The New Beatles Documentary Offers In-Depth Look At Band In The Studio
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 окт 2021
- The new Peter Jackson-directed documentary 'The Beatles: Get Back' compiles over 60 hours of never-before-seen footage from studio sessions and the band’s final rooftop performance. The New Yorker's David Remnick joins Morning Joe to discuss the band's legacy.
» Subscribe to MSNBC: on.msnbc.com/SubscribeTomsnbc
About: MSNBC is the premier destination for in-depth analysis of daily headlines, insightful political commentary and informed perspectives. Reaching more than 95 million households worldwide, MSNBC offers a full schedule of live news coverage, political opinions and award-winning documentary programming -- 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Connect with MSNBC Online
Visit msnbc.com: on.msnbc.com/Readmsnbc
Subscribe to MSNBC Newsletter: MSNBC.com/NewslettersRUclips
Find MSNBC on Facebook: on.msnbc.com/Likemsnbc
Follow MSNBC on Twitter: on.msnbc.com/Followmsnbc
Follow MSNBC on Instagram: on.msnbc.com/Instamsnbc
The New Beatles Documentary Offers In-Depth Look At Band In The Studio
I would watch all 60 hours of the film.
Everybody on earth would. Why we are being fed a piecemeal portion of that is jaw dropping insane.
Release every minute on a big fat blu-ray box set.
We waited 50 years for something new... let's be glad we have something new to lay our eyes on!! Though I'd agree, all 60 hours would be great! 👍 I'm sure it will be possible in the next few decades though
And knowing Peter Jackson, I'm positive he's releasing the best bits
Me too! Just the trailer is amazing to watch and listen to!
Same.
My opinion: NO ONE can compare to The Beatles, and no one ever will..
The Beatles are hands down the greatest rock band of all time...stones and everyone else come nowhere close...they are the purest definition of what rock and roll is....they had multiple influences and the diversity in their output is unmatched...not to mention they did all that in 7 years and remain(as of this very moment) the highest selling artist of ALL time!
The Beatles will FOREVER LIVE IN OUR HEARTS! They are truly MIRACLES and BLESSED by GOD then given to us!
Well the The Rolling Stones are the greatest rock n roll band of all time and the Beatles are the greatest pop band! Everyone knows this! Maybe you should listen to music before giving opinions about
@@dondamon4669 In fairness, the Beatles wrote songs for the Rolling Stones, but we shouldn't get hung up on who is best. Whatever music YOU like is indisputably the best. It's the same with how you like your steak or coffee!
Amen buddy. Totally the best ever!!
Id say Floyd and Zeppelin are the only bands in God tier w Beatles
The Beatles were the most momentous and revolutionary cultural icons of the 1960's and beyond.
There is The Beatles and then there is a huge gap and then there is everyone else.
Beatles were the greatest. But the Stones and The Who are on the same playing field.
I agree, but I absolutely love Billy Joel and Bruce Springsteen (and John Mellencamp), even if none of them are quite at the same level.
@@garyolshan4177 I love those other groups to But they always rode off on the heels of the Beatles. Even P Townsend said that. That they were influenced by the Beatles.
@@garyolshan4177 No, the Stones and the Who were not on the "same playing field" as the Beatles. The Beatles had 3 legendary singer/songwriters, and pushed the boundaries of recording and making albums an entire piece of art. All the other bands followed in their footsteps.
That's right! Nothing after *The Beatles* ... I mean, there were a lot of great groups and singers that followed but nothing like "The Beatles" That's it mate!
Talking about raising the bar... Its raised clean up through the Universe! 🤣 🚶🏿♂🚶🏿♂🚶🏿♂🚶🏿♂🤎
As John said at the end of the 60s, even though he revised his opinion later, The Beatles were The Beatles because of John, Paul, George and Ringo.
We will never see what we saw with the Beatles, EVER! Like Beethoven, Beatles music will be played 200 years from now. Think about that?
Paul & John loved each other. Thank God they made it up before John was killed.
John played some of his last album for Paul over the telephone and Paul was going to do the same. Not only was their friendship rekindled by then but the respect and sharing of ideas had also begun.
John had just turned 40 years old and that is a time of reflection for most people. Perhaps he and Paul were moving towards a reunion of sorts.
I like to think so, but the world will never know.
I have loved The Beatles since I was 7 years old. They were truly amazing!
The Beatles and their first album were created to push LSD (Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds) which was created by a Warburg pharmaceutical company. Young girls were paid to scream hysterically for the long haired dopeheads in an effort to degrade American culture and Christian values. Much like the entire "Anti-Establishment" movement of the 60's was created by, guess who, the "Establishment". A former MI6 agent presented these revelations shortly befor John Lennon met his end. It was assumed that he had a big mouth and was the most likely to talk about how they really got their start
I loved many albums but the White Album was my favorite. A much different Beatles showed up in their music on that one.
@@thomasinapaine503 You might want to loosen your tin-foil hat, as it's clearly cutting off circulation to your brain.
@@thomasinapaine503 Great parody, but you failed in the first few words, which was historically inaccurate.
@@colinbaker3916 they were created to set off the psychedelic drug culture of LSD. I didn't actually say Lucy was on the first album, nor does it matter. Do I need to tell you why Cardi B was created, or is it not painfully obvious?
Beatles music was/is in a league of its own. It's really not easy to categorize their music or talent with respect to other groups. I've been a fan for over 55yrs.
58 years for me!
Sorry Willie, but they were more than a rock n roll band. Yes, they were that too -- but they were so much more
AMEN>>>AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! comparing the Stones to the Beatles is really an insult to the Beatles!!!!!!!!!
@@Andy-ty2ni Comparing bands is futile to begin with. I love the stones. They rocked way harder than the Beatles. But I love the Beatles more.
@@Andy-ty2ni Not really (MHO).
Both have been excellent rock bands. Both had blues origins and also both acknowledged the influence of great musicians like Chuck Berry, Muddy Waters, Fats Domino.
John used to call Chuck his hero.
