Michael Lindsay-Hogg's 'Let It Be' is coming!

[Rickenbacker325]

Disney Logo-Free. A very good new reconstruction rather than a "restored" or "clean" version of the original one. New fonts used for the opening credits. New closing credits with three extra songs (snippets). A different end. A reprise missing. So, a new version of the "Let it Be" film and for purists, don't throw out your original Beta/Laser Disc or bootleg versions.

Lots of subtle differences in the edits…definitely smoother in that department…the intro Twickenham version of Don’t Let Me Down sounds fishy…

[mikec]

Very accurate to say that now we have two films/variants:
1-"Let it Be" 1970. Original version directed by Michael Lindsay-Hogg
2-"Let it Be" 2024. Peter's Jackson Version

So, goodbye Les Parrott and Paul Bond

[Rupert Pupkin]

oh shit
They also use a kärcher for the film grain argentic texture ? (I was happy to get the 2160 version)
they should have let a US studio like Criterion who did an amazing job by conducting the restoration of Richard Lester "A Hard Day's Night" - first release on blu-ray then they re-release it on UHD+BR. They release a lot of great movies : The Last Waltz, A Poem is A Naked Person, a lot of D.A Pennebaker stuff (including Monterey 67)...etc...
I remember that I activate the high protection of my pacemaker when the scene train with the lovely Pattie Boyd came (and the next one, and the other one )
The R.Lester's movie is absolutely gorgeous in 35mm with this film-like texture.
I was expecting a movie experience for Let It Be...

[Rickenbacker325]

They also took measures to eliminate or considerably lower any vocals that didn’t match the footage..I noticed it on the Twickenham I’ve Got a Feeling

[Tolvo]

Very accurate to say that now we have two films/variants:
1-"Let it Be" 1970. Original version directed by Michael Lindsay-Hogg
2-"Let it Be" 2024. Peter's Jackson Version

So, goodbye Les Parrott and Paul Bond

Did you take those bottom images taken with your phone? They look bad.

[A-Caceres]

Very accurate to say that now we have two films/variants:
1-"Let it Be" 1970. Original version directed by Michael Lindsay-Hogg
2-"Let it Be" 2024. Peter's Jackson Version

So, goodbye Les Parrott and Paul Bond

Interesting. I think the letterbox version also has different title fonts and placements. I wonder why they removed Les Parott and Paul Bond?

[DVWerks]

they should have let a US studio like Criterion who did an amazing job by conducting the restoration of Richard Lester "A Hard Day's Night" - first release on blu-ray then they re-release it on UHD+BR. They release a lot of great movies : The Last Waltz, A Poem is A Naked Person, a lot of D.A Pennebaker stuff (including Monterey 67)...etc...

I like Criterion, but they are often beholden to the companies that own the films they license. It's like how vinyl releases are most often from digital masters these days; the analog tapes are rarely used to cut new discs. Studios have paid for 2K or 4K masters that get licensed out as opposed to Criterion doing their own scans from negatives. And as was discovered through audio posted here at one time, the "original" mono soundtrack presented on the Criterion version of "A Hard Day's Night" was not fully authentic. If Criterion did get a chance to put out "Let it Be," I'm almost certain it would be exactly the same as the streaming version.

[ledzepfilm]

Very accurate to say that now we have two films/variants:
1-"Let it Be" 1970. Original version directed by Michael Lindsay-Hogg
2-"Let it Be" 2024. Peter's Jackson Version

Several of the old prints have differences in the opening credits as well, so variants of Let it Be isn't news at all.

Also, re: your other post, this isn't a "reconstruction", it literally is a restored, clean version (at least visually - regardless of your opinion on the methods used). Apple has a 16mm negative cut of Let it Be which they've used as a basis for all the versions out there. That explains the differences in transitions, text, etc., and why Peter Jackson's team had to generate frames to transition between footage used in Let it Be and the outtakes in Get Back (since you lose a frame or two on each side when physically cutting film).

[GP10Ellison]

no time to finish watching it tonight but having watched my old mp4 of it recently I can say that other than the clearer image and cleaner audio in parts, so far it is basically the same film I watched before.
it is frustrating to know all the stuff that happens between the shots used....not seeing george bring his equipment in, not seeing george quit, not seeing them trying to decide what the performance part was going to be, not seeing the decision to leave twickenham, etc. etc. ad infinitum

still great to have an official release but I much prefer the depth we got from Get Back and hope that someday the rest of the footage will be released.

[mikec]

Very accurate to say that now we have two films/variants:
1-"Let it Be" 1970. Original version directed by Michael Lindsay-Hogg
2-"Let it Be" 2024. Peter's Jackson Version

Several of the old prints have differences in the opening credits as well, so variants of Let it Be isn't news at all.

Also, re: your other post, this isn't a "reconstruction", it literally is a restored, clean version (at least visually - regardless of your opinion on the methods used). Apple has a 16mm negative cut of Let it Be which they've used as a basis for all the versions out there. That explains the differences in transitions, text, etc., and why Peter Jackson's team had to generate frames to transition between footage used in Let it Be and the outtakes in Get Back (since you lose a frame or two on each side when physically cutting film).

We agree to disagree which is always good. "Reconstruction" and "Restored" are both applied to the 2024 Version. For example, the new intro for the 2024 version is clearly not a "restored clean version" (and full frame) from the film we knew and from Apple's 16mm negative cut, its a "reconstruction" of a familiar film but with some modifications, one of them, the shoot of the drum head logo, now facing front and still frame, contrary to the original (slight side view and camera shaking) and with clear differences in the logo's font (specially "THE" and the spaces between the rest of the letters, like "TH" and "TL" so its a digital modification made by Jackson's team trying to match Take 1 of this opening scene which has the drum head logo more centered, facing directly to the camera); in this case, we have differences in the footage. That and the fact that we knew Peter Jackson used outtake footage that they cleaned up to make this new version.
Or re you going to tell me that Apple's 16mm negative of the original film has two opening scenes , one with the drum head logo facing to the camera, no shaking and the other, the drum head logo is leaning to the side and camera shaking?


Take 2 for the opening credits was used in the original 1970 film, the drum head logo is facing slightly a side view.
Take 1 has the logo more up to the center and we can see the "Ludwig" logo on the top of the drum head.

This is Take 1:

Peter Jackson created a visual view for this 2024 version, combining Takes 1 and 2 (take 1 is not part of the original film) or by manipulating digitally the drum head so "The Beatles" logo could face now directly to the viewers. That's not a "restored clean version" but a "manipulation" or "reconstruction" of one scene.