Thursday, July 28, 2005
Beatle Bits #319 (Let it Rot!)
Well, I (we) should have known it.
With the help of Abbey Road supreme news digger Steve, I got to break the story of the upcoming-when, when!-release of Let it Be on DVD for Canadian newspapers, in the Toronto Sun, several weeks ago.
But now comes late word from one of Steve's reliable sources, that LIB is-yet again!-on the back burner, and may not be released in 2005.
Now if this information is true, then I say (another) pox upon the rotten House of Apple.
Oh sure, there probably is some sort of-maybe even plausable-explanation as to why this highly awaited release won't, or may not be coming out this year, but then again I and many, many other fans are so fed up with the delays, no matter what the reason(s) we are mad as hell.
And when LIB restoration director Bob Smeaton gives an interview saying that the package is FINALLY completed and ready for imminent release, well then, it sure puts the mockers on the fans eternal hope of seeing LIB on DVD in their lifetime.
Look, this is not braine surgery or rocket science, this is a bloody pop music movie for God's sake.
Apple, stop the ridiculous screwing around and get this thing into the store, ASAP.
Otherwise, some fans may be saying Let it Rot, to Let it Be.
With the help of Abbey Road supreme news digger Steve, I got to break the story of the upcoming-when, when!-release of Let it Be on DVD for Canadian newspapers, in the Toronto Sun, several weeks ago.
But now comes late word from one of Steve's reliable sources, that LIB is-yet again!-on the back burner, and may not be released in 2005.
Now if this information is true, then I say (another) pox upon the rotten House of Apple.
Oh sure, there probably is some sort of-maybe even plausable-explanation as to why this highly awaited release won't, or may not be coming out this year, but then again I and many, many other fans are so fed up with the delays, no matter what the reason(s) we are mad as hell.
And when LIB restoration director Bob Smeaton gives an interview saying that the package is FINALLY completed and ready for imminent release, well then, it sure puts the mockers on the fans eternal hope of seeing LIB on DVD in their lifetime.
Look, this is not braine surgery or rocket science, this is a bloody pop music movie for God's sake.
Apple, stop the ridiculous screwing around and get this thing into the store, ASAP.
Otherwise, some fans may be saying Let it Rot, to Let it Be.
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Beatle Bits #318
Well, the further I go through Tony Bramwell's Magical Mystery Tours, the more I am unsure of just what the 'ell that Tone-as the Fabs called him-really is saying, or should I say implying?
It certainly isn't, "all we are saying, is give peace a chance."
The first half of the book generally focuses on what an odd ( albeit genius) duck that John Lennon was, and I got the feeling that John was the Beatle that Bramwell ultimately respected most.
However, as the book slides into its second half, it appears to me that Tone wants the world to know that Yoko Ono DID break up the Beatles, turning Lennon from a street wise leader, to a hopeless toady and nutter under the care and control of Ms. Ono, who would from 1968 on, be calling the shot for both of them.
Accordingly, Paul McCartney, who lurked in the background in the first half of the book, now seems to emerge as the only real voice of reason in what would come to known as the longest cocktail party.
Bramwell describes Georfe Harrsion as too meek and/or stoned to really make any impact on group decisions, and Ringo Starr, well, enough said.
And as the book proceeds, Bramwell makes it painfully obvious AGAIN AND AGAIN that he believes the (in)famous team of JohnandYoko WERE the MAIN reason for the falling of the Fabs, and that Ms. Ono turned John into another person almost overnight.
(Bramwell relates that Paul was mighty, mighty pissed at John-and told him so- for the way Mr. Lennon dumped first wife Cynthia, and reprises the story of how Hey Jude came to be.)
However, Bramwell concludes that the other famous Beatle wife, Linda Eastman, was very good indeed for Macca and turned his life from chaos to comfort and common sense, if such a commodity is possible in the insane Beatle world.
Bramwell also concludes that after the Lovely Linda came into his life, Paul became-and is still today-just a regular, ordinary, billionaire pop star. Although Tone does let slip that Macca did seek spirtual guidance form the Maharishi Yogi several years ago.
Is it fair to deduce from Bramwell's book that his main thesis is thus:
John -chooses wrong woman-or maybe more accurately woman chooses him-and things are for the worse.
Paul -chooses right woman, and things are for the better, although not enough to "save" the Beatles.
I would love to hear from Yoko on this book.
Stay tuned, more to come.
It certainly isn't, "all we are saying, is give peace a chance."
