I took a film making class in Uni, and we had to pitch story ideas to our professor, before we got the go ahead on production. In the last class before this, he said to us, as the very last thing; "Oh, and I shouldn't have to say this, but if you pitch a story, and the ending is, 'and it was all a dream', I will reject it". The fact that Paul got this through is honestly hilarious in hindsight :D
@@davidjames579I think it works for that film because the middle is such an outlandish setting coupled with the fact it's a song and dance musical. When people invest in a plausible reality that gets pulled out from under them after an hour or two (or entire season), then they feel ripped off. I think of something like Wizard of Oz vs. Patrick Duffy's character dying in Dallas and then showing up in a shower alive after several episodes making the death into a dream. People were mad because the retcon made NEITHER story worthwhile. In stuff like Alice in Wonderland and Wizard of Oz, it NOT being a dream demands all sorts of background explanation of why this stuff REALLY happened. Plus, the journey of dancing scarecrows and psychotic playing cards is infinitely more entertaining than just a different set of realistic events happening. Sorry was so long-winded. It was an interesting point to ponder.
The fact that it is all a dream is both the film's greatest strength and its greatest weakness. Broad Street doesn't work as a movie b/c it betrays narrative convention. It has no plot or character development. All the characters are cut-outs and even the protagonist has no agency. In a standard narrative, the protagonist is trapped by fate but reluctantly takes control of their destiny to resolve the plot, which drives the action. And normally, the "it's all a dream" twist ending comes off as a cheat. You'd think someone with A-Level English, like Paul, would know this.😘 However, if you understand that it is all a dream from the beginning, which the film clearly hints at (jump cut from chauffeured car in the rain to driven car in the sun), then it is really quite a remarkable feat of dream logic depiction. In a way, it's a testament to how successful it is in depicting what it's like to BE in a dream, that you forget it is one and the reminder that it is a dream at the end then feels like a copout twist ending. (Or Paul is just a bad writer) Unlike other dreams depicted on film, it is not self-conscious or full of clever symbolic imagery. I would argue that it is perhaps the most accurate depiction of a "realistic" dream captured on film. It starts as a typical stress dream. These are caused by worrying about something stressful that you are unprepared for the next day. In this case, it seems to be a board meeting. We don't know what the actual stressor is, b/c we never SEE the real board meeting. It happens after the film. So the dream starts the way most dreams of this kind do -- you're late for something you'd rather avoid (like a test at school). Paul's subconscious tries to "take control" by driving fast. The dream stressor is Paul's greatest fear -- fear of loss; his music is missing, his company/legacy is on the line and in the nightmare sequence he literally loses his loved ones over it. We are told upfront that the loss of the tapes will lead to the loss of his empire and we are tricked into believing that this is the plot of the film; it is not. the film HAS no plot. Paul's psyche is overwhelmed by this fear and attempts to escape through his basic routine. He is passively led through all the things he enjoys about his life and might typically do: rehearse, record, make a video, perform on a radio show. This is an impossible day; you could never do all these things in one day. But he can't escape the loss of the tapes and keeps trying to "solve" the problem, but he can't because in dreams we have no agency, so he keeps moving passively through the scenes. None of the other characters are developped because they aren't real. Then in that state of semi-consciousness right before we wake up, he is able to "solve" the problem just in time to go to the meeting. Roger Ebert is right. This is a non-movie. But it is a surprisingly successful work of filmic art. And it is also really brave. With this film, Paul has shown extreme bravery and a complete lack of judgement. He has exposed to the world his greatest fear and delivered it in a vehicle that had the power to make that fear come true.
@@andrewbaker2970 There's a scene in the film where someone says "You know William", and then looks at "Paul", because he is William (Billy). Look it up!
Ringo will always be the best actor out of the 4 Beatles. I still laugh at the interview when they ask if Ringo would become an actor if he left The Beatles and George replies with "There is a possibility he wouldn't be an actor too."
"This scene could have functioned fine without the monkey," is a great line. If the film is remastered/rereleased for a 40th anniversary edition, that's the quote I want on the cover.
love this film, the acting wasn't great, the plot was thin and silly at times, but I don't care, the music is awesome even No Values. I have the soundtrack on vinyl and it's awesome. Plus, the actor you said was ADR'd is a famous British wrestler called Giant Haystacks
the "plot" does actually feel like one of those dreams you have where you keep appearing in places and random people keep popping up and none of the events make any sense whatsoever,, it creates that nonsensical dream atmosphere pretty well because i was absolutely clueless throughout the entire thing i had to stare blankly at a wall for a couple of minutes after i finished watching it loll
Yes, of course, I'm sure that's the reason, and not that Paul had no experience whatsoever writing scripts, or that the director also had very little experience directing, or anything like that lol.
@@Alfonso162008 You're right. It is very flawed because the script wasn't vetted and redrafted and the the director had no idea what he was doing. If those things were different it might have been more entertaining and successful as a film. However, it really does succeed as a depiction of a dream despite those flaws. It's kinda brilliant on a psychological dream level.
Fun Fact: Big Bob was actually UK wrestling star Giant Haystacks. Apparently, Paul was a bit of a fan and basically wrote him into the movie so they could hang out. I'd never noticed the dubbed lines and always just thought he did a decent job of playing this dangerous looking dude.
I do agree that if Paul let his weird side out, things would have been totally different. We needed to meet the guy who was John Lennon's best friend. It's ironic that if he had been himself, it would have probably changed a lot in terms of how he's perceived.
@@reinacarbetta388 Meaning, he relaxed with John and was his unabashed weird adhd self. You can see a little bit of that in the Let It Be movie, but here and there Paul let's it out This movie is "rock star Paul", which was the version that John always had a problem with. It's Paul masking his quirks and putting out an image he thinks people want to see. My general point was that if Paul made a movie to just amuse himself and not worry about making a "proper film", it would have been fantastic.
@@MrKeychange Ok, I get what you’re saying. Though, the root of any problems John had with Paul was jealousy (by his own admission, too.) Paul fit into any scene or crowd and garnered attention without having to try. John felt the need to put on antics (all the damn time) for attention. For whatever reason, Paul chose to show us the laid back version of 40 year old Paul in this film. Maybe because the Boomers had wrongly characterized him as controlling after the “Let It Be” film. 🤷🏻♀️
@@reinacarbetta388 I agree for the most part. They were both adhd with different strengths, and John seemed envious of Paul not having the same degree of emotional dysregulation. John seemed so tortured by his mood swings and guilt over saying random crap without thinking.
Just going to say, “Hard Days Night” is more then just an irreverent movie, it’s an intelligently written, and subtle comedy compared to “Help!”. The dialogue is perfect, especially that scene with Lennon saying. “I’m not him”
_A Hard Day's Night_ benefitted greatly from the French New Wave, the immediate wake of The Beatles' splash in the USA, and the novelty factor for the boys themselves, as well as their merely-budding amount of cynicism as celebrities. They weren't weary of their fame yet and were willing to try new forays in entertainment. All-time favorite. ^_^
I mean, to be fair to Paul regarding the Gene Siskel interview, it was extremely bad form for Siskel to for no reason in particular just tell McCartney that he hated his movie at the beginning of the interview, it's a good way to immediately poison the well for conversation.
Slight correction! I mention that 'Tug of War' is Paul's first successful solo post-Beatles album, when I meant *critically* successful, as well as commercially. Also, I probably should have mentioned that Sandra is played by the legendary Tracey Ullman, and thank you to all of you who keep reminding me of this 😑😑😑
I think you have to acknowledge your inclusion of footage of Paul's school mate, Peter Sissons, presenting the Channel 4 News piece on Broadstreet too. Nice vid though, thanks.
I can't remember which interview but George Harrison talked about the film and said that he quite liked it. However, he apparently told McCartney that it was a mistake to do everything himself.
Yeah, I've seen that. My impression was that George was quite pleased making the remarks. Maybe a mixture of his advice being right but also Paul getting a bit humbled after years of success. But I dont think he was meaning to be unkind and it's nice that George said something supportive.
Fun note about one of the songs from the unreleased Rupert the Bear soundtrack is a completed version of a song that Paul wrote during the Get Back sessions called Castle of the King of the Birds.
Point of order - the guy doing the moonwalk during “silly love songs” is Jeffrey Daniels of 70s/80s dance troupe The Lockers and later was in Shalamar. More importantly he’s the guy who was doing the moonwalk a good year before Michael Jackson (they later worked together. Also Sandra is played by Tracy Ullman.
My favourite story re this film is the one Macca told of how he asked George how Shanghai Surprise was going. It was the one Madonna was in and George replied “It makes Broad Street look like an epic”.
dude Eliot Roberts easily the most outrageously underrated TH-camr, his videos have genuinely good editing even when it's the first video, keep up the good work man, waiting for that George Harrison video ;b
i half-assed watched film in 1985 or so but it's nowhere to be found now. mccartney's wins vs. losses is as great as anybody over the course of 60 years. i appreciate you not piling on just for the sake of following the vindictive pack. i loved the lennon and harrison videos and will watch the mccarney one next.
i love paul just as much as everyone else here but i think the get back doc proved why paul wouldn’t want to hire a seasoned director who would have greater creative pull, he was and wanted to be the director with creative pull! sgt peppers, the magical mystery tour film, even being the one determined to write the movie himself prove that, unfortunately the movie kind of suffered as a result of his lack of experience i think.
I think that this movie could have had a script with a musical/comedy focused solely on Paul and Ringo, Like a Buddy type comedy duo, and maybe gotten George to do a cameo in the Middle of the flick...a wasted opportunity had Paul Not let his ego get in the way-IMO
Mmm, Paul is my least favorite Beatle. His songs are almost always over emotional and I have to admit that I sometimes skip them if I am listening to The Beatles. I much prefer John and George, as Beatles and solo. I don’t think I have ever heard a Paul McCartney solo album or Wings album that I have liked or enjoyed. To me his career after The Beatles has been mediocre to below mediocre. And I think he and his personality are fake. He just tries too hard to keep this appearance of a likable guy. I would not say I love Paul, I kind of find him and his music annoying.
I wonder if there was a part of Paul that never really got over the original Band on the Run tapes being stolen, so he vented his frustration when writing the script. Of course there's the mid-life crisis/recapture the zany Beatle movie days thing too, but the whole thing about the tapes being worth a lot and the fact that they were magically found near the end of the movie leaves enough to ponder.
It might have worked better if it had been about Paul's stolen Hofner bass. I think a lot more of us might have been a bit more invested in the outcome.
