Thanks for the review Andrew. On the subject of how Brian pronounced his name, apparently although he used to say it as 'Ep stine' his brother and his parents called themselves 'Ep steen'. It's discussed (at length )in episode 90 of the BC The Beatles podcast where they also reference one of their previous podcasts. I'm sure Mark Lewisohn has also mentioned this although I can't remember if I read it in 'Tune In' or heard him mention it in a talk. Obviously they should have used Brian's preferred pronunciation in the film when they're talking specifically about him. One other thing, if the Beatles really is 'The Greatest Story Ever Told', does this mean they were bigger than Jesus after all?
They got a lot of detail spot on when it came to the band's instruments, and if that wasn't Studio Two at Abbey Road I'd be amazed! Thanks for the review and the interesting points you raise
Brian walking and doing the narrative through out the film was a great idea ,the actors playing Paul and Pete my goodness spot on ,and yes I agreed with you regarding The pronunciation Of Brian’s surname. Brian certainly had the Midas touch. 👏
I am fresh from watching the movie and have to say that although it didn't stop me enjoying it (especially "Brian" breaking the fourth wall) I did notice all the things you mentioned. I suppose no movie will be perfect, but when the subject matter is so well known - and flawless, as you said, the imperfections seem even more unnecessary. A fair, honest and accurate review, thank you for sharing it.
Thank you for the very revealing inaccuracies in this film, Andrew. I watched several teasers for the film and spotted inaccuracies in them. One was when Pete said to Brian that he and Ringo were friends.
I understand why certain events need to be shortened or left out, but it's so jarring for anyone who already knows the story to see timelines altered or events made up. The makers of these biopics can't seem to stop themselves.
Spot on review! The dwarf Lennon was distracting indeed. And although the beatles were in general well portrayed, i felt they were treated as cartoon beatles. Always making silly comments and jokes. The boys were brighter than that, especially in private life situations. I've always been a bit skeptic about this film since i saw some promo pics at the time of shooting playing Orange amps and I cant remember if it was a Les Paul or a Strat guitar in a circa 63 era picture. They improved that and it's not a terrible film but it could 've been much better
On the whole I enjoyed it, the lads playing the band came across as slightly cartoonish, but there was also some great performances in there. One thing I found amusing was the fact that they could acquire the rights to How Do You Do It, but seemingly not recreate the Beatles cover of Twist and Shout!
"Money" at the RV Concert really jarred so thank you too for raising this. The actor who played John was, as you say, too small both in stature and charisma and wasthat "Ringo"? in a bad wig? Shame. But even with these criticisms the actors were streets ahead of those in the recent Dr Who. I hope the actor playing Paul is given a shot at the four way bionics coming u.
i went into this with some trepidation...i can honestly say its absolutely brilliant, ignore all the little inconsistencies, i kept me riveted from minute one...i implore everyone to watch this...ITS FAB !
Hello Andrew I hope you are doing better thank you for taking a break from your break to make this video. I’m really looking forward to seeing this film but Amazon has done a weird thing with the film in the USA they haven’t released it yet to watch so When it does get released I’ll be ready but strange that it is not released yet Take Care thanks again
I do agree. Good review. The guy who played John was too short ( which was really off putting) and he didn't have Lennon's strong personality. The guy who played Brian was excellent. His performance was the standout for me. It was an overall enjoyable watch but not brilliant.
Thanks Andrew for your very measured review. One thing that struck me was your evident acceptance of the view that Brian's overdose was accidental. We know that he had his 'demons', and will have felt that his raison d'etre was gone when the Beatles became far less reliant on him. I had not been aware that his father had died in the month before Brian himself died. This fact adds to my impression that, in the circumstances, he may well have chosen to end his own life. I think it is clear, as well, that the absence of Brian's oversight marked the beginning of the end of the Beatles.
Nice review Andrew. I haven't seen the film yet but I may have a problem now. I notice if there are continuity issues it spoils it for me. A bit OCD but that's just me. Thanks again, best wishes to you.
Brian Epstein deserves better as the Beatles were a way of life to him and not just a cash cow.. In my humble opinion, the most empathetic & realistic depiction and performance by an actor playing Brian was the 1979 film Birth of the Beatles. Great objective review stating both the positives & negatives.
Andrew thanks for making this video on your days off! You brought lots of good points mostly on Beatle John He is larger than life so He needs to look the part His shoes are very important!!! Andrew your making so many important wrong things the movie director and screen writer missing out on historical facts you have brought up so many important facts like there haircuts and John's height also you bring up the good facts doing biopic films maybe hard to bring out! And Royal performance not playing Twist and shout but playing Money kind of strange! Let's hope the new biopic movies on each Beatle in 2027 Let's hope there is some improvement because now we're talking about the biggest of the biggest The Beatles hope they get there heights right and voices and true facts! Thanks Andrew great review and bringing up so much facts!
Thanks Andrew for a spot on review that highlights the good and the bad points. I watched the film and thought it was quite good but on reflection you can’t beat the real footage of the real Beatles their personalities and charm, charisma and talent always outshines any actors’ attempts. So the question is why attempt to make a film when you don’t have the rights to the music? I’m not sure who the film is aimed at, I think fans like us have to take off our Beatle-heads and enjoy the film for what it is.
Excellent review. I might check out this movie but I am usually never a fan of biopics, I'd rather watch a documentary. They always change the storyline around like you mention, just like in the Queen movie, which is very annoying, and there is usually no reason to change the real history.
Brian's family did prefer the STEEN pronunciation, so I think it makes sense that they say it that way in the film. I was just listening to the Fab4Free4All podcast from 2014 where author Vivek Tiwary discusses it. Love your content as usual Andrew.
I liked the way they referenced (through Brian) the sweaty / slimy walls of the Cavern and the shock of going from the darkness of the cellar to the brightness of daylight.
Thanks a lot for this. The part on the contract with Pete Best is in at least one biography. In the Ray Coleman biography, Brian and the Beatles had originally planned a dinner/party with the Beatles on the day he died. He then tried to make other arrangements at short notice but that also didn’t materialize.
An excellent review Andrew! I’m fairly certain I’m not alone in finding myself agreeing with your comments, especially the ‘red flag’ moments. I guess this highlights the problem with biopics too. Those that know the ‘history’ will likely be disappointed whereas someone just watching with no or minimal knowledge might find it an inroad to further exploration of the subject matter. I well remember my late Grandfather criticising the ‘Glenn Miller Story’ for similar reasons. Artistic license is a thorny issue that’s for sure. I know nothing of the complex issue of using copyrighted music in films and TV other than it is mouth droppingly expensive! I’m guessing the film had a modest budget compared to a ‘blockbuster’ movie so compromises would have to be made. With some innovative editing e.g. Royal Variety Performance - cut to newspaper reports with voice over or Pathe news style narration/music they wouldn’t need to have given us ‘Money’ instead of ‘Twist and Shout’ etc. I don’t know enough about Brian’s relationships, and it’s probably none of our business anyway to be honest, but do you think ‘Tex’ was a composite character? Taking off my ‘Beatles’ glasses I can say that I enjoyed watching the film. My mum was moved by the portrayal of Brian’s life and made comments that she and likely most of her generation too had no idea of the torment that he endured. She still remembers the shock of learning that he had died. I was too young to remember being 5 at the time and apparently skipping around the house ‘singing’ Yellow Submarine’ incessantly. In conclusion perhaps Midas Man was made for people like my mum rather than the Beatles obsessives like myself.