I like both bands but I love The Beatles.
Also, we shouldn't leave George out.
John; not the best rhythm guitar player in the world,
Paul; not the number 1 bass player,
George; not the top lead guitar in the world,
Ringo; not the best drum player, (among the top 10 though)
but together they became the numero uno rock (and more) band in the whole world.
4 talented guys got together and the music changed for ever.
That's why they're known as the Fab 4
Yes. The Beatles influenced and changed pretty much every aspect of Life. They were a cultural game changer on a global level. You will never see a band have that mind blowing impact again.
@@albertopalma1663 Pretty sure any band Paul might've landed in back in the early 60's would've risen to the top. I don't even LIKE the guy, but yes he was a GREAT bass player*, and EXCELLENT singer (with a goodish voice), and a crushing 0songwriter above all else.
John -- of course -- tempered his bubblegum nature, which helped.
* I don't mean great like Jaco P, but endlessly creative, writing some of the hardest grooves ever. And he sang LEAD and played with apparent ease.
Rest in peace and belated birthday wishes to John Lennon 10 9. Imagine today's music 🎶 without the example of him 💔 I can not
BEATLES GREATEST BAND EVER. SAW THE 1ST ONE AT AGE 17.........LOOKING FORWARD TO THE 2021 VERSION
I was 11 when The Beatles released "Please please me". I still (often) listen to their songs. As much as I love the raunchy down-to-earth Stones, The Beatles were (perhaps, are) without equal, as master craftsmen of innovative songwriting and arrangement. (caveat: I can only opine for Western culture).
The Beatles and their first album were created to push LSD (Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds) which was created by a Warburg pharmaceutical company. Young girls were paid to scream hysterically for the long haired dopeheads in an effort to degrade American culture and Christian values. Much like the entire "Anti-Establishment" movement of the 60's was created by, guess who, the "Establishment". A former MI6 agent presented these revelations shortly befor John Lennon met his end. It was assumed that he had a big mouth and was the most likely to talk about how they really got their start
@@thomasinapaine503 yeah ok and 9/11 was an inside job too right?
@@jefvarnadore2267 that would be an oversimplification of the matter to say the least
DAM !!!! YOU’RE OLD !!
@@thomasinapaine503 In an interview John found that statement to be totally ridiculous, the one about LSD.
He said he had no idea what some people had been thinking (or smoking) when they were saying Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds had something to do with LSD. He just laughed.
That was a media creation after hJohn said that the Beatles were more known than Jesus. He later recanted and regret he said that. This wasn't published. Media tactic.
One of those organizations was the KKK, complaining that they were a "religious organization" and completely disagreed with the Beatles, so they decided to burn the band's albums.
I'm sorry, but listening to the Beatles, now as when I was young, is a spiritual experience. They carried this over through their solo albums. I can go into detail as to why, such as the chords they use are those found in heaven, etc., but suffice it to say that when I listen to Bob Dylan, I don't have this same experience. I do to a certain extent when listening to Cat Stevens, but with the Beatles, it was almost every one of their albums, starting with Revolver, Rubber Soul, the "White Album", St. Pepper's, Magical Mystery Tour, Let it Be, Abbey Road, and on. I don't think there will ever be or can ever be another group like them.
Somebody sent me a cd of a band called cotton mather years ago. Sounded like a great lost beatles album. It had no name and sounds nothing like their current music so i don't know any info but it's great whatever it is if you feel like searching all their music..
@@kensims4086 I will definitely check it out. Thanks for the recommendation!
Yes, I concur. A song like Eleanor Rigby for example is just such a marvelous piece of work that I find it hard to compare almost any pop music in the last 5 decades with it! Possibly the only artist who was as brilliant as the Beatles was Brian Wilson. But don't get me wrong, I LOVE Cat Stevens as well.
@@kensims4086 That's funny, actually. It's named after a Puritan preacher from I believe the 17th century...
@@kensims4086... Careful Ken. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."
"...the chords they use are those found in heaven..." "Saint Pepper's..." "...listening to the Beatles... is a spiritual experience."
Getting close to adoration there. Ask yourself: Who would Jesus listen to? Beatles, Stones, Cat Stevens (Yusef Islam)?
I’m so excited for this!
Yes that’s right my dear Laurie Strong.
Me too...looking forward to this...im a die hard fan
Paul played the guitar solo on “Taxman”.
Interesting
this is irrefutable. :)
He played many solos. George a generally mediocre guitarist and slow in the studio, according to EMI workers.
....and they reversed it for Tomorrow never knows.
@@steveconn "EMI workers"? If John and Paul thought George was a mediocre guitarist, they wouldn't have kept him around. They were pretty clear about not wanting him to contribute much to the songwriting. He was only there to be the lead guitarist. How many "greatest guitarists" lists has he been on now? Yeah, all the guitar-playing writers who have been coming up with those for decades are total idiots. Only the anonymous EMI workers know the score. Well, if I'm now supposed to accept that every Beatles book ever published was wrong and that the boys actually had a fantastic time making Let It Be, well, maybe I can go along with George being a hack. Down is up, and up is down. It's the post-truth world.
Funny……I was 22 when The Beatles broke up. I do not recall everyone saying it was Paul’s fault AT ALL. Rather, to my friends and me, it was John who insisted on bringing Yoko to rehearsals and almost insinuating her into the fabric of the group that caused the rupture. Yoko was an artist and highly creative, and began to influence the creative process of the band through John. And Paul….who had been John’s creative partner for all the years of the band, was angry, aghast, and bewildered. The people I knew didn’t blame him. We blamed Yoko, rightly or wrongly. But we were you g and had to blame somebody. With fifty more years of life under my belt, I now choose not to judge or place blame. It was just a crying shame that it happened. I will say still, though, that had Yoko not been in the picture, I think they would have remained together much longer.
I also was devastated when they broke up. After many years i think it was a good decision, Abbey Road was a great album and a fine ending of the best band in the world.
I agree, but John also said: I created the band, I can break it apart.
