|
|
Post by BillyJones on Jul 6, 2004 15:30:58 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Jul 6, 2004 19:28:52 GMT
As always, Chris, WELL Done! I can NEVER see Paul posing like Bill/Faul. You're right he would not have been caught dead in that one pose or any of those poses for that matter. Paul was all man, all the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jilli on Jul 6, 2004 20:45:48 GMT
look at that first picture of Faul...the one where he is looking in the mirror. look down on the shelf in front of the mirror. Is that a collection of false noses? I think so
|
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on Jul 6, 2004 21:15:01 GMT
Why Jilli, I think you're right. Damn, I was at this ALL day. I kid you not! It is NOT easy putting so many photos up. But as you can see, I'm VERY serious about all of this  Chris  |
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Jul 8, 2004 15:15:26 GMT
I like the one where he is playing with his nipples ;D This man? really has a problem. Also the one where it looks like he's in a snit, he can't button his pants...gained weight, have we? Maybe that's way he's in a snit ;D ;D ;D
Paul was a man all the way and Faul/Bill was a.........just a minute the word(s) will come to me.......bisexual, faggie, scary, freaky, weird. Can anyone add to these?
|
|
|
|
Post by gracemer on Jul 8, 2004 19:34:39 GMT
Unwholesome, loathsome, girly-man.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Jul 8, 2004 19:49:27 GMT
The man is truly weird....not even sure if I should refer to him as a man. Totally weird, totally fem, totally crude. What's with the chains and bamboo "fencing" Is he into S&M ?
And we all know James Paul would NEVER have worn anything pink, purple, fuscia. In the 60's those were considered "gay" colors and real men wouldn't be caught dead in them.
I can't believe we have something like that representing James Paul. Bet he's turning over in his grave.
|
|
|
|
Post by gracemer on Jul 11, 2004 18:58:02 GMT
Bill & Chris, you asked that differences be posted here. After watching Anthology, the biggest difference I noticed is that Faul talks with his hands all the time. Paul didn't do that. He kept a calm dignified demeanor during interviews.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillyJones on Jul 11, 2004 22:26:12 GMT
gracemer - thank you. I do believe your right. If you look at the photos of Faul posted here, he DOES seem to need to quiet his hands. He poses them, or shoves them in his pocket I will try to find more photos to further illustrate this very important fact. It's good that you pointed this out. I'll just post photos of them being interviewed, if I can find enough of each man to do so ;D Chris  |
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Jan 2, 2005 17:19:18 GMT
I'm bumping this up so that the DeZombificator can see what I was referring to.
|
|
TheDZ
Provocative Operator 
Posts: 435
|
Post by TheDZ on Jan 3, 2005 0:52:23 GMT
An excellent collection of shots I must say. What strikes me most is how different Paul and Bill look. Totally Freakin Different!!! (love that pile of noses, lol) With regards to body language , the clip of Hello, Goodbye is particularly revealing , to me that is. Bill's movements are VERY awkward, strained and out of rhythm compared to the effortless, confident movement of the real thing.(Vocally as well) The other Beatles in that clip seem to be drugged perhaps to blend in better with Bill. Bill was , after all, faking it. Its hard to be something that you are not. With Regards to Bill's sexual orientation, thats kinda difficult to tell. I've seen some rather effeminate males in my time that definitely weren't gay or bi. And some Burly men that were. Now Sister Mary, about John and Bill having an intimate relationship, I'll have to think about that some more . All four of them were under an enormous amount of emotional pressure. Things can happen under pressure that might not otherwise, especially when strange narcotics are added to the brew.  Excellent Forum btw, even in spite of the blind and mind controlled trolls. Remember, you wouldn't know that you're on the right track if the ding dongs didn't try to mess with you! ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Jan 3, 2005 5:54:41 GMT
Blind and mind-control trolls? I thought we'd managed to pretty much get rid of them.  |
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Jan 3, 2005 15:07:42 GMT
Well, DeZombificator, I have been a Beatle fan since 1964 and I can guarantee you that Paul would NEVER have worn pink, purple or any such colors, nor would he have worn gold platform shoes. Neither have I ever seen Paul in a feminine pose. Yet I have seen dozens of pictures of Bill looking and acting fem.
The picture of Elton John is a good example. I could never see Paul having another male sit on his lap and look so sweet. He would have "sh*t a brick". Too often Bill is posed cuddling to some other guy.
In their marriage Linda was the more masculine and Bill nire effeminate.