Excellent review Andrew. I’ve been fortunate to grow up with the Beatles (I am 67) and I would just be looking for the “artistic licence “. I always thought it was significant that the Beatles was in Wales when Brian died. An excellent unbiased review Andrew, thank you. I think I’ll just watch a carry on film instead. Mick
For me personally, the movie was a big miss from Brian talking directly to the camera, which to me it would have been better if he had narrated the scenes instead, to the choice of casting a short John Lennon was a complete mistake. The casting of Jay Leno as Ed Sullivan was just as bad if not worse. As a matter of fact, he didn't even try to sound like Ed Sullivan. Let's face it this movie was a complete injustice to Brian's legacy. I just hope that these Beatle movies that are supposed to come out in a few years don't suffer the same plight.
Thank you Andrew excellent review as always I do agree with all your points just a bit more care in research needed good to see you again take care look after yourself 👍🎸
Hi mate agree with your review. I saw it here in Sydney over a month ago at the cinema. With the '64 Tour there was no mention as well of the Australasian Tour ! Don't know if I would buy this one. Thought they could have used someone else to play Ed Sullivan.
I awaited this film with great trepidation but instead was pleasantly surprised. With anything regarding the Beatles, casting is absolutely vital and I think the actor who played Brian was terrific. The boys themselves were a mixed bag with Paul being the best interpretation I've seen so far but I struggled with the casting of John as he was just too short and it was a major distraction along with George appearing to be about 6 foot 6! 😊 I feel the end was rushed and Brian's torment over his contract reneval wasn't dealt with at all. Overall, I enjoyed it but it's always going to be difficult making a biopic involving Beatles as there's so much to cram in. Fingers crossed the four Sam Mendes movies will be well written and spot on in casting.
@AndrewDixonMusic.... say mate, don't blame you for the weekends, Those Liverpool Reds are looking pretty smart these days! Excellent review, very good points. Say, had you watched the Beatles in India TH-cam videos as of yet? Take care My friend.
Brian’s mum says she phoned all the radio stations requesting Love Me Do. Anyone who knows their history would know that there was only ONE UK radio station that played pop music in 1962
Depending on the source, John was shorter than George and Paul but still taller than Ringo. Some sources have John, Paul and George all at 5'11, but other sources have John at 5"11 but Paul and George at 6'1. George has been referred to as having been quite tall and he generally appears around the same height as Paul in photos, while John generally appears slightly shorter so that would make sense to me. Ringo is around 5'6-5'7. I'm not sure how tall Pete Best is but I always had the impression that he was maybe slightly taller than Ringo back in the day. On a related note, the Best family have a museum in Liverpool near The Cavern called The Liverpool Beatles Museum. It's by far the better of the 2 Beatles museums in Liverpool (the other being The Beatles Story). I'd highly recommend it to any Beatles fan as there are so many personal artefacts from throughout The Beatles career, not just from when Pete was in the band. Back to the subject of heights though, this is nothing new when it comes to Beatles biopics. According to Peter Capaldi who played George in John And Yoko: A Love Story, the actor playing Ringo towered over the rest of the cast and so nearly every scene involving The Beatles showed them all seated. The EpSTEEN rather than EpStein thing does sound like an American thing. However, The Beatles did use that version of the name in Get Back so maybe they were using that as a reference. Still, if they'd seen The Beatles First US Visit, then they'd have seen Brian's assistant on the phone to an American journalist correcting them on how to say Epstein, so it is clear from that that he and his family were very particular about that. It is a odd thing to get wrong as Get Back is the only time I've heard any of The Beatles or anyone connected to them officially call him EpSTEEN (and I'm pretty sure that they were doing it as a joke). That's a pretty major thing to get wrong in a film like this. I wonder if they call their Rickenbacker guitars RickenBACHers too.
George himself has said he was about 5'9'', Paul has said he was the tallest Beatle. People who met John in USA 1970's seemed surprised he wasn't taller based on Beatlemania propaganda. He was probably also around 5'9'' but those '60's cuban heels made a difference!
With Eddie Izzard,it was like he had a different accent every line he said. Film was ok if you don’t actually care about it being about the Beatles. Your comments are spot on !
Whenever I watch a biopic, I approach it knowing that it's not gonna be perfect. Whereas they'll be facts in the movie, because of story telling (and lets face it, the movies running time) I know they won't be factually placed. (Hope that make sense). But I totally agree with everything you've said here. I think by putting All You Need Is Love at the end (and after Brian's fathers death) is because the director wanted to finish the film on a positive note EVEN THOUGH Brian dies (something not really explored except that he takes pills). The Beatles say goodbye (hugs etc...) and then weirdly Brian walks across the Abbey Road crossing WHICH has the Beetle parked there!! How many years was that there!?! ;) It all seemed like the director was trying to put a pretty bow on it. But like you said, I did enjoy it and I too will watch it again.
Thanks for watching this film for me and it was great to hear your feedback. The problem I have with biopics, and especially music biopics, is that the casual viewer will naively come away from watching these films as 100% factual. I'd much rather watch a well-researched unbiased documentary to be honest, but that's just how I feel. I'm going to do my best to resist the temptation to not watch the upcoming four authorised biopics of The Beatles!
I agree. These films are mostly for people who were not there and didn’t live in that time. I’ve no interest in a Hollywood recreation of those days. It’s entirely not possible to capture the real charisma of the Beatles in a biopic. Same with Elvis and Hendrix and basically any of these massive stars. It’s just more Hollywood rubbish.
Excellent review, agree with your comments about the acting choices and performances. However I do understand why All You Need is Love was the final scene. They had reached the absolute summit, broadcasting to 100s of millions of people. So his job was done, and he gets a hug from all the "boys". He walks across Abbey Rd, fade to black. (Strange Sgt Pepper wasn't mentioned though or did I miss that?)
Next go through Elton's Rocket Man and Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody movies. In the movie, Elton John took the name John from John Lennon, not Long John Baldry. In the Queen movie they say Queen had broken up and got back to together for Live Aid. No, they were touring Australia immediately before Live Aid. As Derek Taylor used to say "never let the truth get in the way of a good story"
That's why I will never watch those movies or the Elvis movie. Apparently also full of inaccuracies. The Doors movie even though well made, paints Jim Morrison as a pretentious poetry spouting monster. When in fact his friends have said he was quiet & reserved most of the time. Val Kilmer did an excellent job of portraying Jim Morrison even singing some of the songs.
To be fair, Taylor was talking sardonically about actual truth and how stories are reported in newspapers purportedly as actual truth. Movies usually state that their biopics are “based on” real events and need to make a movie that works as a three act drama. Many reporters for more reputable newspapers at least try and report objective truth while there has never been a biopic that showed every single event exactly as it happened because that is the nature of biopics.
Hi Andrew thank you for a wonderful critique of Midas Man. I haven’t seen it yet and I’m not sure I want to but I probably will just out of curiosity. Where it will be a problem for me is that fans like myself who were around at the time always worry that like you said certain aspects of the film were historically questionable. I just worry that new or much younger fans will get the story of the great Brian Epstein out of context and are left with a story that seems to fall tragically short of what the actual truth was. It would be a terrible shame if left uncorrected in any future Beatle biopics.