It's true. The Beatles was his creation.
He included Paul, then George. Together decided to include Ringo who replaced Best.
He also said. The Beatles was just a band but J,G,P and R, that's different and they will stay forever.
The original film Let It Be was done at a time when John was a heroin addict, Yoko was attached to his hip and tensions were high. Being a bit spiteful, John went ahead and signed with Allen Klein and took George and Ringo with him. Paul signed with Lee Eastman, yes he was Linda's father so what? He wouldn't screw his son-in-law and his band the way that Klein did in later years. Paul never wanted the group to end. If not for Macca there wouldn't have one album of theirs since they quit touring in 1966. Like him or not, Paul was the GLUE in the band, the one who actually LOVED being in the studio doing what he loves: MUSIC.
@Michael You obviously are clueless. :)
Elvis was the first Big Bang and Elvis didn’t have a peer or anyone to go through it with. It was john’s band remember that journalist and his voice and side of the break up died with him. Love Paul and John and Elvis . The Beatles win overall though because they not only performed but they wrote 1000 years worth of songs in 7 years.
When you mention the Beatles please mention George martin he took their musical minds to another level...
They do, listen.
Truly the 5th Beatle.
Howlin' Wolf should've been the first person inducted into the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame.
Sorry, that'd be Chuck Berry
Bang, 1970 debut solo album McCartney (Maybe I'm amazed). Then Wings, Still touring after a 50 years career in 2020. This after the Beatles.
Uh, correct title of that song on the McCartney debut solo album is Maybe I'm Amazed, not Baby I'm Amazed. However, your title actually sounds better to me, and makes it sound more definite. "Maybe" sounds like he's not sure.
in a class all by himself. just like brian wilson, imo
@@thomastimlin1724 got it thanks, it's usually always Baby, lol
@@craigrheberling oh, what did Wilson do after Pet sounds? His mental health deteriorated in the late 1960s, his contributions to the band diminished, and he became much-mythologized for his lifestyle of seclusion, overeating, and drug abuse. Paul is still touring?
Cherries , first solo. Ram next . First solo album from a Beatle , WonderWall , George!
Paul was a great person and he was so happy for all of them I am 71 July 04
The movie that should have been made 51 years ago. The version where the Beatles like each other! It's about time!
The version that ignores all the tension that had built up and was about to come to a head! Who cares about art and the truth? Give us safe fairy tales!
@@WaitingtoHitprecisely.
@@beatlegreg07 Okay, well, at least you know that you're a child.
@@WaitingtoHit - The truth is a combination of both of those things. Don’t be a putz.
@@crusheverything4449 That would contradict every researched account of that period that's been published in the decades since the breakup. It seems like you would have to be a putz to suddenly dismiss all of those Beatles scholars. But hey, for the sake of argument, let's say the truth is a combination of both of those things and that there's no intent to deceive. In that case, I'm fully expecting, concurrent with the Jackson documentary, a beautifully remastered reissue of the Let It Be film with lots of promotion and wide distribution. However, thus far, it seems like Paul and Ringo are just facilitating historical revisionism. I think the truth makes them uncomfortable, so they'd rather bury it.
What's so great about McCartney is that he writes wonderful melodies and there is always something in the arrangement that catches the ear for a second. A guitar riff or drum fill or piano arpeggio. He is a remarkable talent.
I often say, Rock & Roll is the love child of the Blues and Country. I'm a child of the 60s and grew up listening to the Beatles. They'll always have a place in my heart. In fact, "Let It Be" is my second favorite song of all time ("Let It Ride" by BTO is my all-time favorite). RIP John and George. Long live the Beatles!
As a Canadian BTO were awesome.
The Beatles and their first album were created to push LSD (Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds) which was created by a Warburg pharmaceutical company. Young girls were paid to scream hysterically for the long haired dopeheads in an effort to degrade American culture and Christian values. Much like the entire "Anti-Establishment" movement of the 60's was created by, guess who, the "Establishment". A former MI6 agent presented these revelations shortly befor John Lennon met his end. It was assumed that he had a big mouth and was the most likely to talk about how they really got their start
@@thomasinapaine503 Now that you mention it, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. It was only used by Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster on Sundays...
@@pcbacklash_3261 thats a better proposition than living my whole life believing I was a free spirited hippie, when all the while I was really serving the interest of the CFR- International banking- Communist-zionist 6 point star movement towards global governance
@@thomasinapaine503 If you're willing to buy that, I also have a time-share in Shangri-La I can get for you real cheap.
John Lennon was a pure artist. Paul McCartney was an artist and a workaholic perfectionist. And I say that with the highest respect
IMHO, let's not forget George, a true talent as well.
When the Beatles started they were a cover band, a lot of bands from that era especially in England heard American blues R&B and rock artists on record and radio and it sparked them to become bands/musicians.
Every single UK band started by playing covers... Beatles, Rolling Stones, Who, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple...
paul and john started writing while still very young. When you have to play for 8 hours like they did in Germany, you learn a lot of songs.
@@sumonjamal1653 Well I think Pink Floyd were the exception, apart from a couple of very early gigs from the Floyds first single Arnold Layne their music was very original
"If you are in a rock & roll band, you are in a blue covers band." Yeah, that's probably true...until the Beatles came along.
Or until they stole Buddy Holly's entire four piece band/original songwriting style lol
@@steveconn Stole or developed way beyond anything Buddy ever thought of?
@@steveconn yeah, that great album cover art that Buddy did, the way he revolutionized recording studio techniques, his opening up subject matter in lyrics, his use of unconventional instruments, his realization of the concept album...all things the Beatles stole from Buddy Holly. What alternative universe do you live in?
Right? When are people gonna realize that rock n roll is the fusion of blues and country….with a bit of jazz, folk, and classical added on. I hate when people say rock came from blues and that’s it….you can’t make a stew with one ingredient. You need more.
