Quoted from Maria, posted April 17, 2004, 8:37pm at here

Sometimes the media got excited, though ...

Quoted from The_End, posted April 18, 2004, 12:09am at here

If I've mad a mistake in this text, please forgive me.... I'm a bit drunk!

Quoted from misterchaz, posted April 23, 2004, 8:55pm at here

They WOULD have gotten together again.

John had ALREADY signed a contract to appear with them as a group again for a one-off (at that time) concert sequence for the Long And Winding Road (Anthology) project.
---

Quoted from Maria, posted April 24, 2004, 2:30am at here

I have never heard of this contract for a one-off concert sequence. My first reaction to what you said there was great scepticism. Can you give evidence for what you say, Charles?

Quoted from misterchaz, posted April 24, 2004, 3:03am at here

I somehow felt you might be skeptical, Maria.

Quoted from misterchaz, posted April 24, 2004, 3:03am at here

I never saw or heard of these remarks again until about a year ago when the subject came up in rec.music.beatles newsgroup.  When I mentioned this article it was confirmed by 2 or 3 others, one of whom wrote out a timeline of the events.

I know.  Mind-blowing.  But quite true, I assure you.  There is *always* something to discover about these guys...the depth of their phenomenon is astounding.

I USED to think I was a Beatle expert until I started frequenting these forums and realizing I was only slightly above average.  There is a lot I have learned in the last 5 years.

Quoted from Maria, posted April 24, 2004, 5:41am at here

During the Beatle years, Mal Evans had made his own film of many events, public and private, involving the Four. After they'd broken up, it was mooted (not by the Beatles, but others within the circle) that this film, along with other footage (media, etc) might be made into a wonderful documentary of the phenomenon.

Quoted from Maria, posted April 24, 2004, 5:41am at here

Ta for the compliment.

Here's my understanding:

During the Beatle years, Mal Evans had made his own film of many events, public and private, involving the Four. After they'd broken up, it was mooted (not by the Beatles, but others within the circle) that this film, along with other footage (media, etc) might be made into a wonderful documentary of the phenomenon.

Rumors that was about to happen would surface every now and then over the years, and then subside. I remember George (I think) saying that it would probably be very interesting to watch, but he couldn't see it happening.

One rumor was that the Beatles would do a soundtrack for it. Another was that they would do a set of nostalgic songs about those years. And a concert. And on and on. So many rumors.

I honestly think you've latched onto one of these fictitious rumors, Charlie. Your evidence for John having signed a contract (essentially reforming the Beatles) is that there was an article in an industry publication that said that an entertainment lawyer claimed that ...

You can mock my scepticism, but I'll take that over gullibility.

Quoted from Maria, posted April 24, 2004, 5:52am at here

Things I read in forums, rmb and the like I am always very cautious about. There is so much half-baked stuff, and downright lies, that you have to be careful if it's accuracy you're after.

I don't doubt that there was such an article as you describe. But that doesn't make the claim in the article true. That others remember it also is not evidence that the claim was true.

Remember, anyone make make a claim. It is only the evidence for it that is interesting.

Quoted from Maria, posted April 24, 2004, 5:41am at here

Ta for the compliment.

Here's my understanding:

During the Beatle years, Mal Evans had made his own film of many events, public and private, involving the Four. After they'd broken up, it was mooted (not by the Beatles, but others within the circle) that this film, along with other footage (media, etc) might be made into a wonderful documentary of the phenomenon.

Rumors that was about to happen would surface every now and then over the years, and then subside. I remember George (I think) saying that it would probably be very interesting to watch, but he couldn't see it happening.

One rumor was that the Beatles would do a soundtrack for it. Another was that they would do a set of nostalgic songs about those years. And a concert. And on and on. So many rumors.

I honestly think you've latched onto one of these fictitious rumors, Charlie. Your evidence for John having signed a contract (essentially reforming the Beatles) is that there was an article in an industry publication that said that an entertainment lawyer claimed that ...

You can mock my scepticism, but I'll take that over gullibility.

Quoted from slick_rick, posted April 25, 2004, 12:30am at here

maria your spelling atrociously correct.you don't have to beat people down all the time.on another note when was bill sargent trying to reunite them???????????paul did see john a few odd times in 76 and 79.rumours can start very easily.it doesn't take much.there is a recording or two that is preported to be from one of these meets.one tune is stand by me and the other escapes me now.but it sounds like it could be them.but my "could" could stem from the fact i wanted them to regroup too.i did not veiw my wish as selfish but it is.if they wanted to be together they would......

Quoted from Maria, posted April 24, 2004, 9:44pm at here

So Charlie, basically you admit your case is weak. Just your assertions, basically.

All the rest is you trying to put a brave face on it.

Quoted from misterchaz, posted April 25, 2004, 2:43am at here

self-appointed Beatle experts should always retain an element of humility.  At some point in time you'll need it.

Quoted from Maria, posted April 25, 2004, 1:47am at here

Hi, pc31.

Quoted from AdamD, posted April 25, 2004, 4:32am at here

Lennon lost his nerve for playing live so I don't think any big concert would've happened.

It seems to me that McCartney was the problem in the band - the one instigating the break up and all the ugliness that ensued.

Perhaps if McCartney was shot instead, things would've been different.

Quoted from misterchaz, posted April 25, 2004, 4:41am at here

Funny as a train wreck.

Quoted from AdamD, posted April 25, 2004, 5:37am at here

Funny yet true.

Now throw a nickel in the bag and move along.

Quoted from Maria, posted April 24, 2004, 9:44pm at here

So Charlie, basically you admit your case is weak. Just your assertions, basically.