@@Alfonso162008 yes that's right. Originally thought to have been stolen from the Let It Be stage set in Twickenham in Jan '69, but actually it recently came to light that it was taken from the back of a van parked up overnight in West London's Ladbroke Grove in March 1973, during rehearsals for Red Rose Speedway!
I got the making of movie book. It’s interesting seeing concept art for the movie, but the interview with Paul and Linda at the end of the book gets very strange. For some reason the book includes Linda talking about how she can’t smoke pot without the media making a big deal out of it, and Paul dispelling a rumor that he earned 20 million pounds in 1982. Like what does this tabloid crap have to do with the making of the movie?
My theory is that this movie basically exists for 2 reasons: 1. MTV was in full swing at the time of its release. Paul tried to get involved by trying to make a movie with as many potential music videos loosely strung together with a thrown together plot. While the plot wouldn't necessarily work, there was a higher chance that at least one video could get picked up in MTV rotation and get him involved in the new popular music video scene. None did though, making the movie just bad. 2. CDs were becoming the new form of media. As a result, Paul tried to make a pseudo-greatest hits compilation for people who were trying to transition their music collection into the newest format. He also rerecorded the songs to avoid as many legal issues that could occur by having Beatles, Wings, and solo material on one compilation.
He basically made a movie custom made for MTV, but they didn’t use any of it. Michael Jackson would do the same with Moonwalker a few years later, and they took almost all of it…
Wow. Do you remember the three advices Paul McCartney made to Michael Jackson?: Make music videos, hire a good accountant that take care of your money, and the last one invest in the music bussiness.
Only just saw this film for the first time a month ago! Thankfully saw it on TH-cam, and, for free, it was a fun enough film to have on in the background. One of the things I didn’t understand though was why have the framing device of Paul daydreaming at the beginning and end - to justify some of the weirder things happening? Like Paul felt he had to explain the heightened reality? (Gotta give Paul some credit though, he did dreams within dreams 26 years before Christopher Nolan did). Initially I thought they were going to do a Walter Mitty style thing where it dips back and forth between reality and fantasy, and I think that’d be more interesting - have a day in the life of Paul McCartney (recording songs, filming music videos, doing interviews, and boring board meetings) being the reality, and have the hunt for the tapes being Paul’s escape into fantasy (and importantly, have Paul hunt for the tapes himself, not have it all happen offscreen - show, don’t tell, that’s like writing rule #1). If they played up the angle that Paul in the film is having a mid-life crisis and his imagination is always looking for ways to liven up his everyday routine with outlandish plots, that could provide some fun comedy bits, and provide a little meta commentary on the nature of film-going and escapism. Probably wouldn’t be a masterpiece but it’d fix it feeling so inconsequential. At the very least, they should’ve brought back Wilfrid Brambell as Paul’s grandfather to provide some more hijinks - even 20 years later he’s still getting his grandson into trouble.
I actually adore the soundtrack, super weird underrated gem. The originals are really cool, "No More Lonely Night" is a McCartney classic and I enjoy hearing 80's versions of classic Beatles tunes (THAT VERSION OF THE LONG AND WINDING ROAD!!!)
I like this version of Winding Road the best, though I think his vocal performance on the original is better. He tended to have some odd vocal affectations in later years, whereas with the Beatles he sang simply and purely and enunciated things clearly.
“This scene could have functioned fine without the monkey.” Perhaps one of the only times this sentence has ever been uttered… Another awesome video, Elliot! I’d been looking forward to this one for months, and you didn’t disappoint! I love being a Patron and watching your videos early, but I usually hold out to watch them on TH-cam so you get the views. (Gotta feed that algorithm lol)
I remember a 1986 episode of a British sitcom, where a character tries to write a script. When asked why it takes so long, he says “theres certain things a writer needs to start writing….like a story”. I can’t help but feel the show’s creators saw this film 😂
While watching this, I thought about what it would be like if The 4 had made it together. George & John would’ve added such a witty touch to it, and I feel like some of Monty Python would’ve joined in on it. It probably would’ve still been sub-par, but regardless, it made me crack a smile while watching this and seeing Paul & Ringo together, and being able to tell how much Paul cared about this movie.
Paul is just not an actor. He has no script.. no idea of what the film should be and even if he did he is a notoriously dialed down person unless he's giving his all as a singer of songs.. and even in that mode he's one of those rock guys who need to hold or play an instrument to address the audience otherwise he is uncomfortable and awkward. Imagine having RALPH RICHARDSON HIMSELF on set and not know what to do as an actor! George Harrison had it totally right.. you don't make films by yourself. It is always a collaboration. what would have been best is for Paul to have started small. A Wings sequel to MMT? A movie based around Wonderful Christmastime with some Christmas tunes in it from an accompanying soundtrack album. Perfect opportunities for McCartney to get some film/acting experience on some low risk of failure projects and then maybe something as ambitious as a new era movie musical based around lyrical vignettes or an attempt at Pythonesque Goon Show material with a rocking soundtrack of songs. Even a hit parade in the style of his hero Cole Porter where he redid his old songs and maybe some other classics in a more rigorous musical style. What's not to like.. but it was just a half a***ed poorly planned poorly thought out production which as always failed Paul. This film was a sad and unnecessary failure. The film should be reedited and released on video and a full treatment of the soundtrack should be along with it. Make it the next archives release and leave it at that!
I really loved this video (everyone always forgets about Give my Regards to Broad Street) but the part about Paul's Rupert the Bear album TOOK ME FOR A TAILSPIN. I've been listening to Sunshine Sometime from the Ram archive collection for the better part of this year and was always bummed that there wasn't a more finished version but there it is!! Paul's excursions into more child oriented entertainment like his children's book he recently released is so cool, he really follows whatever artistic path he wants to take. Can't wait for your next video!
I actually really love Press To Play. It's sounds are dated a bit, but at the time it was cool to hear Paul's voice with "modern" sounds. I was a teenager and it actually opened my mind to new music from other artists.
haven’t even watched yet but just wanna say whenever i’m going through a particularly rough time i always turn back to my love of the beatles!! and your videos on them always help revive that love and spirit :,))
Back in 1984 my friend and I saw "Give My Regards To Broad Street" in the movie theater. We both liked the movie, but then again we were only 17 years old. I will confess I have not seen "Give My Regards To Broad Street" since that time, so in my mind it is still a good movie. You have to admit that the music video for "No More Lonely Nights" is good...right?
No More Lonely Nights is an absolute classic! I must've heard it a million times throughout my life, and before this video, I would've never guessed that it came from such a terrible movie 😂
I was lusting to find this movie when I was a kid in the 80's. Considering it being a flop and me living in an endsville town of eastern Finland it is needless to say it was quite an impossible task to find it anywhere... Well, until our town library brought out a wishing list, where you could write down your suggestion for any published vhs, lp's, books and whatnot that they could acquire within their annual budget of nearly a nought. To my surprise Give My Regards appeared in their shelves after six months. Loaned it. Yeah, it was a pretty weak story-wise, a vanity project of a gifted but lost millionaire, but also an amazing music video with a bunch of redone classics. I love it in that sense. It's quite good introduction to what Sir Paul is made of musically. Pure gold. And hey, you can't hate a film with Sir Ringo in it.
...your review is such a sweet homage to Paul... I imagine what annoyed and hurt him so much about the reception is that he poured love into it, and at the same time was at a very fragile point in his life (midlife-crisis) not really knowing where to go... well, glad to know now, that he digged himself out of that hole again... although I never go back to it now, I actually bought the 'Give my regards...' album (not the movie!) then, and thought it wasn't that bad, while certainly not among his strongest works... Paul felt also like a beloved friend, and you don't let down a friend, if they have a weak moment either... so, I do love your review, because I share the love and reverence, that you express alongside your honest feelings about the movie xx
Paul may not have been a good actor, but I think he would've been hell of a voice actor and should've really pursued that more. We could've had many more Rupert films. where are they? In Hard Day's Night we get a glimpse of some of his accents. In the Rupert movie he does at least 4 characters. In Get Back, one of the more entertaining segments is Paul reading the newspaper as an establishment twit. He's just so good at it! As for the criticism that Paul didn't put enough of himself in Broad Street, I think the reason the failure stung so much is b/c he did. Not in his performance, perhaps b/c he felt exposed and self-conscious, but in the script. This film is all about his greatest fears: personal betrayal (Harry), loss of his music (the tapes), loss of his legacy (the company), being alone (the deaths of Ringo, Barbara and Linda). But Paul in the film, perhaps like Paul in real life, doesn't turn for help. Despite his fear of being alone, he isolates himself in the film and is convinced that it's up to him to solve it on his own. Yet despite his hero complex, he is very passive and just follows his scheduled itinerary, which kinda victimizes him instead. He seems content to let his fate play out, until he remembers that it really is up to him and he saves the day by finding Harry. Huzzah! It's all very meta, in that it is all a dream about a fantasy mid-life crisis depicted in a film that is itself a mid-life crisis.
Man, that’s an interesting analysis. Didn’t occur to me this film might be a self-portrait, I only had it clocked as a silly little vanity project. I suppose with Paul writing a film where he plays the main character, and that character is himself, how could it not be a self-portrait?
Thanks for your detailed "review" of Broad Street. You hit many valid points about the plot and acting, but I feel you definitely did not give the music as much credit as it deserves. Besides excellent live versions of some Beatles classics (especially For No One, Here There and Everywhere, and Yesterday) the re-imagined arrangement of Silly Love Song is fantastic despite the weird video and Wanderlust shines as it should, being a beautiful gem from Tug Of War (in my opinion McCartney's best solo album). I feel you needed to recognize, besides Dave Gilmour, the other the top notch session players on the new songs such as Herbie Flowers, Eric Stewart, Chris Spedding, Louis Johnson and Jeff Porcaro to name a few. All are supremely up to the challenge and are probably the best musicians included on any McCartney album. It is because of this quality that if a 40th anniversary release is in the works, it should stress the music, the players and the arrangements since they can proudly stand on their own. One last thing... you mentioned that the next McCartney album after Broad Street was Press, and you seem to also put that down. Here again, I disagree with you. That record is one of the most creative, non-Beatlesque albums of his career. Yes, some of the tracks are a little weird but then again so were some of the Beatles most creative arrangements. Here again, we need to recognize the genius of the man and his attempts to continually push himself and his audience into new musical realms.
