am in two minds whether to just purchase the Blu-ray instead on release.
I was expecting to see some rare live footage with complete performances. The Shea footage on the '1' Blu-Ray was outstanding. But it seems from JSD's review that EDAW is more a spin-off of Anthology covering live performances but not necessarily showing them!
Maybe we'll have to wait for a true "Beatles Live" soundtrack album to actually hear the Beatles live and uninterrupted?
Perhaps one day we'll even get the 'Let it Be' movie or some form of it released again in our lifetimes?
|
|
|
Post by sallyg on Sept 17, 2016 16:47:12 GMT -5
Former member here and fellow Hoosier ChuckE advised me that the only Indiana showing of Eight Days A Week: The Touring Years was in Fort Wayne. Chuck thought that Thursday was the only showing. I discovered that it was playing for three nights at Cinema Center which is 75 miles from my doorstep. I am a Beatle freak and road-warrior so I bought a ticket from Fandango. The theater in question, Cinema Center, is an independent arts cinema and when I pulled up pursuant to my GPS device, I didn't recognize the building as a movie theater, it looked like a warehouse. The facility sold Indiana craft brewed beer and organically grown popcorn. The place was 90% full which was nice, contrasted to when ChuckE and I saw The Concert For George with two other people in the theater. The crowd was mostly my age or older(only three young people) although there were the obligatory Beatles Blowhards talking loud enough to let us know that they think they know everything Fab. Thankfully they shut-up once the film started. Ah the film itself, my thoughts[ SPOILER ALERT!]: 1. There is very little "live" about this film. I may be wrong but I do not think there was a complete live musical performance of a complete song and any live concert or television clips shown(and there were not many)were marred by the dreaded voice-overs! There are much more varied concert and live television performance clips on Anthology! The lack of actual concert/live television footage in this movie is shocking and I was completely disappointed in that regard. Forget seeing four or five complete songs done by The Beatles in each touring year and much more than that exists! I thought for sure this would start with the complete "Some Other Guy" from the Cavern but we get only a snippet and same for subsequent years. What if Ron Howard made a documentary movie about The Beatles live but forgot the live part: that is Eight Days A Week. 2. The talking heads give us nothing new or interesting. Nothing, nada, zero. Who were some of those assholes anyway? Elvis Costello tells us that he hated Rubber Soul for the first six weeks of its release but then he could not live without it. Okay. I felt that way about Flowers In The Dirt. 3. This film gives Paul McCartney yet another format to be deemed the official spokesman/elder-statesman/leader of The Beatles such as it is in 2016. Paul's contemporary appearances in the film surpass Ringo's and Paul's current commentary is used extensively as narration even when Paul is not shown. Paul does not say anything patently offensive like he has been known to do to the media these past 36 years as to John and their respective legacies but he doesn't say much at all, certainly nothing he hasn't said before and better. Ringo is Ringo and got some laughs with his comments. But I can see why younger fans think it is Paul McCartney & The Beatles because Paul is thrust forward as the leader by survivorship and he clearly relishes this, Paul's revenge for the Allen Klein vote! 4. It is not the end of the world if you do not see this documentary in a movie theatre with great audio/visual A lot of the footage isn't that gloriously restored. Some is the same old dodgy stuff. One should have seen The Concert For George in a HD theater with surround sound because that was filmed as such. My theater had a great A/V system but I do not feel that I gained anything by seeing this on the big screen. It will be as good at my home on my television screen through Blu-Ray. 5. I was not disinterested during the film as it is about The Beatles but it is clearly Anthology-lite and do not go thinking you will see fantastic and rare film footage of The Beatles live, you will not. 6. Shea is heavily edited in content as no helicopter shots, no lockeroom shots and no opening act shots. It starts right with Ed Sullivan introducing the band as they take the stage. The picture and sound are good but no better than what we saw on Anthology 21 years ago. Shea is shown as an extra because the powers that be first watched EDAW and said: "Crap, Ron Howard made a documentary about The Beatles live and he forgot to add the live stuff!! We must supplement this with Shea footage!" 