Four New Films!
-
theboxinargentina
- Posts: 301
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:12 pm
- Has thanked: 187 times
- Been thanked: 97 times
-
theboxinargentina
- Posts: 301
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2021 4:12 pm
- Has thanked: 187 times
- Been thanked: 97 times
Re: Four New Films!
Sam Mendes will direct four movies about each Beatle, slated for release in 2027 with an “innovative and groundbreaking” release schedule
In a gamble so crazy it just might work, director Sam Mendes has teamed up with the two living Beatles for a truly ambitious project: four different movies, each from the perspective of a different member of the band, all slated for release in 2027.
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-68350477
The project marks the first time that The Beatles and their company Apple Corps have granted full life story and music rights for a scripted film, according to a statement.
In a gamble so crazy it just might work, director Sam Mendes has teamed up with the two living Beatles for a truly ambitious project: four different movies, each from the perspective of a different member of the band, all slated for release in 2027.
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-68350477
The project marks the first time that The Beatles and their company Apple Corps have granted full life story and music rights for a scripted film, according to a statement.
-
billychildish
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2021 9:29 pm
- Been thanked: 26 times
Re: Four New Films!
Gonna be terrific to see how they handle that whole George banging Maureen thing.
-
Lord Reith
- Posts: 4696
- Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:22 am
- Location: BBC House
- Has thanked: 148 times
- Been thanked: 4083 times
Re: Four New Films!
If I were asked to direct this (serious) this is how I'd do it:
Each film would deal with a particular period in their career, seen through the eyes of one member.
Part one would deal with August 1962 through the end of 1964, and be seen through Ringo's eyes. As a newcomer to the group, he would be an ideal anchor for the audience because he knew almost nothing about them too. It was all new to him, just as it will be to many people now. We'd start with his hiring, their first record, the flush of #1 hits in 1963, Beatlemania and Sullivan and the US tour. We'd see the other three through Ringo's eyes: strange and mercurial people with an incredible blossoming talent.
Part two would deal with 1965 through 1966 and be seen through George's eyes. The bloom will have gone off Beatlemania now and they are starting to tire of it, but none so much as George. His growing discontent would mirror their musical progression towards new frontiers. Part two would end with Candlestick Park, and touch briefly on George's Indian "awakening".
Part three would deal with the Summer Of Love, and be seen through Paul's eyes. They are now at the height of their mythical status as Paul steers them through Pepper and MMT. Epstein dies and they are faced with an uncertain future. A heavy emphasis on Paul's avante garde leanings in this episode, and how they influenced the others.
Part four would be seen through John's eyes and begin with Rishikesh and his first romantic fling with Yoko. We'd then see John trying to deal with his new desire to break free of The Beatles and do stuff with Yoko, and the effect this had on the band. Concurrent with this would be the Apple disaster and the financial problems, concluding with the breakup of the group.
Anything prior to 1962 would be dealt with only in flashbacks, thus avoiding having to deal with awkward subjects like "crips", Pete Best, Nazi salutes, pissing on nuns and woman-bashing which modern audiences would recoil from in horror.
As with any biopic, whether it works or not depends on who they get in the role. At the bad end of the spectrum you've got something like Nowhere Boy where the actor involved knew nothing about John Lennon and, worse still, felt that he didn't even need to know. At the other end you've got quality biopics like the ones about Johnny Cash, Ray Charles and even Kurt Russel's depiction of Elvis. A good character actor in each role would be absolutely essential to make up for any other flaws in the film. If the people who play The Beatles are believable, it'll work.
We shouldn't be surprised that The Beatles are going down this route. It's big projects like this that drive streaming numbers and profits. Restoring the Star Club or Stowe School sadly does absolutely nothing for Apple. So this was innevitable, and if actually turns out half decent and makes millions of new fans then that's fine with me.
Each film would deal with a particular period in their career, seen through the eyes of one member.
Part one would deal with August 1962 through the end of 1964, and be seen through Ringo's eyes. As a newcomer to the group, he would be an ideal anchor for the audience because he knew almost nothing about them too. It was all new to him, just as it will be to many people now. We'd start with his hiring, their first record, the flush of #1 hits in 1963, Beatlemania and Sullivan and the US tour. We'd see the other three through Ringo's eyes: strange and mercurial people with an incredible blossoming talent.
Part two would deal with 1965 through 1966 and be seen through George's eyes. The bloom will have gone off Beatlemania now and they are starting to tire of it, but none so much as George. His growing discontent would mirror their musical progression towards new frontiers. Part two would end with Candlestick Park, and touch briefly on George's Indian "awakening".
Part three would deal with the Summer Of Love, and be seen through Paul's eyes. They are now at the height of their mythical status as Paul steers them through Pepper and MMT. Epstein dies and they are faced with an uncertain future. A heavy emphasis on Paul's avante garde leanings in this episode, and how they influenced the others.
Part four would be seen through John's eyes and begin with Rishikesh and his first romantic fling with Yoko. We'd then see John trying to deal with his new desire to break free of The Beatles and do stuff with Yoko, and the effect this had on the band. Concurrent with this would be the Apple disaster and the financial problems, concluding with the breakup of the group.
Anything prior to 1962 would be dealt with only in flashbacks, thus avoiding having to deal with awkward subjects like "crips", Pete Best, Nazi salutes, pissing on nuns and woman-bashing which modern audiences would recoil from in horror.
As with any biopic, whether it works or not depends on who they get in the role. At the bad end of the spectrum you've got something like Nowhere Boy where the actor involved knew nothing about John Lennon and, worse still, felt that he didn't even need to know. At the other end you've got quality biopics like the ones about Johnny Cash, Ray Charles and even Kurt Russel's depiction of Elvis. A good character actor in each role would be absolutely essential to make up for any other flaws in the film. If the people who play The Beatles are believable, it'll work.
We shouldn't be surprised that The Beatles are going down this route. It's big projects like this that drive streaming numbers and profits. Restoring the Star Club or Stowe School sadly does absolutely nothing for Apple. So this was innevitable, and if actually turns out half decent and makes millions of new fans then that's fine with me.
Women there don't treat you mean, in Abilene
Re: Four New Films!
You'd all recall that a couple of years back Peter Jackson said that he was in talks with Paul and Ringo to develop a new film. I think he even said a live action film.
I wonder if this is the outcome from those talks and Sam Mendes now has the project Peter Jackson was referring to?
I wonder if this is the outcome from those talks and Sam Mendes now has the project Peter Jackson was referring to?