The Beatles - Get Back Documentary

pocket player

Junior Member
I don't think that's 100% true... i grew up in detroit in the 70's and got bombarded with Zep,ACDC and Nugent non-stop... All 3 i can't stomach for more than bout 5 seconds now, I still listen to beatles all the time just due to the music being soo good.. If it wasn't good people would stop listening or caring bout it :)
You hit the nail on the head ice !
 

GruntersDad

Honorary Lifetime CEO
Staff member

mikyok

Platinum Member
I've ambled my way through the documentary. It takes a bit to get through and can be a bit of a slog.

It struck me that nobody said to them at the time, are you sure this is a good idea lads!

Too many randoms involved in the whole process
 

Chris Whitten

Well-known Member
It struck me that nobody said to them at the time, are you sure this is a good idea lads!
Has it turned into a bad idea?

The thing about The Beatles is that they innovated just about everything we think is normal now.
Bands writing their own material. Writing in the studio, taking months to record an album. Playing big outdoor stadiums. Singles that are longer than 3 minutes. Must videos (albeit on film and Elvis was of course also making movies at the time).
And documenting their work in long form with a film crew (like Metallica).
 

cbphoto

Diamond Member
I've ambled my way through the documentary. It takes a bit to get through and can be a bit of a slog.
Yes, it‘s long. I first thought it was a typical 90-minute documentary, only to discover three 3-hour episodes. oof!

It struck me that nobody said to them at the time, are you sure this is a good idea lads!
Brian Epstein, the only guy who could and would have questioned this production, had died a little over a year prior.

Too many randoms involved in the whole process
The Beatles were a money-making machine for the label. Given this “TV” opportunity, there was MOAR money to be made.
 

Chris Whitten

Well-known Member
Brian Epstein, the only guy who could and would have questioned this production, had died a little over a year prior.


The Beatles were a money-making machine for the label. Given this “TV” opportunity, there was MOAR money to be made.
Like I said above - who says this was a mistake or bad?
The Beatles were in almost compete control of their destiny, direction and productions. The label (EMI) would have had zero input on whether to make a documentary of the Let It Be sessions or not. I don't think it cured to any of there Fab 4 that the would be 'money making'. Again, they were innovating and pushing the creative boundaries of what it was to be a band (at the time).
 

cbphoto

Diamond Member
Like I said above - who says this was a mistake or bad?
Please, just let us discuss their consideration of this undertaking without your arrows. None of them looked particularly excited to be there in the first episode. They were struggling. George was clearly not respected and put out. Ringo looked buzzed most of the time. The entire endeavor did not look healthy.
The Beatles were in almost compete control of their destiny, direction and productions. The label (EMI) would have had zero input on whether to make a documentary of the Let It Be sessions or not. I don't think it cured to any of there Fab 4 that the would be 'money making'. Again, they were innovating and pushing the creative boundaries of what it was to be a band (at the time).
After Epstein died, who was their manager?
 

Chris Whitten

Well-known Member
Please, just let us discuss their consideration of this undertaking without your arrows.

After Epstein died, who was their manager?
I'm discussing it.
Seeing as the entire universe is currently buzzing about the 8 hour doco, it seems very likely their judgement was absolutely bang on.
They've probably had more streams and digital downloads in the last week than they've had in the last couple of years.
Who was their manager? Are you still thinking they were told what t do and the decision was based on monetary considerations. In that regard you are wrong.
After Epstein they sort of managed themselves. They were the first band to set up their own office, recording studio complex and label (Apple Corp).
It's a complicated story but at a certain point John wanted to get an American businessman (lawyer I think?) Allen Klein involved. That was highly controversial and was another element in the break up and years of bad feeling within the band.
 

mikyok

Platinum Member
Has it turned into a bad idea?

The thing about The Beatles is that they innovated just about everything we think is normal now.
Bands writing their own material. Writing in the studio, taking months to record an album. Playing big outdoor stadiums. Singles that are longer than 3 minutes. Must videos (albeit on film and Elvis was of course also making movies at the time).
And documenting their work in long form with a film crew (like Metallica).

It was ultimately an aborted project that only saw the light of day because the engineers were instructed not to throw anything away.

Doesn't mention how the album was put together or Mr Spector.

The South Bank Show on Sgt Pepper they did for McCartneys 50th is far better.

Metallica Some Kinda Monster........what a train wreck that was!
 

Chris Whitten

Well-known Member
It was ultimately an aborted project that only saw the light of day because the engineers were instructed not to throw anything away.
No, it was released at the time and has been one of my favourite movies for years.

When you make a fly on the wall doco you shoot way more footage than you can use.
Director Michael Lindsay-Hogg made his own creative decisions on the mood of the movie, what was in, what was out.
All that happened was that they opened up the vault and gave Peter Jackson all the hours of raw footage and he made some different creative decisions.
The Beatles won a grammy for best movie score for the original 1970 'Let It Be' and the song itself won an Oscar.
 

mikyok

Platinum Member
No, it was released at the time and has been one of my favourite movies for years.

When you make a fly on the wall doco you shoot way more footage than you can use.
Director Michael Lindsay-Hogg made his own creative decisions on the mood of the movie, what was in, what was out.
All that happened was that they opened up the vault and gave Peter Jackson all the hours of raw footage and he made some different creative decisions.
The Beatles won a grammy for best movie score for the original 1970 'Let It Be' and the song itself won an Oscar.

But it was still an aborted project where the album was thrown together after they'd split up by Alan Klein.

See my previous post. I have the original film too. I love the album but it was plagued for years over the Phil Spector involvement.
 

Juniper

Gold Member
Get Back sticking- rrL rrL rrL rrL

Ringo leads with his left being left handed so that’s probably his version of a more natural LLR LLR..etc

When I played this song in a band many years ago RRL just felt a little unnatural to me.

Doesn’t matter which way you play it though! Just a little geek thing I love about Ringos playing.
 

BruceW

Senior Member
If there were 28 documentaries about the Kinks, we would likely have much more appreciation and admiration for the work of the Kinks. Familiarity has a lot to do with why many people like the Beatles so much.

I'm a big fan of The Kinks, and I'd be interested in a proper documentary about them and their career.

That having been said, they had no where near the impact on music and culture that The Beatles did. The sheer volume of amazing music that they created in less than a decade. And the continued output of all four members of the band also contribute to the legacy...The Kinks are pretty much Ray and Ray alone, away from the band.
 

Mr Farkle

Well-known Member
It was shot on 16mm Arriflex and other high quality film cameras using Kodak film that had an ISO speed of 100. You can get a very high quality image from that combination so they had a good base to start from.
I’m pretty sure they did some film grain smoothing too.
 
Top