The first half of the book generally focuses on what an odd ( albeit genius) duck that John Lennon was, and I got the feeling that John was the Beatle that Bramwell ultimately respected most.
However, as the book slides into its second half, it appears to me that Tone wants the world to know that Yoko Ono DID break up the Beatles, turning Lennon from a street wise leader, to a hopeless toady and nutter under the care and control of Ms. Ono, who would from 1968 on, be calling the shot for both of them.
Accordingly, Paul McCartney, who lurked in the background in the first half of the book, now seems to emerge as the only real voice of reason in what would come to known as the longest cocktail party.
Bramwell describes Georfe Harrsion as too meek and/or stoned to really make any impact on group decisions, and Ringo Starr, well, enough said.
And as the book proceeds, Bramwell makes it painfully obvious AGAIN AND AGAIN that he believes the (in)famous team of JohnandYoko WERE the MAIN reason for the falling of the Fabs, and that Ms. Ono turned John into another person almost overnight.
(Bramwell relates that Paul was mighty, mighty pissed at John-and told him so- for the way Mr. Lennon dumped first wife Cynthia, and reprises the story of how Hey Jude came to be.)
However, Bramwell concludes that the other famous Beatle wife, Linda Eastman, was very good indeed for Macca and turned his life from chaos to comfort and common sense, if such a commodity is possible in the insane Beatle world.
Bramwell also concludes that after the Lovely Linda came into his life, Paul became-and is still today-just a regular, ordinary, billionaire pop star. Although Tone does let slip that Macca did seek spirtual guidance form the Maharishi Yogi several years ago.
Is it fair to deduce from Bramwell's book that his main thesis is thus:
John -chooses wrong woman-or maybe more accurately woman chooses him-and things are for the worse.
Paul -chooses right woman, and things are for the better, although not enough to "save" the Beatles.
I would love to hear from Yoko on this book.
Stay tuned, more to come.
Sunday, July 17, 2005
Beatle Bits #317
Although I am just nicely into Tony Bramwell's new tome, Magical Mystery Tours, I am also nicely intrigued.
Intrigued, because it is obvious that this book contains perhaps-that's perhaps people-more insider type things about the beginnigns of the Beatles, than perhaps-again-any other book out there to date.
Already catching my eye is Bramwell's claim that by his mid teens, John Lennon was seeing "visions" and faces in the mirror, and was prone to talking to those faces, and or brooding quietly by himself, perhaps tormented by the stuff in his head that according to Bramwell, he rarely or never talked about, save for some soul sessions with Paul McCartney.
Bramwell thinks that the bond between John and Paul was forever cemented when both lost their mothers withnin a year or so, just as the group was about to come together.
Although Bramwell sees the Fabs phenom mostly through a UK lens, he makes some rather interesting claims about the greater western culture impact
According to Bramwell, the Beatles were responsible for the acceptence of the birth control pill (!).
Now, I have heard the claim that the Fabs crushed Communism and other tributes, but this, this is really some claim.
(Imagine if you will, a late teenaged gal going to her doctor in 1965 and saying, "Doc, the Beatles have shown me the way. Gimme a script for the pill. Yeah, yeah, yeah.")
Another interesting tidbit-that I think may have come to light before-was the overdubbing of the Shea Stadium film, and where that placed the Shea tune included on Anthology 2. Was it too an overdub?
Finally, and I will have a lot more to say about this in future BBs, is Bramwell's description of Yoko Ono as a "stalker," of John Lennon, beginning in 1966.
Bramwell says that as late as 1967, Lennon was privately describing Ono as "nuts."
I doubt Ms. Ono will be amused at Bramwell's take of perhaps one of the world's most (in)famous couples.
Stay tuned.
Intrigued, because it is obvious that this book contains perhaps-that's perhaps people-more insider type things about the beginnigns of the Beatles, than perhaps-again-any other book out there to date.
Already catching my eye is Bramwell's claim that by his mid teens, John Lennon was seeing "visions" and faces in the mirror, and was prone to talking to those faces, and or brooding quietly by himself, perhaps tormented by the stuff in his head that according to Bramwell, he rarely or never talked about, save for some soul sessions with Paul McCartney.
Bramwell thinks that the bond between John and Paul was forever cemented when both lost their mothers withnin a year or so, just as the group was about to come together.
Although Bramwell sees the Fabs phenom mostly through a UK lens, he makes some rather interesting claims about the greater western culture impact
According to Bramwell, the Beatles were responsible for the acceptence of the birth control pill (!).
