If the Beatles had gotten back together...
-
do you think it would have been to write new songs, tour, or both. John has said in interviews if he was to get back with Paul, it would to to create new music. This seems counter intuitive since the least risky project would be to do some shows together. I'm not sure either of them would want to take a risk to write again if it might tarnish their legacy by not meeting expectations.
-
If they had gotten back together it would have been to primarily record new music, in my opinion anyway. They stopped full fledged touring by 1966 to focus on studio work. They would've cranked out a couple more albums for sure. If all were still alive, there's no doubt we would've seen a reunion tour in the 80s or 90s though.
-
I think Paul would have talked all three into a reunion today if George and John would have still been here. I mean sometimes Ringo and Paul hang out together even today so I think there could have been a reunion. Songwriting though Im not sure of. Concerts I know would probably be out of the question it could have been too much for them George especially, I know wouldn't want to go through the whole Beatlemania thing again that driven him nuts. I think Paul would have been the only one though to have a Beatles Reunion more than the other three.
-
I tend to think had a reunion occurred with all four of the boys could've went in one of two ways...if it happened at a point not long before John died, or some hypothetical point after the fact (had John not died), it may have been pretty similar to what we got with the 'Threetles' during the Anthology project...except without quite the same 'chord' struck since there would've be no 'John's dead' theme to work around..It would've happened and then they'd go on their own merry ways, except without the weight or pressure of what a reunion might be light hanging over their heads The other scenario involves having reunited earlier in the 70's...that would've been something much greater than just being a curiosity and probably would've lived up to the anticipation, if for no other reason, they all still looked and sang like they were in their primes...and if newly written songs didn't blow anyone away, hearing them sing their older songs together at a time when they still could sound exactly like their youth would blow people away
-
I agree with others who say that any reunion would've been primarily to write songs. I don't know that George would've ever wanted to tour, but Olivia has said that he really missed being in a band (I think that was supposedly one of his motivations for putting the Traveling Wilburys together), so I think he probably could've been convinced to record some music with the boys again. I do wonder, though, what their live shows would've been like, had they toured in 2014. If they were all in a good place with one another, I think they could've used today's technology to put together something truly amazing. One can dream ...
-
In many ways, the Anthology WAS the Beatle reunion. I know it could never be a REAL reunion without John, but the essential dynamics were there for all to see. Recording, working on new material, remembering good times, and some old tensions surfacing.
-
RMartinez:
In many ways, the Anthology WAS the Beatle reunion. I know it could never be a REAL reunion without John, but the essential dynamics were there for all to see. Recording, working on new material, remembering good times, and some old tensions surfacing.
That's a good point. The closest we can get now is things like the Grammy show in February. 2 playing together is better than none. Curious though what you meant by old tensions surfacing...I hadn't heard that as it pertained to the Anthology stuff.
-
LiveForever:
RMartinez:
In many ways, the Anthology WAS the Beatle reunion. I know it could never be a REAL reunion without John, but the essential dynamics were there for all to see. Recording, working on new material, remembering good times, and some old tensions surfacing.
That's a good point. The closest we can get now is things like the Grammy show in February. 2 playing together is better than none. Curious though what you meant by old tensions surfacing...I hadn't heard that as it pertained to the Anthology stuff.
I may have overstated. I meant when you see them talking, and different points of view being presented, there are times when I think they kind of look at each other like "Really?" And when they are seated in the grass talking, and George is playing a ukulele, Paul makes a comment and asks for George to respond, and George clearly ignores him, and McCartney responds like "Or I guess not!" Or something like that. That's all, no big issues, just that they would not be like they were in 1964, they were clearly 4 individuals, 3 in 1995, who were not going to fall into their old mop top roles.
-
Yeah, and also in the Anthology, Paul was clearly more excited about playing together again and he says something like "Let's do..." (can't remember the song offhand) and George says "The short version."
-
Nancy R:
Yeah, and also in the Anthology, Paul was clearly more excited about playing together again and he says something like "Let's do..." (can't remember the song offhand) and George says "The short version."
I also remember the part with Paul and George sitting around on a grass/lawn with ukuleles and Paul seemed to have to prod George into taking part in that bit...I'm pretty sure 'I Will' was played (in part) during that segment
-
JoeySmith:
do you think it would have been to write new songs, tour, or both. John has said in interviews if he was to get back with Paul, it would to to create new music. This seems counter intuitive since the least risky project would be to do some shows together. I'm not sure either of them would want to take a risk to write again if it might tarnish their legacy by not meeting expectations.
No offense, but I couldn't disagree more, both Lennon and Harrison were skittish about playing live solo, let alone as Beatles, clearly, they would have recorded new music, and possibly filmed a live in the studio performance or maybe done some kind of live show, but clearly they would have made a record
-
whobeatle:
JoeySmith:
do you think it would have been to write new songs, tour, or both. John has said in interviews if he was to get back with Paul, it would to to create new music. This seems counter intuitive since the least risky project would be to do some shows together. I'm not sure either of them would want to take a risk to write again if it might tarnish their legacy by not meeting expectations.
