'Let It Be' squashed by Paul and Ringo (1 Viewer)

[ted:r]

Paul and Ringo stop Beatles film 'Let It Be'

 

[Bradley Newton]

I'll just hold on to my decrepit VHS release from the early 80's. I've transferred it to disc and pull it out occasionally. I have to say, the movie is a slow, boring bummer.

 

[Sam Favate]

Not true, and the headline for this thread should be changed.

Here is word today from Apple: Another pitch for the release of "Let It Be" on DVD

...as well as word that Paul and Ringo are not behind the delays.

 

[Jon Martin]

LET IT BE is getting to be like SONG OF THE SOUTH.

There is all this speculation about why it won't be released, when the actual film isn't as bad as the critics claim.

Sure, there are a few uncomfortable moments, but as a film, I think it is a very good one. Better than HELP at least.

 

[Alan Tully]

There was a ton of film (16mm) shot for this, & I'm sure none of the good stuff made the final cut. I think everyones going to have to be dead before an interesting film is released.

 

[Peter Neski]

I been hearing that"its coming out " for 10 years!! so even if this story
is crap,the fact is theres no "Let It Be" or much form Apple ,if paul and
Ringo wanted it out ,it would be out ,Instead we have that Lame "Naked"

 

[WillG]

Well, whoever is behind this, if that reasoning is true, it's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. The Beatles breakup was the biggest breakup in music history. Everyone knows about it. Everyone knows who Yoko is (not saying she the direct cause of the breakup, but everyone knows the association). I really can't stand revisionist history. Do the money people think that if people found out that there were tensions before they BROKE UP, they would stop listening to the music. Not to mention that the Beatles were involved in worse stuff over their careers than band tensions.

I had never seen Let it Be until about a year ago. I found it to be nowhere near as bad as it is reputed to be.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Exactly, Sam - thanks for posting this. I was going to post this myself, but you beat me to it!

However, it IS absurd that it's taken so long for LET IT BE to come out.

 

[Ruz-El]

All the reasons for it not coming out make zero sense to me. they show awkward stuff in the "ANTHOLOGY" documentary from the sessions (George absolutely exasperated with McCartney, been so long since I seen "LET IT BE", I'm not sure if it's in that movie), and Yoko has released less then flattering material of John with that Anthology box set of music and "Imagine : John Lennon" doc. It's on record in countless interviews that they all hated each other at that point, yet their catalog still continues to sell... I see no reason to have to re-tool this. They did that with "ELVIS : That's The Way It Is" and it took all the guts out of it. Then again, We'll probably never see "ELVIS ON TOUR" in it's complete theatrical form either... so maybe I should keep the king out of it...

Just release it, warts and all.

 

[David Deeb]

It's not like anyone is going to stumble into this movie accidentally. It's 30 plus years old!

The Beatles were good, but this film would have to set "Dark Knight" sales records for it to actually destroy people's interest in the Beatles 40 years later.

 

[ted:r]

I posted it with the title because that's what the article conveyed and as such is accurate as to the article. I'm not a journalist, nor did I engage in a ton of research (or any, really) to determine the article's accuracy (somehow I have misplaced Paul and Ringo's phone numbers...damn.) Nor do I have any info regarding the web site that posted the article or "The Daily Express". I read it, thought it might be of interest and posted it. That's all.

Personally, I believe it should be released as it is a historical document that is of substantial interest. I am interested as to why it hasn't been released in the same way I'm interested in why "The African Queen" hasn't been released. Is it possible that the reasons stated are true? I find it so. Is it possible they are not and there are other reasons? Of course. At the end of the day, we don't know and that causes speculation, rightly or wrongly. (The same speculation that is currently running about the American Vice Presidential choices. No one knows so uninformed speculation runs rampant.)