Now, I have heard the claim that the Fabs crushed Communism and other tributes, but this, this is really some claim.
(Imagine if you will, a late teenaged gal going to her doctor in 1965 and saying, "Doc, the Beatles have shown me the way. Gimme a script for the pill. Yeah, yeah, yeah.")
Another interesting tidbit-that I think may have come to light before-was the overdubbing of the Shea Stadium film, and where that placed the Shea tune included on Anthology 2. Was it too an overdub?
Finally, and I will have a lot more to say about this in future BBs, is Bramwell's description of Yoko Ono as a "stalker," of John Lennon, beginning in 1966.
Bramwell says that as late as 1967, Lennon was privately describing Ono as "nuts."
I doubt Ms. Ono will be amused at Bramwell's take of perhaps one of the world's most (in)famous couples.
Stay tuned.
Monday, July 11, 2005
Beatle Bits #316 (Stig, meanwhile...)
"In 1970, the Rutles released Let it Rot, as a film, an album, and a lawsuit."
Eric Idle
Well, if recent reports on AbbeyRd are accurate, we may see the long, long, long, long, awaited release of the film Let it Be on DVD sometime later this fall.
I use the qualifier "should," because after all, these are the Apple Corps chowderheads we are dealing with. Yet I've got a feeling-that keeps me on my toes-that this time the rumours will be true.
And, according to the reports, LIB took so long due to film restoration issues and that the DVD will come with "extras."
It bloody well better, and LOTS OF 'EM!!!! And good ones to boot!
In fact, if the new LIB does not contain the complete rooftop concert, I will rate the package as at best a C+.
The rooftop gig is perhaps one of the last holy grails left in Beatledom, and its omission would be a grave error.
Afterall, only first gen Baby Boomer Fabs' fans who may have seen the film in its original run, and only they, will be anxious to seeing more of the wanking about their trousers that is a low-lite of the first run flick, and limited early 80s video release.
Paul McCartney and George Harrison having a row is not the stuff of magic for most Beatles fans. Most fans want the music!
So I'm afraid that if the "extras" are just more "candid" shots of the Beatles tearing each other apart, few will care, or shell out the doh rei mee for the package.
And of course the new LIB must be in 5.1, and hopefully with lots of outtake muscial performances that did not make the original flick.
As for packaging, why not a reproduction of the original box set photo booklet? Now that, would really be something. (Don't hold yer breath, however.)
Yes, I will be looking forward to LIB on DVD.
And Apple, for God's sake, do it right!
NB: Prayers all around for London, over their recent tragedy. Hang in there, mates.
Eric Idle
Well, if recent reports on AbbeyRd are accurate, we may see the long, long, long, long, awaited release of the film Let it Be on DVD sometime later this fall.
I use the qualifier "should," because after all, these are the Apple Corps chowderheads we are dealing with. Yet I've got a feeling-that keeps me on my toes-that this time the rumours will be true.
And, according to the reports, LIB took so long due to film restoration issues and that the DVD will come with "extras."
It bloody well better, and LOTS OF 'EM!!!! And good ones to boot!
In fact, if the new LIB does not contain the complete rooftop concert, I will rate the package as at best a C+.
The rooftop gig is perhaps one of the last holy grails left in Beatledom, and its omission would be a grave error.
Afterall, only first gen Baby Boomer Fabs' fans who may have seen the film in its original run, and only they, will be anxious to seeing more of the wanking about their trousers that is a low-lite of the first run flick, and limited early 80s video release.
Paul McCartney and George Harrison having a row is not the stuff of magic for most Beatles fans. Most fans want the music!
So I'm afraid that if the "extras" are just more "candid" shots of the Beatles tearing each other apart, few will care, or shell out the doh rei mee for the package.
And of course the new LIB must be in 5.1, and hopefully with lots of outtake muscial performances that did not make the original flick.
As for packaging, why not a reproduction of the original box set photo booklet? Now that, would really be something. (Don't hold yer breath, however.)
Yes, I will be looking forward to LIB on DVD.
And Apple, for God's sake, do it right!
NB: Prayers all around for London, over their recent tragedy. Hang in there, mates.
Wednesday, July 06, 2005
Beatle Bits #315
Is former John Lennon lover/helper May Pang a twit?
I am really starting to wonder if that is accurate, after reading a recent interview with Ms. Pang that was posted on an on-line JL fanzine.
In the interview- of which I passed on a link to AbbeyRd-May appears to be talking seriously about getting in touch with John's spirit, and other such rubbish.
