Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
7.58pm
13 November 2009
Offline
AKA Sutcliffe in Love.
Ok, so the music was good.
Just kidding! It was a good movie, similar to The Commitments except that this band makes it to the top. The movie takes some liberties with story, their deportation in particular, but it is usually necessary to streamline things for a movie. I didn't care much for the implication that it was a fight between John and Stu that led to Stu's death. Did they they actually fight? I thought he was attacked by gang members and had to be rescued by John and I think George?
Let's see, I think they did a good job on the casting. The guy playing Paul did a good job for the small part he was given. John was pretty good, but he seemed a little off. Can't quite put my finger on why. Stuart and Astrid were believable as a couple.
All in all, I'd give it a 7.5/10. It could stand on it's own even if it wasn't about The Beatles, but knowledge about them helps.
9.15pm
I rather liked Ian Hart (a native Liverpudlian) who played John Lennon. The role was written a bit over the top but I thought his performance was excellent. He had also portrayed Lennon in "The Hours And Times," a film which speculated as to what might have happened during John Lennon & Brian Epstein's holiday in Spain, which was (surprisingly) tastefully done…
9.06am
14 October 2009
Offline
skye said:
I didn't care much for the implication that it was a fight between John and Stu that led to Stu's death. Did they they actually fight? I thought he was attacked by gang members and had to be rescued by John and I think George?
They got jumped by a group of sailors after Lennon had opened his big gob I think, so maybe John got the 'blame' for starting the fight.
10.26am
13 November 2009
Offline
See, now that would have been exciting and more in line with what I was expecting. It wouldn't have detracted from the 'John is jealous of Stu' plot, in my opinion.
10.34am
26 January 2010
Offline
I think it referred to a story i've read in a few books now that John lost it with Stu when he said he was leaving and beat him up. I think it was referred to in the Philip Norman book recently too. I can't see that being true because he would have to have give him a right beating and how could they have carried on being friends after that? Also, why wouldn't Astrid have told this story because im sure he would have told her.
I don't remember that being in Backbeat
10.52am
13 November 2009
Offline
Well it was more of a lovers tussle, but you didn't see Stu get hit any other time so when the doctor asks if he's taken any blows to the head, you think back to the previous scene.
10.59am
26 January 2010
Offline
Isn't there a scene at the start were they get beat up by sailors in Liverpool? I don't think any films should be making assumptions without knowing the facts. I once read it happened at Litherland Town Hall by a gang of jealous boyfriends but we'll never know. Very sad thing to happen
11.08am
13 November 2009
Offline
I'm going to have to watch this thing again, aren't I?
Even so, in the book I was reading (Liddypool), the author talked to a medical examiner about it and the ME concluded that the time between his concussion and death were too long for the two to be related. No doubt the fights and the speed didn't help, but they weren't the cause.
2.24pm
31 March 2008
Offline
There's a lot of conjecture about this issue, and I think we'll never know for sure. However, I recommend this message from rec.music.beatles suggests Stuart's causes of death were unlikely to be related to a blow to the head.
I've heard it said that it was one of the June/July 1960 appearances at the Grosvenor Ballroom in Wallasey where Stuart was beaten up – by local Teddy boys rather than sailors. Or perhaps he was generally unlucky and it happened more than once. 
5.47pm
13 November 2009
Offline
Damn. That makes sense too. There's like five different versions to every story with this band, all seeming just as valid as the next. How am I supposed to make any sense of it?
Bottom line: Learn to protect your head (or stay out of fights) and choose your parents wisely.
Edit: Never mind. I did a more thorough reading of your comment and of the article and it's almost word for word what I read previously.
Dramatic license it is.
4.11pm
5 February 2010
Offline
Just watched this movie yesterday. That was a very, very interesting experience for me. I thought they did a great job of finding actors who looked like the Beatles and could do the voices reasonably well (which is very important to me in any film/cartoon about the lads).
As could be expected, I suppose, condensing that much story into a 2-hr film made some parts seem too glossy and polished. There are all of these scenes with the boys out and about, in the woods, on the beach, in this club or that club, and I kept thinking, "Where did they find the time for all of this leisure if they were being worked to the bone every night?"
The depictions of the band on stage were a bit too "clean" as well – it looks to me, from the film's portrayal, that Stu was one helluva bass player! All those melodic runs, the rapid fills, and all with a ciggie in his fretting hand! Doesn't really seem to jive with the historical accounts about Stu having a hard time even staying in the right key as the rest of the band.
Someone mentioned Stu's fight with John: that does get covered in some detail in Philip Norman's book, John Lennon: A Life. It was the first source from which I've ever heard that story. I seem to remember him saying that (contrary to the film's rather tame version) John really lost it and beat the slop out of Stu during that conflict (I think he said John kicked Stu in the head a few times). What sticks with me from that account is Norman saying that John was haunted by that fight after Stu had died, thinking he might have been responsible for it. I need to go back and re-read the book to see exactly how it's presented there.
Anyway – all in all, I really did enjoy this movie. It can't be perfect, obviously, but I didn't see anything so glaringly stupid that it would make me want to write off the whole film. I'll definitely watch it again (even if only for Gary Bakewell's performance as Macca – goodness, did he have that smile-while-singing-and-shaking-your-head movement perfected, or what?).
6.44pm
13 November 2009
Offline
PeterWeatherby said:
The depictions of the band on stage were a bit too "clean" as well – it looks to me, from the film's portrayal, that Stu was one helluva bass player! All those melodic runs, the rapid fills, and all with a ciggie in his fretting hand! Doesn't really seem to jive with the historical accounts about Stu having a hard time even staying in the right key as the rest of the band.
———-
Anyway – all in all, I really did enjoy this movie. It can't be perfect, obviously, but I didn't see anything so glaringly stupid that it would make me want to write off the whole film. I'll definitely watch it again (even if only for Gary Bakewell's performance as Macca – goodness, did he have that smile-while-singing-and-shaking-your-head movement perfected, or what?).
It didn't look like the Indra did it? I think they skipped it and went straight to the Kaiserkeller. Bakewell needed a bigger part. 
I think it would have worked better as a mini series, but I'd watch it again.
2.05am
31 January 2011
Offline
I thought this movie was pretty good. The music was GREAT! I'd love to see that Birth of the Beatles movie that was made for TV by Dick Clark. It's been years, but I remember it being pretty good.
4.11am
13 November 2009
Offline
Hi Kail! Welcome to the forum. I think I need to watch it again, now that I am more familiar with their story.
3.15am
31 January 2011
Offline
skye said:
Hi Kail! Welcome to the forum. I think I need to watch it again, now that I am more familiar with their story.
Thanks Skye! This is a great website! I've become addicted.
10.49pm
18 March 2013
Offline
I resurrect thee zombie thread:
Just finished watching Backbeat for the first time a couple of minutes ago (and I call myself a Beatles fan 
) I thought it was quite, the acting was good and for once the actors actually looked like the boys (Hallelujah praise the Lord!). It would also have been a fun drinking game to drink every time you saw a pair of tits or somebody was getting the ride, (you'd be drunk 1/4 through and you would need your stomach pumped by the end) but apart from the few historical blunders it was a decent film. My final thought's are:
Stephen Dorff as 
is a ride and an amazing actor.
Ian Hart as 
was, always very good and another idea for the drinking game every time John says "fuck" take a shot
Chris O' Neill as 
is dawwwww so cute, he didn't want to bring scones with him 'cause he was in a rock 'n' roll band and how he was so awkward with the girl. That's my George Good actor and actually looks like George a rare occurrence in Beatles biopics
Gary Bakewell as 
was brilliant in The Linda McCartney story and brilliant here but he needed more lines
And Sheryl Lee as Astrid was very good
Overall: Very good Beatles biopic and music wasn't that bad either 8/10
11.41pm
1 November 2012
Offline
AppleScruffJunior said
I resurrect thee zombie thread:Just finished watching Backbeat for the first time…
Gary Bakewell as
I had to look up the pics of the actor playing Paul, and found this one with the actress playing Linda:
This is just … wrong, all wrong.
While I like actress Elizabeth Mitchell (she played the oddly deranged doctor on Lost), and while she certainly has the naturally blonde earthy look down, I'm sorry, she's no better than Bakewell at capturing the essence of the inimitable. Some icons just can't be acted by others. For example, I've never seen a Sinatra biopic that had a worthy actor to fill the shoes of his unique persona.
11.51pm
18 March 2013
Offline
^ Not many people can play Paul McCartney sure he isn't the man himself but he does a decent portrayal of him compared to some awful people I've seen try to do Paul before
10.47am
3 May 2012
Offline
I've never seen 'Backbeat' but I quite want to. A few months ago, I wasn't interested in watching any Beatles biopics but I've seen 'Nowhere Boy' now and I loved it, which makes me want to try a few others, as well.
What channel was it on? I didn't seen any adverts for it 
12.01pm
18 March 2013
Offline
I might have watched it coughonlinecough but you didn't need to download it so I was a happy camper. I can give you the link if you want?
Most Users Ever Online: 597
Currently Online: RedLennon, Egroeg Evoli, Beatles in the Blood
3 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
mr. Sun king coming together: 6972
meanmistermustard: 3434
MeanMrsMustard: 2794
Egroeg Evoli: 1533
vonbontee: 1427
Von Bontee: 1373
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 87
Members: 1683
Moderators: 5
Admins: 1
Forum Stats:
Groups: 3
Forums: 33
Topics: 2398
Posts: 73387
Newest Members: fartoons, RIGBY, WilliamCampbell, JQ, Juliana Melo
Moderators: Joe (2702), skye (2295), Ellie (1), Zig (2752), mithveaen (4675)
Administrators: Joe (2702)
