MovieChat Forums > Across the Universe (2007) Discussion > Disgrace to the Beatles.

Disgrace to the Beatles.

posted 13 years ago by TakeALookAtMyID
27 replies | jump to latest

How cheesy can a movie get? This movie completely took all meaning out of the Beatles' lyrics. Especially the awful sequence for "I Want You" Yeah. Of course John was saying that the Statue of Liberty was heavy. That's exactly what he meant. Now all these teenage girls think they're "Beatles fans" when they're actually fans of the stupid storyline they crapped out for this movie. At least the music was decent. Decent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAQpmQebRjs&list=UUjxEGrAKvhx8avyam u4I5jQ&index=1&feature=plcp

[–] FloatOnOk 13 years ago

Either you like it or you don't. I love this movie it the only musical I like.

[–] 3PocketCharlie 12 years ago

Songs are often subjective and it is possible to interpert the lyrics differently.

All glory to the Hypnotoad

[–] NuGram 12 years ago

As I've said before about Across The Universe, I feel so sorry for people who don't "get it".

[–] therefdotcom 11 years ago

repeating it, doesn't make it any less stupid.

"laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone." - Dae-su Oh

[–] NuGram 12 years ago

"Paul and Ringo both liked the movie. "

I bet wherever John and George are, they liked it too. ;)

[–] gabby_bm 12 years ago

I can't speak for what teenage girls get out of this film, but there's no way the director was aiming for "She's so Heavy" to refer to the Statue of Liberty. I found it a phenomenal use of the song, however, visually imparting the weight of American "freedom" upon the soldiers who fight a war that has nothing to do with American freedom. Just a phenomenal follow-up to the incredible choreography of "I Want You" which was also well applied.

Anyone who finds this to be an insult to Beatles music is even worse off in the head than the "Dark Knight" fanboys who don't understand why Christopher Nolan hasn't replaced God yet.

You want a more literal interpretations on film? Go watch "Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" with George Burns.

My "#3" key is broken so I'm putting one here so i can cut & paste with it.

[–] JackDnCoke 12 years ago

I think I love you :)

[–] hodie 12 years ago

To say that John would have liked this film is laughable. He must be turning over in his grave.

"Joey, have you ever been in a Turkish prison?"

[–] NuGram 12 years ago

"To say that John would have liked this film is laughable. He must be turning over in his grave."

...and that is your theory. Just as my saying I think John and George would like it is mine. Prove me wrong.

[–] MaximusGrandimus 10 years ago

"To say that John would have liked this film is laughable. He must be turning over in his grave."

...and that is your theory. Just as my saying I think John and George would like it is mine. Prove me wrong.

Quite true, NuGram. I for one also think John would have loved this movie. Many people assume from what we see in interviews and even documentaries like "Anthology" that John was the more avant garde/artistic type and Paul was more straightforward and commercial - especially given that he fell in love with Yoko, who did installation and performance art, but this is not the case. John was the more pragmatic one behind closed doors. He was more open to merchandising opportunities and he came up with the Apple Records/Studios idea. Look at McCartney's solo career. He has a ton of experimental albums from the Liverpool Oratory to Standing Stone and Liverpool Sound Collage.

I don't know if you're aware of this but I've already changed things. I killed Ben Linus.
--Sayid

[–] neil-476 12 years ago

Yes, I'd like the royalties, too.

[–] NuGram 12 years ago

Yes, I'd like the royalties, too.

Right, because the remaining Beatles are sellout whores and need the money.

[–] El_Guapo_Caballo 12 years ago

They are not? Are you saying millionaires dont like money?

[–] NuGram 12 years ago

"They are not? Are you saying millionaires dont like money?"

Are you saying that the remaining Beatles are "sellout whores"?

[–] popvoid 12 years ago

My initial reaction was the same as yours. Especially with the auto tuned vocals in "Hold me tight." I thought, " Man, this is going to be ba-a-ad!" But I have to admit the film grew on me. Sure, some of the choices were obvious, but some were real surprises. The idea if turning "I want to hold your hand" into a sad song was genius, and comes closer to the unsure subtexts of many of their love songs. The more I thought about it, the more I liked the film. Maybe Lennon didn't mean the Statue of Liberty when he wrote "She's so heavy," but I bet he'd approve.

And in case you're wondering, I've been fan of the Beatles since they hit these shores.

[–] jason-m-cook 11 years ago

Well, we're so lucky to have you around to teach us what a true Beatles fan is. Turns out it's something much more spiteful than I thought! Good to know.

[–] KrystelClaire 11 years ago

I disagree.

The minute you hear a song, it's like you are allowed to like it for whatever reason you may choose. Many people like/feel identified with songs, and by reasons that have nothing to do with what the original meaning the authors intended. Which means that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Like it or not, make whatever meaning you want from the lyrics and the music.

This film is a little like that, in my opinion. They have interpreted the songs in the way they saw fit, and I must say that the songs fit the plot and the characters to perfection. Each song is emotionally charged in the context of the film.

And about fans. Somebody who likes the Beatles and their songs is a fan. Why is anybody entitled to another person: "you are not a true fan of the Beatles?" Who has given you the power to decide so? Who's giving out affiliation cards?

[–] Amills23 11 years ago

"This movie completely took all meaning out of the Beatles' lyrics." John Lennon admitted to the fact that his songs that had "meaning" was bs just words that he thought went together.

[–] Lester_Burnham_Risen 11 years ago

John Lennon admitted to the fact that his songs that had "meaning" was bs just words that he thought went together.

---

quote please to backup what your mummy told you

http://www.kindleflippages.com/ablog/

[–] Owlwise 11 years ago

Doesn't mean they don't have meaning, though. A good deal of creative work springs from the unconscious, and it was his personality & worldview that came through in his songs. He was a great fan of the Surrealists, and in fact stated that Surrealism to him was reality -- and what is Surrealism if not art drawn directly from the depths of the psyche, unmediated by conscious thought as much as possible? Oh, there's plenty of meaning to be found in John's songs, if you look for it! Maybe not consciously intended by him -- unless his denial of meaning was one more put-on anyway -- but there's real substance there.

[–] Lester_Burnham_Risen 11 years ago

Walrus was only song DELIBERATELY stupid to take the piss out of the morons who were assigning all manner of crap to John's songs.

but yes Taymor has really nailed the correct meanings [or some of them] in this movie

please see my blog on Strawberry Fields below

http://reviewacrosstheuniverse.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/strawberry-fiel ds.html

[–] Amills23 11 years ago

I'm sure some of his songs had meaning to them but the point John Lennon wanted to get across that they weren't these bastions of truth that had life changing meanings to them. He couldn't stand the idol worship or the belief that some of his fans thought his songs had GREAT meanings and he could give them all the secrets of life.

[–] Lester_Burnham_Risen 11 years ago

John Lennon wanted to get across that they weren't these bastions of truth that had life changing meanings to them

---

have you ever heard an interview with a rock star that did not play down their music

http://www.kindleflippages.com/ablog/

[–] Amills23 11 years ago

For starters lets look at this logically. Do you know how much of a smug ahole Jon Lennon would have been if he really thought his songs had this great meaning that spoke truth to the world.

Any suppose fan of Lennon would know he didn't take himself as serious as his fans did but most will ignore it b/c its doesn't fit the idol they have turned him into.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM9mzPjcB_M

One among many videos about John Lennon admitting to fact his songs were just songs.