madtitan125
Contributor
"There is no knowledge that is not power!"
Posts: 126
|
Post by madtitan125 on Oct 22, 2003 19:31:49 GMT
Hi again everyone!
If you have access to the Hello Goodbye video, check out the part where they are all performing on stage, dressed up in Sgt Pepper uniforms.
Camera view: directly in front of band.
The floor they are standing on is not level!
Stage floor is OBVIOUSLY slanted downward on Faul's side, to create the illusion of same height John/Faul.
You can find a photo of this in Anthology 2 booklet.
If anyone has access to scanner, please try to post this photo.
I have a video that contains 3 different videoclips for Hello Goodbye. And the floor level discrepency is painfully obvious (painful, that is if you're a JP fan)!
|
|
madtitan125
Contributor
"There is no knowledge that is not power!"
Posts: 126
|
Post by madtitan125 on Oct 22, 2003 20:01:02 GMT
Maybe that's what it is, having Faul stand closer to the camera! (He sure did have to get closer to create the illusion of being same height as John!)
Either way, Faul isn't 5'11. He's not John's height.
He's not James Paul! He's a badwrongfalsepaul (that is funny every time I see it, sorry!)
It sure looks like the floor's not level in the Anthology photo, though. Check it out. Then again, come to think of it, it was kind of a worms-eye view.
p.s. That was one quick reply! Bye for now!
|
|
|
|
Post by Karma76 on Oct 22, 2003 20:18:25 GMT
he is like a fortune cookie...hehe ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Darkhorse on Oct 23, 2003 1:25:38 GMT
This has been discussed before but thank you for bringing it up madtitan. Many of the new members have not seen this. There is also a slanted camera in the I Am the Walrus video on MMT. Plus Faul is wearing no shoes too! Regarding Faul's height, it is my belief that he may be close to 5'11" or slightly taller and JP, John and George were all around 5'9". People always exaggerate their height and especially famous people. So now they list Faul as 5'11" to remove any suspicion since John and George are listed at 5'11" on most sites. The trouble is, is that I recently saw Faul on Saturday Night Live(old repeat) standing next to Alec Baldwin and he looked and inch and a half shorter than Alec and Alec is listed at 5'11" on most celebrity sites. Let's say Faul had shoes with very little heal in them and Alec, standard heals in his shoes. Still that could make Alec a half inch to a full inch taller than Faul. Maybe Alec's height is listed wrong? Maybe he's taller? I don't know. I would say though that John, JP and George were all about 5'9" and Faul stands 5'11 1/2". 5'11" is too generous for the three Beatles.  |
|
|
|
Post by Darkhorse on Oct 23, 2003 2:23:08 GMT
Here is the breakdown of the Beatles' heights. Keep in mind this is totally my opinion and is subject to change. After seeing many videos and comparing the Beatles heights with other celebrities(Jane Asher for one is listed at 5'5" us.imdb.com/name/nm0038870/bio ...doesn't make sense listing James Paul at 5'11" after this: uberkinder.5u.com/paul/fc42.html) I have come up with these figures: James Paul 5'9 1/2" George 5'9 1/4" John 5'9" Ringo 5'5 1/2" Faul 5'11 1/2" Any thoughts? P.S. Faul may be shorter now because he is in his 60's or 70's. Can someonme tell me how much you can shrink as you get older? I think it's at least an inch... |
|
|
|
Post by JamesPaul & Brian on Oct 23, 2003 10:32:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by zoona on Oct 23, 2003 15:56:32 GMT
I have some magazines from the early sixties. There were 4, one on each of the Beatles. I will have to get them out but I do recall that they said that Paul, John and George were all 5 foot 11. I cannot recall Ringo's height but the other three stuck in my mind, with them all being the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darkhorse on Oct 23, 2003 16:39:10 GMT
Interesting Zoona...
|
|
|
|
Post by zoona on Oct 23, 2003 19:38:17 GMT
I've got the four magazines out. They were "Pop Pics Super" and each one says "Beatle" at the top, then their name and then "His Story By Himself". They are from the early sixties, probably 63 or 64.
Paul's height is listed as 5 foot 11
So is John's and George's in their respective issues. Ringo is listed as 5 foot 8.