7. Surprisingly there is Rooftop footage at the end and it looked pretty cool! And these were not simply clips from the LIB movie as these clips are footage of the band itself playing and there are not the cut-aways to people down on the ground, etc. For instance, we get to see John sing the: "I'm in love for the first time, don't you know its going to last." My memory is that in the film this is where the film breaks away to people down on the street. These clips are not complete performances either in EDAW but they are cool. 8. The film is dedicated to the memory of Sir George Martin. Neil, Mal and Derek also get memorial nods. Paul, Ringo, Yoko and Olivia were thanked for cooperating. Did anyone see a tribute to John and George themselves?! I didn't but I may have missed that! I would hope our John and George get a memorial nod since those other well-deserving men did. If convenient, go see this film in a theater but if you don't you did not miss a thing, it will look and sound just as good on your home systems. It is clearly interesting if not profound to us fans. I am bewildered though about the emphasis on the Beatles live in the title and promotion when we get so little of that in this film. Your review of the film is pretty accurate. I watched at home on my pc and my impressions are pretty much in line with yours. You are correct that they do not show any Beatles concert from beginning to end. I was surprised that scenes from the Washington DC show were in color. I never saw the DC show in color before. I was also surprised that the film was only 45 minutes or so long. I thought the film would be longer than that. The movie does not contain anything new that the avid fans didn't know. All and all, I still would recommend that anyone watch this new movie.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 17, 2016 17:36:58 GMT -5
The local cinema here has actually decided to extend the showings until the end of September due to popularity (but now excluding the weekends). Tickets are also only £8 (which is about $10-11 US. However after JSD's critical review then I am in two minds whether to just purchase the Blu-ray instead on release. I was expecting to see some rare live footage with complete performances. The Shea footage on the '1' Blu-Ray was outstanding. But it seems from JSD's review that EDAW is more a spin-off of Anthology covering live performances but not necessarily showing them! Maybe we'll have to wait for a true "Beatles Live" soundtrack album to actually hear the Beatles live and uninterrupted? Perhaps one day we'll even get the 'Let it Be' movie or some form of it released again in our lifetimes? Stavros, by all means go see this film if convenient! LOL, I drove 75 miles one way and do not regret it. I still enjoyed the movie but I was hoping for much more complete footage of live performances of The Beatles. As a documentary I know there has to be some narration but there was still too much talking and not enough just showing The Beatles playing and letting their images and the music they were making do the real talking! The absolute highlight to me comes at the beginning of the film with the footage of the Beatles from November 20th, 1963, at Manchester's ABC Cinema. Filmed as part of a Pathe News short entitled "The Beatles Come to Town", the color film includes the performances of "She Loves You" and "Twist and Shout." Even then I don't think we get the entire songs in the film but shortened versions(I can't remember)but the picture and sound have been restored remarkably and just watching that tells us more about why the Beatles are so awesome than 20 hours of talking from the B-grade celebrities interviewed in the film and yes, even Paul's and Ringo's 2016 comments. There is like 30 to 45 seconds of "Nowhere Man" from Japan!? Nothing else from at least two professionally shot concerts in color! WTF?! Nothing from 1966 Germany. Just a blurb of "Boys" from the Hollywood Bowl when a lot of that 1964 concert can be found on YouTube. Just part of "I Saw Her Standing There" from Washington D.C. and yes it has been colorized. Just blurbs from Sweden. This film in no way supplements Anthology or digs deeper into The Beatles touring years. In fact, Anthology is much more thorough on the topic so I am left scratching my head at what this film is meant to do. Yet it is The Beatles so it will always be very interesting but I am shocked by the lack of actual concert footage in this film which is said to focus on that subject. The movie says it is about the Beatles live and the touring years but we get precious little evidence in the way of actual film footage that The Beatles were an exciting live band.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 17, 2016 17:58:39 GMT -5
John S. Damm, thanks for your extensive thoughts on the movie. I am not expecting much and I have not been expecting much for quite some time already, since it had long been said by Fab 4 experts who've had a sneak peek that this is NOT the film we were all hoping for as diehard fans. So the way I am preparing myself for the screening this weekend will be just to approach it as a general "masses-friendly" documentary. But I'm a little disappointed to hear you say that the talking heads interrupt songs, only because I thought I read in at least one review somewhere that one of the appreciated details at least was that you get songs here and there which are NOT interrupted by talking (??) .