No offense, but I couldn't disagree more, both Lennon and Harrison were skittish about playing live solo, let alone as Beatles, clearly, they would have recorded new music, and possibly filmed a live in the studio performance or maybe done some kind of live show, but clearly they would have made a record
John also said if you want to know what a Beatle LP in the 70s would sound like, get the best songs off their solo albums and put them together and that is what it would be. It makes sense, they were no longer functioning as a collaborating band in the end. I wonder how likely they could have recaptured that magic had they got back together. Not likely. Clearly George was never going to return to his role as third class citizen in the Beatles after being treated as an equal by the likes of Bob Dylan and Eric Clapton. So that dynamic was gone forever.
-
RMartinez:
whobeatle:
JoeySmith:
do you think it would have been to write new songs, tour, or both. John has said in interviews if he was to get back with Paul, it would to to create new music. This seems counter intuitive since the least risky project would be to do some shows together. I'm not sure either of them would want to take a risk to write again if it might tarnish their legacy by not meeting expectations.
No offense, but I couldn't disagree more, both Lennon and Harrison were skittish about playing live solo, let alone as Beatles, clearly, they would have recorded new music, and possibly filmed a live in the studio performance or maybe done some kind of live show, but clearly they would have made a record
John also said if you want to know what a Beatle LP in the 70s would sound like, get the best songs off their solo albums and put them together and that is what it would be. It makes sense, they were no longer functioning as a collaborating band in the end. I wonder how likely they could have recaptured that magic had they got back together. Not likely. Clearly George was never going to return to his role as third class citizen in the Beatles after being treated as an equal by the likes of Bob Dylan and Eric Clapton. So that dynamic was gone forever.
He also said that if you wanted to hear what a post 60's version of the Beatles sounded like, go listen to ELO...I'm not sure if he was serious or if he meant that in a less flattering tongue in cheek fashion (which, if the latter, would be semi ironic given that George Harrison, and to perhaps a lesser extent, Paul McCartney seemed to befriend Jeff Lynne)
-
rich n:
RMartinez:
whobeatle:
JoeySmith:
do you think it would have been to write new songs, tour, or both. John has said in interviews if he was to get back with Paul, it would to to create new music. This seems counter intuitive since the least risky project would be to do some shows together. I'm not sure either of them would want to take a risk to write again if it might tarnish their legacy by not meeting expectations.
No offense, but I couldn't disagree more, both Lennon and Harrison were skittish about playing live solo, let alone as Beatles, clearly, they would have recorded new music, and possibly filmed a live in the studio performance or maybe done some kind of live show, but clearly they would have made a record
John also said if you want to know what a Beatle LP in the 70s would sound like, get the best songs off their solo albums and put them together and that is what it would be. It makes sense, they were no longer functioning as a collaborating band in the end. I wonder how likely they could have recaptured that magic had they got back together. Not likely. Clearly George was never going to return to his role as third class citizen in the Beatles after being treated as an equal by the likes of Bob Dylan and Eric Clapton. So that dynamic was gone forever.
He also said that if you wanted to hear what a post 60's version of the Beatles sounded like, go listen to ELO...I'm not sure if he was serious or if he meant that in a less flattering tongue in cheek fashion (which, if the latter, would be semi ironic given that George Harrison, and to perhaps a lesser extent, Paul McCartney seemed to befriend Jeff Lynne)
John also said, when asked what the Beatles would sound like around 1979 had they stayed together, to listen to Cheap Trick, who backed him on a song or two during the Double Fantasy sessions.
-
The Anthology Project was definitely a reunion of sorts. The tracks "Free as A Bird" and "Real Love" prove to be wonderful tributes to Lennon. I mean, George, Paul and Ringo all added their voices to the demos. The Anthology Albums are undoubtedly my favourite. There is something raw and truly special about the songs in their less ''polished" form. Beautiful. I do however, admire the solo careers of George and Paul... A collaboration between the two of them would have been great. It was devastating that the Beatles never had a true reunion, but what they had whilst they were together was truly special. All things must pass... all things must pass away... R.I.P George Harrison 1943- 2001 R.I.P John Lennon 1940-1980
-
OMG Paul would never have had them sounding anything like the 3rd rate band that was Cheap Trick. No one even talks or cares about that band or their sound any longer. Maybe Lennon/Harrison/Starr might have sounded like them, but again that's another Lennon sound bite that was far from reality but sounded cute in its time. Just like the B52s were doing exactly what Yoko did a decade earlier. Nonsense!
RMartinez:
rich n:
RMartinez:
whobeatle:
JoeySmith:
do you think it would have been to write new songs, tour, or both. John has said in interviews if he was to get back with Paul, it would to to create new music. This seems counter intuitive since the least risky project would be to do some shows together. I'm not sure either of them would want to take a risk to write again if it might tarnish their legacy by not meeting expectations.
No offense, but I couldn't disagree more, both Lennon and Harrison were skittish about playing live solo, let alone as Beatles, clearly, they would have recorded new music, and possibly filmed a live in the studio performance or maybe done some kind of live show, but clearly they would have made a record
John also said if you want to know what a Beatle LP in the 70s would sound like, get the best songs off their solo albums and put them together and that is what it would be. It makes sense, they were no longer functioning as a collaborating band in the end. I wonder how likely they could have recaptured that magic had they got back together. Not likely. Clearly George was never going to return to his role as third class citizen in the Beatles after being treated as an equal by the likes of Bob Dylan and Eric Clapton. So that dynamic was gone forever.
He also said that if you wanted to hear what a post 60's version of the Beatles sounded like, go listen to ELO...I'm not sure if he was serious or if he meant that in a less flattering tongue in cheek fashion (which, if the latter, would be semi ironic given that George Harrison, and to perhaps a lesser extent, Paul McCartney seemed to befriend Jeff Lynne)
John also said, when asked what the Beatles would sound like around 1979 had they stayed together, to listen to Cheap Trick, who backed him on a song or two during the Double Fantasy sessions.
-
Erik in NJ:
OMG Paul would never have had them sounding anything like the 3rd rate band that was Cheap Trick. No one even talks or cares about that band or their sound any longer. Maybe Lennon/Harrison/Starr might have sounded like them, but again that's another Lennon sound bite that was far from reality but sounded cute in its time. Just like the B52s were doing exactly what Yoko did a decade earlier. Nonsense!
RMartinez:
rich n:
RMartinez:
whobeatle:
JoeySmith:
do you think it would have been to write new songs, tour, or both. John has said in interviews if he was to get back with Paul, it would to to create new music. This seems counter intuitive since the least risky project would be to do some shows together. I'm not sure either of them would want to take a risk to write again if it might tarnish their legacy by not meeting expectations.
No offense, but I couldn't disagree more, both Lennon and Harrison were skittish about playing live solo, let alone as Beatles, clearly, they would have recorded new music, and possibly filmed a live in the studio performance or maybe done some kind of live show, but clearly they would have made a record
John also said if you want to know what a Beatle LP in the 70s would sound like, get the best songs off their solo albums and put them together and that is what it would be. It makes sense, they were no longer functioning as a collaborating band in the end. I wonder how likely they could have recaptured that magic had they got back together. Not likely. Clearly George was never going to return to his role as third class citizen in the Beatles after being treated as an equal by the likes of Bob Dylan and Eric Clapton. So that dynamic was gone forever.
He also said that if you wanted to hear what a post 60's version of the Beatles sounded like, go listen to ELO...I'm not sure if he was serious or if he meant that in a less flattering tongue in cheek fashion (which, if the latter, would be semi ironic given that George Harrison, and to perhaps a lesser extent, Paul McCartney seemed to befriend Jeff Lynne)
John also said, when asked what the Beatles would sound like around 1979 had they stayed together, to listen to Cheap Trick, who backed him on a song or two during the Double Fantasy sessions.
Cheap Trick were brought into the Double Fantasy recording sessions by producer Jack Douglas, who had also produced Cheap Trick (and Aerosmith, another "third rate" band, right?), and when John met them, he was very good to them. When Rick Nielsen of Cheap Trick started warming up to record, Lennon actually said, "Where were you when I was recording Cold Turkey? Clapton froze up!" Yeah, that's a comment made about a "third rate" group. Erik, you don't have to like Cheap Trick, I couldn't care less. But Lennon said that, whether you like it or not. And his opinion on all things Beatles carries as much weight or more than Paul's. I'll take his word over yours. And I'll take how Cheap Trick sounds over Paul's light weight pop like With A Little Luck any day. And so would millions of rock music fans.
-
Well RM I was not disputing what you said Lennon said, I was disputing the semantics of Lennon's statement. As Paul has said, John was big when it came to bravado and bold statements. First he said they would have sounded like ELO and then after Cheap Trick does some studio work for him the Beatles would have sounded like Cheap Trick? The two bands have radically different sounds! How could they sound like both? I'd consider Aerosmith a second rate band not third. I remember Cheap Trick well -- they appeared and then disappeared. "I Want You To Want Me" and the like -- dreadful music and sound. I'll take Wings "lite" sound over that any day of the week and I believe I'm in the majority with that sentiment. McCartney has more talent in his pinky finger than all of Cheap Trick put together. ELO and Jeff Lynne were another 2nd rate band that weren't fit to shine the Beatles' shoes though Harrison talked about Lynne like he was some kind of messiah. Yes John said lots of things, he was a big talker and often just shot his mouth off for the sake of talking. Some things were just plain wrong and others he regretted saying.
-
Here ya go, a parting gift!
-
Well after watching them live I must say I have to take back my statement about Cheap Trick being a third-rate band. I now realize that was giving them way too much credit!
