Why hasn't a decent film been made about them yet?

>how heinous that a pajeet might be associated with the beatles

Attached: Ladies-laughing-.jpg (2365x2057, 656K)

racists

Its schmaltzy navel-gazing anglopoor schlock. The pajeet is just a useful shorthand.

Each person is now a corporation and song ownership is a tapestry of corporations/interests. Too expensive to string together and no dedicated director committed to put up with it all. Plus kids consider classic music to be songs like “I ain’t saying she’s a gold digga, I just never seen her with a broke nigga”. Beatles too old fashioned for sophisticated Zoomers

Attached: 88FAD599-F1C1-47C0-B2D9-6E0FB83E98CE.jpg (492x492, 107K)

I hope it flops hard desu. It's fucking stupid they decided to make a film like that in the first place.

Searching for sugarman was so good it killed documentaries on music artists.

If they made a beatles music I would want it to have almost nothing to do with the musical aspects of their career, which were mostly by the numbers big studio operations done in post-production. The interesting bit is what these guys were getting up to while being anointed virtual demigods of the 'free west' who could do no wrong at the height of western bloc decadence and wealth. Some of the shit these guys did and witnessed would be truly mind blowing to behold if it was shot bluntly.

This is generally a problem with any living artists biopic. For example Sacha Baron Cohen had a kino Freddie Mercury biopic in the works but the living members of Queen put the kaibosh on it and opted for the sanitized option that became "Bohemian Rhapsody"

Basically it's hard to make an "Amadeus" type movie when there are people who, just by fact of being alive, have it in their interest to change the plot of the movie

To be fair Kanye music has aged better than most rap.

>that feel when we could've had 120 mins of freddie mercury blowing midgets and binging on truckloads of coke
>but instead we got the disney version of queen

Attached: sacha-baron-cohen-dropped-bohemian-rhapsody-movie-920x584.jpg (920x584, 58K)

try The Rutles: All You Need Is Cash

kanye transcends rap imo

because there's already so much media and content for them. the fuckers made their own movies for themselves. if you really want biopic kino, watch "I'm Not There". it's one of the best there is (Natalie Portman's Jackie is great too). it's about Bob Dylan. let me pitch it for you: cate blanchett, heath ledger, christian fucking bale, richard gere, etc, all play Bob Dylan in different parts of his life. his voice might put you off it/his music, but let me tell you, he's one of the coolest whitest muhfukkas ever. he's so cool, he got all the Beatles truly high for the first time in their lives. without him, you probably wouldn't have all the next-level Beatles shit you have now

Attached: BOB.jpg (1280x720, 78K)

I'm Not There is a really fantastic movie
that's the problem with making music films, you have to make it something that's inherently worthwhile and stands on its own and offers something new. They really don't just make themselves. If you just put some hits on screen surrounded by generic fluff then you might as well just listen to the music instead.
So they require someone really talented to make them. Like Todd Haynes on I'm not There, who is a top tier director. Have you seen his HBO Mildred Pierce, with Kate Winslet? It's one of the best things on HBO, ever.

the beatles do not sounds cool. sorry faggot

Have you even listened to their albums you little cunt?

no i haven't seen Mildred but i like Todd and HBO so i will check it out. and i agree, that's the problem with most biopics, they'll take a complex artist and make a by-the-numbers film about their lives. Todd Haynes got it. you can't just make a straightforward film about bob dylan

youtube.com/watch?v=

Only Scorsese could film it and he probably prefers the Stones. He did work on Woodstock 1969 though

Yeah do, it's really really good.
>they'll take a complex artist and make a by-the-numbers film about their lives.
It's like you have to capture the spirit of their lives, not the letter.
Not plot points and descriptors but the feeling.
I didn't even bother to watch the Queen film. What the fuck where they thinking.

the doc about George was pretty good. He was always the best Beatle.

youtube.com/watch?v=CtnXnWpC9GE

cut me off will you

And how stupid to turn down an opportunity to have SBC make actual kino about your life, which further immortalizes you, just because you're a snowflake who can't bear the thought of being depicted in a negative light in any way.

Whatever, piss on those faggot communists

youtube.com/watch?v=-jbTCyvKAKo

Attached: John-Lennon-LSD.jpg (750x396, 85K)

>The Beatles were commu-
youtube.com/watch?v=l0zaebtU-CA

>Bohemian Rhapsody
>Freddy was literally corrupted by a short-haired mustache-twirling faggot
>He realized the error of his ways and came crawling back to the band begin for forgiveness

At first, I thought the movie was unbelievable unremarkable but the more I sit on it the more I hate it. Not only that but the music is done so fucking lazily. I can listen to Queen anytime I want, playing it during a movie doesn't make it better. At least Rocketman and Yesterday have the stars actually singing.

Attached: StefaniaFerrarioFloss.webm (400x500, 2.32M)

What about Ringo? He's still alive and kicking.

>yellow fever
>beats women
>pisses off normalfags
Why do people hate John?

Because they are women or raised exclusively by women.

Goddamn it, I want to fuck a woman!

>communists

Nigga what?

OP is retarded.

There is a disturbing lack of RINGO in this thread

Attached: Ringo Starr.jpg (200x200, 42K)

As long as they skip any stupid fucking in-studio session of them recording a famous song (which every music biopic seems to have), this would be cool.
Although a kino one would be Obladee Obladaa cause Lennon hated the song but McCartney wanted to make it anyway, which nearly led to a fistfight. Then some time later they're figuring out the instrumentals for it and John comes in late and high and does the little piano riff thing from the beginning and leaves.

Ringo is too busy warning fans with peace and love.

youtu.be/hV8JFj17AtY

George was the best beatle when it came to their solo careers, and that's by miles. But if you're talking about percentages on who had the best songs out of the songs they wrote, then he is the best Beatle overall.

I think a little interlude of the white album sessions would be good, since both lennon and harrison were apparently on LSD and combative throughout the entire recording.

What a fag. People like this bongs why now? Can't be for their music or stunning personalities.

Take a look in the lyrics of this song and stop being an ignorant and spreading lies
youtube.com/watch?v=BGLGzRXY5Bw

cause Paul and Ringo are still alive

All I know is I'm not seeing that dumb fucking pajeet movie

OI YOU'VE NEVA EARD OF THE BEATLES MATE, INNIT

>youtu.be/V6eV7ZsghCs

Listening to his son talk about him is pretty fucking sad. Considering the circumstances, Julian having such a well reasoned and calm opinion of his father ridiculous.

Why did he do it, bros?

Attached: mark david chapman.jpg (1600x1030, 91K)

Lol holy fuck his mannerisms are so reminiscent of John's. Is that because of the first fourteen years of his life or are our mannerisms inherited do you think?

Beatles are my favorite band but honestly I hope a movie about them never happens. Why should it in the first place? They are the most popular band in history, there are shittons of documentaries, interviews and books about them. No need for a movie that would probably suck balls.

Attached: 1540159609265.jpg (1000x1527, 1.17M)

MK ULTRA

>Their whole career and each member's life is pure kino.
How do you mean?

Jesus Lennon was the best Lennon look. Goes from incel to guru just from growing his hair out.

Mental illness. Beatles and Jesus Chirst was the 2 things Mark loved the most, he couldn't handle what John said in 1966 about Beatles being "bigger" than Jesus.

>kills him 14 years later
A likely story.

Plus, it stole from a superior Nippon original

Attached: boku-wa-beatles-2549325.jpg (1200x862, 141K)

>traced shit with uncanny cartoon heads
>superior
The weeb marches on.

>he couldn't handle what John said in 1966 about Beatles being "bigger" than Jesus.

But wasn't he planning on assassinating Bowie too?

George was the only interesting one and he already has a great documentary bio.

Julian is a good person. He understands how John was a bad father but at the same time how he wasn't a bad person.

This is actually the first time I read about it. Have any source on that?

More like too busy making ART

Attached: yer-baby.jpg (600x452, 159K)

why? it sounds like a fun concept even if it looks shit in the trailers

I hate Paul so goddamn much
fucking fag with his granny music

>According to Bowie, New York City police discovered that his name was next on a hit list of targets of John Lennon’s assassin, Mark David Chapman.

>At the time of Lennon’s December 8, 1980 murder outside of his Manhattan apartment, just blocks away David Bowie was starring on Broadway in the play The Elephant Man. “I was second on his list, the detectives said”, Bowie told me in the New York studio we shared near Madison Square Garden.”Chapman had a front-row ticket to ‘ The Elephant Man‘ the next night. John and Yoko were supposed to sit front-row for that show, too. So the night after John was killed there were three empty seats in the front row. I can’t tell you how difficult that was to go on. I almost didn’t make it through the performance.”

inthestudio.net/redbeards-blog/john-lennon-assassin-had-hitlist-david-bowie-2/

Attached: david bowie 1980.jpg (1000x563, 460K)

C'mon I too prefer John over Paul but he's still a great songwriter and the best musician in the band. How can you hate this: youtube.com/watch?v=9Ta9FUOQ4oY

Attached: __͡__͜ʖ_͡__-.png (297x376, 131K)

Holy shit what a fucking cunt Mark is. Good thing he will rot in jail.

True but add to that the fact that Sony own the rights to their songs now and will probably be responsible for the movie. And I don't know if you've seen any recent Sony pictures but they've been pretty bad across the board.

Plus with Yoko and Paul's involvement we won't get a version wherein John becomes a deranged acid casualty for a year and a half and if you can't do that why make the film?

Also because despite the short time they were together every single period of the band's history is notable and excluding any of them is a sin. Movies like Nowhere Boy and Backbeat are full feature length films concentrating on only the pre-Hamburg days of John and the Hamburg/Stu Sutcliffe era. A full Beatles biopic has to do those 2 eras, plus the Cavern-era, plus the early-late Beatlemania era, then the marijuana era, then the early LSD/studio fuckery era, then the bigger-than-Jesus/fleeing the Philippines era, then the full LSD Sgt. Pepper era, then the we-took-too-much-LSD Magical Mystery Tour era, then the Yoko/Apple Corps failing era, then the John becoming an acid casualty/junkie/victim of yellow fever era... etc. And I haven't even gotten up to the multiple break-up sagas yet. It would really only work as a miniseries or a fucking 10 hour long movie featuring nearly all their songs.

Only other way I can think of doing it would be to do it like that Brian Wilson film and just concentrate on a few specific eras in detail.

Oh and this exists too so you're just fucking wrong OP.

Attached: paul and george.jpg (750x565, 78K)

One thing I give paul credit for is leading the single hardest rock song the beatles ever produced with helter skelter. Don't know why he never managed to produce anything even vaguely resembling it before or after.

>Not posting Martha My Dear

Yea because Mother Nature's Son is better

>It would really only work as a miniseries

This isn’t a bad idea actually.

Also what would be a fitting conclusion point for a film/series about them? There seem to be so many points where you could stop the story: The rooftop gig, John’s murder, George’s death, etc.

Attached: Simpsons-ringo-starr.jpg (630x420, 167K)

John's moida for sure. Kind of when that whole generation bought the bullet on a spiritual level as well.

Get Herzog to direct it. Wouldn't be the film anyone else on earth wanted but I'd watch it.

Attached: digital-blog-feature_MyBestFiend.jpg (1170x773, 102K)

>Rocketman

I just saw this as it was about to be taken out of my local theater and holy shit, it's pretty fucking good.

they make some weird creative choices at parts, try to frame some scenes too much like a play or musical, But Taron is amazing as Elton. It's the first Biopic film that I've seen in years that I've actually enjoyed. Well Paced, well put together, certainly more honest than Bohemian Rhapsody.

Also really makes me wonder how the fuck Elton dodged the butt-bug.

I'd only watch it if it covers Faul and the crossroads deal

>traced shit
How is that traced?

>our mannerisms inherited

This

There's more substantiating research on this than most people like to admit

Only time any of the Beatles were on LSD while recording was during Pepper and even then only because John accidentally took some thinking it was speed. He couldn't cope with it and ended up on the roof of the studio staring at the stars all night.

I read some biography that said they will take their real story to their graves.

Do you see those videos where the girls are screaming and you cant even hear them playing.
Christ, imagine the shit they did to them

They spent a lot of time in the studio not doing shit during the white album sessions. There are videos of john on LSD from the white album sessions ffs.

My mom went to school with one of the girls who appeared on TV crying for the beatles during their red letter appearance on the Johnny Carson show, and she said that girl was mercilessly bullied the next day for acting like an emotional freak.

It's by Danny Boyle who has made a few fun movies so I'll give it a chance.

holy shit all boomers need to die already

Source? I'd love to see that.

Not that user but they suck ass you stupid fucking boomer,and I did listen to their album to evaluate them given their undying cultural relevance

None of them were good musicians,well,George was.In fact,he was a great person too,I love George Harrison so much

Which album? Besides you know most of their famous songs were released as singles and weren't on most of their albums anyway. Also: top tip, try to find the mono mixes of all the stuff up till Magical Mystery Tour. For some reason the shitty 60s stereo mixes are still the most commonly available versions despite being the inferior mixes.

Just the word boomer need to die really. It's been overused and misused so much on Yea Forums its lost all meaning.

lol
They were all good musicians, Paul being particularly great. George was the worst which is why many of his solos were played by other musicians.

youtube.com/watch?v=fr1v5DWNI9I
The video I was thinking of is actually from 1969, but its only a few months after the recording of the white album ended and probably a good indicator of what his general condition was in that period. I know for example that he took a hit while they were trying to record a song for the white album supposedly thinking it was a barbiturate and ended up on the roof talking to george all night.

Um, not quite.
MDC (we don't use the name) saw hypocrisy in the writing of a song like Imagine while living in mansions. He came to view Lennon, one of his heroes, as a 'phony' -- thus the connection with Catcher In The Rye, which MDC had in his hands when the cops showed up the night of the murder.

Also, he was batshit crazy.

"The Beatles" never appeared on Carson; John and Paul did the show in 1967 on a night when Johnny wasn't even there (Joe Garagiola was guest host). You might be thinking of the band's appearance on Ed Sullivan which was a theater full of girls losing their shit.

Yeah I was my bad.

We've already got one:
>youtube.com/watch?v=5Vt4ejyosn4
Apparently John loved it, Paul hated it, George made a cameo cause he's based and Ringo got depressed by it.

Attached: rutles.jpg (1280x720, 139K)

The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved. In a sense, the Beatles are emblematic of the status of rock criticism as a whole: too much attention paid to commercial phenomena (be it grunge or U2) and too little to the merits of real musicians. If somebody composes the most divine music but no major label picks him up and sells him around the world, a lot of rock critics will ignore him. If a major label picks up a musician who is as stereotyped as can be but launches her or him worldwide, your average critic will waste rivers of ink on her or him. This is the sad status of rock criticism: rock critics are basically publicists working for major labels, distributors and record stores. They simply highlight what product the music business wants to make money from.

Listening to him talk is so fucking odd, he’s a phycopath to the ninth degree

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER WITH A GIRL LIKE YOU! THAT I WOULD LOVE EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO!

>9.20
"In his autobiography, 'A Cellar Full of Goys"
haha

it's more that the peak of rock was the 70s and the 70s were essentially a depression not seen since the early 30s so there was little patronage of the genre so it turned away from its blues roots.

Dude that's an ancient copypasta originally by a rather particularly pretentious critic who later got revealed as being a pedo.

too bad yoko sold his ass to MJ

"Che Stadium. Named after the Cuban guerrilla leader, Che Stadium..."

this looks mental but he's been incrediblely famous for 40+ years.

Too long, too much shit to get through, too many songs to fit onto one soundtrack. Watch Anthology instead.

Attached: beatles leather.jpg (760x601, 234K)

TUNS OUT OIM DUH ONWEE WUN WEW KNOWS ABOUT DUH BEETOWS

Ok, real talk. Why hasn't there been a KLF movie yet? Their career was so short yet every single thing they did was insane, it just seems like perfect movie material.

Attached: bill drummond.jpg (1366x1987, 524K)

yesterday, it's going to turn out to be all a dream isn't it?

Unironically the best Beatles movie. Why? George Harrison gave Eric Idle and Neil Innes the real story of what happened and then they spoofed the fuck out of it.

Either a HBO Miniseries or a 3h movie (1 hour of beatlemania, 1 hour of golden era, 1 hour of last albums and breakup) would be needed

Yep, best Beatles film. George Harrison even supported the movie so it is approved by the best Beatle!

the beatles suck

there's a movie about beatlemania where american girls lust over big beatle cocks.