Appreciate your review. I didn't watch it yet, but your insight is very necessary to make it worthwhile in our active life and the time necessary to invest in it.👍👍👍
I have no idea when it’s gonna be available in the USA. It said it was supposed to be on Prime Video on October 30th but it’s still not available where I live in the USA. Not sure why but I’ve been excited for this movie for quite a while
Overall enjoyed . I thought the shot outside the cavern could have been more authentic due to the many other appropriate locations in the city ( the sight of roller shutters and tarmac seemed unresearched ) . Nice to see Freda Kelly making a cameo …
Agree with all your comments, couldn't believe the Twist and Shout / Money 'error' and the death of Brian's father. I did also think the casting of George Harrison was a strange choice.
My sister won 2 tickets to see the beatles in Glasgow in 1964. I was to get the second ticket till she me a boy from school and she gave it to that bastard. He became famous so I won't mention his name.
Nice review Andrew. the St-eye-n / st-ee-n think will rage on. Ive always called him St-eye-n so was surprised to hear him referred to as St-een. Did some research. There is a video out there on YT where a podcaster asks the same question , so he checked with the family who told him that the family name is pronounced Steen even though Brian himself preferred St-eye-n. Stein and Stien are very common Jewish names often used with other words before them such as Goldstein, Silverstein etc. The general consensus seems to be its it spelt Stein -its pronounce Steen and if it's Stien it's pronounced Stine. So there you go. I wonder how Linda's family pronounced before changing to Eastman.
Mark Lewisohn refers to the pronunciation of Brian's surname in 'Tune In'. He suggests that his family were always Epsteens but Brian chose to pronounce it as Epstine in an attempt to play down his Jewish background. He apparently stopped using his middle name Samuel for the same reason.
Hi Andrew. I haven't seen the movie, but I would love to if that comes here. I agree with your comments. The only thing I would add is that when I read the Hunter-Davies book in High School in Canada, I was very interested more in the early days with Brian Epstein (EPSTINE), and in Germany with the Star Club, and it is a great story, and I agree, the producers need to get the facts right, regardless of what an audience would applaud. Hollywood is a Master of changing the script on famous people to sell tickets. In defense of the director and script and actors, as long as the genius of Brian is portrayed, that is sufficient.
I’ve just done my own review and I purposely didn’t watch yours as I didn’t want to be influenced by your excellent work. Within five minutes there have been about half a dozen points I also raised! I wish I was more coherent and organised in my presentation, as you are! I ended up giving the movie a 6.5/7 out of 10.
Hi Dom, I can see your review on your channel, I'll have a watch tonight and get back to you! (And thanks for that McCartney interview link a few days ago 👍)
@ ah bless you mate! Yeah, I’ve just finished watching yours and you hit upon a couple of points in particular that I’m kicking myself for missing. The fact that they didn’t make more of the fact that Brian thought he was losing his grip on The Beatles after their touring days, not to mention the ‘Ep-stine Ep-steen’ debate! I did raise the fact that I thought it was strange that they didn’t go into Lennon’s ‘powerplay’ with Brian, although I know think you’re absolutely right: it would have been too much for one story, and indeed it has been covered in ‘The Hours and Times’ movie about John and Brian’s trip to Spain. You may have done this already, Andrew but a great video would be a top 10 of Beatle biopics including Midas Man, Birth Of The Beatles, The Rutles: an important inclusion as this was made after Eric Idle had seen the original rushes of Neil Aspinal’s Long And Winding Road, Backbeat, John and Yoko: a love story, Nowhere Boy, Backbeat, Two Of Us, Lennon Naked (starring Christopher Eccleston), The Hours and Times, The Linda McCartney story. That’s 10, but maybe wait until Sam Mendes bring out his four movies about each Beatle. 😊👍🏻
When I first heard about this movie I was intrigued and that it would be about Brian's life and his managing in the music business not necessarily centered on the Beatles I haven't watched it yet but I was hoping we would get a lot of interaction of him with the other bands he managed, it sounds like this is not the case The Beatles story has been covered to death it would be nice to see biopics and documentaries that's centered on the other bands suchas the big three
Excellent review Andrew. You really should present on a bigger stage, you’re a natural! I agree with all your thoughts and had virtually the same views as I watched it. A couple of things. I thought there were very subtle hints about the JL/BE relationship, body language etc. you may pick up on it when you watch it again. The other point is when GH comments on not liking GMs tie I dont think GM should have removed it. As I don’t think that really happened. GMs portrayal was good but I thought the delivery was a little too choppy at times. I can see why it was a free prime movie rather than with a fee attached. I thought the attention to detail of the scenery etc was great. They spent a lot of time evoking the period. 6.5/10 for me. I’m glad I watched it
Watched it the other night. My wife enjoyed it but my son & I had questions, including the points you mentioned. The actor who played Mall was far too small & George Martin was lacking in height. Also, Brian did have the meal with Dick Rowe at the rejection meeting, not sure why they did that. Good review 👍
Thanks for the video Andrew and your honest opinion 👍 At least you confirmed why I NEVER watch biopics about anyone, but especially The Beatles. Your comments about the so called artistic licence is definitely the main reason I don't watch them, but getting crucial facts wrong, or portraying some of the most important people in my life incorrectly is just unforgivable to me. Give me a brilliantly researched documentary anyday. In this day and age with the amount of footage available and factual material like Mark Lewisohn's books and wealth of other information, and the fact they could make them any length to tell the story and then stream them, gives me no reason to even think why we need embarrassing biopics. I haven't seen this and definitely won't watch it, or for that matter, the 4 Beatles one's on the way. Oh God, I'm cringing already...😬
Thanks for the review. Actually the only reason I realised it was out. Personally I don't care about the casting. It was decent to me. I've seen many cheap biopics and this is a better cast who managed some naturalness to the quippyness. Even short John captured his likeness and some of his character. He and the rest of them were seriously lacking in depth and character. A better biopic would have explored these relationships, characters, tensions, fears ect.. there was material . But I can see how they just didn't have the time. It would have been wrong to cut out Cilla and the Mersey beat acts, but that stuff was taking up a lot of time along with his business stresses. It must be incredibly difficult to balance this stuff . He just needed a mini series treatment or a massive simplification of his story. It felt like alot of climactic moments were sped through and deeper drama unexplored. Probably due to timing. I agree with many of the other criticism. Along with not landing the insecurity about his relationship with the band they set up but didn't follow through on his feelings about wanting to be out as a gay man. Surely one of the stresses that was getting to him the most and fueling self hating addiction. He literally wanted it to be public at the end of his life. But I think the chaos and double life part was portrayed adequately. And I liked alot of the Beatles stuff.
I watched the movie last Wednesday 30/10/24 and thought it was pretty good (I’m a big Beatles fan!) Thank you for your review and the Actor who played Lennon was way too short.
In regard to Epsteen. You’re right, on the Maysles film there’s a point when an American office person with BE in the background pronounces it just like that Steen not Stein
I heard an interview with Lewisohn about this and Brian always referred to himself as "Epstine" whilst his brother Clive and the rest of the family pronounced it "Epsteen". I think I'll give this one a miss.
Yes, Lewisohn makes it clear in "the book" that Brian was the only one in the family who said "Epstine". I don't think he corrected people who called him "Epsteen", but he didn't call himself that.