So anyway, I'm still looking forward to seeing this in a theater to at least get an audience reaction from fans, and also to see Shea on a big screen. (It's s damn shame that the Shea footage omits the helicopter scenes and locker room. What's up with that!?).
|
|
|
Post by sallyg on Sept 17, 2016 19:13:03 GMT -5
Your review of the film is pretty accurate. I watched at home on my pc and my impressions are pretty much in line with yours. You are correct that they do not show any Beatles concert from beginning to end. I was surprised that scenes from the Washington DC show were in color. I never saw the DC show in color before. I was also surprised that the film was only 45 minutes or so long. I thought the film would be longer than that. The movie does not contain anything new that the avid fans didn't know. All and all, I still would recommend that anyone watch this new movie. [/quote]
My bad, I read the time counter on the film wrong. The film is a little under 2 hrs, my apologies. You know the old saying that time flies when you are having fun.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 17, 2016 23:25:41 GMT -5
Joe, maybe I am mistaken on voice-overs but I am not mistaken that there are precious few actual full song length live performances in the film. Some songs like "Nowhere Man" from Japan are very short and the pundits start talking again when the film cuts away from the footage instead of letting us see the real Beatles in action!
I still enjoyed the film because it is about the Beatles and in a happy period of their career. The crowd was pretty cool at my viewing. Most people quieted down once the film started but there are always one or two people who think they are more important than the group and feel the need to talk and "explain" things to the poor wretches they are with.
During the playing of the finished "Eight Days A Week"(we also hear early studio work-ups of the song like on Anthology I), the crowd I was in did the handclaps which was kind of cool. I had a very nice conversation before the film started with the two women who sat next to me and were out on a self-described, "girls' Beatles night!"
I may watch this on Blu-Ray and think I was too hard in my review here. I think this film will be better received by casual and new Beatles fans. We long-time fans are at the point where we don't need the talking heads and the background narrations. We just want the most and best restored actual footage of The Beatles themselves when they were young, making music and being the closest things to gods walking on Earth!
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Sept 18, 2016 9:08:08 GMT -5
The local cinema here has actually decided to extend the showings until the end of September due to popularity (but now excluding the weekends). Tickets are also only £8 (which is about $10-11 US. However after JSD's critical review then I am in two minds whether to just purchase the Blu-ray instead on release. I was expecting to see some rare live footage with complete performances. The Shea footage on the '1' Blu-Ray was outstanding. But it seems from JSD's review that EDAW is more a spin-off of Anthology covering live performances but not necessarily showing them! Maybe we'll have to wait for a true "Beatles Live" soundtrack album to actually hear the Beatles live and uninterrupted? Perhaps one day we'll even get the 'Let it Be' movie or some form of it released again in our lifetimes? You do get to hear The Beatles portion of the 1965 Shea Stadium concert uninterrupted at the conclusion of the Ron Howard Documentary but only in theatres. No word on whether the Shea film will come out on DVD yet. Giles did a good job cleaning up the sound on every live clip you see in the Doc. Even the overdubs from Shea.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 18, 2016 12:10:31 GMT -5
It also goes without saying that like the Shea Stadium film we all know and loved from Beatlefest and bootlegs, this restored version omits "Everybody's Trying To Be My Baby" and we only briefly hear the awesome "She's A Woman" in the closing credits that were very brief.
In my fantasies, I imagined Apple reconstructing the entire Shea Stadium concert as it was undoubtedly filmed in its entirety. It would be awesome to return those missing songs to the line-up if they still exist!
|
|
|
Post by Zander on Sept 18, 2016 16:48:49 GMT -5
I actually won tickets to the Premiere courtesy of my sister so the whole event was magical. I enjoyed the film but I pretty much support John S Damm's verdict. The highlight of the film was seeing the only surviving footage of the final UK tour (probably about5-7 seconds in total) - everything else I'd pretty much seen before in greater length and the same quality. And why the hell they interviewed that idiot Eddie Izzard I do not know...