Sandra was played by Tracey Ullman, a Brit, whose Tracey Ullman Show would later launch The Simpsons onto the world once she moved to the States. Top notch video yet again, Elliot
I have very warm, nostalgic memories of watching this movie as a nerdy Beatles-obsessed 13 year old. Clearly, I was wearing rose-colored glasses and completely missed how truly terrible this movie was lol. Glad you put this out here though, not a bad thing to recognize that even the greats can produce a stinker for the ages every so often. At least No more lonely nights is a fine addition to Macca’s body of work. Long live the Beatles!
Back in the day, when TH-cam wasn't a copyright nightmare, I watched the majority of Beatles films; Help!, Magical Mystery Tour, Yellow Submarine and Give My Regards to Broadstreet. The sad thing is I didn't caught on A Hard Day's Night, which is as far as I know, the good one.
Some of Paul’s other film incursions have been fun, like his cameo in Pirates of the Caribbean 5 as Uncle Jack (although the film is poor). Plus Netflix will release in 2023 the animated film “High in the Clouds” based on his children book and with original music by Paul.
I won’t say that I wasn’t slightly disappointed in it as a film but in the late 70s through the 80s, the general impression was that McCartney wasn’t doing concerts any more; and the chances of teen-age Me getting tickets for a Beatle in those dark ages would have been mighty slim. This movie was the only hope of seeing him. I loved it. Bought the record, the picture disc, the cassette (for my first car) the movie poster and the book with the story, lyrics, production notes/photos, etc. Now that I think about it, I believe I even went to the bargain theater to see it months after it had left the multiplex. You could pay 2 bucks and sit in the theater all day as it played over and over - and they had that nice little Rupert and the Frog Song cartoon before each showing. I haven’t seen it since then, tho. Probably might leave it at that. Thanks for the abbreviated re-visit! It really hit the spot.
When I found out about this film in 2002 as a thirteen year old die-hard Paul fan, I became obsessed with finding it. This was before my family had eBay etc, and it took several months of searching in car boot sales and even The Beatles Shop in Liverpool (guy had never heard of it!), until my Dad found an advert in the back of a music magazine for a business which distributed music videos. Obviously, the film was bad, but it was great to see '80s Paul. No More Lonely Nights is one of the greatest songs in his whole career. It may not have the haunting melancholy of Eleanor Rigby or be the quirky ode to everyday mundanity that was Penny Lane, but as a commercial love ballad it's strikingly effective. He looked great in this film, too - easily ten or twelve years younger than his actual age at the time. I agree it's remarkable how almost everyone seems to have forgotten this film. I think it's because it's so bland and unmemorable that there's just no reason to remember it. If it were bad in an outrageous way, there would be more to recall. A thin story and dull dialogue (weirdly, for all the musical numbers, it's a quiet film with long moments of silence) mean that there's little for the memory to actually evoke. Although he wanted to do a film of some kind since the late '70s (one suggestion was to base it on Band on the Run), I think John's death and Paul's resulting reluctance to tour meant that cinema was one of the few ways left to get his face out there. He would have been better off making more music videos as good the one he made for Pipes of Peace.
The film was so bad they were forced to close Broad Street station - it was demolished two years after the film came out. And where did all the trains that used to terminate at Broad Street go instead? Liverpool Street station. Coincidence? I think not…
I love the scene where Paul plays Yesterday outside the Tube Station!!..I could watch that over and over (and I have!!) And he really did and wasn't Recognized by a few people.
6:37 I feel like as far as a plot summary goes, you’ve already missed a super key thing: a couple minutes before this, back in the traffic scene, HE FALLS ASLEEP. The entire movie following that, up until the moment we’re back in that rainy traffic and he wakes up, in the last minute of the movie, IS A DREAM. (The Eleanor Rigby sequence is a dream-within-a-dream! …Inception!) I just feel like that is a really crucial point for setting the tone and expectations of… the entire thing. All of it makes more sense when you accept that he’s just dreaming. The shady vaguely-formed villains, the whimsical asides and odd details (like the monkey), the lack of logical transitions, even his non-reactions and casual acceptance of nonsense… none of it seems that strange if you take as a given that it’s a dream. It’s Paul McCartney dreaming. I totally see why the movie flopped and why people are critical of it, but I also think that among Paul fans, it might actually be a bit under-appreciated and misunderstood? I wouldn’t say it’s like… really objectively a good movie, but also, I think fans feel pressured to disclaim it as bad? Lol and it’s really not that bad, in my opinion. And no, I didn’t see it as a kid. I saw it a couple months ago, at 34, as a newly converted Beatles fan, after also seeing (for the first time) A Hard Day’s Night, Help!, and Magical Mystery Tour (not to mention Get Back). As music-video movies meant to reflect someone’s emotional/psychological state in a certain moment of time expressed through dreams strung together in a loose narrative go… its really not bad.
That's my take too. It's surprisingly successful as a depiction of a dream. It even makes the lack of plot or character development and Paul's complete lack of agency make sense. It's like a real dream, which few films ever achieve in their dream sequences.
elliot i just wanted to say i LOVE your channel. is everything my 11 yo me needed when i first started to become a fan of the beatles. seeing you talking about your pasion and love about this 4 guys actually makes my day better. you deserve so much more recognition, thank you for your videos and everything 💕✨
I know it’s totally not the focus of the essay, but as a child of the 80s who has a copy of Rupert and the Frog Song in her VHS collection (recorded off the Disney Channel if memory serves), thank you for mentioning it! It was one of my favorite things to watch as a wee one, even before I knew it was a Paul McCartney joint. Rediscovering it as an adult (in part because of your Macca album essay) brought on a major pique of nostalgia - I’d completely forgotten about it! I’m so glad it got its proper recognition here. ♥️
I am a massive fan of Paul. If you love him more than anybody else does, then I’ve gotta be the one in second place. I really appreciate the treatment you gave this video - it’s very well measured against the typical “haha movie bad” backlash, and I think your insights about what went wrong were spot on. I also completely agree that it’s missing McCartney’s goofy energy, and I’d love to see the version of this movie where he let that side of him show more on camera.
This is perfect timing - I just watched this movie the other day and I have to say that I really enjoyed it lol. Is it the most inspiring or influential movie? No! And it’s not supposed to be! It’s just a silly 80s movie with some great songs from Paul and some fun musical sequences. (everyone can their own opinion ofc)
Love your channel mate - your analysis of Get Back (and just everything Beatles!), and your lovely comments about the perfection that is the beautiful anti-biopic Love & Mercy (Brian Wilson - such a genius), made me a loyal fan. Fingers crossed for 100k soon - you deserve it!
Honestly, I don’t really like this film very much. I mean the music was pretty good and it was nice to see Paul and Ringo together, but the acting from everyone (besides Ringo) was pretty bad, the story was disjointed and weak, and this film was something that I would never call Paul, boring. Listen to the soundtrack, but skip the movie. Plus, the scene where Paul sees Linda as a ghost feels a little sad and eerie.
Thank you for mentioning the Frog Song, my mum likes to rile me up by telling me that she doesn’t like the Beatles’ music, but that one’s OK. It’s really sweet how much Rupert Bear means to Paul, though. Next can you do a bit about Ringo being the narrator for Thomas the Tank Engine?
I loved this film. I saw it at the theater the day it was released, the audience loved it. It's a great rewatch now and again. The soundtrack is awesome as well. Screw the critics.
Yes exactly. I saw it when it came out in the theater too.a few minutes in an older couple left and I summized that they thought they were going to see "Give my regards to Broadway" not Broad Street. It was great then and still love it today and especially the soundtrack CD.
It's a year later and unfortunately you still haven't hit that 100k mark. I guess there is just a limited market for Beatles related content on TH-cam and lots of people competing for a slice of the pie. You are one of the best by far in a crowded field. Your solo discography rankings were epic. I hope you continue to find new ways to explore the act we've known for all these years. If you keep making them, I'll keep watching. Cheers.
An interesting detail: on the scene in which Harry tells everyone he's going to Broad Street there's that dark blue carpet with a pattern that looks like musical notes. It's the exact same fabric you can still see inside the MPL office in London to this day. Not only as a carpet but also as curtains and covering a couch. There are many interviews, videos and photos of Paul at MPL from the early 80s onwards that show that. I've looked inside the glass door at MPL one day and saw it there. By the way, the Wings Greatest statuette can also be seen from outside MPL, in one of the Windows. Also, the original painting used in the Tug of War cover can also be seen hanging on the wall next to the door on the ground floor.
I think that with Sir Paul, if he puts his heart and soul into something and it doesn't do as well as he expected...it's almost like it didn't exist. I recently released a review of Back To The Egg which is my favourite of his post Beatles albums and that album was very much a project that he was all in on. There was a TV special, big touring plans, plenty of unreleased material...but the album didn't sell as well as expected and so now it seems to be an album that he doesn't look back on too fondly. It was a big deal for him at the time, but for whatever reason, it wasn't the highest selling album of the year and so he saw it as a disappointment and I don't think has played any songs from it live since that tour (which was cut short after Japan). If it were just another album, then he might have more affection for it, but because it was a passion project that wasn't given the love that he thought it would, he just sort of moved on and forgot about it. It's interesting to note that with the McCartney Archives sets, it got up to London Town and Back To The Egg being the next 2...and suddenly it was decided to end the series. So I think Broadstreet is a similar case. It was something that he expected to be huge and so he put everything that he had into it...and it was rejected. It's a shame as I don't think that it's a bad film and certainly not the lowest point of his career.
I just love the insane ‘80s version of “Silly Love Songs” with members of Toto and Louis Johnson. The “capuchin monkey” video is so weird, it’s brilliant! “No More Lonely Nights” also would have been a huge hit for anyone not as famous as Paul.
Thanks for uploading. When we first got MTV, the No More Lonely Nights video was in very heavy rotation, as I remember, even though no one was seeing the film. The video was enough I guess and the song really grew on me.
The great beatles biographer Mark Lewisohn has said that he feels this movie is a direct window into how Paul thinks, he never elaborated on that as far as I know, but it seems like it has alot of truth to it, like most of what he says.
I remember reading about this film about two years before it came out and I was very excited about it. Imagine my disappointment when it never even reached the cinemas here in Sweden. I had to wait two more years before it was shown on Swedish television. It's really a great shame that Paul didn't let a professional screenwriter write a proper script. I really love the musical numbers though, apart from the weird "Silly Love Songs" act. "Eleanor's Dream" is the highpoint of the film, in my opinion.
"It's really a great shame that Paul didn't let a professional screenwriter write a proper script." I guess he didn't learn that lesson from Magical Mystery Tour.
if only this had been more experimental and dream-like, with musical performances connecting the vignettes! the plot and acting sink it! would pay full price for a full length bizarre Jane Austen paul.
