Time Magazine Special Edition for Paul's 70th!
-
Here's a Times article with 70 pics for Paul's 70th. http://lightbox.time.com/2012/06/18/happy-birthday-paul-mccartney-70-iconic-images-for-70-years/#ixzz1y8bul43Z
-
I don't care if its overpriced or not: I am definitely getting this!! Paul only turns 70 once... : Although, 75 will be a big year too, won't it?...
-
CMackbird:
Mine arrived today. Its a nice book with nice pictures but FAR, FAR too beatle heavy. Atleast 2/3s of it is all pre-1970. Then you maybe get 15 pages making up the next 42 years. Pretty shameful tbh.
back in the days when he was a Wing the mags would be full of Paul & the band, these days the emphasis is on The Beatles, Paul himself is partly to blame for this.
-
Macsback:
CMackbird:
Mine arrived today. Its a nice book with nice pictures but FAR, FAR too beatle heavy. Atleast 2/3s of it is all pre-1970. Then you maybe get 15 pages making up the next 42 years. Pretty shameful tbh.
back in the days when he was a Wing the mags would be full of Paul & the band, these days the emphasis is on The Beatles, Paul himself is partly to blame for this.
Yup, he is partly to blame for this but won't rip into him too much on his 70th! Although, Im not sure if you have it, but theres a list of 40 best macca songs and theres like 5 solo/wings tracks. And some of the beatles tracks in it (as much as I like them) PS I Love you and Obladi Oblada. :
-
CMackbird:
Macsback:
CMackbird:
Mine arrived today. Its a nice book with nice pictures but FAR, FAR too beatle heavy. Atleast 2/3s of it is all pre-1970. Then you maybe get 15 pages making up the next 42 years. Pretty shameful tbh.
back in the days when he was a Wing the mags would be full of Paul & the band, these days the emphasis is on The Beatles, Paul himself is partly to blame for this.
Yup, he is partly to blame for this but won't rip into him too much on his 70th! Although, Im not sure if you have it, but theres a list of 40 best macca songs and theres like 5 solo/wings tracks. And some of the beatles tracks in it (as much as I like them) PS I Love you and Obladi Oblada. :
I never got the mag, we would be better making our own lists as ours are much better than someone somewhere who knows hee haw about Paul's music choosing songs he/she has picked from other lists on the net
-
I picked up my copy at Sam's Club - 30% off the cover price.
-
CMackbird:
Mine arrived today. Its a nice book with nice pictures but FAR, FAR too beatle heavy. Atleast 2/3s of it is all pre-1970. Then you maybe get 15 pages making up the next 42 years. Pretty shameful tbh.
Thanks for the warning. Between all the books and magazine I have collected over the past 20 something years I'm now not sure if I want this one. 15 pages for the past 42 years? Boo.
-
shame isn't it?
-
Got mine @ Walgreens for 14.99.....was going to order from Amazon , but with shipping , it was about the same price...pretty cool, but 40 YEARS as a SOLO ARTIST and little over 20 pages??????? :
-
I wonder if that will ever change? I really doubt it...if Paul doesn't take it seriously why should the press? :
-
WARNING: There are a number of errors in this thing, starting with the section early on where it says Maybe I'm Amazed was his first single! Near the very brief post-Beatles last chapter we learn that Mull of Kintyre went to number one in the States--must have been on stealth chart because I bought the single when it came out and don't recall ever hearing it on the radio once. Then the text it ends very abruptly in 2008, four years shy of the present, as Paul and Nancy drive off on a cross-country trip on the legendary Route 66. It's as if Time said "Relate the story in this many pages and no more!" so it just runs out. Nice photos though. P.S.....for those looking to save, purchased my copy off ebay for about $10.00 and it was free shipping.
-
That's one thing I couldn't figure out, myself: why, in a book celebrating Paul's 70th, supposedly telling his story up to that birthday, would you stop the story 4 years before that?? Just don't get it!
-
Thisbe211:
That's one thing I couldn't figure out, myself: why, in a book celebrating Paul's 70th, supposedly telling his story up to that birthday, would you stop the story 4 years before that?? Just don't get it!
To take a cynical view of it, guess that's what we can expect from people that take forty years of great music and cram it into one, final chapter of a tribute magazine. Cutting out the last four years eliminated writing up Electric Arguments, the recent tours and live CD, the Archives series, etc. Not good for very casual fans browsing this publication, hoping to be informed of recent releases and events.
-
The whole tribute book was a joke IMO. It was just a beatles tribute. Typical pash. :
-
I finally got to take a thorough look at this thing yesterday at the airport while waiting for a delayed flight to take off. What an inept job. The multiple factual errors have already been noted. And WTF is up with that list of Paul's supposed best 40 songs that, unless I missed something, contains NOTHING later than the 70s? For serious fans, the thing is insulting.
-
Bruce M.:
I finally got to take a thorough look at this thing yesterday at the airport while waiting for a delayed flight to take off. What an inept job. The multiple factual errors have already been noted. And WTF is up with that list of Paul's supposed best 40 songs that, unless I missed something, contains NOTHING later than the 70s? For serious fans, the thing is insulting.
The 40 song list was a complete joke. Just insulting.
-
I wasn't going to buy this, as it was a little costly, but eventually succumbed. As a few others have already intimated, there are a few nice pictures - but for the most part it's quite lightweight and too 'teen-fanzine-ish' for my liking. It's also pretty negative about much of the solo years, and offers very little space on it; a shame, as this period would make for more interesting reading, as it's much less-covered ground. You'd think a magazine proclaiming how 'The Legend Rocks on at 70' on the cover, would be a little more evenly-spread on how it covered those 70 years.
-
Now there is a new Life Magazine tribute to The Beatles just out on the newsstands in America. Focusing on just 3 years by their "official" photographer Robert Whitaker. A really nice issue!
-
beatlesfanrandy:
Now there is a new Life Magazine tribute to The Beatles just out on the newsstands in America. Focusing on just 3 years by their "official" photographer Robert Whitaker. A really nice issue!
There are some great pictures. Unfortunately the text is filled with cliches and inaccuracies. For example, there's a passage at the end where it describes John's troubled upbringing and then describes Paul's family life as "idyllic" and suggests he was raised in middle class comfort. ??? The magazine totally ignores that Paul's mother died when he was 14 -- so much for idyllic -- and that his family was working class or the very low end of middle class. Sheesh, his mother HAD to work in order to keep the family in a house and fed. And of course it was John who lived in middle-class comfort, and while his parents were unstable, John had a steady, solid parental figure in Mimi. But the pictures are nice, and included some I hadn't seen before. They should stick to the photos!!
-
which one is more worth getting?! I searched for the thread about them and i couldn't find it, mods feel free to merge I can't find anywhere UK based selling the Life special, just the Time one, but that is £9.59 on amazon. Is it too beatle based? I'm pretty skint, but looking for some last minute xmas pressies my bf can buy me http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1618930249/sr=1-1/qid=1355159808/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&qid=1355159808&seller=&sr=1-1