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Sept 18, 2016 20:55:48 GMT -5
I saw the film tonight with my beautiful wife - she enjoyed it, too! I did notice some "out of sync" vocals in the Shea Stadium film (as well as some acoustic guitar - possibly Baby's in Black but I can't be sure!)which makes me think there was some retained "sweetening". At least Act Naturally was "live" and not just the record! But yes, I thought it was very very good - the Shea Stadium concert was a nice bonus! I agree with lowbasso (as usual) ;-)
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 18, 2016 20:56:36 GMT -5
I actually won tickets to the Premiere courtesy of my sister so the whole event was magical. I enjoyed the film but I pretty much support John S Damm's verdict. The highlight of the film was seeing the only surviving footage of the final UK tour (probably about5-7 seconds in total) - everything else I'd pretty much seen before in greater length and the same quality. And why the hell they interviewed that idiot Eddie Izzard I do not know... I wish The Beatles had filmed their final U.K. show(s)! Yeah, the blurb and photos we see from that final U.K. tour are fascinating but too short. The Beatles performed "We Can Work It Out" on that final U.K. tour. I would love to hear that!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 18, 2016 22:28:10 GMT -5
I just saw the movie. I can be a harsh and objective critic, but I LOVED this film. I can't help wondering if many other Beatles fans saw a different cut than me, because even as a huge collector of all sorts of rare footage and bootlegged videos, I saw a ton of stuff I don't readily recall seeing before. The same goes for still photos, audio clips, and some studio session snippets now and then; not all of it was instantly familiar at all. I never thought Ron Howard was a huge Beatles Maniac, but I got the impression that the filmmaker was going out of his way to make his movie different by NOT making it seem so visually familiar with the same old footage! I can't help but wonder what type of footage people expected? All sorts of home movie footage was used here. Were they supposed to make new footage up that was never shot, from scratch?
The biggest objection is, of course, that there are not songs shown in full other than a couple. But I was prepared for that, and frankly it's fine because this is NOT a concert movie... it's a documentary which tells a story. And in that department I felt Ron Howard succeeded mightily, and captured what the touring years were like, as well as ultimately painting a grim picture of what made the Beatles tire of life on the road. So I thought that Howard told his story perfectly.
I did not think any Beatle got the short end of the stick at all; every member was given his time and well accounted for. I loved that both Brian Epstein and George Martin were recognized too and were given their moments to shine.
The colorization on some performances were weak, but I'm so used to seeing those particular songs so often that I didn't mind the change there just for this one feature.
The dramatic power of SGT PEPPER was a great transition to the "new level" once the Beatles gave up touring. Although people now think PEPPER is so dated and uneventful, you really get the vibe of just how that 1967 era was so amazing when it was brand new. The rooftop footage from LET IT BE was amazing because so many different angles and shots were seen here which I never saw previously. It wets my appetite ever more for the LIB release to DVD/Blu-ray one day, hopefully. I loved how the film ended with showing the latter stages of The Beatles from 1967-1969, all without overstaying its welcome or taking away from the story that came before.
Whoopi Goldberg was effective with her heartwarming story. The "talking heads' were not a disaster all around, and Larry Kane in particular was invaluable with his participation.
The Shea footage to me seemed anti-climactic at the end of the actual movie. The clean-up quality of the visuals was outstanding, and the audio was not bad either (I especially appreciate not hearing the record over "Act Naturally"!). However, I thought I detected the actual studio recordings of "Twist and Shout" and "Baby's In Black" during those performances.
One PC moment was when John's "clap your hands and stamp your feet" routine was abruptly cut out during the Washington concert. But it made up for it by making sure to demonstrate Ringo's sensational and powerful drumming on "I Saw Her Standing There".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 23:26:15 GMT -5
I just saw the movie. I can be a harsh and objective critic, but I LOVED this film. I can't help wondering if many other Beatles fans saw a different cut than me, because even as a huge collector of all sorts of rare footage and bootlegged videos, I saw a ton of stuff I don't readily recall seeing before. The same goes for still photos, audio clips, and some studio session snippets now and then; not all of it was instantly familiar at all. I never thought Ron Howard was a huge Beatles Maniac, but I got the impression that the filmmaker was going out of his way to make his movie different by NOT making it seem so visually familiar with the same old footage! I can't help but wonder what type of footage people expected? All sorts of home movie footage was used here. Were they supposed to make new footage up that was never shot, from scratch? The biggest objection is, of course, that there are not songs shown in full other than a couple. But I was prepared for that, and frankly it's fine because this is NOT a concert movie... it's a documentary which tells a story. And in that department I felt Ron Howard succeeded mightily, and captured what the touring years were like, as well as ultimately painting a grim picture of what made the Beatles tire of