I loved this movie as a teenager with a huge crush on Paul McCartney, and even as a middle ager I enjoy it through the goggles of nostalgia. It's beautifully filmed, the whole thing. Every set and scene is gorgeous. The writing, not so much. I loved the music!
Paul Simon has a very similar mid-life crisis movie he wrote and starred in himself, called "One Trick Pony". Like Paul McCartney, Paul McCartneys acting is pretty all over the place. He can barely pull off the simplest lines in his own film, yet at the same time he pulls off convincingly crying on demand for a scene with his "Ex wife" near the end of the film. Its mostly a drag but theres some really poignant and entertaining scenes here and there throughout, such as a scene where he and his band are traveling through the country side to a gig naming their favorite musicians and artists before slowly realizing most all of their heroes are long dead and their time as a successful band are dying out, as well as one scene near the end where he decides to destroy his newest album before it releases by sneaking the recordings out of his producers studio by hiding them in his guitar case before destroying them. Interesting movie if you're a Paul Simon fan looking to get into his head.
Give My Regards To Broad Street may not be a masterpiece, but I enjoy listening to the album from time to time. In my opinion it’s a good compilation with some very nice rearrangements of Paul’s old and (relatively to the time) new songs. I love the Yesterday / Here, There And Everywhere / Wanderlust medley, for example. Plus, No More Lonely Nights is an amazing tune with some terrific guitar job from David Gilmour.
I can never understand the bad press that broad street gets ! it's not the greatest film ever made obviously. But it's an entertaining little romp through a fantasy version of maccas life. he never pretended it was anything more than that. It's full of lovely little set pieces and the photography is often brilliant. the whole eleanors dream sequence is incredible, the imagery during the long and winding road looks great, No more lonely nights is one of his best songs EVER. the only part of the film that falls really flat for me is the Silly Love Songs bit, but other than that its a really enjoyable flight of fancy :-)
The only thing I like about this movie is the soundtrack. Hard to believe this is the same guy who wrote the best music in the world. And he really has a special thing with Rupert. When I briefly met him in 2017 in the hotel, a friend of mine was holding a Rupert plushy. He even asked if it was for him. It was the only person he spoke to on that day
I want to get in there that Ballroom Dancing is an under the radar classic. I often play it back to back with The Kinks Come Dancing as they are utterly similar in tone and content! Love them.
I remember going to see this in 84 at the picture show and it was excruciating. The album was even worse and I like you are one of the biggest McCartney fans on the planet. But on the other hand when McCartney's gone will still have this to look at if we want to.
Seen the movie, but never heard the sdtrk..............................how's it bad? Isn't it just Paul doing new versions of Beatles songs (besides No More Lonely Nights)?
@@davidl570 Yes, he does a song from Pipes of Peace which was out a year earlier and he does a couple songs from tug of war which was out 2 years earlier and he does a song from speed of sound from 76 and redoes Beatles songs. When I first bought the album in 84 I thought it was kind of cool at the time that he redid Beatle songs but then I kind of grew kind of cold on it after a while. The only good song out of the three new tracks was no more lonely nights in my opinion. The other two 'Not such a bad boy' and 'No Values' were very weak. I kind of felt sorry for the guy in the '80s because from Pipes of Peace up through flowers in the dirt wasn't all that great again in my opinion. I will say there's some good tracks on flowers in the dirt but all in all that was another not so great album. I enjoyed off the ground but you had to get the double disc off the ground complete works. The second disc was a bunch of songs that McCartney left off of the original off the ground that were really good that should have been on the album.
@@daytripper9222 Okay, thanks for the info! (And I've never cared for Pipes of Peace either.................I actually think it's one of his worst. Flowers in the Dirt, while not his best, was definitely a major step up from it. And Off The Ground is easily one of his most underrated!).
@@daytripper9222 Flowers in the Dirt was his return LP to the live concert stage. That '93 show is in my top 5 concerts of my life so I have a soft spot for that album.
I mean honestly... this looks like a movie I'd totally watch. I would rather watch a bad entertaining movie than a bad soulless movie. We don't have enough slapstick humor or campiness in movies anymore and its always so serious🙄 I'm the guy that love watching Lamagedin ,Attack of the killer tomatoes and The killer clowns from outer space. But I can totally see how the lack of direction will mess up the pacing of the movie, but I generally still love all of the artists steps like the different dreams, sceneries, wacky scenarios and can absolutely feel all of the heart in this film. The whole entire movie is probably how it feels to be in a dream, in a dream. in a dream of a famous musician trying to get to the studio in a car ride. Dreams are usually very disorganized and disorienting and doesn't make logical sense and random stuff just happens😭 But it probably needed alittle bit more direct and alittle more energy to literally knock it out of the park😎🤙 I've literally seen worse movies in my life and this doesn't come close, as long as the movie was entertaining, it did it's role as a movie and I can feel the genuine sense of love poured into this✨💙
Exactly. A lot of people feel cheated because they feel that it being a dream invalidates the whole film ... except you know it's a dream from the beginning if you're paying attention and the film follows dream logic rather than a plot. You can only truly enjoy it if you know that going in, otherwise it's a confusing mess and a cheat.
As a life long fan of the Beatles - I'm in my 70's - I never had the desire to see this film; it wasn't after all, the Fab Four performing. So after seeing your revue, I'm glad I didn't buy a ticket to it. However, this was an educational half hour and as always with your presentations, it didn't disappoint. Can't wait for your next one.
I enjoyed the movie when it came out. My friends and I were big Beatles and post-Beatles fans so we all went to the theater to see it. It was pretty obvious that it was fairly light weight and many scenes seemed somewhat thrown together, but I thought the music was excellent including the new songs and the acoustic oldies. I will admit I have only watched it a few times since, but it serves the purpose if you want to watch a fun movie that isn't particularly demanding.
NB: Sandra is played by the great Tracey Ullman, and this movie was the genesis of Paul's cameo in her video for "They Don't Know About Us". Also note the Dave Edmunds cameo (blue suit) @15:03.
This film is like watching your dad dance badly at a wedding, taking a break now and then to tell some dad jokes and then getting up to do karaoke - and actually doing it really well.
I love all of your videos! Their so detailed and made with so much thought. Like little documentaries. Maybe you could do a video on Band on the Run, Wings in Nigeria, ... would love to see a video about that story. Anyway, keep up your great work!
Sure the plot is shitty but I’d pay full price just to hear and see the Wanderlust performance and the amazing acoustic numbers, priceless in fact! Love So Bad too!
I can agree with Ebert's assessment as the film being a "nonmovie" when it goes the route of invalidating everything that happened as just a dream. That being said...I guess it could be taken as even lighter entertainment as a result. This movie comes to my mind once every couple years and I remember having some fond memories as a kid -- rewatching it here on TH-cam a couple years back, I realized that was just general love of McCartney and that this just seems like a promo for his music rather than a film. Take it for what it is, not viewing it as a serious film, and you might be able to enjoy it. I never knew about the video games! Thanks for sharing that new tidbit to me. Oh, and I'd have to watch it again, but I thought "Silly Love Songs" was performed in front of cameras for a music video shoot.
I took a film making class in Uni, and we had to pitch story ideas to our professor, before we got the go ahead on production.
In the last class before this, he said to us, as the very last thing; "Oh, and I shouldn't have to say this, but if you pitch a story, and the ending is, 'and it was all a dream', I will reject it".
The fact that Paul got this through is honestly hilarious in hindsight :D
I think what makes it okay is we see from the start it's all a day dream 🤷🏻♀️
It worked for The Wizard Of Oz
@@davidjames579 In that case, it made sense thematically, at least.
@@davidjames579I think it works for that film because the middle is such an outlandish setting coupled with the fact it's a song and dance musical.
When people invest in a plausible reality that gets pulled out from under them after an hour or two (or entire season), then they feel ripped off.
I think of something like Wizard of Oz vs. Patrick Duffy's character dying in Dallas and then showing up in a shower alive after several episodes making the death into a dream. People were mad because the retcon made NEITHER story worthwhile.
In stuff like Alice in Wonderland and Wizard of Oz, it NOT being a dream demands all sorts of background explanation of why this stuff REALLY happened.
Plus, the journey of dancing scarecrows and psychotic playing cards is infinitely more entertaining than just a different set of realistic events happening.
Sorry was so long-winded. It was an interesting point to ponder.
The fact that it is all a dream is both the film's greatest strength and its greatest weakness.
Broad Street doesn't work as a movie b/c it betrays narrative convention. It has no plot or character development. All the characters are cut-outs and even the protagonist has no agency. In a standard narrative, the protagonist is trapped by fate but reluctantly takes control of their destiny to resolve the plot, which drives the action. And normally, the "it's all a dream" twist ending comes off as a cheat. You'd think someone with A-Level English, like Paul, would know this.😘
However, if you understand that it is all a dream from the beginning, which the film clearly hints at (jump cut from chauffeured car in the rain to driven car in the sun), then it is really quite a remarkable feat of dream logic depiction. In a way, it's a testament to how successful it is in depicting what it's like to BE in a dream, that you forget it is one and the reminder that it is a dream at the end then feels like a copout twist ending. (Or Paul is just a bad writer)
Unlike other dreams depicted on film, it is not self-conscious or full of clever symbolic imagery. I would argue that it is perhaps the most accurate depiction of a "realistic" dream captured on film.
It starts as a typical stress dream. These are caused by worrying about something stressful that you are unprepared for the next day. In this case, it seems to be a board meeting. We don't know what the actual stressor is, b/c we never SEE the real board meeting. It happens after the film. So the dream starts the way most dreams of this kind do -- you're late for something you'd rather avoid (like a test at school). Paul's subconscious tries to "take control" by driving fast. The dream stressor is Paul's greatest fear -- fear of loss; his music is missing, his company/legacy is on the line and in the nightmare sequence he literally loses his loved ones over it. We are told upfront that the loss of the tapes will lead to the loss of his empire and we are tricked into believing that this is the plot of the film; it is not. the film HAS no plot. Paul's psyche is overwhelmed by this fear and attempts to escape through his basic routine. He is passively led through all the things he enjoys about his life and might typically do: rehearse, record, make a video, perform on a radio show. This is an impossible day; you could never do all these things in one day. But he can't escape the loss of the tapes and keeps trying to "solve" the problem, but he can't because in dreams we have no agency, so he keeps moving passively through the scenes. None of the other characters are developped because they aren't real. Then in that state of semi-consciousness right before we wake up, he is able to "solve" the problem just in time to go to the meeting.