I guess anything is possible, but could it be that the standard Pang media interview needed to be gussied, er , comjured up a bit?
One can only dine out so long over an 18 month period spent with Lennon, now some 30 years ago, so perhaps new ideas are needed, no matter how daft?
After reading this recent interview, I am now glad that Ms. Pang did not even bother to reply to 3 requests for an interview with me.
Because if she would have told me the spirits slop, I would have laughed, and asked if we were not reliving the Rutles, or even something sadder-and funnier.
Certainly, I do not begrudge May ANY of the attention she has got-and milked-over her association with John. As Lennon himself noted, so many more people got rich OFF the Fabs, then the Fabs themselves.
But when she has a shot to set records straight by answering questions about her relationship with Yoko Ono, May suddenly goes to ground like an ostrich, save for claiming that Yoko once bumped into her and turned and left without saying a word.
She said, she said?
Who knows?
But I do know this-and Pang admits as much-that when it comes to wives and girlfriends, rarely do girlfriends come out ahead.
So my advice to May is stick to the past and here and now, rather than the hereafter.
I am really starting to wonder if that is accurate, after reading a recent interview with Ms. Pang that was posted on an on-line JL fanzine.
In the interview- of which I passed on a link to AbbeyRd-May appears to be talking seriously about getting in touch with John's spirit, and other such rubbish.
I guess anything is possible, but could it be that the standard Pang media interview needed to be gussied, er , comjured up a bit?
One can only dine out so long over an 18 month period spent with Lennon, now some 30 years ago, so perhaps new ideas are needed, no matter how daft?
After reading this recent interview, I am now glad that Ms. Pang did not even bother to reply to 3 requests for an interview with me.
Because if she would have told me the spirits slop, I would have laughed, and asked if we were not reliving the Rutles, or even something sadder-and funnier.
Certainly, I do not begrudge May ANY of the attention she has got-and milked-over her association with John. As Lennon himself noted, so many more people got rich OFF the Fabs, then the Fabs themselves.
But when she has a shot to set records straight by answering questions about her relationship with Yoko Ono, May suddenly goes to ground like an ostrich, save for claiming that Yoko once bumped into her and turned and left without saying a word.
She said, she said?
Who knows?
But I do know this-and Pang admits as much-that when it comes to wives and girlfriends, rarely do girlfriends come out ahead.
So my advice to May is stick to the past and here and now, rather than the hereafter.
Monday, July 04, 2005
Beatle Bits #314
Oh well, I guess I should weigh in with a Live 8 Bore and Grate report, but only if I have to.
The Big story? Ringo Starr did not show up to sing with Paul "I'm Not Playing Unless I can Open and Close the Show" McCartney.
And even though Dirk, er Paul, did provide a rousing Hey Jude send off, I kept thinking that hell, the Beatles have been bust for 35 years now, um, give it a rest!
However, it is neat to wonder what if?
What if John Lennon and George Harrison were still with us in 2005?
I'd bet a bag of tea-and biscuts- that the Fabs would have staged a reunion. Sheit, if the Punk Floyd can do it, so could have the Fab Four.
But, as George so wonderfully stated in 1985, "there can be no Beatles reunion while John Lennon remains dead."
Nuff said.
As for the whole Live A dogs breakfest, believe it or not, the best may have come from Canada, where an inspired Motley Crue-of all people-laid down a withering set, and Neil Young, rocked out the show in the free world.
Please Bob (Geldof), no more.
Next up: Is May Pang a twit?
The Big story? Ringo Starr did not show up to sing with Paul "I'm Not Playing Unless I can Open and Close the Show" McCartney.
And even though Dirk, er Paul, did provide a rousing Hey Jude send off, I kept thinking that hell, the Beatles have been bust for 35 years now, um, give it a rest!
However, it is neat to wonder what if?
What if John Lennon and George Harrison were still with us in 2005?
I'd bet a bag of tea-and biscuts- that the Fabs would have staged a reunion. Sheit, if the Punk Floyd can do it, so could have the Fab Four.
But, as George so wonderfully stated in 1985, "there can be no Beatles reunion while John Lennon remains dead."
Nuff said.
As for the whole Live A dogs breakfest, believe it or not, the best may have come from Canada, where an inspired Motley Crue-of all people-laid down a withering set, and Neil Young, rocked out the show in the free world.
Please Bob (Geldof), no more.
Next up: Is May Pang a twit?
