|
|
Post by BillyJones on Apr 12, 2004 6:35:53 GMT
More photos. The Beatles, either 1963 or 64:  Check out how SMALL a person Paul was. Now, the Beatles, 1969:  Again, The Beatles, 1964:  Now, the Beatles, 1967:  The resemblance is UNCANNY isn't it? Still, his face is longer. He should've stopped with the plastic surgery at this point. He didn't of course. Check out the size of his shoulders & legs compared to Paul's! He's a bigger man!  The Beatles - from a vintage document, photo taken 1964?....  the Beatles - Life magazine cover, 1967 Compare the faces of the different individuals. The others all look relatively the same. Same shaped faces, ears, eyes. EXCEPT FOR PAUL!!! |
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on Apr 28, 2004 15:15:19 GMT
 The Beatles...  the Beatles... Why is it that "Paul" is the only one that looks TOTALLY different   The Beatles...  the Beatles... Faul resembles Paul more in this photo, BUT, Faul's face is still longer !!!  The Beatles...  the Beatles... Faul still does not resemble Paul...  The Beatles...  the Beatles...  The Beatles...  the Beatles...  The Beatles...  the Beatles - 1969  The Beatles - gawd, Paul was so CUTE!  the Beatles...  The Beatles...  the Beatles...  The Beatles...  the Beatles... Johnny looks sick & exhausted in this photo from the Sgt. Pepper session.  The Beatles...  the Beatles - look at George's face!  The Beatles - our boys...  the Beatles ...  The Beatles - MBE  the Beatles...  The Beatles...  the Beatles...  The Beatles - 1966?  the Beatles...  The Beatles...  the Beatles, look at Johnny's face. He looks so sad...  The Beatles...  Johnny & Faul...  Johnny & Paul, very young...  Johnny & Faul. Look at the body language in THIS photo. ![]() img47.photobucket.com/albums/v145/Kissmekatie/pauljohn.jpg[/img] Johnny & Paul - look at the expression in their eyes...  the Beatles...  The Beatles...  the Beatles - from MMT...  The Beatles - from Help!  the Beatles...  The Beatles - from the Help! session...  the Beatles - Yellow Submarine...  The Beatles...  the Beatles...  The Beatles...  the Beatles... Compare Faul to the photo of Paul above it. Do they REALLY look like they can be the same person?  The Beatles - sherriff rd. photo session - check out that Paul is SHORTER than George.  the Beatles... Compare Faul to the photo of Paul from the sherriff rd. session. Look how broad across the shoulders Faul is. Paul wasn't!  The Beatles - the revolver sessions. Look how small Paul was!  the Beatles - looking sad...  The Beatles - looking tired... What the HELL was going on in the life of these men. The expression on the faces of Paul ( from the Beatles for Sale photo session ) & Faul ( from the Beatles Mad Day Out photo session ) is almost identical. Except that Faul's head & face is bigger. Paul's expression shows that he felt trapped. Faul's expression shows that he was contemplating something. And each set of eyes reflects a DIFFERENT soul looking out! |
|
|
|
Post by LUCY on Apr 28, 2004 19:35:36 GMT
[ hey! is that a NIKE swoosh on Ringo's neck? I wonder what the ribbon says. can anyone zoom in? |
|
Hamlet
Contributor
To say it , or not to say it?
Posts: 90
|
Post by Hamlet on Apr 28, 2004 20:15:14 GMT
Many thank you´s Mr. billy Jay! So kind.
I give million dollars the one who find a photo after 66 with John´s (or George´s) arm around "paul". You can find many pictures of them hugging, being close friends, none of them in that mood after 66.
George was the most "sincere", the one who found the hardest to play the smiling game.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on Apr 29, 2004 15:57:38 GMT
Hamlet - very astute my friend. You'll find many more photos of George looking angry, upset, even tearful after 1966, than of him SMILING. I don't think he thought the "game" was very much fun at all! George & Paul were good friends since they were boys. Considering what his life must've been like after the death of Paul & Brian, who can blame George? You're also very right about the "affection" factor. Those boys weren't just friends, they were compadres. They truly loved each other. I believe that this photo illustrates perfectly how much John missed Paul:  Even Faul seems to be at a loss for words. |
|
|
|
Post by Palin on Apr 29, 2004 20:21:18 GMT
Many thank you´s Mr. billy Jay! So kind. I give million dollars the one who find a photo after 66 with John´s (or George´s) arm around "paul". You can find many pictures of them hugging, being close friends, none of them in that mood after 66. George was the most "sincere", the one who found the hardest to play the smiling game. It might be worth getting this in perspective. George warmly embraces Paul in the Anthology DVD and I thought it was quite moving. Don't forget that George was under no compunction to make the Anthology series, and actively pushed for it to happen because he was quite poor following the collapse of Hand Made Films, and a couple of other failed business deals. |
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Apr 29, 2004 20:54:50 GMT
The pictures taken after 1966, George has his hands behind his back or stiffly in front or at his side. No way does he encourage touching, hugging, horsing around. The look on his face is pure misery.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on Apr 29, 2004 21:00:50 GMT
As far as I'm concerned Faul owes everything to George.
