Yes but that didn’t stop me from arguing that Lennon and McCartney ran rings around him.
I’d have been right there with you, brother.
Maybe this thread is my way of doing penance for arguing with my dad.
True, but AHDN was hardly a biographical film, it was a film featuring characters named the Beatles, who were no more the real Beatles than the ones who lived together in a big house in “Yellow Submarine.”
BTW, John was married at the time (not in the movie!) but they tried to keep it hushed up so as not to upset the screaming girls.
They were all playing parts, and they did it rather well. They also played the nice mop topped kids as opposed to the Stones.
I didn’t say it was. I was drawing a contrast/comparison. Films that were specifically biographical barely adhered to literal facts, so why should a film like this that was just meant to be a lark. Perhaps I should have bolded or italicized it so that it would have been read as intended.
Got it. I thought you were more addressing those who seem to think this was a biographical movie. And I’m with you on the inaccuracy of biographical movies. I was peripherally involved in some of the events of one fairly recent one, and while I understand why the scriptwriter distorted reality, it was still annoying.
Well, it purported to be autobiographical. Certainly had me fooled at the age of 11.
It promised me a full length, hilarious, action packed film. I don’t remember anything about it promising to be autobiographical, fact-based or real-life.
i may not have been the brightest 11 year old, but I suspect a few others got fooled into thinking it was more biographical than it was, especially since they recreated some lines the actual Beatles were known to have adlibbed.
No. That one is totally confirmed…
