|
Post by Scatterdome on Sept 18, 2003 13:44:06 GMT
I'm starting this thread to see what new observations pop up that relate strictly to: 1)evidence that a different person took on the public role of "Paul" after autumn 1966, and 2)evidence that the Beatles intentionally presented us with numerous "Paul Is Dead" clues.
If I, or anyone else, posts anything that's already been pointed out on this messageboard, please send a message to the poster including directions to the thread where it's already appeared. If it's me, I'll erase all (or part) of my new post if it seems the earlier post already said what needed to be said. I'm still new to this messageboard (first view: 9/8), and still have not yet had time to read everything on it due to other time-restraining obligations.
Hold tight, I will quickly follow this with my first observation.
|
|
|
Post by MotherNaureSon on Sept 18, 2003 14:33:55 GMT
I can't wait until then !! I'm intrigued !
|
|
|
Post by Scatterdome on Sept 18, 2003 14:46:01 GMT
Well, here's my first observation:
Back in '96, when I first viewed the Beatles Anthology videos, I noticed something strange in the section covering 1966, although at the time I didn't realize it was downright fishy.
"Paul" is surprised by a reporter with a cameraman in tow, during a night-on-the-town. He is wearing a new moustache for the first time in the chronologically-presented videos, and appears to have been taken off-guard. Here is my word-for-word transcription of the clip:
Reporter: "Let's have a brief word with you."
Faul: "Yeah?"
Reporter: "If you never toured again, would it worry you?"
Faul: "Uh, I don't know... No, I don't think so."
Reporter: "Wouldn't worry you?"
Faul: "But, because the only thing about that is is, that, uh- Performance, for us (pauses to nervously rub ear) See, it's, it's gone downhill, performance. 'Cos we can't develop when no one can hear us, you know what I mean so for us, to perform is, uh it's difficult, gets difficult each time."
Reporter: "You mean they don't listen to you, and you definitely don't want to do that?"
Faul: "Oh yeah we want to do it but- uh, if we're not listened to, then and we can't even hear ourselves then we can't improve... in that. We can't get any better."
When I first saw that clip in '96, I instantly thought: "Wow, he must be REALLY stoned! He can barely form sentences!" But then I realized that didn't make sense, as the Beatles were first introduced to pot by Bob Dylan in September '64, and had been puffing HARD since then, especially picking up the pace during "Help." From September '64 through the above interview clip in late '66, the Beatles had done countless live, on-the-spot (& on-the-pot) interviews, and never did Paul seem remotely as bumbling in his sentence formation and overall presentation; up to this interview, he had consistently remained as famously quick-witted and well-spoken in interviews as he had from the beginning, even when caught totally off-guard. Back in '96, after thinking of that, I reasoned that he must have just been really tired for that brief interview, as he didn't seem to be drunk and was still (at least according to the Beatles) not into anything stronger than pot, alcohol or over-the-counter speed pills in late '66.
Now that we know that Faul first entered the scene around then wearing a moustache to distract from his facial differences, there is a much stronger probable reason for his severe verbal stumbling in this interview:
Faul was still a little shaky in his brand-new role, and had not yet smoothed out his speech imitation-- his brain energy was largely focused on keeping the voice sounding the same as Paul. Even though he smoothed out his public persona as time passed, in my opinion he never again exuded the level of wit that we loved about the original Paul.
This is just one of many possible indications of the switch that I have found by viewing the 1966-1967 segments of the "Beatles Anthology" with new eyes and ears. (In this same brief segment documenting the period between their announcement that they were quitting touring and "Strawberry Fields Forever / Penny Lane," check out how Neil Aspinall delivers his line, "and what was Paul doing? I don't know what he was doing.") I haven't seen the new expanded DVD yet-- I wonder if it contains even more indications of the switch in the segments from that period.
"I'm looking through you / YOU'RE NOT THE SAME!"
|
|
|
Post by MotherNaureSon on Sept 18, 2003 14:59:34 GMT
Yes, I have seen that scene too.