@@robbielux8353 Didn’t John day something like “good artists borrow, great artists steal”. They were influenced by many many artists, from before their time & contemporaries. Their harmonies in some cases were them trying to sound like the Everly Brothers. Their name was directly influenced by Buddy Holly & the CRICKETS. I have not read everything ever written about them but I have been a fan since I was 5 years old- 58 years ago & was born on John’s birthday.
Lennon was better at writing lyrics, Macca was better at composin melodies. That's why they were so great together.
I always think of how John added “What do you see when you turn out the light/ I can't tell you, but I know it's mine...” in “With a Little Help from My Friends”. The best verse, in my humble opinion.
I think they were both maybe equally geniuses. Sometimes I tend to think Paul was slightly more. Such an impossible “measurament”, though…
George was an excellent song writer too (and he's barely mentioned. Joe, listen, this is about The Beatles, not only about McCartney) but he was obliterated by two giants. Though his songs are among the best of the whole band together with Ln-McC
Something is as good as Let it Be
Here Comes the Sun is as good as Hey Jude.
The Inner Light and others.
The list goes on.
@@albertopalma1663 I totally agree about George’s songs. But I tend to assume that most of the creative decisiona were up to Lennon-McC, and also the amount of great material they wrote is just out of this world. But, yes, George was also genius!
@@albertopalma1663 - George developed into an excellent songwriter, but John and Paul had a head start of several years.
Love this. Thank you
As a youngster (many years ago), I had every new release by the Beatles on pre order. My father would go pick them up from the record shop (Curry’s in the U.K.), and bring them home for me. Then one day I heard the Rolling Stones on the radio, it was one of those “Wow, what was that !” moments. I became a huge fan and R&B, blues has been my staple diet ever since. That being said, I still listen to the Beatles songs and look forward to seeing the documentary.
If you want to nominate the greatest composer of all time it would be Lennon McCartney. Except there was no such person. The consensus is that Paul McCartney is the greatest composer the world has seen, but that he was influenced by John Lennon in achieving that. There were many incredibly good composers over the years, like Wolfgang Mozart and the Strauss family with their beautiful waltzes, But none of them changed the world like The Beatles did. Their music truly changed everything, from the culture to the way society is today. From all the names I mentioned, only Paul is alive today. We are so fortunate. He should be lauded every day for the incredible genius that he is.
watching paul and his recent band "live" on you tube, whenever they cut to the crowd, it's so obvious that those people KNOW what they are seeing- and the reactions? priceless!
Together they brought the best out of each other, competitive nature.
I'm not a Beatle fan, I'm a Beatlemaniac but I'll nominate Bob Dylan as one of the greatest composers of all time.
Not to discount McCartney's genius, when I think of the best Beatles' songs they're almost all by Lennon.
@@chcarroll5164 Yes, Lennon's songs were his soul- Paul had a definite degree of separation from his art
The first film, "Let It Be", was NOT grim....I hate all the opinions being made by people who weren't even alive when the film came out talking about it being dark, grim, depressing, etc. The director did, admittedly, have an agenda while editing. But it wasn't grim. The NEW film will be more agenda driven, they specifically went for the more animated parts of the sessions and I am VERY excited about seeing this. BUT, again, that being said, the first film wasn't the depressing awful thing that pundits are claiming. There were plenty of smiles, very little in the way of arguments and really, the only part was the "discussion" between Paul and George that has been blown out of proportion over the last 50 years. I'm excited about the new cut. It will be amazing.
You are so right! I saw it back in 1970 and it was fine. The Paul/George argument has been blown way out of proportion.
Right , it was not grim. There were a few moments like the George and Paul guitar playing disagreement and John looking bored and not saying anything while Paul talks about playing in public. That was it and not a big deal.
It popped up on RUclips last year and I saw it for the first time in over 30 years. It was not grim. It was a dull movie, but it wasn't grim. Check out the channel Pop Goes the 60s and how he puts the Paul/George argument in context.
@@jaceconverse6337 And the general boredom while they played Maxwell's Silver Hammer. "Get on the mike!...during 'Two of us'. The Twickenham setting was very grim. That Paul was a terrible leader - and not the natural leader - is obvious. Expecting the others to turn up early in the morning in the freezing cold ....and while being filmed...make music when they normally recorded at night. Paul sprung the project on them. They'd only just released a double album! "Set up by Paul for Paul", John later said. Leading them into 'Magical Mystery Tour' was another debacle, but I digress...
@@gettinhungrig8806 - A least Paul had the balls to experiment and break new ground, which Sgt. Pepper’s LHCB certainly did, and, to a lesser extent, Magical Mystery Tour. Part of the initial failure and critical drubbing of MMT was due to it being broadcast in black and white on Boxing Day, England’s largest annual TV audience.
The Beatles are the greatest band ever, they started it all, music, songwriting,fashion, recording techniques,trends all the others could only copy. Their songs have and will stand the test of time. And this movie will show their last days as a band, what “Let it Be “ just touches on. Really looking forward to it. God bless John and George!
The Beatles were a four-headed monster! And Macca Is The Master.
I love the beatles
I don't think writers trying to get a comment from an artist about other bands is particularly fair.
I mean, the Beatles & the Rolling Stones came from worlds apart - Liverpool & London. The Beatles have massive selling records like 'Abbey Road' & the 'white' album... Their music is mythical today.
The Rolling Stones' biggest records were 'Some girls'... 'Tattoo you' ... 'Sticky fingers'... nowhere near the Beatles' sales numbers...They had periods in the 70's where they were struggling to sell concert tickets. They got huge on longevity & perseverance... along w/ their stellar music.
It's 2 different career paths...
Paul is the GREATEST bar none
ELVIS WAS NOT THE FIRST ONE INDUCTED INTO THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME. CHUCK BERRY WAS.
You always hear the first black baseball player, the first black opera singer, etc Elvis was the first white Chuck Berry.
Berry and Little Richard deserved to be the first inductions.