John too. It's good that he helped him out when he really needed it. I'm glad to hear that George didn't die pennyless. That would've been a terrible shame. Hopefully the Anthology series will help Olivia give Dhani the life that he deserves, being George's son!
Even with that, it's plain to see that more often than not George looked miserable. His life spiraled out of control for years following the deaths of Paul & Brian. Don't forget how YOUNG he was when it happened!
I'm sure that after all of the years of being friends, Faul grew on George as the true person that HE was. Not as a substitute for Paul. Does that make any sense?
|
|
|
|
Post by Palin on Apr 29, 2004 21:41:55 GMT
Yeah, sure, but you can't have it both ways. George either liked him or he didn't. He could also have walked away after Sgt Pepper, and kept his mouth shut, assuming the 60If scenario is true.
(I don't think Olivia and Danhi need quite that much money - I thin they're comfortable - know what I mean?)
Looking at those photos Billy posted, it occurs to me that all the Beatles look quite different in some of them from their normal personas, and there is definitely a danger that people read too much into momentary facial expressions. That one of John where Billy says he looks sick to the soul - to me that just looks like the quizical look John adopted some times, and he looks happy enough as far as I can tell.
In plenty of the photos John looks happy; does that mean Paul is still alive? How many photo sessions did the Beatles have to endure after 66, and how difficult would it have been to look happy all the time - especially when at least George and John were growing sick of the whole thing according to the official history?
And if I can find a picture of Beatles hugging after 66 does it mean that all of 60IF is wrong? You can't rely on subjective interpretations of people's body language and facial expressions as proof one way or another, and I wish people would stop suggesting otherwise.
I'm also not convinced by the reasons that have been put forward for the Beatles having had to continue a charade. Can I just go through them?
1 The Illuminati wanted to effect social change and the Beatles were central to the plan.
Find another band, Tavistock them, spend money getting "fans" to turn out at the airport as was done with the Beatles. Effect change through them, or the Stones, or whoever.
2. The authorities were scared that kids would kill themselves if they found out Paul was dead?
Where was the precedent for this in 1966? Hysteria wasn't understood in the terms it is today, and nothing like it had occurred before. Cobain has been cited on these boards as an example, and the supposed 200 that killed themselves after he died, but that was long after Paul, and Cobain's fan base was markedly different from the teeny boppers that comprised the hysterical seciton of the Beatles audience. There was no evidence at all to suggest that Paul fans would have killed themselves. (Mind you, I nearly did when I heard The Frogs Chorus)
Anyway, the authorities could have played the whole thing down. Rather than go down the 60IF road, why not just have the announcement that the Beatles have stopped touring? Then, release a series of muted announcements about them working in the studio. By the time Pepper was out, Beatlemania was dying out. Delay any further announcements by a few months, then change the stance to "we haven't split up, and we'll probably get together and release an album quite soon." People get bored - pop is fickle. Without new product, fans move on. Honestly - there would have been so many better ways to handle the Paul is dead scanario.
3. Money and greed meant the Beatles had to continue.
EMI would have made a fortune from the death of Paul, and anyway, the remaining Beatles could have survived as a trio.
Just some ideas
|
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on Apr 29, 2004 21:56:29 GMT
Those are very good ideas, Palin. The important thing is to keep the ideas coming. That's the only way we're going to get to the truth of the situation. It really doesn't make sense. However I do believe that either the 60IF scenario happened, or something similar to it. Things happen all the time that don't seem to make sense. The fact that your observations really do seem logical, only makes this a bigger mystery than ever!
The only thing I differ with you on is the look on John's face in that photo. He looks so thin, so worn out. I don't know what he was going through at the time, but it couldn't have been good. John was never very good to his body.