At the end of the day, I don't think the title matters, since anyone interested will read the posts within and (hopefully) make up their own mind, or remain mystified. But if a mod wants to change the title, well, just "Let It Be"

 

[WadeM]

I agree with this from the link from Sam: "The DVD should be a 2-disc set. Disc 1 the original film, as-is, for historical purposes. But a second DVD should be a completely new creation. Including full band performances of songs that ended up on Abbey Road, rehearsal footage of All Things Must Pass and some of the better-performed oldies (Blue Suede Shoes and Gone Gone Gone) and jams (No Pakistanis, Commonwealth Song). Of course the complete extant rooftop footage should be included. And this is just based on the footage that I've seen."

I've never seen this movie mostly because of the bad things I've read about it, but if they were to release something like what's described above, then I'd buy it.

"People like to imagine The Beatles were a happy ship but the reality towards the end was very different as this film shows." -- so much for All You Need Is Love -- Ha!

 

[Patrick McCart]

I have a rip from the laserdisc, which pretty good quality - for a 28 year old video transfer made from a dupe of a dupe of 16mm. The film itself is boring... it just feels thrown together without much of a form. The rooftop concert, though, is great. All the good stuff ended up in Anthology, along with nearly all the "controversial" stuff. If you've seen Anthology, you've seen whats supposedly holding back the release. They should let someone go through all the footage again and make a decent documentary out of it. Let It Be, as it exists in 1970, feels like 70 minutes of random footage taped togeher, with a stirring finale suddenly appearing.

 

[chas speed]

It is pretty dull. Unless they do something interesting with it, like showing musical outtakes, I can't imagine it selling that well.

 

[Terry Hickey]

It's a piece of history and was meant to be a documentary. Of course it didn't turn out the way they thought it would. If or when it gets released, I will purchase it for nostalgia.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

It will sell well because it's The Beatles.

It may not be the most perfect film, but it's got good performances of TWO OF US, LET IT BE, and THE LONG AND WINDING ROAD... as well as the outstanding final Rooftop Concert, the last public peformance the Beatles ever did. It's worth it for this grand finale alone.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

There is no mystery here. EVERYONE knows the Beatles had problems at the end and did not always get along, and thus split up for a bunch of reasons. All four Beatles themselves have talked freely about this for 40 years, and it's all over the official ANTHOLOGY release... What's so new here?

As for your ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE quip, that was just a quick song conjured up to play for the Live 1967 "Our World" broadcast... and it was the "Summer Of Love", so....

 

[Ruz-El]

So true, Thing is, at the end of the Anthology, Paul and Ringo try to make out that the Beatles where the most magic love filled band in the history of music, where as Lennon and Harrison where more of the "we were just a good band, but still people." view. If any live Beatle was scuttling this project, I would totally believe it to be Paul. It seemed like all the others got along all right, Lennon recorded with both Ringo and George, George played with Ringo, Ringo took any gig that paid... the odd duck for many years was Paul.

Maybe Paul really is a big asshole and wants the "cute Beatle " image for a few more years.

 

[WillG]

That may not actually be too far from the truth. I've been reading this Beatles biography by Bob Spitz. I'm still in the early years but there are some incidents so far that show Paul in a less than positive light. And not that I trust Heather Mills, but not to long ago she made a few somewhat serious accusations against Paul claiming abuse.

And yes, the three other Beatles did record and hang out together from time to time after the breakup, but no one really seemed to interact with Paul much for a long time after. And wasn't it he who, somewhat prematurely, declared the breakup?

 

[Ockeghem]

The Spitz work is a wonderful book, isn't it? We recently purchased that one for our library. I also love the book that goes through The Beatles 2nd Album cut-by-cut. Check it out sometime if you have the time. It's entitled The Beatles Second Album, by Dave Marsh (New York: Rodale, 2007). Here is a listing of the contents if anyone is interested:

Give them 22 minutes (they'll give you the world) -- Pledge of allegiance -- Taking it too seriously -- The sound of young Britannia -- Liverpool to Hollywood via Gary, Indiana -- Butchered -- The man who hated the Beatles -- Building complexity out of simplicity -- Millions of "yeah".

BOT--

I've owned the Let It Be film for years in legitimate and not-so-legitimate copies. I don't really need it in pristine condition, but I would purchase it if it were issued that way eventually, since I am an avid collector of Beatles music, films, books, etc.