Paul's eye colour is listed as "hazel"
I would love to upload a picture from the front cover of the Paul one because his eyes look greeny coloured but I'm not sure how to upload direct from computer on to here.. if anyone can advise me then I will do so, as I have it scanned in ready.
|
|
|
|
Post by zoona on Oct 23, 2003 19:42:26 GMT
I've searched it on the net and here is the mag that I talk of above..  |
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Oct 23, 2003 21:44:07 GMT
.....I would love to upload a picture from the front cover of the Paul one because his eyes look greeny coloured but I'm not sure how to upload direct from computer on to here.. if anyone can advise me then I will do so, as I have it scanned in ready. zoona, you have to upload the photo to a hosting site or server in order to post it on the board. If you aren't able to do that, you can email it to me and I'll post it for you. Check your private messages for my email addy. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Oct 23, 2003 21:49:18 GMT
Please a 300dpi .tif scan of that WONDERFUL image of James Paul McCartney! Please!  |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Oct 24, 2003 0:04:24 GMT
Zoona, is this an original mag from 64 or a reprint in a later book? We understood that Paul's eyes were chocolate brown.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darkhorse on Oct 24, 2003 0:35:07 GMT
...yes Paul's eyes were definitely brown, not hazel! |
|
|
|
Post by zoona on Oct 24, 2003 9:05:40 GMT
Hello ;D I've made a page to link the pictures from. The magazine is not a reprint. It's an original, all four issues are originals.. Also below are the details printed in size that clarify Paul's height and eye color..   If the pictures dont load here is a link to the page.. www.geocities.com/zoonaking/index.html?1066985321150 |
|
|
|
Post by Curious on Oct 24, 2003 9:16:10 GMT
That's the first time I've ever seen, in print, his eyes referred to as hazel. Also, I've always seen his hair referred to as dark borwn, as opposed to black.
|
|
|
|
Post by zoona on Oct 24, 2003 9:23:15 GMT
A couple of years ago I visited London and went to the Rock Circus who are part of Madame Tussauds. Of course the Beatles waxworks were in there. I made a point of studying his eye color and they were definitely hazel.
Prior to the visit I'd always liked the song "Brown Eyed Handsome Man" because I always related it to Paul but when I saw the waxworks I was almost shocked because his eyes were not brown...
and the waxworks were made from the exact features of each of the Beatles. There is a picture somewhere of Paul sitting holding or besides his waxwork eye.. so the waxwork details are precise... his eyes are hazel..
zoona
|
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Oct 24, 2003 9:40:22 GMT
Well, the eyes in the photo are clearly brown so...hazel brown then?
|
|
|
|
Post by Darkhorse on Oct 24, 2003 17:01:10 GMT
Watch any of the Beatles movies or their appearances on the Ed Sullivan show. Paul's eyes are definitely brown!!!! Nuff said.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eggman on Oct 24, 2003 18:09:51 GMT
And Faul's eyes DEFINITELY green!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Karma76 on Oct 24, 2003 19:54:15 GMT
Again if you knew me you would say my eyes are dark brown but when you look for real they are hazel. Hazel can flucuate depending on what you wear or by lighting. I say if they are hazel then lets maybe remove that focus from the theory. rememebr you guys want everything to be valid and if your going to say the madame T's wax manequins are proof for the height. then you got to say the same for the eyes!
|
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Oct 24, 2003 22:47:26 GMT
the Beatles in Madame Tussaud's NYC are definitely not done from the actual Beatles, the likeness is terrible.  |
|
|
|
Post by zoona on Oct 25, 2003 14:17:44 GMT
The thing is with waxworks, sometimes facially it is the expressions that they get wrong, the look might not be quite right.. and we then say "they've not got that person right" and it is all down to their facial expression... But when it comes to height, hair color, eye color etc, then they have to be correct They take a lot of time measuring the person, matching their eye colors and hair. I once saw a program about it and there is a lot involved, everything has to be perfect. zoona |
|
|
|
Post by Karma76 on Oct 27, 2003 16:34:31 GMT
Yes i actually heard that JLO was bull casue she thought her butt looked way way too fat and the madame said sorry i went by exact measurements and would not change it.
|
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Oct 27, 2003 17:48:59 GMT
Yes i actually heard that JLO was bull casue she thought her butt looked way way too fat and the madame said sorry i went by exact measurements and would not change it. Madame Tussaud has been dead for many years (she was a friend of Marie Antionette)...the museum PR states that they still use her techniques, etc., but some of the figures (at least in the NYC Tussaud's) are inferior quality in comparison to the others. Almost as if they were from a different waxwork entirely. I saw a program (possibly the same one referenced above) about Tussaud's, which showed in great detail the measurements, photographs, etc that were done to create a new figure (the museum calls them 'portraits') -- this one was of skater Michelle Kwan, and came out beautifully. They have others that were not done from the actual person, such as Elvis -- and the likeness is terrible. Tussaud's has had more than one Beatles "look" in wax over the years...is it known for sure if any of the real Beatles sat for measurements and photos for Tussaud's, or if they simply worked from measurements "on record"?  |
|
