My favorite BEATLE (and solo) films in order of preference not sequential order :

1) Let It Be 1970---I've seen it of course in all it's bootlegged forms-- and I think the OFFICIAL release date is LONG overdue
2)A Hard Day's Night 1964--Richard Lester's first foray into Beatle-related cinema, and boy is it a masterwork.
3)Magical Mystery Tour 1967--Macca being the principle "director" and mastermind behind this odd, psychedelic, post-Epstein era sojourn into the abstact, I always loved the amateurish feeling to it. Fave scenes : John (as delightfully evil waiter) shoveling the spaghetti onto fat lady's plate, and the bus scene when "Aunt Jessie" implores Ringo not to get "historical" AND OF COURSE the "Death Cab for Cutie" sequence...."take it off !!!!!!!!"
4)Help ! 1965--The Fab in Austria, Bahamas, London. Great film and sophomore Beatles/Lester collaboration--in glorious COLOR too lol. "Ticket To Ride" sequence rocks (by '65 standards)and so does the "stonehenge" venue for "The Night Before" & "I Need You"
5)Yellow Submarine 1968--Love the later included, "Hey Bulldog" section, not too mention the overall Peter Max-like animation. CUTTING EDGE for '68. By the way, there WERE Blue Meanies sighted outside the theater when I saw it back in '68 in Pittsburgh, Pa. They were promptly taken out by a S.W.A.T team shortly afterwards.

John Lennon 1967--"How I Won The War"--another Richard Lester piece .The BEST anti-war film ever made IMO (along w/ Kubrick's "Full Metal Jacket", of course)Michael Crawford--later of "Phantom Of The Opera" fame co-stars w/ John. The movie's  locale (coastal Spain)must've inspired Lennon because when he got back to London in Fall of '66 he had "Strawberry Fields" tucked under his arm --recorded just a short time later at Abbey Road. I also LOVED the Warner Brothers release "Imagine"--this is THE most revealing documentary about ANY Fab. I love the scene when the young American stalker/homeless dude tries to enter Lennon's English estate and is greeted by John himself, who is rather sympathetic to this hapless man. He even offers him a meal (John was such a compassionate person when he wasnt railing against a given cause) Also the scene in the Montreal hotel room where Lennon & friends (Smothers Brothers & Tim Leary too ? lol) later recorded "Give Peace a Chance". This depicts conservative cartoonist the late Al Capp (who obviously didnt share John & Yoko's politics)trying to insult Lennon & Ono's "Bed Peace" campaign and was summarily tossed out. A CLASSIC scene. (I can't BELIEVE Kapp had the gall to demean Yoko--calling her a "that" or some such other epithet in FRONT of John....even got Derek Taylor angry!!  You GOT to see this film if you havent already!!!) I wish Mal Evans had been there to kick the guy's a**.

Paul McCartney 1984--"Give My Regards To Broadstreet"--The plot is weak (a stolen master tape? gimme a BREAK, Macca), but some of the song sequences are awesome (NOT SILLY LOVE SONGS, THOUGH..ugh...) but his re-vamped "Eleanor Rigby" & "For No One" are truly beautiful---and so are the Victorian boating scenes w/ Linda, Ringo & Barbara. Some parts look like they're out of a Dickens novel...slightly anachronistic, but it still works. Like MMT, this film is generally considered a flop, but for Fab completists, you NEED it for the music scenes...and PAUL's CAR !!!!!!!!haha

Ringo--I mentioned already Magic Christian (w/ the Badfinger soundtrack)(and how can a movie w/ Sellers in it be bad ?...look at Dr. Strangelove..) Also loved Ringo in Candy (the gardener ?? lmao !!) and his tour de force in "Caveman" !! Ringo at his pre-historic, satirical best.

George --The Concert For Bengla Desh 1971--this is such an amazing concert film. I had it for ages on VHS, but now thankfully on DVD. The Dylan section knocks me out. The illusive (and reclusive) Zimmerman showing up for pal George's charity plea was a thrill. So does Billy Preston. Awesome. Another highlight is George's solos w/ Slowhand.
"Concert For George"--reverential tribute to Harrison. A really great evening that must've been...and Dahni Harrison (Hari's son) is a DECENT musician himself (in the Julian Lennon sense)--also, isnt Dahni a DEAD RINGER for his old man...? spooky.  

why do you hate Universe?