@@jeancoughlin5490 don’t hate the player hate the game. Elvis said many times he didn’t invent rock n roll. Elvis stated that the king was Fats Domino and I agree. Fats was the first rocker
Did they just induct bands or individuals one at a time or did several enter the first time around? I know the baseball HOF opened in 1935 and inducted 5 members, including Babe Ruth. There were actually some of the sportswriter voters who didn't vote for him.
@@martinmahern7268 MY POINT WAS JUST THAT JOE SCARBOROUGH AS USUAL HAS NO 8DEA WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT
Bands writing their own songs. One of the greatest gifts the Beatles bestowed upon music
Wait a minute, what?! I remember that breakup, and it wasn't Paul who was blamed, it was Yoko and Linda, with a VERY heavy emphasis on Yoko. People still think Yoko was to blame. I also seem to remember that Paul was blamed for suing the other three, but that was sensible if they were to earn money from their own songwriting ever again. I simply can't remember of anybody blaming Paul for The Beatles splitting.
In the last 40 years, Paul did “Chaos and Creation in the Backyard”. A GREAT album that I enjoy still. My favorite Paul solo effort.
Yeah, it’s his best solo Album, great Songwriting
yeah its good? i have to admit i got totally gun shy about Pauls solo albums after Band on the Run...w/o Lennon it just seemed Macca went too schmaltz ...so frustrating too knowing what he is or was capable of....some of the songs he did with Elvis Costello were good with Costello played Lennon's role as schmaltz-filter haha
@@julianciahaconsulting8663 😅😅 Yeah, Paul did a lot of Muzak, but this Album is great.. not this „Ebony & Ivory horror“
@@julianciahaconsulting8663 I believe Chaos and Creation works too because of the anti schmaltz filter created by producer
Nigel Godrich 😀
As many people, if not more blamed John/Yoko for the break up as Paul. I love Paul and he's had a huge impact on music and the world in general. I also believe that had John been around for the last 40+ years he would have had an even bigger impact. I also think they would have played together again before George passed.
Any one who has gotten past the age of fifty knows that you have to let bygones be bygone to live without regret. When the 3 remaining Beatles came together in the 90's, I believe that would have been the time for at least a concert if not more.
There used to be a place in San Francisco in the late 70s, where you could watch three Beatle movies back to back for $2.00. "Help!," "Yellow Submarine," and "Let It Be."
The bad part was it shown on a 16mm projector and you had to sit in a metal folding chair. I did it twice just to see "Let It Be." I've always loved both the energy and spontaneity of the "Let It Be" sessions.
Dylan has nothing on Paul McCartney!
Please do not compare apples to oranges.
The Beatles have often said they did NOT have a rivalry with The Stones. The Stones records do not sound like Beatles records at all.
Look at Sgt Pepper, and then look at Their Satanic Majesties Request
@@bluepeng8895 Yes, but that's one example only. And the Stones openly admitted they tried to a 'Pepper' and failed. Find me one other record they made that sounds even remotely like a Beatles record.
@@justiceforall6412 Paint It Black. George Harrison pioneered the use of the sitar in rock, and indeed, Western music period. All sitar-containing pop songs ultimately stand on the back of Norwegian Wood. It simply is so.
@@bob7975 Pioneering is one thing and utilizing a discovery is another. The Stones, like any other band then and now were simply keeping up and trying to be relevant. Stones records do NOT sound like Beatles records. The Beatles themselves have disavowed this assumption on several occasions.
I really enjoyed the original Let it Be movie, but looking forward to the new Get Back coming out. I don’t agree that Dylan’s music over the past 40 years is better than McCartney’s.
Who said that? Even Bob Dylan admires Paul McCartney.
The Beatles need to be appreciated as one. They all contributed to create what they did.
Instead of discussing and arguing over who did more John or Paul, i think we should try and shine more light on the important roles of George Martin, Ringo and more.
Thank you Willie!👏👏👏
All of it came out of blues!
The Beatles and their first album were created to push LSD (Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds) which was created by a Warburg pharmaceutical company. Young girls were paid to scream hysterically for the long haired dopeheads in an effort to degrade American culture and Christian values. Much like the entire "Anti-Establishment" movement of the 60's was created by, guess who, the "Establishment". A former MI6 agent presented these revelations shortly befor John Lennon met his end. It was assumed that he had a big mouth and was the most likely to talk about how they really got their start
Can’t wait to see it
i still got my 1964 64 card set by the way..came in gum…perfect shape !
Joe, I would argue that LENNON would be the '2nd guy after Elvis" inducted into the R&R Hall of Fame. It was he who created the band and was its driving force as much as McCartney.
The Beatles were the greatest phenomenon in music ever created by the human race(sorry Mozart, Beethoven). The music of The Beatles will always be eternal!
McCartney and The Beatles will never be eclipsed. Serious Pop Music Geniuses. PAUL was the guy that wanted The Beatles to go on. It sucks that he still gets slagged for the breakup.
John, George, & Ringo thought alot of Pauls sappy pops songs were in his grandma style.
But he also did Hey Jude , Oh Darling, Helter Skelter, Live or let die which had alot of Balls ‼️
The amount of people’s lives these guys effected for the better is otherworldly.
Great discussion of George and Ringo.........
I always loved them right from the start, its sad there are only two left in the world, but boy they left there mark , amazing I would say.
In Tune Volume I by Mark Lewisohn is the definitive book on the early Beatles up to 1962.
It’s so good.
David Remnick is right. His adequately interpret like it was.