All the rest is you trying to put a brave face on it.

Quoted from AdamD, posted April 25, 2004, 4:32am at here

Perhaps if McCartney was shot instead, things would've been different.

Quoted from AdamD, posted April 25, 2004, 9:13am at here

I have retracted the final line of my post as on second glance, it looks like a provocation and it does not add particularly to the discussion. My appologies.

I am still of the opinion that it would have been more likely that Lennon, Harrison and Starr would have sooner collaborated than McCartney, Harrison and Starr.

Any further opinion on this would be appreciated.

Quoted from Maria, posted April 25, 2004, 10:01am at here

I suppose I have to reply to your latest post, Charles.

First: when I asked for evidence initially, this is the sort of thing you should have produced.

**Why?  I don't work for you.  I went to google groups and it was the very first article that came up.  If you were so concerned about evidence you certainly could have checked it out yourself.

**I said I had backup and I did. 

I thought your abusive approach was uncalled for.

**LOL "abusive"??  Right.  Please point that out to me.

It also looked to me as if you were being evasive.

**Again, what it seemed like to you is in no way reality.  But then you cannot seem to admit to that.  Ah well. 

**'Evasive.'  I was being as open as possible without proof, even admitting to such.  Again, get some humility.

Nevertheless, it still won't do, because ---

**It does just fine.  Whether you want to accept it is ridiculous.  Is your ego really this fragile?

Next: I think you have misinterpreted what's going on here.

**Think what you want, I misinterpreted nothing.  I gave a direct quote from a verifiable source.

Apple Corps wanted to stop the stage production; so they get as much ammunition as possible. One of the bullets is to get John to say that the Beatles "have plans to stage a reunion concert".

**Nice piece of fiction.  Got anything to back it up or is this just YOUR interpretation?  I think we all know the answer.

That's certainly not John "signing a contract" as you claimed: a deposition is not a contract. And in any case "having plans" is nothing concrete.

**Geez, keep flailing away.  Yes, they did want to stop the stage show, and this is a seperate issue.  And this is YOUR misinterpretation here. 

**He DID sign a contract in AUGUST.  No, I did not bother killing myself to find the corraboration for this specific item since I found this related and entirely relevant post.  It verifies that this was in the works since 1970 and that this was an element of the project.  Case closed.

Last: most of the rest of what you posted relates to the LAWR/Anthology thing which had been in their minds as a possibility for a long time (Mal Evans' films, etc).

**Nice try.  Really.  But ineffective and rather sad.

Most important point: still no evidence that John had signed a contract.

**Nor will there be.  Unless you are a judge and jury I have no need to produce anything further.  It's clear you cannot admit to being wrong.  Your personality flaw is not my responsibility.

Charles,

**Charles?  Yes, teacher!  LOL

I think it's time we dropped this.

**Go ahead, you can stop at any time.

Your standards of evidence are different from mine.

**So are my standards of group comportment.

But neither you nor I will lose any sleep over that. So shall we drop it?

Quoted Text

John had ALREADY signed a contract to appear with them as a group again for a one-off (at that time) concert sequence for the Long And Winding Road (Anthology) project.

Quoted Text

Most important point: still no evidence that John had signed a contract.

Quoted Text

**Nor will there be.  Unless you are a judge and jury I have no need to produce anything further.  It's clear you cannot admit to being wrong.  Your personality flaw is not my responsibility.

Quoted from tkitna, posted April 24, 2004, 6:21am at here

I've also been curious (and unfortunately ignorant) about the Mal Evans movies. I read that his home movies were released on video and had footage of Paul and him on safari in Kenya, but i've never heard of anybody seeing them or anyone speaking of them. Since Mal is dead, has his estate stopped the distribution? You would have thought i'd hear something by accident. Anyone?

Quoted from The_End, posted April 25, 2004, 10:38pm at here

Mal Evan's Kenyan safari cine film of Jane Asher and Paul McCartney was released on silent video back in the Eighties. It was sold in a replica film canister and also contained behind-the-scenes footage of the Beatles filming Magical Mysery Tour in Newquay, Cornwall. I have a copy - it's quite boring actually! LOL

Quoted from Maria, posted April 25, 2004, 9:25pm at here

If you don't want to stop, that's fine. I'll accommodate you.

***That's because you CAN'T stop.  I imagine some here get wore down by your constant nit-picking but it won't work for me, so let 'er rip.


I asked for your evidence.

***And I asked for your proof of my "abusive" post.  Guess neither of us gets what we asked for, huh?


I burst out laughing when I read that. Charles, you've got no idea about how to argue a case; you have no idea what constitutes evidence.

Quoted from misterchaz, posted April 26, 2004, 2:07am at here

***------- And you are forgetting a very important tenet: do I CARE about your definition of evidence?  No, I do not.

Quoted from misterchaz, posted April 26, 2004, 2:07am at here

***The proof is out there, but I am not going for it, and as this is not a court of law (as I stated clearly before) I don't need to.  To satisfy what?  YOUR standards?  LOFL  Really, maria, grow up.

Quoted from Maria, posted April 26, 2004, 2:41am at here

I know you don't care: that's the problem kiddo!

****LOL.  I know it is a problem for YOU.



The generally accepted standard is that the burden of proof (evidence!) lies with the asserter (that's you, when you asserted John had signed a contract...). I would think you would want to provide the evidence, not to satisfy me, but to satisfy yourself!

****Ahh, but my dear maria, I AM satisfied.  *I* read the article, and I received corraboration years later.  Just because I don't produce it on demand for your pleasure means nothing.

Quoted Text

The contract signing is a lesser aspect and only you are fixating on it.