Birth of the Beatles (1979)

A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

This movie receives such high praise from other reviewers, because other films about the Beatles beginnings are so bad.Contains much that is out of order and completely falsified. Stewart Sutcliff's death is presented more than six months before it happened.The Beatles are told that they have a recording contract while in England, while actually Brian Epstein (their manager) cabled them in Germany to let them know.The first time they meet George Martin (their producer) it is actually long after they met him historically.They tell Brain they want Ringo in and Pete out before they even meet George Martin, and it was George Martin along with George Harrison who were the biggest advocates in getting rid of Pete.Dick Row (Decca executive) is presented in a scene giving his famous lone (which was actually delivered over the phone) as George Martin walks in (who worked for competing record company EMI).There are numerous of these historical inaccuracies. There is a scene where John Lennon chastises Brian Epstein for not getting a record contract that I have never heard of. And at that point Brian had raised their appearance fee from 16 pounds a performance to 100 pounds, making the confrontation unlikely and contrived.Also this film has the Beatles playing songs years before they were written or recorded by previous groups.The Decca recording session on January 1, 1962 presents them playing songs that are not in the actual set.Has the Beatles in the wrong costumes and playing the wrong song for their opening appearance for Ed Sullivan.Almost worthless as history, but it does have some of the music.

I've been a Beatles fan for most of my life. Grew up 30 miles from Liverpool a few years later than the boys did. So I could be mean and point out some of the liberties the filmmakers took here. But all in all this isn't bad. The actors are easily recognisable as their characters and the accents aren't too far off. The major players in the Beatles story are all there, and the settings (Liverpool, Hamburg) evoke the era and are believable. The songs come over really well - sounds like Rain were a decent band in their own right. The larking about on stage is also captured perfectly. But Astrid looks a little too much like Anne Robinson (and not blonde enough) for my liking - she even winks at one point! The early relationship between Brian Epstein and the Beatles seemed very real. Well, Pete Best was there at the time and, as an adviser, should have helped them to get it right. He obviously believes (to this day) that there was a long-running conspiracy to replace him with Ringo. And I think he's right.I think my favourite cameo in the film is Nigel Havers as George Martin. The posh tall classically trained English gent, running a comedy label as part of EMI, was the only record executive to recognise the unique talent that changed popular music for ever.Good job, lads.

I saw this film only once when it premiered on the ABC movie of the week. I have always hoped to find it again on TV but to no avail. What this film tries to do in a 90 minute span is tell the story of the start of The Beatles from the beginning in Liverpool. As far as facts go there are some discrepancies.The songs that are preformed is one but the sacking of Pete Best was way off. From reading the book "Shout" ( a must for any Beatle fan, if you can find a copy get it)That scene we all know was coming. To me it was personal as Pete Best was involved in the making of the film. Overall not a bad film but I always hoped that they would do a second film with the same actors to continue the history of the band leading up to the breakup. I guess they did not think we needed to see it.My biggest problem with movies about rock bands is that they skip over things you want to see and always leave you with a happy ending (HYSTERA the Def Leppard story anyone?) If any die hard Beatle fan has not seen this movie try to find it I think you might enjoy it.

This is a rather overlooked film, though one with many good points. It goes through the now familiar story of the development of the Beatles, ending (I think) with the tragic death of Stu Sutcliffe. Unlike the later Backbeat, which, though a good film, was flawed by its 'arthouse' approach, Birth of the Beatles tells the story fairly straightly. I'd imagine that casual fans would be more interested in this then die hard fans. But check it out anyway - the performances (particularly that of John Lennon) are very good.