Balanced review Andrew...I also didn't like the TEX charactor who was using Brian. I know this was part of the story ..but he looked too modern like he walked in from the naughties into a 60s film. Whilst I felt the actor who played brian was a good actor I didn't see some elements as being the Brian I've seen in interviews and footage and books. It was clear the film was made on a shoestring budget. And I will never get over little john...I thought Paul was the best accent wise, pete was pretty good to..and I'm hyper critical being from South Liverpool.
Thanks for the excellent review. I’m not a fan of these biopics (Queen & Elton John being the most obvious recent examples). Your analysis here makes me even more wary of the four (!) upcoming Beatles films.
Brian’s story is one which deserves to be told - from shop keeper to manager of the largest entertainment act in the world: he made positive creative changes and his entrepreneurial spirit achieved great things and without him there might have been no Beatles. But this film suffers from far too much Beatles and completely ignores his inability to run a business at scale and that his naivety cost him and the band endless millions. Paul began to ask uncomfortable questions about finances and the business was in a mess. This is alleged to have contributed to his self destruction. He was planning to shaft them before they sacked him. The film is far too kind to him in this regard. His is a story of achievement and quickly getting way out of his depth - which this film fails to even try to convey.
After watching your review, I am so looking foward to this film. However Beatle film makers, you need to ger Andrew Dixon on board as a consultant, and he will make it a must for all Beatle fans.
In terms of playing ‘money’ after the quip of rattling ur jewellery I guess the writers thought that was a fairly good segue into the performance. Also with the switch of his fathers death and the all u need is love worldwide performance- given it said one of the last things he said was how he was on top of the world (something like that anyway 😬) I think they wanted to hammer the point that he died at the point of having achieved unimaginable success, and to end it on his fathers death would have just undermined that. With the casting, I thought the main actor did a really great job of portraying Brian and primarily how kind he was. With Lennon, it took me a while to warm to the actor- I couldn’t see why Brian would have been so enamoured of him. I think he looked more like John at the end, but still not sure about the actual portrayal. McCartney’s actor was stellar both look and portrayal. And when I saw the actor playing George Harrison I was stunned they found someone who looked so like him (although I feel like he looked less like him at the end) but for the majority of the time he almost looked like an illustration of George, not a real person. And with Ringo, I think the actor did the most with the small amount he had. When u first see him at the drum kit I felt he just captured the spirit of Ringo. I also really liked how they included them imitating the Goons in his office. Ultimately, there’s always gonna be quibbles and problems- I don’t think this is an incredible movie. It kinda does what a lot of biopics do and rather than show cause and effect, does a more checklist of things that happened. I think the only way to even try to do the story right is a tv show with multiple seasons. But I think the casting of the Beatles in this is the best I’ve seen.
I'm having a tough time with biopics being so prevalent. Now, we have a Dylan movie and a Springsteen movie too. The Bealtes LIVED their story so that nobody would have to copy it. How about more original ideas on film?
I quite enjoyed bits of it! It captures the sixties very nicely but as you say the actor who plays John Lennon was totally miscast, quite distracting at times. They missed a trick with Allan Williams.
I think I'll give this one a miss. It sounds like the inaccuracies will just annoy me. There was a British dramatic television mini series from a few years ago about Brian I thought was done well. I can't remember the name of it.
Actually, it looks like the film was better researched that you realize. Brian and his family did call themselves "Epsteen". It was John and the other Beatles who would purposely mispronounce his name as "Epstine".
It kind of came out of nowhere this film. I'm not sure I was aware of it at all until this week. Or completely forgot about it. Was on the fence about watching it. Still not sure to be fair 😂
Andrew My Friend, how are you, you okay? Great video, great review, I have to watch it, very interesting, Andrew, My Friend Takecare, Besafe, Blessyou, Steve
One thing that was never understood by ”fans” of a musical group or artist (like Bohemian Rhapsody) - it is NOT a documentary, it is NOT ”as it was in real life” or ”dont mess with the story, you re not gonna improvee it”). For a film, a fantacy, using your imagination for that presentation, even if its made after a real life event, IT ALL FITS!!! It has nothing to do with : ”this is not how it was” or ”this happened in june, instead of july”. Not in a film, not in art, not in a painting or a song, not in inmagination of that scene. That is what the author wants to create from real life. Please tell me you dont think Titanic is not how it really happened, and that Rose or Jack dont have the correct voice. An actor, a real good actor will not do impresion of a voice - that is just a first hand amatoristic aproach! You said it yourself at the end - Did you enjoy the movie? Thats what it is about : if it left you feeling, imagining, dreaming about that, even if you know the real story - then thats the point! Not if Brian was the real height in the movie, or had the correct voice, or if they played Twist & Shout because of the copyrights or something else - its about the THE MOVIE, the essence of it, the meaning (thats why even the film is not called ”Brian Epstein”). Its a story of a manager that made a great thing - wow what a great thing he did, and how he did it. Anyway - THATS HOW MOVIES ARE MADE (the art of making a movie, anyway, and not a camera witness).
I don't disagree with what you say, but I would add that if we as movie watchers are expected by the film makers to cut them slack for unnecessary changes to reality, then equally film makers should cut the viewers some slack and accept that not everyone is going to be pleased with those decisions, especially when, in the case of this movie, many of those inaccuracies were either lazy, or completely unnecessary from a storytelling point of view. They shouldn't have the expectation that they can go unchallenged.
First of all, is this a documentary or is this a drama? If it’s a drama, you can change things up and there are good reasons for doing that. If this is a documentary and accuracy is important… That’s a different story, but I got the impression that it’s not a documentary. Too bad it wasn’t put in the hands of a great director who could’ve taken this to another level.
Thanks for the review Andrew.
On the subject of how Brian pronounced his name, apparently although he used to say it as 'Ep stine' his brother and his parents called themselves 'Ep steen'. It's discussed (at length )in episode 90 of the BC The Beatles podcast where they also reference one of their previous podcasts.
I'm sure Mark Lewisohn has also mentioned this although I can't remember if I read it in 'Tune In' or heard him mention it in a talk.
Obviously they should have used Brian's preferred pronunciation in the film when they're talking specifically about him.
One other thing, if the Beatles really is 'The Greatest Story Ever Told', does this mean they were bigger than Jesus after all?
They got a lot of detail spot on when it came to the band's instruments, and if that wasn't Studio Two at Abbey Road I'd be amazed! Thanks for the review and the interesting points you raise
Brian walking and doing the narrative through out the film was a great idea ,the actors playing Paul and Pete my goodness spot on ,and yes I agreed with you regarding The pronunciation Of Brian’s surname. Brian certainly had the Midas touch. 👏
I am fresh from watching the movie and have to say that although it didn't stop me enjoying it (especially "Brian" breaking the fourth wall) I did notice all the things you mentioned. I suppose no movie will be perfect, but when the subject matter is so well known - and flawless, as you said, the imperfections seem even more unnecessary. A fair, honest and accurate review, thank you for sharing it.
Thank you for the very revealing inaccuracies in this film, Andrew. I watched several teasers for the film and spotted inaccuracies in them. One was when Pete said to Brian that he and Ringo were friends.
That’s not an inaccuracy. Pete did allege they were friends.
I understand why certain events need to be shortened or left out, but it's so jarring for anyone who already knows the story to see timelines altered or events made up. The makers of these biopics can't seem to stop themselves.