Also, George could have had an initial dislike for Faul ( just BECAUSE he replaced Paul ) and then gotten to like him for who he really was. Sometimes it takes awhile for people to grow on each other.
|
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Apr 30, 2004 3:41:53 GMT
George was religious of sorts. Perhaps he learnt to forgive Faul as the years went on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Apr 30, 2004 5:18:20 GMT
I think that your thoughts and reasons are quite good, Palin, quite sound.
People who are used to phoro shoots know how to "put on the dog" as far as their electricity, or personality goes. They can project whatever, when they need to. (Unless stoned, high, drunk, or otherwise "partied" out.........)
They could have waited to let it all die down, as far as the popularity angle, to avert upsetting young folks with sudden news.
EMI could have (and in fact did( develop new acts. You always need new acts in the pipeline.
Anyway. it was a good post you made.
|
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Apr 30, 2004 7:56:15 GMT
George would have been particularly forgiving if FAUL had been agreeable to putting clues in the Free As A Bird video.
giving the game away, hey, hey. . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Apr 30, 2004 8:33:07 GMT
Every time I find the "Frankenstein Monster" metaphor very similar to the John's situation after Faul's incoming.
Remember the Frankenstein Monster killed Doc Frankenstein....too
|
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on Apr 30, 2004 12:33:28 GMT
Are you ever right, S.K. It's so horrible what happened to those men. All of their lives were ruined forever. Perplexed, I agree. T.I. & P.B., I agree with you both also.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on Apr 30, 2004 17:13:57 GMT
Lucy - I have to take a closer look at that ribbon. Sorry it's taken so long to get back to you on this. Stay tuned. I just looked, can't tell. Abbey if you read this, break out your magnifying glass ;D Or anyone else, of course!
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on May 1, 2004 4:03:38 GMT
Lucy - I have to take a closer look at that ribbon. Sorry it's taken so long to get back to you on this. Stay tuned. I just looked, can't tell. Abbey if you read this, break out your magnifying glass ;D Or anyone else, of course! I can't swear for sure. The printing is really blurry, but the bottom looks like it coud be #1. Possibly the top writing which is so blurry is "Beatles" Beatles #1??? Just a guess. Couldn't bring it into focus even with the Sherlock kit.  |
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on May 3, 2004 15:56:30 GMT
Thank you, Abbey ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on May 3, 2004 21:41:39 GMT
Did Billy give himself a "blue ribbon" for taking over James Paul's life? Or is because he won the so-called contest for a Paul look-alike? I thought cheap copies didn't get ribbons |
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on May 3, 2004 22:39:40 GMT
Who knows. All I can say is that the photo itself is suffused with sadness  |
|
|
|
Post by LUCY on May 3, 2004 23:42:00 GMT
Who knows. All I can say is that the photo itself is suffused with sadness why dosen't that image display anymore? and seriously, IS that a NIKE swoosh on ringo's neck? what is that mark?can you enlarge it ABBEY? |
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on May 5, 2004 13:28:22 GMT
LUCY - it's still displaying on my terminal. I don't know WHAT that mark is. Abbey take a lookee & let us know, ok luv?
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on May 8, 2004 5:31:26 GMT
why dosen't that image display anymore? and seriously, IS that a NIKE swoosh on ringo's neck? what is that mark?can you enlarge it ABBEY? Sorry to be so slow getting back to you. I can't enlarge it as my computer came over on the Mayflower. However, with a magnifying glass and close examination, it appears to be a hickey  There is a roundish spot that shows up the best and then "bruising" going up from there, giving the appearance of the Nike check. |
|
|
|
Post by abbey on May 19, 2004 5:37:15 GMT
When I first saw that series of pictures, I was embarassed for Paul. He looked almost girlish. Thank God, I now know that it wasn't Paul, but Faul. Come to think of it, he looks royally stoned.
|
|
|
|
Post by ViVi on Sept 3, 2004 18:25:30 GMT
I wanted to move this up so that the new people can see the photos. What I find so amazing is that Paul & Bill really do greatly resemble each other in certain photos. If Faul/Bill was a smaller man, I'm pretty sure that his replacing Paul would be ALOT harder to prove !
It's the difference in the size of the two men that makes it so obvious !
ViVi
|
|
There is a roundish spot that shows up the best and then "bruising" going up from there, giving the appearance of the Nike check.