life on the road. So I thought that Howard told his story perfectly. I did not think any Beatle got the short end of the stick at all; every member was given his time and well accounted for. I loved that both Brian Epstein and George Martin were recognized too and were given their moments to shine. The colorization on some performances were weak, but I'm so used to seeing those particular songs so often that I didn't mind the change there just for this one feature. The dramatic power of SGT PEPPER was a great transition to the "new level" once the Beatles gave up touring. Although people now think PEPPER is so dated and uneventful, you really get the vibe of just how that 1967 era was so amazing when it was brand new. The rooftop footage from LET IT BE was amazing because so many different angles and shots were seen here which I never saw previously. It wets my appetite ever more for the LIB release to DVD/Blu-ray one day, hopefully. I loved how the film ended with showing the latter stages of The Beatles from 1967-1969, all without overstaying its welcome or taking away from the story that came before. Whoopi Goldberg was effective with her heartwarming story. The "talking heads' were not a disaster all around, and Larry Kane in particular was invaluable with his participation. The Shea footage to me seemed anti-climactic at the end of the actual movie. The clean-up quality of the visuals was outstanding, and the audio was not bad either (I especially appreciate not hearing the record over "Act Naturally"!). However, I thought I detected the actual studio recordings of "Twist and Shout" and "Baby's In Black" during those performances. One PC moment was when John's "clap your hands and stamp your feet" routine was abruptly cut out during the Washington concert. But it made up for it by making sure to demonstrate Ringo's sensational and powerful drumming on "I Saw Her Standing There". Good review Joe, it has added much needed balance to JSD's "pull the movie from the cinema's" review.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Sept 19, 2016 7:42:43 GMT -5
I just saw the movie. I can be a harsh and objective critic, but I LOVED this film. I can't help wondering if many other Beatles fans saw a different cut than me, because even as a huge collector of all sorts of rare footage and bootlegged videos, I saw a ton of stuff I don't readily recall seeing before. The same goes for still photos, audio clips, and some studio session snippets now and then; not all of it was instantly familiar at all. I never thought Ron Howard was a huge Beatles Maniac, but I got the impression that the filmmaker was going out of his way to make his movie different by NOT making it seem so visually familiar with the same old footage! I can't help but wonder what type of footage people expected? All sorts of home movie footage was used here. Were they supposed to make new footage up that was never shot, from scratch? The biggest objection is, of course, that there are not songs shown in full other than a couple. But I was prepared for that, and frankly it's fine because this is NOT a concert movie... it's a documentary which tells a story. And in that department I felt Ron Howard succeeded mightily, and captured what the touring years were like, as well as ultimately painting a grim picture of what made the Beatles tire of life on the road. So I thought that Howard told his story perfectly. I did not think any Beatle got the short end of the stick at all; every member was given his time and well accounted for. I loved that both Brian Epstein and George Martin were recognized too and were given their moments to shine. The colorization on some performances were weak, but I'm so used to seeing those particular songs so often that I didn't mind the change there just for this one feature. The dramatic power of SGT PEPPER was a great transition to the "new level" once the Beatles gave up touring. Although people now think PEPPER is so dated and uneventful, you really get the vibe of just how that 1967 era was so amazing when it was brand new. The rooftop footage from LET IT BE was amazing because so many different angles and shots were seen here which I never saw previously. It wets my appetite ever more for the LIB release to DVD/Blu-ray one day, hopefully. I loved how the film ended with showing the latter stages of The Beatles from 1967-1969, all without overstaying its welcome or taking away from the story that came before. Whoopi Goldberg was effective with her heartwarming story. The "talking heads' were not a disaster all around, and Larry Kane in particular was invaluable with his participation. The Shea footage to me seemed anti-climactic at the end of the actual movie. The clean-up quality of the visuals was outstanding, and the audio was not bad either (I especially appreciate not hearing the record over "Act Naturally"!). However, I thought I detected the actual studio recordings of "Twist and Shout" and "Baby's In Black" during those performances. One PC moment was when John's "clap your hands and stamp your feet" routine was abruptly cut out during the Washington concert. But it made up for it by making sure to demonstrate Ringo's sensational and powerful drumming on "I Saw Her Standing There". Glad you liked it Joe. Me too! It was designed for the general public who remembers those days and young folks who think only Justin Bieber can excite a crowd to a frenzy. It was not designed for Beatle Nerds who want every minute of footage of every concert available. But it does capture a time when pop music was changed forever by a band who did not need The Wrecking Crew on their records and wrote their own material on a level with the greatest composers of both pop and classical music going back centuries. I loved the film and for a few hours I was a kid again back in the 60's without a care in the world.
