[QUOTE=thickasabrick]I wouldn't want him to play Imagine...it's not his song. He didn't contribute to that song in any way. I want him to play something psychadelic, just because that's when his bass playing skills were best put to use.[/QUOTE]
Im interested in seeing him play either way.

[QUOTE=DeusExMachina]
That statement about McCartney is a little harsh, don't you think? [/QUOTE]

Sure, but I'm trying to be provocative.

[QUOTE=DeusExMachina] I mean, he was golden in the Beatles before Epstein died, [/QUOTE]

He didn't have control, and he was contending furiously with Lennon behind the scenes.

[QUOTE=DeusExMachina]....and if the death of Sutcliffe really helped anyone, I'd say it was Harrison. With three guitars in the band, Harrison wouldn't stand out nearly so much. However, with McCartney on bass, Harrison had his chance to show off his lead guitar playing abilities. [/QUOTE]

Well, the remark is a little off with regard to Sutcliffe, but only because Sutcliffe died AFTER quitting the Beatles, not MUCH after, however, so it's still close--poetic truth if not literal truth.

Harrison was undisputed top guitarist for his entire Beatles tenure. Sutcliffe's departure helped Harrison only in the way that it helped all four; there was one fewer Beatle--or at least that's how I see it.

I read an interview once with McCartney in which McCartney was angry at some Beatles book that claimed he'd pushed out Sutcliffe so that he could take over the bass. It was his contention that he'd got "slagged" with the bass (nobody wanted to play it). He said he rang up Harrison and asked, "Did I get slagged with the bass?" and Harrison answered, "You got slagged with the bass." The problem with the book, however, was only in its mis-imputation of the motive; it WAS on the right track. Pete Best confirms that McCartney was hostile to Sutcliffe, sometimes savagely hostile. Well, Sutcliffe was in the band for one reason only: because he was John Lennon's best friend and John Lennon wanted him in. Paul McCartney wanted him out, and eventually succeeded in booting him. With Sutcliffe gone, McCartney no longer had to compete for second chair.

If McCartney had a real sense of humor, he'd sing "How Do You Sleep?" That would be hilarious and a great way to rise above the fray.

I still haven't forgiven McCartney for "Freedom". I want him to redeem himself (partially) by denouncing Bush unequivocally. The line "God gave me the right to live in freedom" particularly bothers me. As far as I know, this is the first time God appears in a McCartney song. When Lennon sang about God, he was honestly grappling with the thing intellectually. When Harrison sang about God, he was honestly grappling with the thing emotionally, spiritually. Apparently McCartney doesn't need to grapple; God is McCartney's best buddy, and McCartney can speak for God with impunity--"Freedom" is rather like Dylan's "With God On Our Side" without the irony.

[QUOTE=Ned]If McCartney had a real sense of humor, he'd sing "How Do You Sleep?" That would be hilarious and a great way to rise above the fray.

.[/QUOTE]

That would be awesome :lol:. Of course since the guys who did it are dead maybe it wouldn't be nice to mock them.

Eh, just let him do Maybe I'm Amazed.

Trust me, hearing that and Let it Be live was some of the greatest experiences of my life.

Of course, he should just go all out badass and do Helter Skelter, which I don't think he's ever done live before.....oh yeah :thumb: that'd be the best half time show of all time.

[QUOTE=Rock'n roll]Also I've always wanted to know what (Jai guru deva om)that line in "Across the Universe" meant?[/QUOTE]

We praise you, heavenly teacher. Om. (Not exact, but its hard to get an exact translation of sanskrit. Om is a hindu sound that I'm sure you'd recognize, it goes at the end of prayers and is supposed to be the natural vibrations of the universe.)

[QUOTE=DeusExMachina]We praise you, heavenly teacher. Om. (Not exact, but its hard to get an exact translation of sanskrit. Om is a hindu sound that I'm sure you'd recognize, it goes at the end of prayers and is supposed to be the natural vibrations of the universe.)[/QUOTE]

Interesting. It's Sanskrit, not Hindi? "Guru" is teacher, of course. Is "deva" more or less a cognate of the English "devotion" or is the resemblance fortuitous? I assume in the song Lennon only wants to invoke the idea of chanting, that is, the song itself is not saying "We praise you, heavenly teacher".

I liek teh Beetles.

Paul McCartney is not the villian Ned and some others make out
Paul McCartney may not of liked stu sutcliff, but, if you were in the beatles and you had some no hope in the band, who was only really there as a friend of one of the other members of the group would u like him?,
For that matter i doubt George Harrison would of liked [I][B]that fact[/B] [/I]bout stu, or Pete.

And during the beatles and all that the "behind the scenes fights" with john wernt as bad as what Ned said, fair enough you saying that though becourse there were fights but the media etc. blew the fights RIGHT out of preportion
John Lennon said:
"You can have a fight with ur best mate, and come to blows over it if u like, but in the end he is still ur best mate.... but when [B][U]we[/U][/B] figth its some sort of... trecherary...or some crime against the state"

I've quoted that before in here^^ but it seems like it needs to be said again now.

[QUOTE=Ned]Interesting. It's Sanskrit, not Hindi? "Guru" is teacher, of course. Is "deva" more or less a cognate of the English "devotion" or is the resemblance fortuitous? I assume in the song Lennon only wants to invoke the idea of chanting, that is, the song itself is not saying "We praise you, heavenly teacher".[/QUOTE]

Deva is like, holy or great. I'm not positive on the exact translation of each individual word, but I do know "deva" refers to the sacred. I'm fairly certain it's Sanskrit, but it could be Hindi.

To Sgt. Joker, I agree with what I could understand. No offense, but typing a bit more coherently would be nice.

[QUOTE=DeusExMachina]
To Sgt. Joker, I agree with what I could understand. No offense, but typing a bit more coherently would be nice.[/QUOTE]

*edits* any better?

[QUOTE=Rock'n roll]I love the beatles what a brillant amazing band.I wonder what would of happen if they continued touring after 1966 and if the beatles lasted after 1970?
I think they would of been proably better if they toured,but they said it would take away there experimental records,but I dont think it would,but as for lasting longer in the 70s well it would of been hard as you see rolling stones and Led Zeppelin were huge touring bands so they may of not wanna to be outdone live maybe,so they try to beat everyone in the recording side of things.Its really hard to imagine what would and could of happened if those two things would kept going.who knows.[/QUOTE]

What Would of happend if they had stoped touring:
1. They would not of become as experimental because:
They could not hear themselves on Stage.
They would not of been able to perform songs like Tommorow Never Knows due to the fact it uses backwards guitars etc.

and just in general would not of become as good as they did,

my brother just showed me this VERY cool animation:

[url]http://albinoblacksheep.com/flash/cometogether.php[/url]

its awesome check it out

(appologies for the tripple post)

[QUOTE=Sgt._Joker]*edits* any better?[/QUOTE]

You mean it was even worse before?

[QUOTE=Sgt._Joker]Paul McCartney is not the villian Ned and some others make out
Paul McCartney may not of liked stu sutcliff, but, if you were in the beatles and you had some no hope in the band, who was only really there as a friend of one of the other members of the group would u like him?,
For that matter i doubt George Harrison would of liked [I][B]that fact[/B] [/I]bout stu, or Pete.

And during the beatles and all that the "behind the scenes fights" with john wernt as bad as what Ned said, fair enough you saying that though becourse there were fights but the media etc. blew the fights RIGHT out of preportion
John Lennon said:
"You can have a fight with ur best mate, and come to blows over it if u like, but in the end he is still ur best mate.... but when [B][U]we[/U][/B] figth its some sort of... trecherary...or some crime against the state"

I've quoted that before in here^^ but it seems like it needs to be said again now.[/QUOTE]

Look: The account of the fighting between Stu and McCartney comes from Pete Best (although other independent sources corroborate it). If you don't like it, take it up with him. Whether or not McCartney is a "villain", he is certainly a cool, calculating, and not especially scrupulous careerist, and Lennon quit the Beatles and broke up the group because he finally got utterly fed up with his ****, and frankly, I'm pretty fed up with his **** too.