Roger Ebert is right. This is a non-movie. But it is a surprisingly successful work of filmic art. And it is also really brave. With this film, Paul has shown extreme bravery and a complete lack of judgement. He has exposed to the world his greatest fear and delivered it in a vehicle that had the power to make that fear come true.
When Paul sees Ringo, Barbara and Linda as ghosts, he is hallucinating in a dream within a dream within a dream.
This is where Christopher Nolan got the inspiration for Inception. Look it up...
@@andrewbaker2970 There's a scene in the film where someone says "You know William", and then looks at "Paul", because he is William (Billy).
Look it up!
@@NaaHva We all KNOW William, even those that won't admit it
Ringo will always be the best actor out of the 4 Beatles. I still laugh at the interview when they ask if Ringo would become an actor if he left The Beatles and George replies with "There is a possibility he wouldn't be an actor too."
To paraphrase the blog _We Are Number Ones,_ Ringo is a country singer and actor who got sidetracked as the excellent drummer of The Beatles. :b
and this is one of many reasons why ringo is my favorite beatle.
John wasn't that bad of an actor in "How I won the war" some people don't even know he starred in a non Beatle affiliated movie 😆
Ringo was sooo good in 'That'll Be the Day' with David Essex. My favourite line was when he said: "I wouldn't touch her with yours!"
George was pretty good in the "grotty" scene. Paul sounds like he's acting even when he's not.
"This scene could have functioned fine without the monkey," is a great line. If the film is remastered/rereleased for a 40th anniversary edition, that's the quote I want on the cover.
EVERYTHING is better with a monkey! If it's presence is completely unexplained and as far as can be discerned entirely pointless, so much the better!
Guess they should’ve hid that monkey
Everybody’s got something to hide except for me and my monkey 😂
If JimmyHere had been reacting to that scene, he would have been enthusiastically shouting "MMMONKE!"
Brilliant, Whitestripe71!
You definitely deserve 100k and I’m sure you’ll get there really soon! Keep up the fab work!
Thanks David!
love this film, the acting wasn't great, the plot was thin and silly at times, but I don't care, the music is awesome even No Values. I have the soundtrack on vinyl and it's awesome. Plus, the actor you said was ADR'd is a famous British wrestler called Giant Haystacks
omg you know each other
I came here to comment the same!
My two favorite creators OMG
the "plot" does actually feel like one of those dreams you have where you keep appearing in places and random people keep popping up and none of the events make any sense whatsoever,, it creates that nonsensical dream atmosphere pretty well because i was absolutely clueless throughout the entire thing i had to stare blankly at a wall for a couple of minutes after i finished watching it loll
Exactly! And I think it’s supposed to be like that! The whole thing IS a dream, after all.
Yes, of course, I'm sure that's the reason, and not that Paul had no experience whatsoever writing scripts, or that the director also had very little experience directing, or anything like that lol.
@@Alfonso162008 You're right. It is very flawed because the script wasn't vetted and redrafted and the the director had no idea what he was doing. If those things were different it might have been more entertaining and successful as a film. However, it really does succeed as a depiction of a dream despite those flaws. It's kinda brilliant on a psychological dream level.
One of McCartney’s greatest attributes has always been his resilience. He always bounces back whether it be personal or professional.
Especially the Replacement Paul. The man has staying power, for sure.
Fun Fact: Big Bob was actually UK wrestling star Giant Haystacks. Apparently, Paul was a bit of a fan and basically wrote him into the movie so they could hang out. I'd never noticed the dubbed lines and always just thought he did a decent job of playing this dangerous looking dude.
Woah
I was watching that thinking, "that's Giant Haystacks", I'm so old......not to mention Doctor Legg.
I do agree that if Paul let his weird side out, things would have been totally different. We needed to meet the guy who was John Lennon's best friend.
It's ironic that if he had been himself, it would have probably changed a lot in terms of how he's perceived.
Huh?
@@reinacarbetta388 Meaning, he relaxed with John and was his unabashed weird adhd self. You can see a little bit of that in the Let It Be movie, but here and there Paul let's it out
This movie is "rock star Paul", which was the version that John always had a problem with. It's Paul masking his quirks and putting out an image he thinks people want to see.
My general point was that if Paul made a movie to just amuse himself and not worry about making a "proper film", it would have been fantastic.
@@MrKeychange Ok, I get what you’re saying. Though, the root of any problems John had with Paul was jealousy (by his own admission, too.) Paul fit into any scene or crowd and garnered attention without having to try. John felt the need to put on antics (all the damn time) for attention. For whatever reason, Paul chose to show us the laid back version of 40 year old Paul in this film. Maybe because the Boomers had wrongly characterized him as controlling after the “Let It Be” film. 🤷🏻♀️
@@reinacarbetta388 I agree for the most part. They were both adhd with different strengths, and John seemed envious of Paul not having the same degree of emotional dysregulation. John seemed so tortured by his mood swings and guilt over saying random crap without thinking.
@@MrKeychange John was definitely tortured.
Just going to say, “Hard Days Night” is more then just an irreverent movie, it’s an intelligently written, and subtle comedy compared to “Help!”. The dialogue is perfect, especially that scene with Lennon saying. “I’m not him”
Ah but you know him better.
@@thefonzkiss I don't, he's only a casual acquaintance.
_A Hard Day's Night_ benefitted greatly from the French New Wave, the immediate wake of The Beatles' splash in the USA, and the novelty factor for the boys themselves, as well as their merely-budding amount of cynicism as celebrities. They weren't weary of their fame yet and were willing to try new forays in entertainment.
All-time favorite. ^_^
@@Wired4Life2 exactly my thoughts. Thank you
I also love the one second visual gags like John Lennon sniffing a coke bottle
I mean, to be fair to Paul regarding the Gene Siskel interview, it was extremely bad form for Siskel to for no reason in particular just tell McCartney that he hated his movie at the beginning of the interview, it's a good way to immediately poison the well for conversation.
Fuck that guy. Totally unprofessional, I’d be like that if I were Paul, too.
VERY good point! Love Siskel (and Ebert) but he should've known better.
Slight correction!
I mention that 'Tug of War' is Paul's first successful solo post-Beatles album, when I meant *critically* successful, as well as commercially.
Also, I probably should have mentioned that Sandra is played by the legendary Tracey Ullman, and thank you to all of you who keep reminding me of this 😑😑😑
I think you have to acknowledge your inclusion of footage of Paul's school mate, Peter Sissons, presenting the Channel 4 News piece on Broadstreet too. Nice vid though, thanks.
Also a fun fact: Paul playing a busker was done for real and not on a set or anything. People that were paying attention recognized him.
I actually own the original theatrical released poster for the movie. Not a great film but if you love Paul its worth checking out.
I guess they banned Don Derun
I guess you mean just Paul by himself? (no Wings)
I can't remember which interview but George Harrison talked about the film and said that he quite liked it. However, he apparently told McCartney that it was a mistake to do everything himself.
Yeah, I've seen that. My impression was that George was quite pleased making the remarks. Maybe a mixture of his advice being right but also Paul getting a bit humbled after years of success. But I dont think he was meaning to be unkind and it's nice that George said something supportive.
George's advice to Paul was absolutely right!
Fun note about one of the songs from the unreleased Rupert the Bear soundtrack is a completed version of a song that Paul wrote during the Get Back sessions called Castle of the King of the Birds.
I thought it sounded familiar!
Point of order - the guy doing the moonwalk during “silly love songs” is Jeffrey Daniels of 70s/80s dance troupe The Lockers and later was in Shalamar. More importantly he’s the guy who was doing the moonwalk a good year before Michael Jackson (they later worked together.
Also Sandra is played by Tracy Ullman.
Jeffrey says he got the "lean" into broad Street before he got it onto Moonwalker too during the Smooth Criminal scene. Also worked on the "Bad" film.
It was weird to hear one of the most famous living performers referred to anonymously as "the actress".
@@darins8756 Really strange, because Tracy Ullman is the sole real superstar besiders Paul and Ringo in the movie.
I think the moonwalk’s been around a long time. I’m pretty sure Cab Calloway was doing it in the ‘30’s, and it was most likely around before that.
@@marguskiis7711 Not to mention Elliott referenced the Simpsons in this same video.
My favourite story re this film is the one Macca told of how he asked George how Shanghai Surprise was going. It was the one Madonna was in and George replied “It makes Broad Street look like an epic”.
dude Eliot Roberts easily the most outrageously underrated TH-camr, his videos have genuinely good editing even when it's the first video, keep up the good work man, waiting for that George Harrison video ;b
A “Give My Regards to Broadstreet” analysis? Sign me the fuck up. This channel is great as always. Thanks again, Elliot!
i half-assed watched film in 1985 or so but it's nowhere to be found now. mccartney's wins vs. losses is as great as anybody over the course of 60 years. i appreciate you not piling on just for the sake of following the vindictive pack. i loved the lennon and harrison videos and will watch the mccarney one next.
@@marcyfan-tz4wj Full film's on TH-cam, fortunately.
Your shirt being Paul’s shirt in the movie is a very good touch. An entertaining, informative video.
i love paul just as much as everyone else here but i think the get back doc proved why paul wouldn’t want to hire a seasoned director who would have greater creative pull, he was and wanted to be the director with creative pull! sgt peppers, the magical mystery tour film, even being the one determined to write the movie himself prove that, unfortunately the movie kind of suffered as a result of his lack of experience i think.
I think that this movie could have had a script with a musical/comedy focused solely on Paul and Ringo, Like a Buddy type comedy duo, and maybe gotten George to do a cameo in the Middle of the flick...a wasted opportunity had Paul Not let his ego get in the way-IMO
Mmm, Paul is my least favorite Beatle. His songs are almost always over emotional and I have to admit that I sometimes skip them if I am listening to The Beatles. I much prefer John and George, as Beatles and solo. I don’t think I have ever heard a Paul McCartney solo album or Wings album that I have liked or enjoyed. To me his career after The Beatles has been mediocre to below mediocre. And I think he and his personality are fake. He just tries too hard to keep this appearance of a likable guy. I would not say I love Paul, I kind of find him and his music annoying.
@@cactaceouswe dont care!!!!
@@arlene8938 Likewise.
@@cactaceous careful dissin "Paul" he is son of the magician
I wonder if there was a part of Paul that never really got over the original Band on the Run tapes being stolen, so he vented his frustration when writing the script. Of course there's the mid-life crisis/recapture the zany Beatle movie days thing too, but the whole thing about the tapes being worth a lot and the fact that they were magically found near the end of the movie leaves enough to ponder.
Sounds like a reasonable theory.
It might have worked better if it had been about Paul's stolen Hofner bass. I think a lot more of us might have been a bit more invested in the outcome.
