MovieChat Forums > Let It Be (2024) Discussion > Lennon/McCartney... McCartney/Lennon

Lennon/McCartney... McCartney/Lennon

posted 11 years ago by Hawks23
17 replies | jump to latest

Paul McCartney you suck!! How dare you try and change the credits. Thank Christ we have Yoko Ono who I heard aggressively tried and succeeded in stopping this. F$&k you sir Paul. Who am I? Well I'm a nobody but your mate your brother the partnership every man wished he was part of and you stab John Lennon in the back with this outlandish behaviour. You were the outcast in the Beatles there's no doubt about it. Your pretty little boyish looks hide your arrogance as far as I'm concerned. Your a business. George/ John. John / ringo. George/ ringo all healthy combinations. But you just don't fit as mateship goes. I appreciate you carrying on the Beatles legacy as you have every right to. But it's not all yours mister. Yes you got George into the band but you never let him forget it did you?None of your songs will ever match All things must pass, My sweet Lord,Something etc or Johns imagine so keep strutting the red carpets pal cause the other three were always born and bred working class.

[–] bredlau3 11 years ago

Are you thinking that Paul is going to read this and respond?

[–] Hawks23 11 years ago

Haha no just letting off steam. I'm quite passionate and no he won't read it as it doesn't matter as he already knows this. It's such a cowardly act I think about the credits. I mean why?

[–] bredlau3 11 years ago

Actually from what I remember, and I might be remembering incorrectly, I think very early on there were a few credits of McCartney/Lennon before they decided to use the Lennon/McCartney tag.

[–] Hawks23 11 years ago

True that. Maybe before their gentlemens agreement. I may be carrying on but yoko has received the upmost uncalled for treatment all because of love of john. She also has every god given right to protect johns legacy.

[–] phantom2-2 11 years ago

so john's "legacy" is that he gets first billing on songs he had nothing to do with writing? why is that worth protecting?

[–] Hawks23 11 years ago

I get your point but is there any point in doing it?More publicity perhaps. Typical Paul. Now tell me you honestly couldn't see the other three doing similar antics?first he sues the Beatles over the Allen Klein mess which is sort of justified and then gets shafted with the whole catalogue from Michael Jackson!!! Oh Lennon would've rolled in his grave god bless him.

[–] mplrecords 11 years ago

It was originally McCartney/Lennon. Your precious John and SIR Paul agreed that the credit could be reversed at any time. John should not be billed first for songs like "The Long and Winding Road", "Yesterday", and "Hey Jude" which he had nothing to do with what-so-ever!

[–] Hawks23 11 years ago

Point taken but all I'm saying is Johns dead and I think Paul should drop it and his inflated ego out of respect for his fallen partner. Seriously think about it. Who'd do that? It's shameful and it's no wonder it was three onto one.

[–] phantom2-2 11 years ago

how can you say one of the most successful musicians of all time has an inflated ego? how is it even possible for one of the beatles to have an inflated ego, because yes, they actually were that good!

in another who-knows-how-many years both john & paul will be fallen. it happens to the best of us, and sir paul's as entitled to his legacy as john is to his. as long as he's not claiming john's songs as his own i don't see a problem for his getting first billing for songs he wrote.

[–] mplrecords 10 years ago

So, sole Paul songs should be credited first to John? Let me tell you a short story. (This is true.) Paul was eating out one night, and there was a violinist playing. He played "Yesterday". For whatever reason, Paul went up after the performance and looked at the sheet music. It read "Yesterday, composed by John Lennon". The publishers could not fit John Lennon and Paul McCartney on there. The point is even though Paul wrote it alone, John got full credit. Paul cited this as a reason for him putting HIS name first on HIS songs. Personally, I think any Paul songs should read "McCartney/Lennon" and any John songs should read "Lennon/McCartney". But, I can see why Paul was angered.

Sing Hello Dolly in French.

[–] Hawks23 10 years ago

i stand to be corrected but wasn't it John eating out?

[–] Troll_Dahl 10 years ago

I think I actually heard John tell the story in an interview: a violin player waltzes up to him in a restaurant playing Yesterday! Wish I could track down a reference. I think Yoko said Lennon got insecure about McCartney's songs being more popular/covered more frequently. Can't say I blame him for being fed up about "Hello Goodbye" and "Lady Madonna", for example, being the singles while stuff like "I am the Walrus" and "Across the Universe" is either the b-side or pushed aside completely. To be fair to Paul, it's easy to see the pop appeal of many of his songs and it is a genuine talent to write that sort of music. He's written some brilliant songs. I don't mean to shortchange the man and I sometimes feel as though I'm too uncharitable.

However, I must admit, I'm inclined to agree that credit-changing now seems unnecessary and runs the risk of coming across the wrong way. Especially seeing as McCartney has come across the wrong way before, to put it kindly. I just wonder how many songs McCartney would be willing to take his name off of if Yoko, or someone else, came forward with a claim that they were written solely by Lennon? I agree that Yoko has done a lot to take care of her husband's legacy and gets way too much crap for some of it.

As I'm not in the industry, maybe I don't understand, but I hope I'd be above worrying about my legacy because of my name being cut off of some sheet music. I really don't want to ever be the guy who gets upset because his name is printed prominently enough.

Om Shanti

[–] Hawks23 10 years ago

Well said!!!!

[–] mplrecords 10 years ago

Paul has never said he wants sole credits. He just wants to be credited first. That's very generous, considering John didn't do a thing on "Yesterday".

[–] Troll_Dahl 10 years ago

On the one hand, I understand wanting to be credited for your work (or not wanting someone else to be wrongly credited). On the other, I just wonder how he'd feel if Lennon were alive and wanted to have McCartney's name removed from certain songs. Say John wanted Paul's name off of Strawberry Fields Forever, Across the Universe, and Revolution--songs we know were solidly Lennon. I say John himself rather than Yoko or his estate, to make it fairer. Even more interestingly, how many think Lennon would never even bother? To my knowledge, there was never any discussion of revising songwriting credits during Lennon's life and his estate has made no move in that direction since, the only possible exception might be changing Give Peace a Chance and possibly Cold Turkey, released as solo singles, to a Lennon-only credit for reissues.

In general, I think trying to change any credits, especially after Lennon's death, is bound to open a can of worms. I think that's what McCartney may have realized. If they'd been thinking, maybe they should have severed the legal partnership before the Beatles even broke up. They made the deal and it's probably better to just stick to it now.

Om Shanti

[–] mplrecords 10 years ago

The way I always thought it should be is Paul's 1995 proposal

Any song that is 51% or more John goes Lennon/McCartney
Any song that is 51% or more Paul goes McCartney/Lennon
All 50%-50% songs goes Lennon/McCartney

[–] Troll_Dahl 10 years ago

Would have been perfect if they'd thought of it in 1965 instead of '95. I just think that trying to divide them into neat categories, all those years later, without John Lennon's input, would possibly be getting into murky waters. I know there are songs where they disagreed about who was responsible for what.

Om Shanti