Through the Beatles people from my generation learned to look at the world in a greatly different way. We learned to not only accept the differences between people and cultures but to rejoice in and celebrate the diversity and to realize that nobody has the whole story all of us are on this mud ball together a global species that has many varied ideas about a varied many things that we should all be sharing with each other without passing judgment unless it was something that was bad for the environment as we became more aware of how much we fit in the scheme of creation and that we were a part of the whole not separate from and without a mother earth free from pollution that we would end up driving ourselves to extinction and cancer and other diseases would be brought forth and made worse through our own doing, and anything that placed profit for the few ahead of the needs of the many because we recognized that all wars regardless of what the proponents of them claim with their propaganda, all wars breakdown to profits, and are fought to gain some sort of material advantage in which to profit from using religious differences and differing political ideologies as the excuse for doing so, and the people who pay the most for these wars are the average joe citizen who's taxes pay for the military instead of programs to help the people at home with real needs like housing and infrastructure and food and power and access to decent medicine, and it's the young of the average Joe who gets sent off to die in these wars the ones who join out of a sense of patriotism not realizing they are dieing for the priveledge few to get more wealth instead of the grand ideals they thought they were dieing for, then theres the soldiers who joined because they needed employment to feed their families, and during Vietnam the draftees, predominantly kids of color and the poor, the wealthy white priveledged folks managing to get their sons exempt through deferment to college and/or like Trump have a doctor you can bribe into giving your kid some sort of physical anomaly that excuses them from having to serve in the military. We gained much social ,political, and spiritual awareness and learned to love each other because we had the Beatles. Then it was all ripped from us by killing us off in prisons after turning us into criminals for marijuana and passing laws that made it easier for the police to harrass and discriminate against us even outlawing our lifestyles through code enforcement, creating codes limiting the number of unrelated people that could live in one house and how many Buses and Van's and Campers could be on one piece of property regardless of acreage thus eliminating the communal nature of our lifestyle not to mention the all out attack by the media that just made us out to look like just a bunch of crazy kids on drugs rolling around in the mud naked at Woodstock, an extremely important thing that initially showed the world that by believing as we did you could have that many people drawn together for several days without any violence and instead the spirit of brotherhood and sisterhood and of people helping one another, and still to this day there has never been a larger gathering of people with no violence, instead they point at the Rolling Stones and the free concert at Alta Mira race track ,hiring the Hell's Angels for security and the violence and death that came out of that, and then they pointed fingers at those of us who became so depressed as we watched the Government and the priveledged few through the use of media start to reverse everything we had accomplished and subvert our ideas into meaning something different , those that in order to cope fell into the needle and heroin and the hard drugs that were never really a part of our belief system, with us it was about things that were going to expand conscienceness like peyote or sllyaciben mushrooms and L.S.D. which they managed to demonize without any real scientific proof, in the minds of Americans. Once the Beatles were gone, so went everything else.
The Beatles and their first album were created to push LSD (Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds) which was created by a Warburg pharmaceutical company. Young girls were paid to scream hysterically for the long haired dopeheads in an effort to degrade American culture and Christian values. Much like the entire "Anti-Establishment" movement of the 60's was created by, guess who, the "Establishment". A former MI6 agent presented these revelations shortly befor John Lennon met his end. It was assumed that he had a big mouth and was the most likely to talk about how they really got their start
Steven Hall. Wow! Right on! 👏🙏🌎🌏🌍🦚🧓💕
@@thomasinapaine503 I don’t know how old you are, but I can assure you the young women of my day didn’t have to be paid to “scream hysterically” at their performances. We were basically ready for the British music invasion. It was new and exciting, and they were good-looking, funny, and acted like real people, unlike the more commercially promoted music stars from before. Not to mention their accents! As for the rest of your comment, I’d never heard of any of that, so I can’t address it.
@@thomasinapaine503 What a steaming load of warmed-over Infowars cult programming. Why are you listening to MI6 agents, for crying out loud? If your precious Establishment was so powerful, why were they so afraid of their own creation? The FBI had a taller stack of files on John Lennon than they did Carl Sandburg, and that's saying something, seeing that Sandburg was both poet laureate of the United States and a known lefty sympathizer. They did everything possible to demonize and hobble the counterculture, with the effect that people like you actually believe this dribblepoop. Of course, you do. You have no way of knowing anything different than what you're told. You think yourself in opposition to this "Establishment", and yet you defend it at every turn. I've heard this story. It sucks.
Wow! How Paul-centric is Joe Scarborough? It's a documentary about the Beatles, give the other three some house room!
yeah, I agree.
None of them mentioned Ringo once...
And he annoyingly, constantly interrupts his guests; what's the point of having them on to interview if you're only interested in your own opinion & hearing your own voice. I feel sorry for his wife and co-host; she can't ever get a break from him & his ego.
@@surfelvis5946 Yeah, Joe is actually like a lot of men I've met--they must ALWAYS dominate conversations. I think it's a defense mechanism, to be honest.
@Theodore Plume But there are way more Paul "duds" in the Beatles' back catalogue: Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da, Maxwell's Silver Hammer, Honey Pie. I think John called them "granny tunes"...
I still say it's John who is the revolutionary ...in music and in life
I couldn’t agree more with you guys about McCartney!
time, place and opportunity paved the way for their genius. what happened then could not happen today.
I remember back in 1970, one summer night, my sister and her husband took me to the Drive-In to see The "Let it Be" movie.
I didn't care if the sound was coming from a tiny window speaker, I still heard the music, and watched my favorite band
of all time make cool music! And, that same week, My brother brought home, for me, The "Let it Be" Album! Awesome!
Now here we are...51 years later.. I can't believe how time just flew by? Also, Just like The Beatles coming to America in 1964,
they helped ease the shock from President Kennedys Assassination, well I lost My Grandma in 1970, and _The Beatles "Let it Be_ " album
and _George Harrisons "All Things Must Pass_ " album did the same for me. It helped easing the pain from my loss. 😭🤎 ⛪🕊✝ 🚶🏿♂🚶🏿♂🚶🏿♂🚶🏿♂
Sorry to not agree with Mr. Remmick but although the Beatles were primarily a Rock and Roll band (and yes they play the Blues with the best of them) they also covered show tunes like Till There Was You from the Music Man a Broadway musical and also incorporated what were considered classical chord progressions and key changes into their music unheard of in Rock or Blues music before they came along.
The creative process - we get to see it ALL happen.
This might sound sophomoric but As great as they were individually, The Beatles were somehow greater, than the sum of their parts.
The Beatles and their first album were created to push LSD (Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds) which was created by a Warburg pharmaceutical company. Young girls were paid to scream hysterically for the long haired dopeheads in an effort to degrade American culture and Christian values. Much like the entire "Anti-Establishment" movement of the 60's was created by, guess who, the "Establishment". A former MI6 agent presented these revelations shortly befor John Lennon met his end. It was assumed that he had a big mouth and was the most likely to talk about how they really got their start
Your comment might well be applied to great bands in general. When the Rolling Stones had their falling out, Jagger and Richards did some mediocre stuff. Also, even in unknown bands, (like the ones i played in), the nature of music requires that "the whole be more than the sum of its parts." There are a lot of rough sides to music, which along with Playing, also drive the band apart. Check out "Living in the Material World", George Harrison's experience.
@@thomasinapaine503 You sound very much like my grandmother on tbe subject. I promise you those girls werent paid to scream. I attended a Beatles concert. There was nothing phony about it. As for the rest of your assertions, theres nothing I could say that would dissuade you from your beliefs.
@@thomasinapaine503 Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds wasn't on their first album.
@@Dr.Ultraviolence their first album was manufactured and written by the Tavistock Institute , where Ed Sullivan spent weeks learning how they were to be marketed. They were to begin the psychedelic drug culture. Lucy in the Sky solidified it
The Beatles are no “blues cover band” and Dylan has been more prolific over the past 40 years but I’ll take Paul’s quality over Dylan’s quantity.. just think about how many classics Paul has written.
Most people blamed Yoko Ono for the breakup of The Beatles, not Paul McCartney. He wanted to keep the band going. It was John Lennon who left the group right after Abbey Road was completed in 1969, but kept it quiet. Paul made the announcement in 1970 that he was leaving, but the group had already dissolved.
Right. I don't know how old this guy is but he must not have around then. John/Yoko got much more grief for the break up.
It’s John Lennon and Paul McCartney together who were the genius core of the Beatles
And yes, I think Willie is kind of correct here. A case could be made that The Rolling Stones were the greatest rock band. The Beatles were clearly the greatest over all band and could match the Stones every step of the way in rock n roll. In fact, they usually lead them.
The Stones became a great band when they stopped copying the Beatles.
@@lynnturman8157 But they never completely did. Not until after the Beatles broke up
It took Lennon and McCartney to pen the Stones first hit, but they got paid.
Macca is still spending that sweet RS money.
@@charlie-obrien John performed that song I believe. Before the Stones made a hit with it and they gave it to Ringo
In retrospect, the chance meetings, the backgrounds of all those involved in the ascendance of the group, is truly mystical. Even the dissolution of the Beatles led to separate careers that created new musical heights of excellence. A transcendent example of destiny ruling. For the record, I never blamed Paul. Allan Klein and others but not Paul.
When and where does it premiere?
John played some of his last album for Paul over the telephone and Paul was going to do the same. Not only was their friendship rekindled by then but the respect and sharing of ideas had also begun.
John had just turned 40 years old and that is a time of reflection for most people. Perhaps he and Paul were moving towards a reunion of sorts.
I like to think so, but the world will never know.
Rock n Roll, everyone has their own definition but the Beatles went beyond rock and roll. Were their elements of rock and roll in their music? You bet, but rock and roll, to me is playing something pretty much live in the studio with very little to no overdubbing. There is a freshness, a rawness to rock and roll. It isn't always the prettiest girl or boy at the party but you don't forget it when you hear it.
This David Remnick dude must be on some kinda crack if he thinks Dylan’s output over the last 40 years is better than McCartney’s. Paul has put out some outstanding albums in even just the last 10 years.
Agreed. Paul has made more interesting music the last 15 years or so than he did in the 80s and 90s!
I've never heard Dylan express awe and admiration for anyone the way he does when he talks about Paul.
His point is extremely valid, the body of work by Dylan over the last 40 years, not necessarily commercial success but critically acclaimed outweighs McCartney's catalog.
@@waynedickson6860 well yeah, critics always kiss Dylan’s toes for anything he puts out. Doesn’t make it any better.
nobel prize for dylan for those 40 years but i like paul too
Scarborough hit it out of the park with his take on Paul
A little overkill on McCartney…… Lennon had a incredible play with words….. yes they where brilliant.
If John's final album, "Double Fantasy" was any indication, he was again hitting a stride with new music at the start of the 1980's.
"why is paul trying to still shape his own legacy at 79?" u clearly dont have passion for anything. he plays because he likes it, playing to people can be addictive.
As a musician, McCartney is the King of Pop leveraging different music from Big Band, Blues, Rock and Roll, and folk to create great songs for the radio and Muzak. John Lennon was more avant garde. He forged new music to create pschodelic, metal, and grunge to influence many great acts, such as Pink Floyd. i.e. Lennon was more experimental. The two together were the true music G-Spot of Rock and Roll!!
Dylan peaked in the 60s and 70s as well. What you think Dylan had a greater catalog than Paul since the 80s?
John wouldn’t have excelled without Paul and vice versa. Separately they were good, at times excellent, but together they were unstoppable. Then John found a new creative partner in Yoko and that was it. She didn’t break up the Beatles but their relationship is what gave John the confidence to walk away.
I agree with you, but there were other factors, too. First, there was the main event that began the fraying of the band: Brian Epstein’s death in 1967. Epstein, who was an equal partner with the four Beatles, famously told them, “You just be Beatles, I’ll take care of everything else.” And that he did. When he died, The Beatles lost the only person they trusted with their money and the vultures swooped in. Suddenly, John, Paul, George and Ringo had to take an interest in business matters for the first time in their careers and it changed the dynamics of their relationships with each other. They were growing up and growing apart, as friends often do in their late 20s. They were all married by ‘69 and had bought houses and spent much less time in each other’s company. I’ve always felt that The Beatles break-up was inevitable. We were lucky to have them as long as we did.
It was an extraordinary time- 1965-late 70's. I saw the Ed Sullivan show the night the Beatles played "Sargent Pepper", just kidding - i think it was "I Saw Her Standing There", and the 'British Invasion' that commenced, with Brian Wilson & The Beach Boys fighting back with "Good Vibrations." An incredibly diverse and, to me wonderfully Melodic, along with the bottom end drive of country rock 'n roll which, to my American Ear the Beatles' greatest contribution is the diversity of excellent songs and their making.
It was a wonderful battle of the band's initiated by the Beatles.
While both Lennon and McCartney are both great songwriters - and George Harrison to some extent - the big difference in musicality is that Paul can write for orchestra and maybe even conduct whereas John could not.
The Beatles and their first album were created to push LSD (Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds) which was created by a Warburg pharmaceutical company. Young girls were paid to scream hysterically for the long haired dopeheads in an effort to degrade American culture and Christian values. Much like the entire "Anti-Establishment" movement of the 60's was created by, guess who, the "Establishment". A former MI6 agent presented these revelations shortly befor John Lennon met his end. It was assumed that he had a big mouth and was the most likely to talk about how they really got their start
@@thomasinapaine503 Don't look now, but here comes the conspiracy version!
why is That the big difference?
@@thomasinapaine503 ??? You know all this because you have the inside track??? What American culture are you referring to exactly? Racism? Political assassinations? Apartheid? Mass shootings in schools? Trying to run the world and force other cultures to accept your own narrow vision of a sanitised, white, blond, blue-eyed Jesus? Your kind make me sick.
Paul does not write sheet music.
If I remember right the headline in the paper read,"Paul Quits the Beatles!"
Everything is a competition; wonder why people can't admit they both changed the world at the same time in slightly different ways. I can binge on Beggars Banquet, Let it Bleed and Exile just as much as I can binge on Revolver, Pepper and the White Album. Do you love The Beatles or The Stones? Both...now drop the needle on whichever one is on the turntable and lets enjoy.
RUclips has many young "reactors" to music from the boomer generation, and they are fans. Big fans. The Beatles are the best representation of that era, in my humble opinion. But then Led Zeppelin came around...🤣 and once again changed things. Anyway, I will always love the Beatles. ❤
On the point about Paul wanting to make sure the record is set straight; early on John and Paul decided to label every song they wrote (individually or together) as a Lennon/McCartney song. Consequently, many people assume that they both wrote Yesterday or When I’m Sixty Four, or Helter Skelter, or on and on … Paul wants people to know that he wrote those songs, he wants people to know that most of the songs they wrote, they wrote separately.
Not quite right. Paul is/was much more likely to say songs were co-written than John. John would tend to attribute a song to whoever had the initial inspiration...whoever kicked it off (Freddy Mercury's view on songwriting credits too by the way). The rest he saw as craftsmanship which he didn't value as much. Paul definitely didn't think most of their songs were written separately ...see 'Many Years From Now'
@@gettinhungrig8806 - I've heard Paul say this in interviews ... doesn't really matter though
Yes, John while he was still alive gave a Playboy magazine interview where he broke down who wrote what. The amusing part was when even he couldn't really be sure, they where so musically intertwined.
Lennon/McCartney was a music publishing agreement they set up to protect and share their royalties.
What has faded from memory is that they wrote a lot of music for groups that weren't the Beatles.
"I am the walrus." - V. I. Lenin
The Dude abides.
shut the up, donnie.
It cracks me up how erudite Walter is.
I disagree with that McCartney should be the second person behind Elvis in the Rock and roll hall of fame. I think Elvis is overrated in the sense that he didn't write his own songs. IMO Chuck Berry or Little Richard are much more deserving to be number one.
I'd go for Chuck.
Know! They never made as much as an impact as Elvis! Elvis changed peoples life’s
It is thought that Elvis trail-blazed the whole thing - even the Beatles acknowledged it
You had to be alive then to realize that if it wasn't for Elvis, white kids wouldn't have heard rock and roll on the radio for another ten years.
Goodbye Beach Boys, Beatles and Stones..... Hello more Doris Day and Eddie Fisher.
I'm always amazed that no one mentions the role Allan Klein played in fomenting mistrust between John and Paul. He was a truly sleazy character out for two things; money and control of the Beatles songbook.
There were two camps in this. One said McCartney did it the other said Yoko/Lennon did it. Attached to that was a sub-argument that McCartney was the Beatles vs Lennon was the Beatles. The Beatles were the Beatles. Lennon and McCartney were symbiotic beings musically. They broke up cuz entropy ... Harrison probably could have told them that. The evolution of hard rock with Hendrix, Cream, Led Zepplin, Jeff Beck, Santana brought a shift in the buying habits of consumers. I think they sensed it was time.
The Beatles and their first album were created to push LSD (Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds) which was created by a Warburg pharmaceutical company. Young girls were paid to scream hysterically for the long haired dopeheads in an effort to degrade American culture and Christian values. Much like the entire "Anti-Establishment" movement of the 60's was created by, guess who, the "Establishment". A former MI6 agent presented these revelations shortly befor John Lennon met his end. It was assumed that he had a big mouth and was the most likely to talk about how they really got their start
@@thomasinapaine503 I've got a bridge for sale if you are interested.....
@scaryharry magaslayer just ignore me
@scaryharry magaslayer fine
@@thomasinapaine503 Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds was not about LSD. It was about a drawing that Julian made in school about his classmate Lucy. Sheesh!
Last man standing and/or rich people get to re-write history.
I do not see why competition has to be brought up , They were as a group at their best and that is that , No competition
I'm glad The Beatles broke up when the did, as it was the catalyst for George Harrison to record and release all the great songs he had written while in The Beatles. His triple album "All Things Must Pass" was one of the first great albums of the 1970s.
Yes, Paul is a legend and wrote some great songs, no doubt about that, but he has also written some completely spineless junk (Mull of Kintyre, Pipes of Peace, The Frog Chorus, The Girl is Mine, Ebony and Ivory, all of the Wild Life album, all of the Back To The Egg album, etc) so no-one is perfect, however legendary.