@@davecostello560wasn't the original bass actually stolen? Or am I crazy? I remember hearing something about it (might've been by Paul himself)
@@Alfonso162008 yes that's right. Originally thought to have been stolen from the Let It Be stage set in Twickenham in Jan '69, but actually it recently came to light that it was taken from the back of a van parked up overnight in West London's Ladbroke Grove in March 1973, during rehearsals for Red Rose Speedway!
@@davecostello560 and now Paul has it back!
No I’m sorry but the news guy going, “unlike the Beatles films, give my regards to broad street. Needs help” Is the greatest thing I’ve ever heard
Punderful
I got the making of movie book. It’s interesting seeing concept art for the movie, but the interview with Paul and Linda at the end of the book gets very strange. For some reason the book includes Linda talking about how she can’t smoke pot without the media making a big deal out of it, and Paul dispelling a rumor that he earned 20 million pounds in 1982. Like what does this tabloid crap have to do with the making of the movie?
My theory is that this movie basically exists for 2 reasons:
1. MTV was in full swing at the time of its release. Paul tried to get involved by trying to make a movie with as many potential music videos loosely strung together with a thrown together plot. While the plot wouldn't necessarily work, there was a higher chance that at least one video could get picked up in MTV rotation and get him involved in the new popular music video scene. None did though, making the movie just bad.
2. CDs were becoming the new form of media. As a result, Paul tried to make a pseudo-greatest hits compilation for people who were trying to transition their music collection into the newest format. He also rerecorded the songs to avoid as many legal issues that could occur by having Beatles, Wings, and solo material on one compilation.
That's a pretty sound theory 👌
Sums it up, I'd say!
He basically made a movie custom made for MTV, but they didn’t use any of it. Michael Jackson would do the same with Moonwalker a few years later, and they took almost all of it…
Wow. Do you remember the three advices Paul McCartney made to Michael Jackson?: Make music videos, hire a good accountant that take care of your money, and the last one invest in the music bussiness.
@@cesarmadero05 That last piece of advice bit McCartney right on the ass.
Only just saw this film for the first time a month ago! Thankfully saw it on TH-cam, and, for free, it was a fun enough film to have on in the background. One of the things I didn’t understand though was why have the framing device of Paul daydreaming at the beginning and end - to justify some of the weirder things happening? Like Paul felt he had to explain the heightened reality? (Gotta give Paul some credit though, he did dreams within dreams 26 years before Christopher Nolan did). Initially I thought they were going to do a Walter Mitty style thing where it dips back and forth between reality and fantasy, and I think that’d be more interesting - have a day in the life of Paul McCartney (recording songs, filming music videos, doing interviews, and boring board meetings) being the reality, and have the hunt for the tapes being Paul’s escape into fantasy (and importantly, have Paul hunt for the tapes himself, not have it all happen offscreen - show, don’t tell, that’s like writing rule #1). If they played up the angle that Paul in the film is having a mid-life crisis and his imagination is always looking for ways to liven up his everyday routine with outlandish plots, that could provide some fun comedy bits, and provide a little meta commentary on the nature of film-going and escapism. Probably wouldn’t be a masterpiece but it’d fix it feeling so inconsequential.
At the very least, they should’ve brought back Wilfrid Brambell as Paul’s grandfather to provide some more hijinks - even 20 years later he’s still getting his grandson into trouble.
I actually adore the soundtrack, super weird underrated gem. The originals are really cool, "No More Lonely Night" is a McCartney classic and I enjoy hearing 80's versions of classic Beatles tunes (THAT VERSION OF THE LONG AND WINDING ROAD!!!)
I like this version of Winding Road the best, though I think his vocal performance on the original is better. He tended to have some odd vocal affectations in later years, whereas with the Beatles he sang simply and purely and enunciated things clearly.
The medley was a great piece of music too
“This scene could have functioned fine without the monkey.” Perhaps one of the only times this sentence has ever been uttered…
Another awesome video, Elliot! I’d been looking forward to this one for months, and you didn’t disappoint! I love being a Patron and watching your videos early, but I usually hold out to watch them on TH-cam so you get the views. (Gotta feed that algorithm lol)
That line could also be said for the movie The Square.
Thanks for the support!
I remember a 1986 episode of a British sitcom, where a character tries to write a script. When asked why it takes so long, he says “theres certain things a writer needs to start writing….like a story”. I can’t help but feel the show’s creators saw this film 😂
While watching this, I thought about what it would be like if The 4 had made it together. George & John would’ve added such a witty touch to it, and I feel like some of Monty Python would’ve joined in on it. It probably would’ve still been sub-par, but regardless, it made me crack a smile while watching this and seeing Paul & Ringo together, and being able to tell how much Paul cared about this movie.
They tried contacting John, but he didn't return their calls.
@@drewcampbell8555 💀💀💀
Paul is just not an actor. He has no script.. no idea of what the film should be and even if he did he is a notoriously dialed down person unless he's giving his all as a singer of songs.. and even in that mode he's one of those rock guys who need to hold or play an instrument to address the audience otherwise he is uncomfortable and awkward. Imagine having RALPH RICHARDSON HIMSELF on set and not know what to do as an actor! George Harrison had it totally right.. you don't make films by yourself. It is always a collaboration. what would have been best is for Paul to have started small. A Wings sequel to MMT? A movie based around Wonderful Christmastime with some Christmas tunes in it from an accompanying soundtrack album. Perfect opportunities for McCartney to get some film/acting experience on some low risk of failure projects and then maybe something as ambitious as a new era movie musical based around lyrical vignettes or an attempt at Pythonesque Goon Show material with a rocking soundtrack of songs. Even a hit parade in the style of his hero Cole Porter where he redid his old songs and maybe some other classics in a more rigorous musical style. What's not to like.. but it was just a half a***ed poorly planned poorly thought out production which as always failed Paul. This film was a sad and unnecessary failure. The film should be reedited and released on video and a full treatment of the soundtrack should be along with it. Make it the next archives release and leave it at that!
I really loved this video (everyone always forgets about Give my Regards to Broad Street) but the part about Paul's Rupert the Bear album TOOK ME FOR A TAILSPIN. I've been listening to Sunshine Sometime from the Ram archive collection for the better part of this year and was always bummed that there wasn't a more finished version but there it is!! Paul's excursions into more child oriented entertainment like his children's book he recently released is so cool, he really follows whatever artistic path he wants to take. Can't wait for your next video!
I love that in McCartney's 'big pissed-off interview moment,' he's still genial AF. The guy can't turn off the nice even when he wants to.
I actually really love Press To Play. It's sounds are dated a bit, but at the time it was cool to hear Paul's voice with "modern" sounds. I was a teenager and it actually opened my mind to new music from other artists.
haven’t even watched yet but just wanna say whenever i’m going through a particularly rough time i always turn back to my love of the beatles!! and your videos on them always help revive that love and spirit :,))
Back in 1984 my friend and I saw "Give My Regards To Broad Street" in the movie theater. We both liked the movie, but then again we were only 17 years old. I will confess I have not seen "Give My Regards To Broad Street" since that time, so in my mind it is still a good movie. You have to admit that the music video for "No More Lonely Nights" is good...right?
No More Lonely Nights is an absolute classic! I must've heard it a million times throughout my life, and before this video, I would've never guessed that it came from such a terrible movie 😂
I was lusting to find this movie when I was a kid in the 80's. Considering it being a flop and me living in an endsville town of eastern Finland it is needless to say it was quite an impossible task to find it anywhere... Well, until our town library brought out a wishing list, where you could write down your suggestion for any published vhs, lp's, books and whatnot that they could acquire within their annual budget of nearly a nought. To my surprise Give My Regards appeared in their shelves after six months. Loaned it. Yeah, it was a pretty weak story-wise, a vanity project of a gifted but lost millionaire, but also an amazing music video with a bunch of redone classics. I love it in that sense. It's quite good introduction to what Sir Paul is made of musically. Pure gold. And hey, you can't hate a film with Sir Ringo in it.
...your review is such a sweet homage to Paul... I imagine what annoyed and hurt him so much about the reception is that he poured love into it, and at the same time was at a very fragile point in his life (midlife-crisis) not really knowing where to go... well, glad to know now, that he digged himself out of that hole again... although I never go back to it now, I actually bought the 'Give my regards...' album (not the movie!) then, and thought it wasn't that bad, while certainly not among his strongest works... Paul felt also like a beloved friend, and you don't let down a friend, if they have a weak moment either... so, I do love your review, because I share the love and reverence, that you express alongside your honest feelings about the movie xx
Paul may not have been a good actor, but I think he would've been hell of a voice actor and should've really pursued that more. We could've had many more Rupert films. where are they? In Hard Day's Night we get a glimpse of some of his accents. In the Rupert movie he does at least 4 characters. In Get Back, one of the more entertaining segments is Paul reading the newspaper as an establishment twit. He's just so good at it!
As for the criticism that Paul didn't put enough of himself in Broad Street, I think the reason the failure stung so much is b/c he did. Not in his performance, perhaps b/c he felt exposed and self-conscious, but in the script. This film is all about his greatest fears: personal betrayal (Harry), loss of his music (the tapes), loss of his legacy (the company), being alone (the deaths of Ringo, Barbara and Linda). But Paul in the film, perhaps like Paul in real life, doesn't turn for help. Despite his fear of being alone, he isolates himself in the film and is convinced that it's up to him to solve it on his own. Yet despite his hero complex, he is very passive and just follows his scheduled itinerary, which kinda victimizes him instead. He seems content to let his fate play out, until he remembers that it really is up to him and he saves the day by finding Harry. Huzzah! It's all very meta, in that it is all a dream about a fantasy mid-life crisis depicted in a film that is itself a mid-life crisis.
….this comment is spot on, holy cow.
Man, that’s an interesting analysis. Didn’t occur to me this film might be a self-portrait, I only had it clocked as a silly little vanity project. I suppose with Paul writing a film where he plays the main character, and that character is himself, how could it not be a self-portrait?
Thanks for making more Paul content I am addicted to him and his music
Thanks for your detailed "review" of Broad Street. You hit many valid points about the plot and acting, but I feel you definitely did not give the music as much credit as it deserves. Besides excellent live versions of some Beatles classics (especially For No One, Here There and Everywhere, and Yesterday) the re-imagined arrangement of Silly Love Song is fantastic despite the weird video and Wanderlust shines as it should, being a beautiful gem from Tug Of War (in my opinion McCartney's best solo album).