Johnny missed Paul and, for a time, tried to accept Bill as his replacement. It didn't work. We now know Johnny was bisexual and so is Bill. Johnny deep slide into drug comatosis shows how much he truly missed Paul.
|
|
TheDZ
Provocative Operator
Posts: 435
|
Post by TheDZ on Jan 3, 2005 23:56:15 GMT
To be perfectly frank, I think the Sgt Pepper wardrobe change made them all look like fools. Would Paul really have dressed up that way? Would any of them , if they had a choice? No Way! They had a great polished act, tremendous live performance skills , studio freedom, massive success: Their albums were uplifting, energetic and amazingly creative. Then the Sh*t hit the fan and the foolish clothes and morose dirges filled with clues began. Soaring spine shivering harmonies gone, except for the real Paul's left overs. What a Bummer! Don't get me wrong, those latter albums contain some excellent music, but..... you know, way heavier in tone. Now a possible point for those in favor of the Faul's door is swinging both ways theory: This is a quote from David Bowie regarding his days performing as Ziggy Stardust - "I lied actually - I said I was gay - when I was actually bisexual - I had thought of saying that I was an existentialist but I realised that I was being used." - Bowie (2000) This is only potentially relevant of course if you've read my earlier post about The Rise and Faul of Paul McCartney and the Beatles from Liverpool in the general section! Sister Mary, considering how many people have known about and otherwise been involved with and profited from this bizarre event, I wouldn't be surprised that a whole lot of disinfo was spread in the 70's to discredit John's image and credibility in the eyes of the public. As I recall it Goldman's book was fairly controversial at the time, for the claims it made about Johns sexuality . Honestly I haven't read the book, so I can't truly comment on it. John may have been a damaged, sensitive man , but my gut says that he was straight. Btw Sister MA , many excellent , insightful and provocative posts. Thanks for sticking around!  This PID thing actually is important! |
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Jan 12, 2005 16:25:21 GMT
Thank you DeZombificator ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by chatcatt on Feb 25, 2005 19:52:53 GMT
Although a very changeable feature, did JPM have a widows peak as Faul does in the picture of him with his hair slicked back? I have yet to see of picture of JPM's forehead, let alone him wearing his hair back, ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by byrdsmaniac on Feb 25, 2005 23:14:18 GMT
We now know Johnny was bisexual because he married Yoko?  What is the basis for this allegation? |
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Feb 26, 2005 2:39:24 GMT
although i can see a moderate difference, i know that i act differently now to when i was an infant, a child, an adolescent etc, and although im not old enough yet to find out, im sure when im in my 50's-60's i wont act in the same way i do now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Feb 26, 2005 8:25:22 GMT
I suspect truly I am regressing. Alas.
Body language. Well, "demonstrative" is a quality I associate with Paul/Bill/Faul/Wiliam/billy/etc.
I don't view Lennon as a bisexual person, but that was up to him I guess.
The largest picture archive of Paul and billy or William I have yet to see, BillyJones! Bravo!
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Feb 28, 2005 14:45:16 GMT
plasticpaul, the differences were obvious the moment Bill took the job. He just has different body language than Paul did. After all, they ARE two different people. You can change a person's facial features. I'm sure they even changed other things about him. However, they have different nipples, belly buttons, feet, hands, etc. They even have different bone structures ! Back in the 60's & 70's who could've known that we would be able to compare photos the way we're doing now ? If they did, we wouldn't have the vast array of photos that we have to use  ;D I've read in several places that John was RELUCTANTLY bi-sexual. He might've given into temptation occasionally. I've heard stories of him & Stu & him & Brian. However if ANYONE dared to call him gay, John would knock their teeth out !!! |
|
|
|
Post by gracemer on Feb 28, 2005 22:18:27 GMT
although i can see a moderate difference, i know that i act differently now to when i was an infant, a child, an adolescent etc, and although im not old enough yet to find out, im sure when im in my 50's-60's i wont act in the same way i do now. Right! As we witnessed on the latest Super Bowl half-time, Faul is still behaving and doing the moves of a 22-24 yr. old Paul (but not as well, of course). Proof that he just plain doesn't know what to do with himself. Sis, John wasn't gay--he was just having sex with men! I think there can be a difference?  ? Being "bad," curiosity or what have you. |
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Mar 1, 2005 0:27:27 GMT
Touche grace
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Mar 1, 2005 14:17:42 GMT
gracemer, I didn't say that John was gay. I wouldn't say that |
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Mar 2, 2005 14:40:17 GMT
Chatcatt - it's very hard to find photos of Paul in which you CAN see his forehead. This is one that I've posted before:  If I come across any others, I will post them for you to peruse. Paul did have a very shallow widow's peak. It was not as defined as Bill's is. Here's a photo of Bill's widow's peak to compare it with. From the McCartney album:  Sis |
|
|
|
Post by cavendish on May 23, 2005 19:52:45 GMT
Goldberry, this if for you courtesy of SMA ! ;D Bumpity Bump ! |
|
You think Michael looks a LITTLE uncomfortable 
Could you picture Paul posed this way 
or this
WHAT a face 
SCARY 
What WAS he thinking 
Look over these photos & then you decide if they CAN be the same man:
This PID thing actually is important!
