This may be an acquired taste, and it may require an already-existing fascination with the Beatles, as well as an understanding of what this three-part docu series signifies – and that’s okay. This is for the people who need it, who want it, who’ve been wanting to see it for fifty years. I’ve already seen a couple of reviews saying how boring it is. Depends on how you look at it. Am I the only person who tries to see a film through the lens of the audience it’s meant for? It doesn’t mean I LIKE it, but I recognize when something is geared at a niche audience. Anyway. Being familiar, myself, with the history of these “Let It Be” sessions, or “Get Back” sessions – and what this full three-part seven-hour docuseries on Disney means … I went into it open to the possibilities and curious to see the rest of the footage, the majority of which has been sitting in a vault for fifty years. My favorite thing about Get Back is that you actually watch songs take formation, moving from nothingness to somethingness, from nonexistence to existence. It’s incredible. Songs we all know now. Maybe this is “boring” to some people. Not to me, baby. I can’t wait to watch this one again, when I’m not taking notes feverishly the whole time.
“Am I the only person who tries to see a film through the lens of the audience it’s meant for?”
I struggle with this very question (or some version of it) constantly. It’s fascinating to me, the idea of intended audiences versus an artist’s inability to control the audience that comes to their work.
Kelly – I’m talking about critics, not artists. So many critics don’t make the leap – like, “Okay this is meant for an intended audience and I’m not part of that audience – but let me try to enter into the film’s world, into its audience’s world, and make some assessments from THAT standpoint, as opposed to ‘This is a bad film, it’s not good.'”
When I review, say, a campy gorey horror film – that’s not my thing, I’m not into that kind of stuff, although I can appreciate it – but there are those who LIVE for that kind of stuff. This is not about not criticizing stuff – it’s about understanding different contexts, and how your context is not the be-all-end-all only context. It’s like male critics who pooh-pooh-condescend to movies geared towards breathless romantic teenage girls. Okay, yeah, maybe it’s silly but what do those girls see in that movie, and why do they see it, and they are a powerful demographic, and you’re just totally missing the point if you DISMISS it.
I guess what I’m talking about, as I so often do, is curiosity. Have curiosity about how other people see the world.
Thanks for this review. I can’t wait to see the documentary – many times, I’d anticipate. I think what broke up the Beatles was being the Beatles. Nobody would want to live like that for very long. The amazing thing is that they handled it as well and for as long as they did. As George said, to be a Beatle, you have to sacrifice your nervous system.
I also like what the music critic Rob Sheffield pointed out: that the Beatles are the only band that broke up because its two leaders wanted to play music with their wives. That’s a really good reason to leave a band, I think.
// Nobody would want to live like that for very long. The amazing thing is that they handled it as well and for as long as they did. As George said, to be a Beatle, you have to sacrifice your nervous system. //
Yes. George Harrison’s comment in re: nervous system – and how fame was an assault to the ego (or words to that effect) – have stayed with me. I think about them all the time, particularly when I write about Elvis. At least the Beatles had each other, to sort of spread the assault on the ego out among the four of them. Elvis was out there all by himself. He couldn’t even commiserate with anyone.
// that the Beatles are the only band that broke up because its two leaders wanted to play music with their wives. //
Ha! That’s great!!
Like I said in the review, I had to keep reminding myself how YOUNG they were at this point. They always seemed so OLD to me as a kid, so GROWN-UP – but they were in their mid-late 20s. And in your mid-late 20s, you often start to get serious about stuff. You may have had relationships in the past, even serious ones – but often it’s around then that you fall in love for the first time. And it’s serious. You can really feel that in Get Back. John was madly in love. I mean … that’s life. Real life. And it was the real thing. They were all growing up, and their worlds were larger than the group.
Will be interested to hear your thoughts once you’ve seen it.
I can’t wait to watch it again – there was just SO MUCH to absorb!!
I just finished watching all three parts for the second time. I keep wandering around, thinking how the entire narrative of their breakup and this recording process was so very wrong—but how happy it makes me to see what Paul has always said about these sessions. I’ll never get tired of any of it. Been a Beatles fan for 57 years!
Sarah – // thinking how the entire narrative of their breakup and this recording process was so very wrong //
I know!!
I think the word I am looking for is “restorative”. Not just that the footage has been restored but that the memory has been restored – like Paul just said. He remembered it as being fun. And then kind of second guessed his own memory for 50 years because of the narrative. It’s wild how that happened!!
I’m envious you watched it a second time – I can’t wait to do that myself.
So so happy that Peter Jackson decided to do this project!
I’m only part way through the second episode but enjoying every minute of it. I have to say it-I’m in love with young Paul McCartney’s hair and his lush thick beard lol
I was a very little kid when the Beatles came to America, not really of an age to appreciate them, but I have a very vivid memory of my little brother and I dancing to ” Hard Days Night” with our babysitter. ( I was definitely wearing my new white go-go boots)
Just finished watching all three parts yesterday and still thinking about it. Planning a rewatch as soon as possible. I loved it. Loved Paul and his beard – how he drove things forward, always. Loved Mal, who hung around and made sure the band had everything they needed. Loved Glyn Johns’ fashion sense. Loved Billy’s infectious smile. Loved John’s dirty jokes. Loved George’s awful boots and furry coats that he wears indoors. Loved Yoko’s bored expressions (although the moment when she interrupted John to whisper to him that her divorce was final was sweet, as was John’s happy reaction).
And then there’s Ringo. RINGO! I shouldn’t be surprised at how awesome he is. He was the best thing in “A Hard Day’s Night”, too. You can’t take your eyes off him when he’s on screen, even when he’s unconscious. The way he slept through the many, many, many, many versions of “Let It Be” was adorable. He shows up every day, on time, even when he’s hungover, and is sometimes the only one there. Everyone’s having fun, but Ringo is having the most fun. I love him most of all.
sorry I am just getting to this now – I so love your observations – // Loved Glyn Johns’ fashion sense // right??
It makes me want to watch it again, I just need to carve out the time.
I so agree about Ringo. He was just this quiet open presence, watching the other guys – following along – supporting them – and, yeah, sometimes sleeping because … he was tired. He was just lovely.
I’m so glad this exists now. I can’t wait to watch it again.