I feel you needed to recognize, besides Dave Gilmour, the other the top notch session players on the new songs such as Herbie Flowers, Eric Stewart, Chris Spedding, Louis Johnson and Jeff Porcaro to name a few. All are supremely up to the challenge and are probably the best musicians included on any McCartney album. It is because of this quality that if a 40th anniversary release is in the works, it should stress the music, the players and the arrangements since they can proudly stand on their own.
One last thing... you mentioned that the next McCartney album after Broad Street was Press, and you seem to also put that down. Here again, I disagree with you. That record is one of the most creative, non-Beatlesque albums of his career. Yes, some of the tracks are a little weird but then again so were some of the Beatles most creative arrangements. Here again, we need to recognize the genius of the man and his attempts to continually push himself and his audience into new musical realms.
Sandra was played by Tracey Ullman, a Brit, whose Tracey Ullman Show would later launch The Simpsons onto the world once she moved to the States.
Top notch video yet again, Elliot
And Paul had a cameo in her 'They Don't Know' music video
@@Kieop Cool! 'Did Not Know' that. And of course, Paul and Linda ended up on the "Lisa The Vegetarian' episode of The Simpsons.
@@NewFalconerRecords "I've got the prescription for you, Doctor. Another hot beef injection!"
I have very warm, nostalgic memories of watching this movie as a nerdy Beatles-obsessed 13 year old. Clearly, I was wearing rose-colored glasses and completely missed how truly terrible this movie was lol. Glad you put this out here though, not a bad thing to recognize that even the greats can produce a stinker for the ages every so often. At least No more lonely nights is a fine addition to Macca’s body of work. Long live the Beatles!
Back in the day, when TH-cam wasn't a copyright nightmare, I watched the majority of Beatles films; Help!, Magical Mystery Tour, Yellow Submarine and Give My Regards to Broadstreet.
The sad thing is I didn't caught on A Hard Day's Night, which is as far as I know, the good one.
Some of Paul’s other film incursions have been fun, like his cameo in Pirates of the Caribbean 5 as Uncle Jack (although the film is poor).
Plus Netflix will release in 2023 the animated film “High in the Clouds” based on his children book and with original music by Paul.
I won’t say that I wasn’t slightly disappointed in it as a film but in the late 70s through the 80s, the general impression was that McCartney wasn’t doing concerts any more; and the chances of teen-age Me getting tickets for a Beatle in those dark ages would have been mighty slim.
This movie was the only hope of seeing him. I loved it. Bought the record, the picture disc, the cassette (for my first car) the movie poster and the book with the story, lyrics, production notes/photos, etc.
Now that I think about it, I believe I even went to the bargain theater to see it months after it had left the multiplex. You could pay 2 bucks and sit in the theater all day as it played over and over - and they had that nice little Rupert and the Frog Song cartoon before each showing.
I haven’t seen it since then, tho. Probably might leave it at that. Thanks for the abbreviated re-visit! It really hit the spot.
Hands down my favorite TH-camr. Actively looking forward to future videos.
Good video explaining a movie I truly never wanted to see, despite loving Paul. Good job Elliot:):)
When I found out about this film in 2002 as a thirteen year old die-hard Paul fan, I became obsessed with finding it. This was before my family had eBay etc, and it took several months of searching in car boot sales and even The Beatles Shop in Liverpool (guy had never heard of it!), until my Dad found an advert in the back of a music magazine for a business which distributed music videos. Obviously, the film was bad, but it was great to see '80s Paul.
No More Lonely Nights is one of the greatest songs in his whole career. It may not have the haunting melancholy of Eleanor Rigby or be the quirky ode to everyday mundanity that was Penny Lane, but as a commercial love ballad it's strikingly effective.
He looked great in this film, too - easily ten or twelve years younger than his actual age at the time.
I agree it's remarkable how almost everyone seems to have forgotten this film. I think it's because it's so bland and unmemorable that there's just no reason to remember it. If it were bad in an outrageous way, there would be more to recall. A thin story and dull dialogue (weirdly, for all the musical numbers, it's a quiet film with long moments of silence) mean that there's little for the memory to actually evoke.
Although he wanted to do a film of some kind since the late '70s (one suggestion was to base it on Band on the Run), I think John's death and Paul's resulting reluctance to tour meant that cinema was one of the few ways left to get his face out there. He would have been better off making more music videos as good the one he made for Pipes of Peace.
The film was so bad they were forced to close Broad Street station - it was demolished two years after the film came out.
And where did all the trains that used to terminate at Broad Street go instead? Liverpool Street station.
Coincidence? I think not…
Elliot - the Sinclair ZX Spectrum is an 80s British icon and "probably" launched an interest in computers for any Brit 45 and over
I love the scene where Paul plays Yesterday outside the Tube Station!!..I could watch that over and over (and I have!!) And he really did and wasn't Recognized by a few people.
6:37 I feel like as far as a plot summary goes, you’ve already missed a super key thing: a couple minutes before this, back in the traffic scene, HE FALLS ASLEEP. The entire movie following that, up until the moment we’re back in that rainy traffic and he wakes up, in the last minute of the movie, IS A DREAM. (The Eleanor Rigby sequence is a dream-within-a-dream! …Inception!)
I just feel like that is a really crucial point for setting the tone and expectations of… the entire thing. All of it makes more sense when you accept that he’s just dreaming. The shady vaguely-formed villains, the whimsical asides and odd details (like the monkey), the lack of logical transitions, even his non-reactions and casual acceptance of nonsense… none of it seems that strange if you take as a given that it’s a dream. It’s Paul McCartney dreaming.
I totally see why the movie flopped and why people are critical of it, but I also think that among Paul fans, it might actually be a bit under-appreciated and misunderstood?
I wouldn’t say it’s like… really objectively a good movie, but also, I think fans feel pressured to disclaim it as bad? Lol and it’s really not that bad, in my opinion. And no, I didn’t see it as a kid. I saw it a couple months ago, at 34, as a newly converted Beatles fan, after also seeing (for the first time) A Hard Day’s Night, Help!, and Magical Mystery Tour (not to mention Get Back). As music-video movies meant to reflect someone’s emotional/psychological state in a certain moment of time expressed through dreams strung together in a loose narrative go… its really not bad.
That's my take too. It's surprisingly successful as a depiction of a dream. It even makes the lack of plot or character development and Paul's complete lack of agency make sense. It's like a real dream, which few films ever achieve in their dream sequences.
elliot i just wanted to say i LOVE your channel. is everything my 11 yo me needed when i first started to become a fan of the beatles. seeing you talking about your pasion and love about this 4 guys actually makes my day better. you deserve so much more recognition, thank you for your videos and everything 💕✨
I know it’s totally not the focus of the essay, but as a child of the 80s who has a copy of Rupert and the Frog Song in her VHS collection (recorded off the Disney Channel if memory serves), thank you for mentioning it!
It was one of my favorite things to watch as a wee one, even before I knew it was a Paul McCartney joint. Rediscovering it as an adult (in part because of your Macca album essay) brought on a major pique of nostalgia - I’d completely forgotten about it! I’m so glad it got its proper recognition here. ♥️
I am a massive fan of Paul. If you love him more than anybody else does, then I’ve gotta be the one in second place. I really appreciate the treatment you gave this video - it’s very well measured against the typical “haha movie bad” backlash, and I think your insights about what went wrong were spot on. I also completely agree that it’s missing McCartney’s goofy energy, and I’d love to see the version of this movie where he let that side of him show more on camera.
This is perfect timing - I just watched this movie the other day and I have to say that I really enjoyed it lol. Is it the most inspiring or influential movie? No! And it’s not supposed to be! It’s just a silly 80s movie with some great songs from Paul and some fun musical sequences. (everyone can their own opinion ofc)
Love your channel mate - your analysis of Get Back (and just everything Beatles!), and your lovely comments about the perfection that is the beautiful anti-biopic Love & Mercy (Brian Wilson - such a genius), made me a loyal fan. Fingers crossed for 100k soon - you deserve it!
I'm thankful the movie exists for "No More Lonely Nights" alone, one of Paul's best songs
I second that!
Honestly, I don’t really like this film very much. I mean the music was pretty good and it was nice to see Paul and Ringo together, but the acting from everyone (besides Ringo) was pretty bad, the story was disjointed and weak, and this film was something that I would never call Paul, boring. Listen to the soundtrack, but skip the movie. Plus, the scene where Paul sees Linda as a ghost feels a little sad and eerie.
Thank you for mentioning the Frog Song, my mum likes to rile me up by telling me that she doesn’t like the Beatles’ music, but that one’s OK. It’s really sweet how much Rupert Bear means to Paul, though. Next can you do a bit about Ringo being the narrator for Thomas the Tank Engine?
I loved this film. I saw it at the theater the day it was released, the audience loved it. It's a great rewatch now and again. The soundtrack is awesome as well.
Screw the critics.
Yes exactly. I saw it when it came out in the theater too.a few minutes in an older couple left and I summized that they thought they were going to see "Give my regards to Broadway" not Broad Street. It was great then and still love it today and especially the soundtrack CD.
I never saw the film and I have not regretted it. I love the music, and that is why I am a huge McCartney/Wings/Beatles fan.
It's a year later and unfortunately you still haven't hit that 100k mark. I guess there is just a limited market for Beatles related content on TH-cam and lots of people competing for a slice of the pie. You are one of the best by far in a crowded field. Your solo discography rankings were epic. I hope you continue to find new ways to explore the act we've known for all these years. If you keep making them, I'll keep watching. Cheers.
An interesting detail: on the scene in which Harry tells everyone he's going to Broad Street there's that dark blue carpet with a pattern that looks like musical notes. It's the exact same fabric you can still see inside the MPL office in London to this day. Not only as a carpet but also as curtains and covering a couch. There are many interviews, videos and photos of Paul at MPL from the early 80s onwards that show that. I've looked inside the glass door at MPL one day and saw it there.
By the way, the Wings Greatest statuette can also be seen from outside MPL, in one of the Windows. Also, the original painting used in the Tug of War cover can also be seen hanging on the wall next to the door on the ground floor.
