I agree with you RR, although I think perhaps I like Wings a bit more than you seem to (if I'm reading you correctly).
And lets admit a truth: Wings wasn't so much a band as Paul's backing band. He was the boss, it only had three consistent members (him, Linda, