The Beatles' final gig, on the rooftop at Apple Corps, January 30th 1969.

50 years ago tomorrow!

The full setlist was

Get Back
I Want You (She's So Heavy)
(Jam)
Get Back
Don't Let Me Down
I've Got a Feeling
One After 909 (With "Danny Boy" tease)
Dig a Pony (with a false start)
God Save the Queen
(Jam)
I've Got a Feeling (with "A Pretty Girl Is Like a Melody" tease)
Get Back
Don't Let Me Down
Get Back (Cut short by police)

Mark Lewisohn reckons they have great cleaned up footage of the gig, and the Let It Be film, and that despite him doing some work for a full release on DVD, it was nixed at the last minute. Some bright spark recently put up a good HD copy of Let It Be from a 35mm print, on YouTube but that's gone too.

The actual bits of the gig that are in the film (about half the show, which in total was 42 minutes long) are great IMO. Hilarious that George was arguing about going up there literally the day before, as captured in Let It Be, someone must have talked him round.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x13rmt9

This was a nice Mojo piece about it from some years ago

https://www.mojo4music.com/articles/11595/20-things-need-know-beatles-rooftop-concert

I was surprised there wasn't a specific thread already.

pretty good but they didn't play Don't Let Me Down enough times

And Get Back a few too many.

(Cut short by police)

Too bad, think how many more Get Backs they could have gotten in.

ah the winter of love

Presumably were stopped for *exceeding* the statutory limit of Get Backs

It kind of blows my mind that U2's tribute rooftop gig 32 years ago came only 18 years after the Beatles'.

The Simpsons rooftop gig 26 years ago came 24 years after the Beatles'.

James did this too - roof of Piccadilly Hotel in Manchester, Jan 30 1991.

Mark Lewisohn reckons they have great cleaned up footage of the gig, and the Let It Be film, and that despite him doing some work for a full release on DVD, it was nixed at the last minute.

An anonymous industry source told the Daily Express in July 2008 that, according to Apple insiders, McCartney and Starr blocked the release of the film on DVD. The two were concerned about the effect on the band's "global brand ... if the public sees the darker side of the story. Neither Paul nor Ringo would feel comfortable publicising a film showing the Beatles getting on each other's nerves ... There's all sorts of extra footage showing more squabbles but it's questionable if the film will ever see a reissue during Paul and Ringo's lifetime."[47] However, in 2016, McCartney stated he doesn't oppose an official release, stating, "I keep bringing it up, and everyone goes, 'Yeah, we should do that.' The objection should be me. I don't come off well."[48]

I saw that Let It Be had made its way to youtube and assumed it was a leak from the inevitable re-release this year or next (how are they dealing with Abbey Road? saving it for 2020?)

I saw this on YouTube. I kept waiting for some huge fights or something. There was nothing of the kind.

wait so the whole 42-minute thing is up somewhere...?

my understanding is the fighting/arguing was more inside at Twickenham

I think it was just the Let It Be movie

oh yeah I've seen that. it's not like there's fistfights or anything, but you can tell how tense it is, everyone is bored and listless etc

I remember checking Let It Be out of the video store when I was 9 or 10, not long after I'd seen Yellow Submarine. "Why are the Beatles so grumpy?" I think I'd like to watch it again now though.

it's interesting but at the same time it's boring cuz a lot of the music is frankly not very good

the only thing I really remember is George getting all pass/agg with Paul

irl lol at "The objection should be me. I don't come off well."

was the Jefferson Airplane rooftop concert before or after this? That was cool af

Ah it was 1968

Blur did one too, in 1995 right at their silly peak

http://www.vblurpage.com/gigography/1995/0915_hmv_2_big.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb1viD56zkM

I'm still surprised Steve Jobs allowed them to use his building for this, guess he was cooler back then than he is today.

From what I remember, the Let it Be movie looks awful (didn't they recruit a professional director/film crew for it ?)and is so boring (of course because the Beatles themselves are bored to death in it).
The worst for me is that "Get Back", the Beatles song I hate the most, is everywhere in it...
Surprisingly, they seem to get on well during the rooftop concert though.

Let It Be movie directed by Michael Lindsay-Hogg, who went on to direct Brideshead Revisited and who may or may not have been Orson Welles' illegitimate son.

It's not like the movie itself is this great lost item, it's easily available on t0rrent sites.

That Mojo article refers to "Billy Preston and his Hammond B3 organ", so enjoy with caution.

Uh..

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/jan/30/peter-jackson-to-direct-new-beatles-documentary-let-it-be

Xp not a great *lost* item no but the copies are invariably pretty lousy, which is why a 35mm print version was such a Big Deal a coupla weeks back. My old bootleg DVD was out-of-sync and looked like it was transferred from a copy they found in a skip.

I have the full 35mm print which I downloaded from t0rrents, this was taken from the BBC broadcast of the film in 1982.

can't wait to watch George quit in glorious 8K or whatever the f.

In a dark time in my teens, I downloaded way too many audio bootlegs from these sessions (there's a massive series called 30 Days or something). This is going to be a slog no matter how they put it together. It's too bad they didn't do more songs in concert so they could've made that the movie.

I read a book once that annotated the session tapes, it was also a slog.

… it’s like a time machine transports us back to 1969, and we get to sit in the studio watching these four friends make great music together

I have the full 35mm print which I downloaded from t0rrents, this was taken from the BBC broadcast of the film in 1982.

uh...

Oh, does that not make sense then? idk, I'm just copying what is on the torrent site. As I understand it, it just means that I have a 1st gen copy from the BBC broadcast.

The full detailed explanation of which version is which, is here
http://wogew.blogspot.com/

Some highlights

1982: BBC2 shows Let It Be for the fourth and last time on May 8. 16mm version, mono.
1992: Original 16mm film restored by Ron Furmanek, remastered sound, stereo when available.
1997: VCI (UK) announces plans to release the 1992 restoration of the film on VHS. It doesn't happen.
2003: Original 16mm film plus outtakes restored by Bob Smeaton.
2003: Movie director Lindsay-Hogg says 2 DVDs with the film and outtakes ready for 2004.
2011: Original film and outtakes re-transferred again in higher resolution for future release.
2015: The last 34 minutes of Furmanek's unpublished 1992 restoration uploaded on YouTube
2015: Apple releases a collection of The Beatles' promotional films on Blu-ray and DVD. The material from "Let It Be" looks unrestored. This triggers speculation that Apple saves the restored version for a later stand-alone release.

Man, that final Beatles gig really was up there

They should transfer the whole thing right off a roof

Yeah, a 35mm print would be five or so individual reels of physical film in cans, weighing about 30kilos, that you would need two sound-insulated projectors and a theatre to watch. You definitely did not download that from a torrent.

It’s also insanely unlikely that the BBC were even TXing off a 35mm print. Your “first gen” copy is at best: 35mm -> telecined to 1” videotape -> broadcast reduced to 625 lines -> now in mono, not stereo -> recorded on home Betamax at 250 lines (or 240 for VHS) -> never ever played back by the user even once, for decades, until they converted it to digital -> probably also compressed for torrenting.

xposts obv, typing with one thumb while a cat sleeps on my other arm

Tell that cat to move over. Twice, if necessary.

leave my kitten alone

i'm not a beatles expert but the film has never been shown in its originally filmed (16mm) aspect ratio, right? it was cropped for 35mm and then cropped further from the 35mm for 4:3 broadcasts?

i might be interested in peter jackson's four-hour epic take on the story if he gets howard shore to record a ponderous and heavy-handed score, preferably replacing the shit the beatles actually played during these sessions

Lord of the Ringos

ugh Huffpost made same pun

I assumed the broadcast was 4:3, but didn’t mention cropping bcz I also strongly suspected it was from 16mm, which pisces’ list does indicate

but I also have no idea if the original edit was done at widescreen, or on 16mm elements & then recomposited for theatrical

finally someone is using their clout to let the world know about the beatles

Used to be, you'd have to go to a pizza place to hear them.

Having been thru a separation, if someone had asked me how to edit footage of the last year of my marriage while it was ending I would have chosen the material which showed the reasons for separation. As a grieving and justification process.

You would want the public to see you and your partner at your worst?

"whitewashing" doesn't really seem the right term to describe a movie that whose producers/subjects (or director-fan) opt not to be shown always fighting. It would be weird to expect otherwise, esp. if they feel the prevailing "bummer" narrative around these sessions has been a little exaggerated

Like why wouldn't they want to be remembered (and remember themselves) for the good times they had?

Seems a lot to ask for anything else from what in the end is just a band

Fair enough.

For example: that clip of John teasing George with real affection over the drug bust, reading the headlines in a reporter's voice. I loved that!

it's nice to see

I thought it was implied that Jackson chose to show the happy bits in his teaser because he wanted to bring some cheer at a time when the world was going to shit over the pandemic.

I posted about this in another thread, but it's telling that the happy footage generally came from Apple's studios. It's been repeated many times (especially in Anthology) that everything about Twickenham was awful. For starters, they couldn't work their usual hours of late in the evening going into early morning, instead it was more or less regular business hours, something they were NEVER accustomed to. (Coincidentally, I just saw an "Old Grey Whistle Test" DVD where they mentioned how that show started work in the morning which was tough because rock stars in general HATED those hours.) It was also cold and resembled a dim, shitty-looking air hangar. When things fell apart and they tried to work it out, the first thing they all agreed to was to vacate Twickenham for the confines of their own company's space. That alone probably made a huge difference - I'm certain it was a great help in "resetting" the sessions. As mentioned Preston coming in helped things even more. If you dive into those 40 discs of bootlegs that were produced from the Nagra tapes, you can hear that divide. The Apple sessions were a LOT more relaxed and amicable. The horrible shit is mainly in the Twickenham part, particularly the January 13th "session" (where there's actually no real music, just frank talk) and it'll be interesting to see how much of it makes the film.

Jackson started this long before the pandemic and said back then, too, that he felt people had the wrong (or exaggerated) impression of these sessions

I mean to say that I wouldn't be surprised if this is largely representative of the end product

can we go back to that green suit though??

Lol

would very much wear, to be clear

I didn't expect to get 'cited about this at all but that's quite something to see.

Really weird how whatever they've done in the restoration makes it look like a recreation that's graded to look like footage from the period. It looks hyper real and unreal.

Just like The Hobbit.

Having never seen any genuine unrestored footage from Middle Earth I wouldn't know.

https://s27363.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Hobbiton-New-Zealand.jpg.optimal.jpg

surely, the original miserable footage was to fit the existing narrative, or to simply CREATE a narrative, one which everyone needed at the time to explain what happened to the band, but while the new happier slant is obv to boost the brand, and say something new about that period and the beatles story in general, the truth is somewhere in between. the old version was too neat. this new one will likely be also, just at the opposite end. the truth is probably just too broad, all over the place, and messy to really grapple with without much nuance, but with so much time having passed, now we prob have the distance to see it a bit more clear eyed, in less simplistic terms.

Yeah, I’m simultaneously super stoked about this movie and disappointed that it’s Jackson, who makes I dunno John Hughes look like a sophisticated & subtle storyteller. I’m sure there’s a big beautiful nuanced movie lurking in all that footage (probably enhanced with a lot of footage from the era that’s not from the LIB vault proper) but I 100% trust that it won’t be this one.

Watched LIB for the first time in many years yesterday. It’s a pretty shoddy piece of filmmaking but there’s a lot to recommend it, just seeing the physicality of each of them & (esp during the rooftop concert) how they click when they perform together well.

Paul did an "Ask Me Anything" on Reddit today, and was asked about the Peter Jackson film:

I think the main thing was that after the release of the 'Let it Be' film I was saddened with the break up of the Beatles. And the film always reminded me of that. So I was very happily surprised when Peter Jackson told me he'd been reviewing the unseen 56 hours of footage and he found it to be entertaining and upbeat. Since then I've seen clips from it and it's very joyful. I particularly like me and John jiving together. And also the birth of the song Get Back. It's pretty exciting, I must say. Crazy!

Crazy!

lol that's basically "it was a pretty shitty period and made me feel shitty and sad, but I just saw this footage and maybe it wasn't shitty and sad and I'm remembering it wrong?"

Maybe Jackson will reveal that they didn't break up after all and they can reunite and tour as state of the art Weta holograms.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K_oYJvag4U

lol, JiC.

Doesn't Paul come across as a wanker in the original film? But now George and John are gone we can at last see the thumbs up bobbly head Macca we know and love.

... forgot raised eyebrow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGuH7Zxbr84

Actually, while I'm sure this famous fight has been a bit overblown, what I recall from the film is the band just generally being over Paul's shit. Paul is playing cheerleader but the band is just not feeling it, or is elsewhere mentally. It's been a while, but I recall a scene of them rehearsing "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" with Paul going so far as to call out the chord changes (like George or John really need them), and the guys shooting lasers at him with their eyes in response as they play the dumb song over and over again, bored.

Not Ringo, though. He's always having a blast.

Philip Norman, often wrong, said the following correct thing in '87 when Harrison was promoting Cloud Nine: "With John dead, George is the only person you can talk to about The Beatles now. Ringo can't tell you and Paul won't tell you.

I always liked the way George would talk about the Beatles like they were just some band he was in when he was younger, often exactly like that. "When I was in my old band, the Beatles ... "

I don't pay as much attention to the Beatles as most of you (LOL) but I remember the bits in the Anthology doc (was there one?) when Paul and George were together being extremely awkward.

You could tell George was very much holding Paul at arms length.

G: ".. my song 'Dehra Dun'.."
P: "(oh.. I remember that one...)"

Had I known nothing about the Beatles watching the doc, I'd swear George was the leader.

For example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPf98jsxyDs

I love the way George talks, could listen to him all day.

Actually, while I'm sure this famous fight has been a bit overblown, what I recall from the film is the band just generally being over Paul's shit. Paul is playing cheerleader but the band is just not feeling it, or is elsewhere mentally. It's been a while, but I recall a scene of them rehearsing "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" with Paul going so far as to call out the chord changes (like George or John really need them), and the guys shooting lasers at him with their eyes in response as they play the dumb song over and over again, bored.

Not Ringo, though. He's always having a blast.

― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, December 23, 2020 3:58 PM (two hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

Just watched the movie today for the first time since I was a kid and your recollection is accurate.

John and Paul are kind of a classic duo consisting of one person who revels in being a confrontational jerk but who is also charming and amusing much of the time, and another person who wants to be seen as nice or "nice" but is all too often overbearing, manipulative insufferable, etc./PopPsych101

lol you wanna George staring daggers in the modern era? Check out his response to Paul's request (order?) to play "Blue Moon of Kentucky" ("The short version"). Paul's relentless cuteness gets to me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wrgrm1eabI

Yeah, was gonna mention that one

I posted this in another Beatles thread, but whenever Paul starts talking during those group interviews in Anthology, George gets this look on his face like, “Ugh, this fucking guy.” If a camera or mic was on Paul, his Performing Persona took over, which George had no use for: “I’ve known you since you were 14, and I can tell when you’re bullshitting.”

One thing I love about that clip, though, is that they’re all, George included, enjoying it, but you get the sense that George just wants to hang out and play without the cameras, and without it being THE REUNITED BEATLES. He might’ve had a blast just swapping tunes and stories without the pressure of it being a heavy Beatle moment.

(Also, when Ringo goes into half time on “Raunchy,” it suddenly sounds more Beatle-y.)

Christ the Anthology era sucked so hard.

Christ: the Anthology <---- the perfect Christmas gift

Too bad Neil Innes and Eric Idle had a falling out before they finished it.

I heard somewhere, maybe from my Beatles nut friend, that the Anthology in the end was designed to be an easy, equitable way to get a heap of money to "the principals" (as I think they were collectively termed). So it served its purpose by, say, making Pete Best a millionaire.

Have I related, or posted anywhere, about the Beatles reunion story I read via the Edge's storied guitar tech, Dallas Schoo? This is the key bit:

There was the time in 1995 when Steve Miller invited him to his home studio in Idaho to service his guitar collection. Miller then warned him: He had some people coming to use his studio and Schoo had to promise to not freak out. Schoo rolled his eyes; he had seen it all.

Two days later, a fleet of SUVs pulled up and out get Paul and Linda McCartney, Ringo Starr and Barbara Bach, George and Olivia Harrison, and Beatles engineer Geoff Emerick. They were there to mix “Free As A Bird,” the final new Beatles music that was made using a John Lennon demo tape of an unrecorded song, and they asked Schoo to maintain their guitars.

Schoo freaked out.

At one point, McCartney leaned over to Schoo during a break and struck up a conversation.

“So you’re with that U2?”

“Yes, yes, sir, I am.”

“That’s meant to be a big deal, isn’t it?”

“Yeah.”

“But they didn’t change the world did they?”

Schoo erupts in laughter. “Then he looked at Harrison and said, ‘If it wasn’t for us, you’d still be walking around in Buddy Holly glasses.’ That story I’ve taken all over the world, man, and Paul and I have remained friends to this day.”

The bonus story I heard came from my friend's cousin, an esteemed producer in Nashville. Apparently he was in a session when he got a whispered furtive phone call from Dallas.

"Hey, man, it's Dallas. Do you hear this?" He holds up the phone to let him hear muffled music. "That's the fuckin' Beatles, man!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8L-PUCx6PzA

Sorry, your story is better.

it's too bad paul didn't finish by excoriating chris for the lame and deeply unfunny sin of reading off of CUE CARDS

Heh, is that a reference to Zappa? #OneThread

ja

Having been thru a separation, if someone had asked me how to edit footage of the last year of my marriage while it was ending I would have chosen the material which showed the reasons for separation. As a grieving and justification process.

yeah but they did that already. in another fifty-one years, you might be ready to look at some photos of the kinder moments in your latter times.

I heard somewhere, maybe from my Beatles nut friend, that the Anthology in the end was designed to be an easy, equitable way to get a heap of money to "the principals" (as I think they were collectively termed). So it served its purpose by, say, making Pete Best a millionaire.

George was open about doing the Anthology stuff because his manager had stolen all his money via HandMade, and fucked off to an island. (The year of Anthology, Harrison sued O'Brien for £16 million, only won £6.7 million, but continued to actually lose more money suing him in bankruptcy court.)

yeah but they did that already. in another fifty-one years, you might be ready to look at some photos of the kinder moments in your latter times.
For sure, which is why I offered it to explain the difference between LiB and this film.

ah!