Quoted from 829

I hate "Universe"-- real Beatle fLix r best

I'm afraid I don't understand? What's 'universe'?

^^ Across the Universe...the musical that's told through the songs of the Beatles

Quoted from JimmyMcCullochFan

^^ Across the Universe...the musical that's told through the songs of the Beatles

Ah, I see. Thanks for enlightening me.

it's great...you should def check it out BlueMeanie! It should be playing at a theater near you.

Quoted from JimmyMcCullochFan

why do you hate Universe?

because like "Cirque du Soliel's" "Love", it's another pseudo-Beatles project aimed at the mighty $.

I don't believe its all about the money..
But for I know, it could be, but even so, it is a wonderful movie.

Quoted from 829

because like "Cirque du Soliel's" "Love", it's another pseudo-Beatles project aimed at the mighty $.

As you started a thread saying you hated it, it would be handy for the rest of us that haven't seen it, if you could give us a little review.

And I wouldn't call 'Love' pseudo-Beatles. It has been done with the full co-operation of The Beatles, and Apple. Did you like the 'original' American album releases? Could they not be called a 'pseudo-Beatles project aimed at the mighty $'. Done without the approval or co-operation of the band.

Quoted from BlueMeanie

As you started a thread saying you hated it, it would be handy for the rest of us that haven't seen it, if you could give us a little review.

And I wouldn't call 'Love' pseudo-Beatles. It has been done with the full co-operation of The Beatles, and Apple. Did you like the 'original' American album releases? Could they not be called a 'pseudo-Beatles project aimed at the mighty $'. Done without the approval or co-operation of the band.

"Across The Universe", is a hodge-podge of music videos in my opinion--sung by ppl that aren't the Beatles. Must we like every cover version of songs we associate w/ the original entity that created it ? For example, even Bono, who I respect greatly(for his own U2 material)doesnt neccessarily enhance a Lennon/McCartney composition just because he's a major rock star himself...we are not automatically obliged to adore every interpretation, unless of course you count yourself among the vast legions of mindless sycophants who accepts everything you see as Beatle-related on face value. I'm more discerning than that.

AND as for "Love", I"m well aware that this "stage show" contains ACTUAL BEATLE recordings-- which, admitedly, differentiates it from "Universe", but in this instance I was speaking of PRODUCTION VALUES---NOT MUSIC. How do jugglers and acrobats convey the more cerebral elements of some of the later period Lennon/McCartney/Harrison songs ? --the ONLY song that comes to mind that lends itself to this theme is perhaps "Being For The Benefit Of Mr. Kite"---but does "Nowhere Man" and songs of this ilk??  IMO it's a ridiculous premise. And as to your further contention that it's thoroughly acceptable because it has the approval of the band and Apple....uh..don't you mean the approval of 50% of the Beatles and Apple...? Last time I checked Lennon & Harrison were dead. How do we KNOW John or George would have approved???? Can we be so audacious to assume we know what two deceased artist would feel..? Come now..isn't that just a TAD presumptuous??? Just because Yoko and Olivia gave their assent to these two wretched shows doesnt mean their late respective spouses would've not found fault (at least thematically)with them. ("wretched shows" is my term, of course, and I'm well within my rights to deem them as such if I choose)
For me the last PURE Beatle production was LET IT BE...[i]anything subsequent are merely paltry attempts to bask in a reflected glory not of their own making...THAT honor ONLY belongs to JPGR..collectively.

Quoted from 829

How do we KNOW John or George would have approved???? Can we be so audacious to assume we know what two deceased artist would feel..? Come now..isn't that just a TAD presumptuous??? Just because Yoko and Olivia gave their assent to these two wretched shows doesnt mean their late respective spouses [i]would've not found fault (at least thematically)to them. ("wretched shows" is my term, of course--and I'm well within my rights to deem them as such)

Erm... it was George's idea!! The show arose from discussions between George and Guy Laliberte; (one of the founders of Cirque), in 2000.

Quoted from 829

"Across The Universe", is a hodge-podge of music videos in my opinion--sung by ppl that aren't the Beatles. Must we like every cover version of songs we associate w/ the original entity that created it ? For example, even Bono, who I respect greatly(for his own U2 material)doesnt neccessarily enhance a Lennon/McCartney composition just because he's a major rock star himself...we are not automatically obliged to adore every interpretation, unless of course you count yourself among the vast legions of mindless sycophants who accepts everything you see as Beatle-related on face value. I'm more discerning than that.

OK, I was just asking if you could tell us something about the film, seeing as you started a thread about it and never actually mentioned it in your post. It would have been informative for the rest of us, if you've seen it. There was no need to go on a rant about cover versions. And then start getting mildly insulting.

perhaps...but that doesnt count in LENNON does it ? (also ...do we assume Harrison would like the FINISHED work ? ...maybe we can dig him up and ask him...opps, sorry...he's in the Ghangis River in ash form, my mistake)

NOR does it OBLIGATE every Beatle fan to fawn over these things...does it ? I'm a devoted Beatlemaniac but it doesnt make me obsequious.

dont we decide here at this site (for example)the relative personal value we place on each of the Beatle albums ?  I think each fan can ALSO decide for themselves which Beatle-related project we think worthwhile or not as well.

once again, I hate Universe....and LOVE. (but it's only one opinion so its no big deal)

Quoted from 829

NOR does OBLIGATE every Beatle fan to fawn over it...does it ?

I didn't say it did. I asked you about the damned film. And so far all you've done is rant over the soundtrack, and Love!! Have you actually seen it the film?

Quoted from BlueMeanie

OK, I was just asking if you could tell us something about the film, seeing as you started a thread about it and never actually mentioned it in your post. It would have been informative for the rest of us, if you've seen it. There was no need to go on a rant about cover versions. And then start getting mildly insulting.

insulting ???  No, sorry...wrong. The "you" I was referring to was GENERAL (the world at large--Beatle fans in the macro-sense) --wasn't speaking about anyone in particular.

Quoted from BlueMeanie

I didn't say it did. I asked you about the damned film. And so far all you've done is rant over the soundtrack, and Love!! Have you actually seen it the film?

Yes, or I wouldn't have such a strong opinion about it. Forgive me but I just think of it as another example of opportunism, that's all. The film's director was on a late night PBS talk show recently here in the States called "The Charley Rose Show"--and she spent nearly have the interview defending her film against vehement criticism which I vigoriously share. So you see, I'm not the only one who has seen it and found it revolting. It's all a matter of taste. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Even me   lol.

Quoted from 829

insulting ???  No, sorry...wrong. The "you" I was referring to was GENERAL (the world at large--Beatle fans in the macro-sense) --wasn't speaking about anyone in particular.

No worries.

On the subject of cover versions though, I don't really have a problem with them. All good artists get covered, it's their fate for having written a good song. Most of them are shite, as we know, but their have been some crackers; Joe Cocker, EWF, Adrian Belew, CSN, Ben Folds. I don't think it's sacrilegious to cover a Beatles song. If I don't like it, then I don't listen to it.

Quoted from 829

Yes, or I wouldn't have such a strong opinion about it. Forgive me but I just think of it as another example of opportunism, that's all. The film's director was on a late night PBS talk show recently here in the States called "The Charley Rose Show"--and she spent nearly have the interview defending her film against vehement criticism which I vigoriously share. So you see, I'm not the only one who has seen it and found it revolting. It's all a matter of taste. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Even me   lol.

Absoluely true.

Is it the story, the acting, or just the music? Forgive me, but there's been no publicity for this film here.

Quoted from BlueMeanie

Absoluely true.

Is it the story, the acting, or just the music? Forgive me, but there's been no publicity for this film here.

No, it's never only the music...it's probably just the concept as a whole. And no, I don't have any right to knock the acting either--which really wasnt that bad. I guess the problem lies w/me. Being a first generation Fab fan, I find myself seriously protective of their original recorded works...and I admit now, it's probably very wrong of me. Sorry if I came off "bitchy", wasnt directed at you--it's entirely directed at the parasites (and many Yanks among them)who still try to make a buck off JPGR (directors, producers, etc..)I keep thinking of Allen Klein...I know, that's nuts, but I remember how rapacious he was in the old Apple disputes. With him it was money first, art second. I should learn NOT to be so automatically dismissive of any new Beatle project...maybe one day someone will create one I'll really love. As for now, the ONLY thing I liked about "Love" was the 5.1 surround-sound upgrade of the original Beatle master recordings. I give Sir George Martin's son high props for his work on that. But I still cant warm up to the stage production. The props seem incongruous to me. "Universe", on the other hand, I just don't "get" at all.

