How did this movie get made?


A great thing about cable is you get to catch up on all kinds of cult classics. I never saw this movie when it first came out, although I do vaguely remember it. When I caught it on HBO this past week, I was astounded by how bad it was.. so bad, and over the top, it actually was fun to watch.

I also was astounded by how much serious talent (not Frampton or the Bee Gees) was in this film, and the range of celebrity guests in the final credits. Plus the flamboyance of the sets. Someone obviously spent a lot of money on this pic. Anyone know the story behind this movie? How did they decide to make it? Was it someone's vanity project? Some threads also indicate some of the stars involved (Billy Preston) were so ashamed when they saw the final product, they wanted their names removed. How did they get talked into it in the first place?

reply

At the time the movie was green-lighted, Frampton and the BeeGees were the biggest stars in the world and Robert Stigwood's RSO the biggest label.

The 10th anniversary of "Sgt. Pepper" was a very big deal and there were plenty of rumors and speculation the Beatles would appear in this movies, probably in heavily disguised cameos. Having George Martin as producer/musical director was supposed to be a big incentive for this to happen (which of course ignored the fact that Paul McCartney was the only member of the band to be really close to Martin).

Wisely they decided that if they were going to reunite, it would have to be for something better than this.

reply

[deleted]

Watch "Blow"

This movie was a direct result of having to launder cocaine money.

I don't need you to tell me how good my coffee is. .

reply

I recall some things about this film that were stated in Frampton's "Biography" episode. He and the Gibbs were told that Paul was going to do a cameo at the end of the film. (Possibly in the part that actually went to Billy Preston). So they were duped into thinking that at least Paul sanctioned the film and would be involved in it. It was a flat out lie, of course, but they'd signed the contract and had to do the damned film anyway. The script was all but non-existent and much was improvised. Both Frampton and the Gibbs knew they were involved in a cinematic train wreck, but had no choice but to endure it. Believe me, they all regretted it and hate the film as much as most Beatles fans do.
There are some not too bad places in it, IMHO. Barry's "A Day In The Life" is pretty good, as well as Aerosmith's "Come Together", of course. The rest is mediocre to downright awful. I was never able to forgive Earth Wind And Fire for what they did to "Got To Get You Into My Life". And Robin's "Oh,Darlin'" was just grotesque. The Beatles' original was an early forerunner to the modern power ballad. Robin's version was too sickly sweet. The Bee Gee's "Sgt Pepper" was okay, but Peter's "With A Little Help" was awful. "Polythene Pam" wasn't too bad, either.

Most skeptics are terrified it's all real and are desperate to prove otherwise. The harder they argue, the more afraid they are.

reply

Though not fantastic, some of these songs were cinematically redeemed in "Across the Universe" ("Oh Darlin'" in particular).

Still, other than 3 mile island and Richard Nixon, this film is the singularly most unforgivable offense of the 1970's. And that includes "Exorcist II: The Heretic"

I don't need you to tell me how good my coffee is. .

reply

I actually saw this on the big screen...TWICE! Have seen it many times on cable over the years.

There was major RSO promotion when this was made. I even remember they even made a whole magazine with the usual behind the scenes, background information, etc.

I even once had the vinyl album, believe it or not.

reply

I also had the vinyl album - and the book, which I read over and over again! (I saw the movie when I was 8, and I loved it!)

reply

Hey, I wanted to thank everyone who responded to my post on this. I've learned a lot from all of you! Shows there is an intelligent community of film lovers on IMDB, so just ignore the occasional trolls.

Again, thanks.

reply

I tend to agree with jaystarstar, in that Frampton and the BeeGees were megastars when this was made. Also Robert Stigwood was coming off a huge success with Saturday Night Fever. So why not have the BeeGees & Frampton team up with a bunch of Hollywood Stars and other musicians to do the Beatles?! Seems like a natural right? WRONG!!!

I still contend that this was the WORST movie I have ever seen in my life, and I saw it in the theater with my mom and my aunt. Afterwards my mom said to me, "Don't ever take me to see anything as stupid and pointless as that again!"

The only thing I can honestly say that I liked about this film was Aerosmith's performance. Please keep in mind I have never seen this movie again since that day in the theater.

Will someone please release the Batman TV Series on DVD.

reply

Long story short - Robert Stigwood had money and wanted to make a Beatles movie. That, and he wanted to exploit the Bee Gees, who were his biggest act. (This blatant exploitation eventually led to the Bee Gees suing him.)

It went farther than people wanting their names removed; the Bee Gees demanded to be released from the movie mid-shooting when they realized how bad it was going to be. Stigwood refused.

reply

it was the 70's!

reply

"it was the 70's!"

Exactly. End of discussion.

reply

>I also was astounded by how much serious talent (not Frampton or the Bee Gees) was in this film>

Screw you buddy. The Bee Gees were the best band in this sorry movie - which they didn't even want to do. So who do you think was 'talented', that Rolling Stones knock off band, Aerosmith? Pathetic, like I expect from people like you. You're obviously trolling anyway as this is your only post.

reply

You know typinghans, it IS possible to disagree with a person's opinion and express that without personal insults. Also, this certainly is not my only post. And I am nobody's "buddy." Especially not yours.

reply

Well said, @dlade-1. No cause for that kind of aggression. Maybe he's having a bad (hair) day.
(I certainly hope that wasn't one of his GOOD days.)

I replied shortly ago to a post of yours. It's odd that you mention Billy Preston wanted out. He was the ONLY good thing in this movie! I can see why he wanted to distance himself from it. I never knew he could dance so well! I think Michael Jackson must have studied his moves, BP was strutting his stuff, and it was fun to see.
R. I. P.

(BTW, I know this post is a few years after yours, but just in case ...)

reply

Michael Jackson must have studied his moves


Must have,

Both were pedophiles,

reply