Good observation, Scatterdome ! ;D
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Sept 18, 2003 16:50:37 GMT
...pauses to nervously rub ear... ...and that guy could be James Paul McCartney.... ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Scatterdome on Sept 18, 2003 17:46:20 GMT
Possibly-- I guess we don't know the exact date of the interview, do we? I'm bound to be wrong about some of the stuff I've written-- gee whiz, I've typed like a madman since I first found this site! If it's James Paul, maybe he really WAS into the stronger stuff at that point. Well, anyway, it's healthy to speculate any possible angles. Type on, fellow explorers!
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Sept 18, 2003 18:12:17 GMT
Possibly-- I guess we don't know the exact date of the interview, do we? December 20th 1966 Oh, don't worry.... Unfortunately it's not James Paul. It's just Faul (no more Bill after plastic surgery and absolutely NOT James Paul McCartney!) Already done. we have spent a year...
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Sept 19, 2003 5:44:08 GMT
Image Manipulation Software.
Anybody here ever use ProTools in the music studio to fix notes and pitches, and rhythms in the computer?
ProTools in for audio.
Is there a video equivalent?
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Sept 19, 2003 8:06:26 GMT
Oh, there are so many... But "the masters" are still those of the ILM. Do you remeber "Forrest Gump" (1994) special effects? Well after that, "Anthology" collection went out....
|
|
|
Post by Forever 17 on Sept 29, 2003 8:07:16 GMT
8-)Here is my contribution to this thread, and it comes via my brilliant son, a true Beatles fan.
He said he put this together recently, that at the end of the Sgt. Pepper's album, they say outright, "We'd like to introduce you to.... BILLY SHEARS!" Then, the song immediately begins with the lyrics.. "What would you do if I sang out of tune, would you stand up and walk out on me...?"
Remember the report of the argument early that morning, when it is said that Paul walked out on Ringo over an argument about a recording?
|
|
|
Post by MrMustard on Sept 29, 2003 10:44:26 GMT
Hey good point! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Scatterdome on Oct 7, 2003 19:54:15 GMT
i wonder if george lucas is upset for not been given credit for the work his ILM team has done with the anthlogy!! I might be getting carried away here, but... I just watched Tape 1 of the Anthology again, and discovered that many of the still photos of "Young Paul" look more like "Young Faul" to me! Is this a sign that my brain is now stretching too far for clues, or is it possible that those photos were altered by a special effects team?? On that note, I should mention that there were a couple rare moments on that first tape where I thought I saw clear unaltered video footage of the unmistakeable round face of James Paul. The first is at the VERY beginning of the tape, during the video montage set to the tune of "In My Life." For the exact span of time when John is singing the lyrics "Some are gone and some remain," a slowed-down shot of James Paul smiling is shown!
|
|
|
Post by byrdsmaniac on Oct 11, 2003 1:00:42 GMT
Sun King has mentioned a zillion times that the anthology has been doctored.
|
|
|
Post by Scatterdome on Oct 17, 2003 4:31:38 GMT
Here's a nice pair of clues that I'm sure has been mentioned, but fits on this thread as an introduction for those of us who haven't read it yet:
Here is how the track listing for "I Am The Walrus" appears on the inside liner notes of Magical Mystery Tour:
I Am The Walrus ("No you're not," said Little Nicola) John Lennon - Paul McCartney
Paired with this famous line from "Glass Onion":
"And here's another clue for you all / The Walrus was Paul"
Translation: I Am Paul ("No you're not," said Little Nicola)
;D
|
|
|
Post by Forum Manager on Oct 18, 2003 18:19:05 GMT
SCATTERDOME!!! THAT WAS BRILLIANT!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Scatterdome on Oct 18, 2003 22:10:00 GMT
Thank you, #9!