Me ? opinionated ?  nah............LOL

Quoted from 829

Me ? opinionated ?  nah............LOL

Ha! I'm also first gen. I actually like Love. It's different. Thought of in the context of a show soundtrack, it's OK. And some of it's damned clever. It's no substitute though. What did you think of Backbeat?

Quoted from BlueMeanie

No worries.

On the subject of cover versions though, I don't really have a problem with them. All good artists get covered, it's their fate for having written a good song. Most of them are shite, as we know, but their have been some crackers; Joe Cocker, EWF, Adrian Belew, CSN, Ben Folds. I don't think it's sacrilegious to cover a Beatles song. If I don't like it, then I don't listen to it.

I don't hate covers per se (and you made an EXCELLENT point that "all good artists get covered")--I guess I'm saying I prefer the older covers --artists that were the Beatles contemporaries (like the Stones doing "I Wanna Be Your Man" etc.. and YES, Joe Cocker--whose version of "Little Help From My Friends" made it into a whole new song, it was THAT good) So there are definite exceptions to the rule. Point taken. (but you'll NEVER catch me listening to Ann Murray's version of "You Wont See Me" ever again...I just cant take it !! I mean, she's a nice lady from Nova Scotia and all...but  stick to "Snowbird" and your own compositions, please (take a lesson from Gordon Lightfoot, Ann...no Beatle covers,  k ?  thank u lol)
)

Quoted from BlueMeanie

Ha! I'm also first gen. I actually like Love. It's different. Thought of in the context of a show soundtrack, it's OK. And some of it's damned clever. It's no substitute though. What did you think of Backbeat?

strangely, I LOVED "Backbeat". I loved the Rutles too...but for ENTIRELY different reasons. lol

Quoted from 829

strangely, I LOVED "Backbeat". I loved the Rutles too...but for ENTIRELY different reasons. lol

I liked it too. It came out at a time when I didn't know too much detail about the very early Beatles, and it made me start reading up on them. I'd love to see it again to see how much of it was acurate.

I HATED the film the Bees Gees did about SGT. PEPPER way back whenever it was.... see what I mean about some of these things ? LOL (and dont get me wrong, I love the OLD bg's stuff---"I Started A Joke" "Holiday" etc...)

in fact, ...now that I think about it, even "Love" is better than the horrendous Bgs/Pepper thing..(but not by much lmao)

Quoted from 829

I HATED the film the Bees Gees did about SGT. PEPPER way back whenever it was.... see what I mean about some of these things ? LOL (and dont get me wrong, I love the OLD bg's stuff---"I Started A Joke" "Holiday" etc...)

in fact, ...now that I think about it, even "Love" is better than the horrendous Bgs/Pepper thing..(but not by much lmao)

The Pepper movie was one of the worst of any kind, ever. It ruined Peter Frampton's career.

Quoted from BlueMeanie

...It ruined Peter Frampton's career.

Really? You mean 'I'm In You' didn't?

Quoted from BlueMeanie

The Pepper movie was one of the worst of any kind, ever. It ruined Peter Frampton's career.

yeah, I know..and it's pity because I remember in the 70's how ENORMOUS he was w/ his "Frampton Comes Alive" album which everybody and his brother had (me included--although I never did upgrade to cd version...still have the vinyl)

I'm trying to remember back, was Frampton in Humble Pie--I know Steve Marriot the singer was...

Quoted from Klang

Really? You mean 'I'm In You' didn't?

yeah, not his best number

BlueMeanie,

I thought that visually the film was A-M-A-Z-I-N-G. The plot was predictable, yeah but that didn't take away from the movie at all for me. I thought it was neat that the characters expressed their feelings through the songs and it gave us a nice little history lesson about the 60's with footage of Vietnam, the Detroit Riots, the Cavern, the Rooftop concert, Savile Row etc

Most of the covers were very good. A lot of my friends that aren't Beatles fans have seen "Across the Universe" and have told me that it was amazing and that they were impressed so I am hoping that they will start to get into the Beatles. That's one thing I think will happen is this movie will rekindle interest in The Beatles among the younger generation.

Thanks for that. I've actually some good reviews of it. Also some bad!

Quoted from BlueMeanie

The Pepper movie was one of the worst of any kind, ever. It ruined Peter Frampton's career.