25:20 After all the different looks of the 60's and 70's with various kinds of facial hair, going back to his Quarrymen look
what the hell is this paulforsaken movie it feels like a fucking fever dream.
and i’m here for it 😈
I think that with Sir Paul, if he puts his heart and soul into something and it doesn't do as well as he expected...it's almost like it didn't exist. I recently released a review of Back To The Egg which is my favourite of his post Beatles albums and that album was very much a project that he was all in on. There was a TV special, big touring plans, plenty of unreleased material...but the album didn't sell as well as expected and so now it seems to be an album that he doesn't look back on too fondly. It was a big deal for him at the time, but for whatever reason, it wasn't the highest selling album of the year and so he saw it as a disappointment and I don't think has played any songs from it live since that tour (which was cut short after Japan). If it were just another album, then he might have more affection for it, but because it was a passion project that wasn't given the love that he thought it would, he just sort of moved on and forgot about it. It's interesting to note that with the McCartney Archives sets, it got up to London Town and Back To The Egg being the next 2...and suddenly it was decided to end the series. So I think Broadstreet is a similar case. It was something that he expected to be huge and so he put everything that he had into it...and it was rejected. It's a shame as I don't think that it's a bad film and certainly not the lowest point of his career.
I just love the insane ‘80s version of “Silly Love Songs” with members of Toto and Louis Johnson. The “capuchin monkey” video is so weird, it’s brilliant! “No More Lonely Nights” also would have been a huge hit for anyone not as famous as Paul.
Thanks for uploading. When we first got MTV, the No More Lonely Nights video was in very heavy rotation, as I remember, even though no one was seeing the film. The video was enough I guess and the song really grew on me.
I heard that girl who played Sandra went on to a somewhat successful career.
i was literally watching your old videos yesterday wondering when you would post again!
Loved the video! Could you critique Ringo's acting career in a future video?
13:13 - That’s the one and only Tracy Ullman playing Sandra. On her show in the 1980s is where the Simpsons first appeared.
The great beatles biographer Mark Lewisohn has said that he feels this movie is a direct window into how Paul thinks, he never elaborated on that as far as I know, but it seems like it has alot of truth to it, like most of what he says.
I heard Lewisohn say this as well and I wish he would elaborate.
Proud to be one of your Subscribers, and hope you get to 100,000 soon. And 1 million soon after that. Cheers.
I remember reading about this film about two years before it came out and I was very excited about it. Imagine my disappointment when it never even reached the cinemas here in Sweden. I had to wait two more years before it was shown on Swedish television. It's really a great shame that Paul didn't let a professional screenwriter write a proper script. I really love the musical numbers though, apart from the weird "Silly Love Songs" act. "Eleanor's Dream" is the highpoint of the film, in my opinion.
"It's really a great shame that Paul didn't let a professional screenwriter write a proper script."
I guess he didn't learn that lesson from Magical Mystery Tour.
i was just re-watching your video ranking McCartney's albums, and now you upload this omg... looking foward to watching it now!! :D
if only this had been more experimental and dream-like, with musical performances connecting the vignettes! the plot and acting sink it! would pay full price for a full length bizarre Jane Austen paul.
“This scene could have functioned fine without the monkey” is such a great sentence!
I loved this movie as a teenager with a huge crush on Paul McCartney, and even as a middle ager I enjoy it through the goggles of nostalgia. It's beautifully filmed, the whole thing. Every set and scene is gorgeous. The writing, not so much. I loved the music!
Paul Simon has a very similar mid-life crisis movie he wrote and starred in himself, called "One Trick Pony". Like Paul McCartney, Paul McCartneys acting is pretty all over the place. He can barely pull off the simplest lines in his own film, yet at the same time he pulls off convincingly crying on demand for a scene with his "Ex wife" near the end of the film. Its mostly a drag but theres some really poignant and entertaining scenes here and there throughout, such as a scene where he and his band are traveling through the country side to a gig naming their favorite musicians and artists before slowly realizing most all of their heroes are long dead and their time as a successful band are dying out, as well as one scene near the end where he decides to destroy his newest album before it releases by sneaking the recordings out of his producers studio by hiding them in his guitar case before destroying them. Interesting movie if you're a Paul Simon fan looking to get into his head.
Give My Regards To Broad Street may not be a masterpiece, but I enjoy listening to the album from time to time. In my opinion it’s a good compilation with some very nice rearrangements of Paul’s old and (relatively to the time) new songs. I love the Yesterday / Here, There And Everywhere / Wanderlust medley, for example. Plus, No More Lonely Nights is an amazing tune with some terrific guitar job from David Gilmour.
6:11 I didn't know Steven Hawkings did voice over work in 'Give my regards to broadstreet'?
Your Beatles content is top notch mate. Subscribed.
One of the melodies on that Rupert album was used again for the melody of Celebration from the Standing Stone Symphony.
I can never understand the bad press that broad street gets ! it's not the greatest film ever made obviously. But it's an entertaining little romp through a fantasy version of maccas life. he never pretended it was anything more than that. It's full of lovely little set pieces and the photography is often brilliant. the whole eleanors dream sequence is incredible, the imagery during the long and winding road looks great, No more lonely nights is one of his best songs EVER. the only part of the film that falls really flat for me is the Silly Love Songs bit, but other than that its a really enjoyable flight of fancy :-)
Using the weird Al interview clips brought me back to a simpler time, loved seeing those!
The only thing I like about this movie is the soundtrack. Hard to believe this is the same guy who wrote the best music in the world. And he really has a special thing with Rupert. When I briefly met him in 2017 in the hotel, a friend of mine was holding a Rupert plushy. He even asked if it was for him. It was the only person he spoke to on that day
🥺 wow that’s so sweet. Did your friend give him the plushie?
I want to get in there that Ballroom Dancing is an under the radar classic. I often play it back to back with The Kinks Come Dancing as they are utterly similar in tone and content! Love them.
I remember going to see this in 84 at the picture show and it was excruciating. The album was even worse and I like you are one of the biggest McCartney fans on the planet. But on the other hand when McCartney's gone will still have this to look at if we want to.
Seen the movie, but never heard the sdtrk..............................how's it bad? Isn't it just Paul doing new versions of Beatles songs (besides No More Lonely Nights)?
@@davidl570 Yes, he does a song from Pipes of Peace which was out a year earlier and he does a couple songs from tug of war which was out 2 years earlier and he does a song from speed of sound from 76 and redoes Beatles songs. When I first bought the album in 84 I thought it was kind of cool at the time that he redid Beatle songs but then I kind of grew kind of cold on it after a while. The only good song out of the three new tracks was no more lonely nights in my opinion. The other two 'Not such a bad boy' and 'No Values' were very weak. I kind of felt sorry for the guy in the '80s because from Pipes of Peace up through flowers in the dirt wasn't all that great again in my opinion. I will say there's some good tracks on flowers in the dirt but all in all that was another not so great album. I enjoyed off the ground but you had to get the double disc off the ground complete works. The second disc was a bunch of songs that McCartney left off of the original off the ground that were really good that should have been on the album.
@@daytripper9222 Okay, thanks for the info! (And I've never cared for Pipes of Peace either.................I actually think it's one of his worst. Flowers in the Dirt, while not his best, was definitely a major step up from it. And Off The Ground is easily one of his most underrated!).
@@daytripper9222 Flowers in the Dirt was his return LP to the live concert stage. That '93 show is in my top 5 concerts of my life so I have a soft spot for that album.
@@lornestein7248 The 93 tour was off the ground.
I have been WAITING for this review!!! Oh man, doing a full breakdown of Ringo's work would be an absolute trip.
I mean honestly... this looks like a movie I'd totally watch. I would rather watch a bad entertaining movie than a bad soulless movie. We don't have enough slapstick humor or campiness in movies anymore and its always so serious🙄 I'm the guy that love watching Lamagedin ,Attack of the killer tomatoes and The killer clowns from outer space. But I can totally see how the lack of direction will mess up the pacing of the movie, but I generally still love all of the artists steps like the different dreams, sceneries, wacky scenarios and can absolutely feel all of the heart in this film.
The whole entire movie is probably how it feels to be in a dream, in a dream. in a dream of a famous musician trying to get to the studio in a car ride.
Dreams are usually very disorganized and disorienting and doesn't make logical sense and random stuff just happens😭 But it probably needed alittle bit more direct and alittle more energy to literally knock it out of the park😎🤙
I've literally seen worse movies in my life and this doesn't come close, as long as the movie was entertaining, it did it's role as a movie and I can feel the genuine sense of love poured into this✨💙
Exactly. A lot of people feel cheated because they feel that it being a dream invalidates the whole film ... except you know it's a dream from the beginning if you're paying attention and the film follows dream logic rather than a plot. You can only truly enjoy it if you know that going in, otherwise it's a confusing mess and a cheat.
As a life long fan of the Beatles - I'm in my 70's - I never had the desire to see this film; it wasn't after all, the Fab Four performing. So after seeing your revue, I'm glad I didn't buy a ticket to it. However, this was an educational half hour and as always with your presentations, it didn't disappoint. Can't wait for your next one.
I enjoyed the movie when it came out. My friends and I were big Beatles and post-Beatles fans so we all went to the theater to see it. It was pretty obvious that it was fairly light weight and many scenes seemed somewhat thrown together, but I thought the music was excellent including the new songs and the acoustic oldies. I will admit I have only watched it a few times since, but it serves the purpose if you want to watch a fun movie that isn't particularly demanding.
NB: Sandra is played by the great Tracey Ullman, and this movie was the genesis of Paul's cameo in her video for "They Don't Know About Us".
Also note the Dave Edmunds cameo (blue suit) @15:03.
YES! I was very much looking forward to seeing a video on this movie!
This film is like watching your dad dance badly at a wedding, taking a break now and then to tell some dad jokes and then getting up to do karaoke - and actually doing it really well.
I am in shock just by hearing that there is “Paul McCartney video game”
Its just as bad as the movie , puré Shite mate.
Been waiting on this since you brought it up in your video ranking all his albums. Glad to see it finally here
1:00 this guy was able to get Paul McCartney himself in the video
I love all of your videos! Their so detailed and made with so much thought. Like little documentaries. Maybe you could do a video on Band on the Run, Wings in Nigeria, ... would love to see a video about that story. Anyway, keep up your great work!
Sure the plot is shitty but I’d pay full price just to hear and see the Wanderlust performance and the amazing acoustic numbers, priceless in fact! Love So Bad too!
I can agree with Ebert's assessment as the film being a "nonmovie" when it goes the route of invalidating everything that happened as just a dream. That being said...I guess it could be taken as even lighter entertainment as a result. This movie comes to my mind once every couple years and I remember having some fond memories as a kid -- rewatching it here on TH-cam a couple years back, I realized that was just general love of McCartney and that this just seems like a promo for his music rather than a film. Take it for what it is, not viewing it as a serious film, and you might be able to enjoy it.
I never knew about the video games! Thanks for sharing that new tidbit to me.
Oh, and I'd have to watch it again, but I thought "Silly Love Songs" was performed in front of cameras for a music video shoot.