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Oct 18, 2003 23:27:42 GMT
;D Scatterdome. Very nicely done... Thank you.... All we need is love & THE TRUTH !!!! Chris
|
|
|
Post by Scatterdome on Oct 22, 2003 8:50:34 GMT
I noticed another clue just of the left of that one; this one surely must have been already been mentioned on this forum, but I'm bringing it up on this thread for continuity's sake and to pose a question. On the opposite inner sleeve of the original vinyl, or on the CD booklet, to the left of the ("No, you're not," said Little Nicola) clue, there is a cartoon of the Beatles wearing red robes and wizard hats with an interesting caption below it: AWAY IN THE SKY, beyond the clouds, live 4 or 5 magicians. By casting WONDERFUL SPELLS they turn the Most Ordinary Coach Trip into a MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR. If you let yourself go, the Magicians will take you away to marvellous places. Maybe YOU'VE been on a MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR without even realising it. Are you ready to go? SPLENDID! The story begins on Page 7... or 8... Now, consider the first line, and that it uses the word "live," which is present tense: AWAY IN THE SKY, beyond the clouds, live 4 or 5 Magicians. Now, of the following two plotlines, ponder which plotline this particular clue is more compatible with: 1)60IF, in which Paul dies in autumn 1966, and in which any subsequent true McCartney compositions recorded by Faul were written before the switch- a scenario in which there were never more than 4 living Beatles actively contributing to any one album. 2)My theory, in which the Beatles hire a replacement for Paul, with one of the reasons being so that he can retreat from Beatlemania, while he continues to write songs for the band, and possibly books, in peace- a scenario in which in 1967 (and on through their breakup) there are 4 Beatles seen by the public, but in reality 5 living, breathing Beatles (Paul, Faul, John, George, and Ringo) actively contributing to the music (John and George as songwriter/performers, Ringo and Faul as performers who don't often contribute songs but write their instrument's parts sometimes, and Paul as a songwriter and (possibly) occasional secret instrumental performer in the studio.) For those unfamiliar with my theory, here is the direct link to the thread: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=paul&action=display&thread=1063219993I'd be interested to see some opinions on this question posted on this thread! On a side note, notice how the four robe-clad Beatles in the cartoon are dancing in a circle, but with a conspicuous gap between George and Ringo! (Also, notice how much larger "No, you're not" is written in proportion to the song titles in this original vinyl sleeve, as compared to the CD booklet, where "No, you're not" is written smaller then the song titles. Maybe they felt they should tone it down?)
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Oct 22, 2003 9:43:56 GMT
Scatterdome: have you ever seen "Magical Mystery Tour" the movie? Well, and the fifth magician is.....Mal Evans!
|
|
|
Post by Scatterdome on Oct 22, 2003 10:02:11 GMT
Sun King, even if that was said in the movie, don't you think it's possible that this clue referring to "4 or 5 magicians" could've had a double meaning, considering the numerous "PID" clues surrounding it in the album's artwork and lyrics, and considering that many of the Beatles' lyrics are widely known to have double, and sometimes, triple meanings? And ESPECIALLY considering that this clue appears directly to the left of the "Little Nicola" PID clue?
|
|
|
Post by Curious on Oct 22, 2003 10:17:16 GMT
Either that, or it could be a reference to Brian, who was sometimes known as the "Fifth Beatle"?
|
|
|
Post by Scatterdome on Oct 22, 2003 10:26:40 GMT
I wouldn't think that either Mal or Brian contributed enough "spellcasting" to the actual recording of "Magical Mystery Tour's" songs to be elevated to the status of another Beatle. This whimsical little paragraph clearly describes 4 or 5 MUSIC-MAKERS, as it obviously implies that the 4 or 5 magicians have created some music that will take the listener on a Magical Mystery Tour. I don't think that Mal doing roadie stuff and shaking a tambourine occasionally, or Brian doing manager stuff, would really qualify them as one of the "spellcasters" in this caption; do you?
|
|
|
Post by Curious on Oct 22, 2003 10:34:32 GMT
I was actually thinking along the lines of Brian having shaped them into the group thy were at that time, rather than making any specific contribution. Without him, none of that would have been happening.
|
|
|
Post by Scatterdome on Oct 22, 2003 10:37:23 GMT
It is true that both Mal and Brian were crucial members of the Beatles' team. But, in reference to this drawing's caption, would their contributions really qualify them as fellow spellcasters?
|
|
|
Post by Curious on Oct 22, 2003 10:48:52 GMT
I believe that Brian's would, yes. He was instrumental in marketing the Beatles and hyping them to heights of fame never seen before. If it hadn't been for Brian, would the Beatles have made it any further than the pubs and clubs of Liverpool?
|
|