Surely The Beatles must be the most researched band in the world. Getting the basic facts right should not be that hard.
Spot on review! The dwarf Lennon was distracting indeed. And although the beatles were in general well portrayed, i felt they were treated as cartoon beatles. Always making silly comments and jokes. The boys were brighter than that, especially in private life situations. I've always been a bit skeptic about this film since i saw some promo pics at the time of shooting playing Orange amps and I cant remember if it was a Les Paul or a Strat guitar in a circa 63 era picture. They improved that and it's not a terrible film but it could 've been much better
Thank you for the video.
P.S. Closer to the end of this video I felt a wish to re-watch the "Eight Days a Week" documentary once again.
I've only just watched this film & everything you highlighted I was shouting out at the TV.
Great review Andrew !
On the whole I enjoyed it, the lads playing the band came across as slightly cartoonish, but there was also some great performances in there. One thing I found amusing was the fact that they could acquire the rights to How Do You Do It, but seemingly not recreate the Beatles cover of Twist and Shout!
Excellent review, Andrew. Are you especially tired? Have a rest you deserve it.
"Money" at the RV Concert really jarred so thank you too for raising this. The actor who played John was, as you say, too small both in stature and charisma and wasthat "Ringo"? in a bad wig? Shame. But even with these criticisms the actors were streets ahead of those in the recent Dr Who. I hope the actor playing Paul is given a shot at the four way bionics coming u.
i went into this with some trepidation...i can honestly say its absolutely brilliant, ignore all the little inconsistencies, i kept me riveted from minute one...i implore everyone to watch this...ITS FAB !
Hello Andrew I hope you are doing better thank you for taking a break from your break to make this video. I’m really looking forward to seeing this film but Amazon has done a weird thing with the film in the USA they haven’t released it yet to watch so When it does get released I’ll be ready but strange that it is not released yet Take Care thanks again
@@josephmantineo1376 Thanks Joseph, I heard a suggestion it's not out until next year in the US, I don't know if that's true.
I do agree. Good review. The guy who played John was too short ( which was really off putting) and he didn't have Lennon's strong personality. The guy who played Brian was excellent. His performance was the standout for me. It was an overall enjoyable watch but not brilliant.
Thanks Andrew for your very measured review. One thing that struck me was your evident acceptance of the view that Brian's overdose was accidental. We know that he had his 'demons', and will have felt that his raison d'etre was gone when the Beatles became far less reliant on him. I had not been aware that his father had died in the month before Brian himself died. This fact adds to my impression that, in the circumstances, he may well have chosen to end his own life. I think it is clear, as well, that the absence of Brian's oversight marked the beginning of the end of the Beatles.
Nice review Andrew. I haven't seen the film yet but I may have a problem now. I notice if there are continuity issues it spoils it for me. A bit OCD but that's just me. Thanks again, best wishes to you.
Brian Epstein deserves better as the Beatles were a way of life to him and not just a cash cow.. In my humble opinion, the most empathetic & realistic depiction and performance by an actor playing Brian was the 1979 film Birth of the Beatles. Great objective review stating both the positives & negatives.
I haven’t seen it yet but it does sound interesting. Thanks for your thoughts on the film. I always enjoy your analysis on The Beatles.
Andrew thanks for making this video on your days off! You brought lots of good points mostly on Beatle John He is larger than life so He needs to look the part His shoes are very important!!! Andrew your making so many important wrong things the movie director and screen writer missing out on historical facts you have brought up so many important facts like there haircuts and John's height also you bring up the good facts doing biopic films maybe hard to bring out! And Royal performance not playing Twist and shout but playing Money kind of strange! Let's hope the new biopic movies on each Beatle in 2027 Let's hope there is some improvement because now we're talking about the biggest of the biggest The Beatles hope they get there heights right and voices and true facts! Thanks Andrew great review and bringing up so much facts!
Thanks Andrew for a spot on review that highlights the good and the bad points. I watched the film and thought it was quite good but on reflection you can’t beat the real footage of the real Beatles their personalities and charm, charisma and talent always outshines any actors’ attempts. So the question is why attempt to make a film when you don’t have the rights to the music? I’m not sure who the film is aimed at, I think fans like us have to take off our Beatle-heads and enjoy the film for what it is.
Excellent review. I might check out this movie but I am usually never a fan of biopics, I'd rather watch a documentary. They always change the storyline around like you mention, just like in the Queen movie, which is very annoying, and there is usually no reason to change the real history.
Brian's family did prefer the STEEN pronunciation, so I think it makes sense that they say it that way in the film. I was just listening to the Fab4Free4All podcast from 2014 where author Vivek Tiwary discusses it. Love your content as usual Andrew.
I liked the way they referenced (through Brian) the sweaty / slimy walls of the Cavern and the shock of going from the darkness of the cellar to the brightness of daylight.
Great review. Thank you very much. I watched your review before I watch the film so I won't be much annoyed about the inaccuracies. 👍🎶
Thanks a lot for this. The part on the contract with Pete Best is in at least one biography. In the Ray Coleman biography, Brian and the Beatles had originally planned a dinner/party with the Beatles on the day he died. He then tried to make other arrangements at short notice but that also didn’t materialize.
An excellent review Andrew! I’m fairly certain I’m not alone in finding myself agreeing with your comments, especially the ‘red flag’ moments. I guess this highlights the problem with biopics too. Those that know the ‘history’ will likely be disappointed whereas someone just watching with no or minimal knowledge might find it an inroad to further exploration of the subject matter. I well remember my late Grandfather criticising the ‘Glenn Miller Story’ for similar reasons. Artistic license is a thorny issue that’s for sure. I know nothing of the complex issue of using copyrighted music in films and TV other than it is mouth droppingly expensive! I’m guessing the film had a modest budget compared to a ‘blockbuster’ movie so compromises would have to be made. With some innovative editing e.g. Royal Variety Performance - cut to newspaper reports with voice over or Pathe news style narration/music they wouldn’t need to have given us ‘Money’ instead of ‘Twist and Shout’ etc. I don’t know enough about Brian’s relationships, and it’s probably none of our business anyway to be honest, but do you think ‘Tex’ was a composite character? Taking off my ‘Beatles’ glasses I can say that I enjoyed watching the film. My mum was moved by the portrayal of Brian’s life and made comments that she and likely most of her generation too had no idea of the torment that he endured. She still remembers the shock of learning that he had died. I was too young to remember being 5 at the time and apparently skipping around the house ‘singing’ Yellow Submarine’ incessantly. In conclusion perhaps Midas Man was made for people like my mum rather than the Beatles obsessives like myself.
Excellent review Andrew. I’ve been fortunate to grow up with the Beatles (I am 67) and I would just be looking for the “artistic licence “. I always thought it was significant that the Beatles was in Wales when Brian died. An excellent unbiased review Andrew, thank you. I think I’ll just watch a carry on film instead. Mick
For me personally, the movie was a big miss from Brian talking directly to the camera, which to me it would have been better if he had narrated the scenes instead, to the choice of casting a short John Lennon was a complete mistake. The casting of Jay Leno as Ed Sullivan was just as bad if not worse. As a matter of fact, he didn't even try to sound like Ed Sullivan. Let's face it this movie was a complete injustice to Brian's legacy. I just hope that these Beatle movies that are supposed to come out in a few years don't suffer the same plight.