|
|
cosmo
Very Clean
Posts: 264
|
Post by cosmo on Sept 19, 2016 9:28:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 19, 2016 10:11:32 GMT -5
Good review Joe, it has added much needed balance to JSD's "pull the movie from the cinema's" review. LOL, I said I enjoyed my time in the theater watching it and meeting other fans. Many others and I thought there would be more live material and the film's maker or Apple must have felt that way too and that is probably why Shea Stadium was added as a short at the end of the feature film and that seems especially borne out by the fact that this Shea footage is apparently not going to be on the Blu-Ray/DVD release as an extra. Joe raises a good point that John's "spastic" stomp was clearly deleted from footage from D.C. and that was jarring to me, it is tampering with history whether or not that was offensive. Joe's also right that there is neat studio chatter and great photographs of the lads in various endeavors(like in the studio) in the film and there were nice graphics showing the amazing success of the albums up to SPLHCB. This is an enjoyable film but I wanted to see much more live Beatles' footage and less memories from B-grade celebrities. As I wrote above, the brief clips from the Manchester's ABC Cinema do a better job of showing us why The Beatles were so amazingly popular than hearing talking heads tell us why. I will buy or be gifted the Blu-Ray of this but I will still turn to Anthology which has much more live footage than this film.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Sept 19, 2016 13:06:34 GMT -5
Good review Joe, it has added much needed balance to JSD's "pull the movie from the cinema's" review. LOL, I said I enjoyed my time in the theater watching it and meeting other fans. Many others and I thought there would be more live material and the film's maker or Apple must have felt that way too and that is probably why Shea Stadium was added as a short at the end of the feature film and that seems especially borne out by the fact that this Shea footage is apparently not going to be on the Blu-Ray/DVD release as an extra. Joe raises a good point that John's "spastic" stomp was clearly deleted from footage from D.C. and that was jarring to me, it is tampering with history whether or not that was offensive. Joe's also right that there is neat studio chatter and great photographs of the lads in various endeavors(like in the studio) in the film and there were nice graphics showing the amazing success of the albums up to SPLHCB. This is an enjoyable film but I wanted to see much more live Beatles' footage and less memories from B-grade celebrities. As I wrote above, the brief clips from the Manchester's ABC Cinema do a better job of showing us why The Beatles were so amazingly popular than hearing talking heads tell us why. I will buy or be gifted the Blu-Ray of this but I will still turn to Anthology which has much more live footage than this film. Maybe Yoko requested John's foot stomping be left out since it makes fun of handicapped people and there is no need to remind folks of that. Maybe Paul and Ringo agreed with her as well. I am sure handicapped Beatlefans don't need to see it either. Some memories are better left forgotten don't you think?
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 19, 2016 13:53:59 GMT -5
Maybe Yoko requested John's foot stomping be left out since it makes fun of handicapped people and there is no need to remind folks of that. Maybe Paul and Ringo agreed with her as well. I am sure handicapped Beatlefans don't need to see it either. Some memories are better left forgotten don't you think? No.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 19, 2016 15:38:08 GMT -5
Maybe Yoko requested John's foot stomping be left out since it makes fun of handicapped people and there is no need to remind folks of that. Maybe Paul and Ringo agreed with her as well. I am sure handicapped Beatlefans don't need to see it either. Some memories are better left forgotten don't you think? No, it was every bit a part of who John was... before everyone became too ultra-sensitive. But here's why this whole list of PC demands becomes so silly after awhile... although you meant no offense and were being understanding and caring here, do you know that the term "physically challenged" is now the required term, and not "handicapped"? So you see, even while maintaining good intentions a decent person like yourself may unknowingly be "stepping across a line"! I didn't like Whoopi Goldberg dropping the F Bomb... it was classless, and I didn't think necessary. We didn't need to see (hear) that either. So it can get crazy.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 19, 2016 17:03:55 GMT -5
I always thought he was making fun of Jerry Lewis.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 19, 2016 17:28:11 GMT -5
I always thought he was making fun of Jerry Lewis. I don't think that is acceptable. What if Jerry Lewis had been offended?
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 19, 2016 18:49:14 GMT -5
I always thought he was making fun of Jerry Lewis. I don't think that is acceptable. What if Jerry Lewis had been offended? It just occurred to me that Jerry has his telethon for Jerry's Kids, children with Muscular Dystrophy. John showed up for it one year. .
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Sept 19, 2016 19:10:21 GMT -5
I always thought he was making fun of Jerry Lewis. George and Paul called it his spastic routine in the Anthology. People who are "physically challenged" today were known by that term in the 60's. It was intended to make fun of them and I don't think the other Fabs really appreciated the routine, but who ever told John what to do in those days.
|
|