Attached: 1-113.jpg (600x818, 526K)

Uh, yeah.
>she was just 17
>if you know what I mean
Lyrical wizards, they were

>too bad yoko sold his ass to MJ
She did not. MJ bought the masters from the record company when Paul couldn't afford to

I'd watch a movie about them. I want to know the full story of how they set a million quid on fire.

drugs. next question.

that's a good line there retard. the joke is that you don't know what paul means. john insisted that paul change it from "never been a beauty queen"

The Beatles made dumb pop music to sell to horny teenage girls. Because they made so much music, for so long, and started making drug music when drugs were extremely popular in the counter-culture of the day, faggy men started to like them too, and their popularity became entrenched. But it's mostly dumb music to make teenage girls' panties wet.

Sugarmayne

Your first day here son?

Nah. Klf were deeper than that.

>John was the absolute basedgod of the group, followed closely after by George
You're a literal retard, or you know nothing about music. McCartney was the most gifted melodicist of his generation.

Your butthurt is overcoming your critical faculties. Seethe more.

Metalfags please go. This is a thread about music.

You're a retard. There's an interview where McCartney confesses to four acid trips, and that was before their psychedelic phase.

>Why hasn't there been a KLF movie yet?
Because Bill Drummond would have to co-operate. He doesn't do co-operation.

He imagined that once he had killed John and laid with him that they would turn to ink and enter the book together.

based

Holy shit I think you're the only person on this board I've seen talk about Rocketman.
Yeah I agree with all your points, I think making it a musical turned from what could have been a boring drama into a film that actually analyzes Eltons psyche throughout his career. Taron was spot on.

Once Yoko and Paul kick it then it’s fair game on a biopic. As long as Sean isn’t a faggot. I can’t imagine Ringo gives any fucks.

I want to see a Scorsese film featuring Lennon wife beating, Harrison whinging and fucking Ringo's wife, McCartney blowing a load over Jane Asher and being a total manslut, lots of drugs, Lennon having hay sex with the manager. That would be fun

Fuck off, Ringo

SNEED’S SO HEAVY

Attached: 1561473454556.jpg (1000x1000, 691K)

only good post itt

its over just cause you still like them doesnt mean they are going to make it

Attached: Op is fag.jpg (316x316, 29K)

Paul is dead.

McCartney is close to insane. He's obsessed with The Beatles' legacy and perpetuates lies to raise their mythos. Harrison called him out on it a few times. Watch the Anthology documentary, you can see how annoyed George gets when he talks. He was also a domineering perfectionist, forcing the other members to spend days on shit songs like Maxwell's Silver Hammer, and then had the audacity to try and change his songwriting partnership with John to "McCartney-Lennon", even though "Lennon-McCartney" was already iconic. He was the sole reason the band broke up - he drove the other three crazy, wouldn't let George flourish as a song writer, and sent subliminal shots at Yoko because he was jealous that John had reached a higher wavelength than him.

He's a musical genius, don't get me wrong. But his personality is shit. He loves playing the doddering old man now, but he has always been a calculating prick. Mick Jagger is more of the same, so was Pete Townshend. I guess every band has one.

>Yoko because he was jealous that John had reached a higher wavelength than him

so this..THIS.. is wavelength yoko knew..

What the fuck are you saying you fucking idiot

youtube.com/watch?v=HdZ9weP5i68

The McCartney you are talking about is an imposter.

>using Amadeus, a work of complete fiction, as an example
If anything, Amadeus is one of the reasons *why* living artists demand to see everything before release.

youtube.com/watch?v=rDFdcfRAaCg

The legend of them is alreay so fucking perfect that a movie wouldn't do it justice. Just leave them alone

I'm not saying her art is good, but the avant garde scene certainly has respect for her. But she made John happy and assisted him with his greatest project (Plastic Ono Band). Paul was jealous because his wife was a basic bitch. He never reached the level that John or George did. Ram and Band on the Run are great albums but they're safe and unremarkable.

Would make sense with the theory that the new Paul was a former superfan.

Only true post in this thread

Fucking Zoomers.
Backbeat was kino of the highest order.

Attached: dl7cjthv48k5iinx3puw.jpg (200x297, 28K)