Thank you Andrew excellent review as always I do agree with all your points just a bit more care in research needed good to see you again take care look after yourself 👍🎸
Hi mate agree with your review. I saw it here in Sydney over a month ago at the cinema. With the '64 Tour there was no mention as well of the Australasian Tour ! Don't know if I would buy this one. Thought they could have used someone else to play Ed Sullivan.
I awaited this film with great trepidation but instead was pleasantly surprised. With anything regarding the Beatles, casting is absolutely vital and I think the actor who played Brian was terrific. The boys themselves were a mixed bag with Paul being the best interpretation I've seen so far but I struggled with the casting of John as he was just too short and it was a major distraction along with George appearing to be about 6 foot 6! 😊 I feel the end was rushed and Brian's torment over his contract reneval wasn't dealt with at all. Overall, I enjoyed it but it's always going to be difficult making a biopic involving Beatles as there's so much to cram in. Fingers crossed the four Sam Mendes movies will be well written and spot on in casting.
@AndrewDixonMusic.... say mate, don't blame you for the weekends, Those Liverpool Reds are looking pretty smart these days! Excellent review, very good points.
Say, had you watched the Beatles in India TH-cam videos as of yet? Take care My friend.
Brian’s mum says she phoned all the radio stations requesting Love Me Do. Anyone who knows their history would know that there was only ONE UK radio station that played pop music in 1962
Depending on the source, John was shorter than George and Paul but still taller than Ringo. Some sources have John, Paul and George all at 5'11, but other sources have John at 5"11 but Paul and George at 6'1. George has been referred to as having been quite tall and he generally appears around the same height as Paul in photos, while John generally appears slightly shorter so that would make sense to me. Ringo is around 5'6-5'7. I'm not sure how tall Pete Best is but I always had the impression that he was maybe slightly taller than Ringo back in the day. On a related note, the Best family have a museum in Liverpool near The Cavern called The Liverpool Beatles Museum. It's by far the better of the 2 Beatles museums in Liverpool (the other being The Beatles Story). I'd highly recommend it to any Beatles fan as there are so many personal artefacts from throughout The Beatles career, not just from when Pete was in the band. Back to the subject of heights though, this is nothing new when it comes to Beatles biopics. According to Peter Capaldi who played George in John And Yoko: A Love Story, the actor playing Ringo towered over the rest of the cast and so nearly every scene involving The Beatles showed them all seated.
The EpSTEEN rather than EpStein thing does sound like an American thing. However, The Beatles did use that version of the name in Get Back so maybe they were using that as a reference. Still, if they'd seen The Beatles First US Visit, then they'd have seen Brian's assistant on the phone to an American journalist correcting them on how to say Epstein, so it is clear from that that he and his family were very particular about that. It is a odd thing to get wrong as Get Back is the only time I've heard any of The Beatles or anyone connected to them officially call him EpSTEEN (and I'm pretty sure that they were doing it as a joke). That's a pretty major thing to get wrong in a film like this. I wonder if they call their Rickenbacker guitars RickenBACHers too.
George himself has said he was about 5'9'', Paul has said he was the tallest Beatle. People who met John in USA 1970's seemed surprised he wasn't taller based on Beatlemania propaganda. He was probably also around 5'9'' but those '60's cuban heels made a difference!
With Eddie Izzard,it was like he had a different accent every line he said. Film was ok if you don’t actually care about it being about the Beatles. Your comments are spot on !
Whenever I watch a biopic, I approach it knowing that it's not gonna be perfect. Whereas they'll be facts in the movie, because of story telling (and lets face it, the movies running time) I know they won't be factually placed. (Hope that make sense). But I totally agree with everything you've said here.
I think by putting All You Need Is Love at the end (and after Brian's fathers death) is because the director wanted to finish the film on a positive note EVEN THOUGH Brian dies (something not really explored except that he takes pills). The Beatles say goodbye (hugs etc...) and then weirdly Brian walks across the Abbey Road crossing WHICH has the Beetle parked there!! How many years was that there!?! ;) It all seemed like the director was trying to put a pretty bow on it.
But like you said, I did enjoy it and I too will watch it again.
The film isn’t available here in America yet, but I really appreciate your thoughts on this one.
Great review!!!
Hi Andrew yes I thought the film was ok. Spot on with your comments good stuff as always .
Thanks for watching this film for me and it was great to hear your feedback. The problem I have with biopics, and especially music biopics, is that the casual viewer will naively come away from watching these films as 100% factual. I'd much rather watch a well-researched unbiased documentary to be honest, but that's just how I feel. I'm going to do my best to resist the temptation to not watch the upcoming four authorised biopics of The Beatles!
I agree. These films are mostly for people who were not there and didn’t live in that time. I’ve no interest in a Hollywood recreation of those days. It’s entirely not possible to capture the real charisma of the Beatles in a biopic. Same with Elvis and Hendrix and basically any of these massive stars. It’s just more Hollywood rubbish.
Excellent review, agree with your comments about the acting choices and performances. However I do understand why All You Need is Love was the final scene. They had reached the absolute summit, broadcasting to 100s of millions of people. So his job was done, and he gets a hug from all the "boys". He walks across Abbey Rd, fade to black. (Strange Sgt Pepper wasn't mentioned though or did I miss that?)
Next go through Elton's Rocket Man and Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody movies. In the movie, Elton John took the name John from John Lennon, not Long John Baldry. In the Queen movie they say Queen had broken up and got back to together for Live Aid. No, they were touring Australia immediately before Live Aid. As Derek Taylor used to say "never let the truth get in the way of a good story"
That's why I will never watch those movies or the Elvis movie. Apparently also full of inaccuracies. The Doors movie even though well made, paints Jim Morrison as a pretentious poetry spouting monster. When in fact his friends have said he was quiet & reserved most of the time. Val Kilmer did an excellent job of portraying Jim Morrison even singing some of the songs.
To be fair, Taylor was talking sardonically about actual truth and how stories are reported in newspapers purportedly as actual truth. Movies usually state that their biopics are “based on” real events and need to make a movie that works as a three act drama. Many reporters for more reputable newspapers at least try and report objective truth while there has never been a biopic that showed every single event exactly as it happened because that is the nature of biopics.
The man who played John was great at the Command Performance section.
I liked the movie. Im a Beatles fan in old age now.
I gave up after the first line of the trailer, when Brian introduced himself as Ep"steen." I mean, it's the main character's name!
Hi Andrew thank you for a wonderful critique of Midas Man.
I haven’t seen it yet and I’m not sure I want to but I probably will just out of curiosity.
Where it will be a problem for me is that fans like myself who were around at the time always worry that like you said certain aspects of the film were historically questionable. I just worry that new or much younger fans will get the story of the great Brian Epstein out of context and are left with a story that seems to fall tragically short of what the actual truth was.
It would be a terrible shame if left uncorrected in any future Beatle biopics.
Appreciate your review. I didn't watch it yet, but your insight is very necessary to make it worthwhile in our active life and the time necessary to invest in it.👍👍👍
Where can I stream this movie? I've looked everywhere and can't find it.
I have no idea when it’s gonna be available in the USA. It said it was supposed to be on Prime Video on October 30th but it’s still not available where I live in the USA. Not sure why but I’ve been excited for this movie for quite a while
Overall enjoyed . I thought the shot outside the cavern could have been more authentic due to the many other appropriate locations in the city ( the sight of roller shutters and tarmac seemed unresearched ) . Nice to see Freda Kelly making a cameo …
Yes, agreed, it looked like it was an industrial estate outside the city.