[QUOTE=Grateful Dead]I assume you've all heard of the all-star version of Across the Universe to be played at the grammies? It'll feature Brian Wilson and Velvet Revolver, among others, in aid of the tsunami victims. I can't wait :)[/QUOTE]

As long as we're going on about renditions of this song...Bowie performs it (in collaboration with Lennon) on "Young Americans"--without the chant. I don't particularly care for this rendition, but....what? Oh, never mind.

Has anyone heard that Ringo is going to star as himself in his own super-hero TV show?

I don't like it when they leave out the chant... its like watering it down so it's less, I don't know, maybe more Christian. I thought it would be cool if McCartney sang Imagine because it is the ultimate protest song, and it would be a slap in the face against all of the corporate sponsors, and alot of what the superbowl is about, while at the same time being very peaceful, understandable, and moving.

Hahahaha... I remember Ringo on some show about trains when I was really little:
Mom: "Do you know who that is?"
Me: "No"
Mom: "It's Ringo Starr."
Me: "How are you supposed to tell what he's saying?"'
Who's doing the superhero show? BBC? Maybe it will be on PBS...

Yeah Ringo was the voice of the Conductor on Thomas the Tank Engine along with George Carlin the Comiedian.

[QUOTE=Sgt._Joker]my brother just showed me this VERY cool animation:

[url]http://albinoblacksheep.com/flash/cometogether.php[/url]

its awesome check it out

(appologies for the tripple post)[/QUOTE]
Wow that was trippy. Very Cool. :thumb:

[QUOTE=Grateful Dead]I assume you've all heard of the all-star version of Across the Universe to be played at the grammies? It'll feature Brian Wilson and Velvet Revolver, among others, in aid of the tsunami victims. I can't wait :)[/QUOTE]

Hm... Doesn't sound very good to me. I don't think Brian Wilson's voice would work on that, nor would Velvet Revolver's playing. I think the Beatles did it perfectly. I agree with Ned, David Bowie did a pretty poor job of it. But Young Americans is an amazing song.

I would just like to say to whoever neg repped me (if they're in this thread) that commenting a neg rep with nothing but "youre gay" (and yes, they did spell it youre, not you're) and not leaving a name is fu[COLOR=White]ck[/COLOR]ing wussy. If you don't like The Beatles, post it in the thread, don't neg rep me for starting a thread on them. And, if you don't like me, give me a reason and don't be a prick about it.

[QUOTE=Grateful Dead]It's not just those, it's an all-star version:

VELVET REVOLVER will take part in an all-star live performance of THE BEATLES song "Across the Universe" during the 47th annual Grammy Awards celebration, according to Billboard.com. The song, which will also feature U2 lead singer Bono, Stevie Wonder, Norah Jones, Alicia Keys, Tim McGraw and Brian Wilson, will be immediately released to raise funds for tsunami relief efforts.

I tend not to like it when that's done, but I'm a fan of most of those artists, so I'm excited. I also like Rufus Wainwright's version, very tasty. :D[/QUOTE]
They cant...the just cant...:upset:

[QUOTE=Sgt._Joker]my brother just showed me this VERY cool animation:

[url]http://albinoblacksheep.com/flash/cometogether.php[/url]

its awesome check it out

(appologies for the tripple post)[/QUOTE]

Very nice indeed, classy stuff :cool:

[QUOTE=Schyma000]They cant...the just cant...:upset:[/QUOTE]

That can't be legal.

There is nothing wrong with Tim McGraw. I think. But, regardless, 10 bucks says that the "all star performance" of Across The Universe will suck. Although Norah Jones IS very very awesome.

[QUOTE=DeusExMachina]There is nothing wrong with Tim McGraw. I think. But, regardless, 10 bucks says that the "all star performance" of Across The Universe will suck. Although Norah Jones IS very very awesome.[/QUOTE]

Hey, Bono is there!

Has anyone seen the whole 1st ed sullivan show performance?

[QUOTE=Seafroggys]Hey, Bono is there![/QUOTE]

Bono is a hack. U2 wish they were as cool as REM.

[QUOTE=clown_phobia]Has anyone seen the whole 1st ed sullivan show performance?[/QUOTE]

No. Do you know where I could find it?