This movie was on the other night and I tried to watch it as a novelty. I hadn't seen it in years and I thought it would be good for at least a laugh. WRONG! I could not sit through it. What a horrible movie. They didn't even let them do any acting cuz they were so bad. George Burns had to do all their lines. How pathetic is that? As for LOVE, I thought it was AMAZING! But the difference is is that they use the ACTUAL Beatles. I mean, it's the Beatles singing and talking. God that makes such a difference. I'm seeing Across the Universe this Friday and I'm hoping I can sit through it. It really does look good, but it's so hard for me to sit through people butchering Beatles songs. Do they actually show the rooftop concert and cavern in it? It would be worth it just for that! They should have made a modern ant-war film. I mean, Vietnam is old news and we DO actually have a war going on for God's sake. Although I guess Vietnam goes better with the 60's theme.

they show the actor's and they sing in the Cavern and they sing on the rooftop...it's not the actual Beatles but  

here's a trailer from the movie..."Why Don't We Do It In The Road?"

nice cover IMO

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6iVKXDuvELc

Quoted from 829

"Across The Universe", is a hodge-podge of music videos in my opinion--sung by ppl that aren't the Beatles. Must we like every cover version of songs we associate w/ the original entity that created it ? For example, even Bono, who I respect greatly(for his own U2 material)doesnt neccessarily enhance a Lennon/McCartney composition just because he's a major rock star himself...we are not automatically obliged to adore every interpretation, unless of course you count yourself among the vast legions of mindless sycophants who accepts everything you see as Beatle-related on face value. I'm more discerning than that.

AND as for "Love", I"m well aware that this "stage show" contains ACTUAL BEATLE recordings-- which, admitedly, differentiates it from "Universe", but in this instance I was speaking of PRODUCTION VALUES---NOT MUSIC. How do jugglers and acrobats convey the more cerebral elements of some of the later period Lennon/McCartney/Harrison songs ? --the ONLY song that comes to mind that lends itself to this theme is perhaps "Being For The Benefit Of Mr. Kite"---but does "Nowhere Man" and songs of this ilk??  IMO it's a ridiculous premise. And as to your further contention that it's thoroughly acceptable because it has the approval of the band and Apple....uh..don't you mean the approval of 50% of the Beatles and Apple...? Last time I checked Lennon & Harrison were dead. How do we KNOW John or George would have approved???? Can we be so audacious to assume we know what two deceased artist would feel..? Come now..isn't that just a TAD presumptuous??? Just because Yoko and Olivia gave their assent to these two wretched shows doesnt mean their late respective spouses would've not found fault (at least thematically)with them. ("wretched shows" is my term, of course, and I'm well within my rights to deem them as such if I choose)
For me the last PURE Beatle production was LET IT BE...[i]anything subsequent are merely paltry attempts to bask in a reflected glory not of their own making...THAT honor ONLY belongs to JPGR..collectively.

Well first of all did you watch the movie or are you just jumping to conclusion(without watching it) and saying its absolute crud because the beatles aren't singing the songs?  You sure make out sound like if its not The Beatles then its absolute crude. You're also making it seem that anyone who wants to do a modern day thing with beatles music that they're just doing it to make money. You need to stop being so close minded man. It sure seems like your motto is "If its not The Beatles then it sucks!"

Quoted from Wordno

Well first of all did you watch the movie or are you just jumping to conclusion(without watching it)

first of all, try reading a little closer to a person's full comments before you "jump to the conclusion" that I did not see the works in question.. you're wrong, I did...and what my personal critique about a given film is...well, that remains my own choice. Just as yours is your own. Secondly, don't make automatic assumptions about subjective comments before you gather all the facts. I never said that ALL covers of Beatle compositions were "crud", (if you look a little closer--and obviously you didnt, you'll see that I gave high praise to a few --e.g., Cocker's rendition of "WALHFMF" is a case in point) The conclusion you drew on this point was also unfounded.

I have extolled the merits of many a Beatle/Lennon/McCartney/Harrison cover over the years--Stone's doing "I Wanna Be Your Man", Brazil '66 "Fool On The Hill"...even Elvis covering George's "Something"...et al.

I do not need to continually defend my position if I dont happen to like "Across the Universe" (film)...or for that matter, "Love". I have been following The Beatles (in the flesh) since 1964...I think I'm old enough to make up my own mind about personal likes or dislikes on works regarding this band. Personal opinion may be assailable, but it also has the right to remain steadfast...which, in the present case, it does.

I too was VERY sceptical about the "Love" project (just read some of my past comments on this board) but I have seen it and my wife (who incidentally is not a Beatle fan at all!) and I absolutely loved it (no pun intended!).