Agree with all your comments, couldn't believe the Twist and Shout / Money 'error' and the death of Brian's father.
I did also think the casting of George Harrison was a strange choice.
good, balanced review, thanks
My sister won 2 tickets to see the beatles in Glasgow in 1964. I was to get the second ticket till she me a boy from school and she gave it to that bastard. He became famous so I won't mention his name.
Movie said Peter Best was sacked by George Martin but GM is on record saying he wanted a drummer for recording and never wanted Pete best fired.
Nice review Andrew. the St-eye-n / st-ee-n think will rage on. Ive always called him St-eye-n so was surprised to hear him referred to as St-een. Did some research. There is a video out there on YT where a podcaster asks the same question , so he checked with the family who told him that the family name is pronounced Steen even though Brian himself preferred St-eye-n. Stein and Stien are very common Jewish names often used with other words before them such as Goldstein, Silverstein etc. The general consensus seems to be its it spelt Stein -its pronounce Steen and if it's Stien it's pronounced Stine. So there you go. I wonder how Linda's family pronounced before changing to Eastman.
Mark Lewisohn refers to the pronunciation of Brian's surname in 'Tune In'. He suggests that his family were always Epsteens but Brian chose to pronounce it as Epstine in an attempt to play down his Jewish background. He apparently stopped using his middle name Samuel for the same reason.
In the mini-series where Sheridan Smith played Cilla Black, Epstein's surname was pronounced by her as Ep-steen.
@@barbarakirk3064 Yes im pretty sure that's how it should be pronounced
Hi Andrew. I haven't seen the movie, but I would love to if that comes here. I agree with your comments. The only thing I would add is that when I read the Hunter-Davies book in High School in Canada, I was very interested more in the early days with Brian Epstein (EPSTINE), and in Germany with the Star Club, and it is a great story, and I agree, the producers need to get the facts right, regardless of what an audience would applaud. Hollywood is a Master of changing the script on famous people to sell tickets. In defense of the director and script and actors, as long as the genius of Brian is portrayed, that is sufficient.
I’ve just done my own review and I purposely didn’t watch yours as I didn’t want to be influenced by your excellent work. Within five minutes there have been about half a dozen points I also raised! I wish I was more coherent and organised in my presentation, as you are! I ended up giving the movie a 6.5/7 out of 10.
Hi Dom, I can see your review on your channel, I'll have a watch tonight and get back to you! (And thanks for that McCartney interview link a few days ago 👍)
@ ah bless you mate! Yeah, I’ve just finished watching yours and you hit upon a couple of points in particular that I’m kicking myself for missing. The fact that they didn’t make more of the fact that Brian thought he was losing his grip on The Beatles after their touring days, not to mention the ‘Ep-stine Ep-steen’ debate! I did raise the fact that I thought it was strange that they didn’t go into Lennon’s ‘powerplay’ with Brian, although I know think you’re absolutely right: it would have been too much for one story, and indeed it has been covered in ‘The Hours and Times’ movie about John and Brian’s trip to Spain.
You may have done this already, Andrew but a great video would be a top 10 of Beatle biopics including Midas Man, Birth Of The Beatles, The Rutles: an important inclusion as this was made after Eric Idle had seen the original rushes of Neil Aspinal’s Long And Winding Road, Backbeat, John and Yoko: a love story, Nowhere Boy, Backbeat, Two Of Us, Lennon Naked (starring Christopher Eccleston), The Hours and Times, The Linda McCartney story. That’s 10, but maybe wait until Sam Mendes bring out his four movies about each Beatle. 😊👍🏻
When I first heard about this movie I was intrigued and that it would be about Brian's life and his managing in the music business not necessarily centered on the Beatles I haven't watched it yet but I was hoping we would get a lot of interaction of him with the other bands he managed, it sounds like this is not the case The Beatles story has been covered to death it would be nice to see biopics and documentaries that's centered on the other bands suchas the big three
Great review ..,unfortunately I hate all biopics! Give me a great documentary any day !
Excellent review Andrew. You really should present on a bigger stage, you’re a natural! I agree with all your thoughts and had virtually the same views as I watched it. A couple of things. I thought there were very subtle hints about the JL/BE relationship, body language etc. you may pick up on it when you watch it again. The other point is when GH comments on not liking GMs tie I dont think GM should have removed it. As I don’t think that really happened. GMs portrayal was good but I thought the delivery was a little too choppy at times. I can see why it was a free prime movie rather than with a fee attached. I thought the attention to detail of the scenery etc was great. They spent a lot of time evoking the period. 6.5/10 for me. I’m glad I watched it
Watched it the other night. My wife enjoyed it but my son & I had questions, including the points you mentioned. The actor who played Mall was far too small & George Martin was lacking in height. Also, Brian did have the meal with Dick Rowe at the rejection meeting, not sure why they did that. Good review 👍
Thanks for the video Andrew and your honest opinion 👍
At least you confirmed why I NEVER watch biopics about anyone, but especially The Beatles. Your comments about the so called artistic licence is definitely the main reason I don't watch them, but getting crucial facts wrong, or portraying some of the most important people in my life incorrectly is just unforgivable to me.
Give me a brilliantly researched documentary anyday. In this day and age with the amount of footage available and factual material like Mark Lewisohn's books and wealth of other information, and the fact they could make them any length to tell the story and then stream them, gives me no reason to even think why we need embarrassing biopics.
I haven't seen this and definitely won't watch it, or for that matter, the 4 Beatles one's on the way.
Oh God, I'm cringing already...😬
Thanks for the review. Actually the only reason I realised it was out.
Personally I don't care about the casting. It was decent to me. I've seen many cheap biopics and this is a better cast who managed some naturalness to the quippyness. Even short John captured his likeness and some of his character. He and the rest of them were seriously lacking in depth and character.
A better biopic would have explored these relationships, characters, tensions, fears ect.. there was material . But I can see how they just didn't have the time. It would have been wrong to cut out Cilla and the Mersey beat acts, but that stuff was taking up a lot of time along with his business stresses. It must be incredibly difficult to balance this stuff . He just needed a mini series treatment or a massive simplification of his story.
It felt like alot of climactic moments were sped through and deeper drama unexplored. Probably due to timing.
I agree with many of the other criticism. Along with not landing the insecurity about his relationship with the band they set up but didn't follow through on his feelings about wanting to be out as a gay man. Surely one of the stresses that was getting to him the most and fueling self hating addiction. He literally wanted it to be public at the end of his life.
But I think the chaos and double life part was portrayed adequately. And I liked alot of the Beatles stuff.
I watched the movie last Wednesday 30/10/24 and thought it was pretty good (I’m a big Beatles fan!) Thank you for your review and the Actor who played Lennon was way too short.
I was intrigued by why they renamed Dizz Gillespie as Tex Ellington.
In regard to Epsteen. You’re right, on the Maysles film there’s a point when an American office person with BE in the background pronounces it just like that Steen not Stein
I heard an interview with Lewisohn about this and Brian always referred to himself as "Epstine" whilst his brother Clive and the rest of the family pronounced it "Epsteen".
I think I'll give this one a miss.
Yes, Lewisohn makes it clear in "the book" that Brian was the only one in the family who said "Epstine". I don't think he corrected people who called him "Epsteen", but he didn't call himself that.
Balanced review Andrew...I also didn't like the TEX charactor who was using Brian. I know this was part of the story ..but he looked too modern like he walked in from the naughties into a 60s film. Whilst I felt the actor who played brian was a good actor I didn't see some elements as being the Brian I've seen in interviews and footage and books. It was clear the film was made on a shoestring budget. And I will never get over little john...I thought Paul was the best accent wise, pete was pretty good to..and I'm hyper critical being from South Liverpool.
When Eppy asked John once what he should call the title of his book about his life, John rather cruelly said, "What about..........". 😱
That was merely an example of John Lennons caustic wit
Yes 1962 started in August according to this film
I hope to see this Midas Man. Andres, is there a way to get hold of you without everyone seeing? Please let me know if you can.
Hi Richard if you look through my profile details there's an email address 👍
Thanks for the excellent review. I’m not a fan of these biopics (Queen & Elton John being the most obvious recent examples). Your analysis here makes me even more wary of the four (!) upcoming Beatles films.
Brian’s story is one which deserves to be told - from shop keeper to manager of the largest entertainment act in the world: he made positive creative changes and his entrepreneurial spirit achieved great things and without him there might have been no Beatles. But this film suffers from far too much Beatles and completely ignores his inability to run a business at scale and that his naivety cost him and the band endless millions. Paul began to ask uncomfortable questions about finances and the business was in a mess. This is alleged to have contributed to his self destruction. He was planning to shaft them before they sacked him. The film is far too kind to him in this regard. His is a story of achievement and quickly getting way out of his depth - which this film fails to even try to convey.
After watching your review, I am so looking foward to this film. However Beatle film makers, you need to ger Andrew Dixon on board as a consultant, and he will make it a must for all Beatle fans.
In terms of playing ‘money’ after the quip of rattling ur jewellery I guess the writers thought that was a fairly good segue into the performance.
Also with the switch of his fathers death and the all u need is love worldwide performance- given it said one of the last things he said was how he was on top of the world (something like that anyway 😬) I think they wanted to hammer the point that he died at the point of having achieved unimaginable success, and to end it on his fathers death would have just undermined that.
With the casting, I thought the main actor did a really great job of portraying Brian and primarily how kind he was. With Lennon, it took me a while to warm to the actor- I couldn’t see why Brian would have been so enamoured of him. I think he looked more like John at the end, but still not sure about the actual portrayal.
McCartney’s actor was stellar both look and portrayal. And when I saw the actor playing George Harrison I was stunned they found someone who looked so like him (although I feel like he looked less like him at the end) but for the majority of the time he almost looked like an illustration of George, not a real person.
And with Ringo, I think the actor did the most with the small amount he had. When u first see him at the drum kit I felt he just captured the spirit of Ringo.
I also really liked how they included them imitating the Goons in his office.
Ultimately, there’s always gonna be quibbles and problems- I don’t think this is an incredible movie. It kinda does what a lot of biopics do and rather than show cause and effect, does a more checklist of things that happened. I think the only way to even try to do the story right is a tv show with multiple seasons. But I think the casting of the Beatles in this is the best I’ve seen.
The Beatles called him Epsteen, to be fair.
Have you heard a clip of Brian stating his name? Not sure I have.
Was there a TEX or is that a creation?
Thanks for enduring this Andrew I’ll avoid! They rarely get these right but i do enjoy backbeat and story of John and Yoko
Thanks for the film review. While I will be a little disappointed in some of the areas you mentioned, I am looking forward to watching.
I agree with your critical views. Compared to 'Backbeat' or 'Nowhere Boy' I think it's lazy and forgettable.
I could not take the film seriously because as you mentioned the casing of John was a bad choice and the portrail of his character was disappointing .
I'm having a tough time with biopics being so prevalent. Now, we have a Dylan movie and a Springsteen movie too. The Bealtes LIVED their story so that nobody would have to copy it. How about more original ideas on film?
I quite enjoyed bits of it! It captures the sixties very nicely but as you say the actor who plays John Lennon was totally miscast, quite distracting at times. They missed a trick with Allan Williams.
Anyone in the US able to see this yet?
I think I'll give this one a miss. It sounds like the inaccuracies will just annoy me. There was a British dramatic television mini series from a few years ago about Brian I thought was done well. I can't remember the name of it.
Script by Wikipedia and AI.
Casting John as Paul Simon 😂
Actually, it looks like the film was better researched that you realize. Brian and his family did call themselves "Epsteen". It was John and the other Beatles who would purposely mispronounce his name as "Epstine".
For me it’s really a turn off when they get the small details wrong. It just shows they didn’t bother to research the subject thoroughly
It kind of came out of nowhere this film. I'm not sure I was aware of it at all until this week. Or completely forgot about it. Was on the fence about watching it. Still not sure to be fair 😂
Midas man ? no he happened onto a ready made diamond sure he added some polish got them gigs don't recall him writing a song.
Andrew My Friend, how are you, you okay? Great video, great review, I have to watch it, very interesting, Andrew, My Friend Takecare, Besafe, Blessyou, Steve
if people stop thinking its about The Beatles, its about Brian Epstein, youll love it !
Midas Man: th-cam.com/video/zBhWVB0Y_4Q/w-d-xo.htmlsi=V9JVkmJa5d5vE5Gj&t=33
It's crap.
John Lennon's a midget and Ringo Starr is taller than Paul.
One thing that was never understood by ”fans” of a musical group or artist (like Bohemian Rhapsody) - it is NOT a documentary, it is NOT ”as it was in real life” or ”dont mess with the story, you re not gonna improvee it”). For a film, a fantacy, using your imagination for that presentation, even if its made after a real life event, IT ALL FITS!!! It has nothing to do with : ”this is not how it was” or ”this happened in june, instead of july”. Not in a film, not in art, not in a painting or a song, not in inmagination of that scene. That is what the author wants to create from real life. Please tell me you dont think Titanic is not how it really happened, and that Rose or Jack dont have the correct voice. An actor, a real good actor will not do impresion of a voice - that is just a first hand amatoristic aproach!
You said it yourself at the end - Did you enjoy the movie? Thats what it is about : if it left you feeling, imagining, dreaming about that, even if you know the real story - then thats the point! Not if Brian was the real height in the movie, or had the correct voice, or if they played Twist & Shout because of the copyrights or something else - its about the THE MOVIE, the essence of it, the meaning (thats why even the film is not called ”Brian Epstein”). Its a story of a manager that made a great thing - wow what a great thing he did, and how he did it.
Anyway - THATS HOW MOVIES ARE MADE (the art of making a movie, anyway, and not a camera witness).
I don't disagree with what you say, but I would add that if we as movie watchers are expected by the film makers to cut them slack for unnecessary changes to reality, then equally film makers should cut the viewers some slack and accept that not everyone is going to be pleased with those decisions, especially when, in the case of this movie, many of those inaccuracies were either lazy, or completely unnecessary from a storytelling point of view.
They shouldn't have the expectation that they can go unchallenged.
First of all, is this a documentary or is this a drama? If it’s a drama, you can change things up and there are good reasons for doing that. If this is a documentary and accuracy is important… That’s a different story, but I got the impression that it’s not a documentary. Too bad it wasn’t put in the hands of a great director who could’ve taken this to another level.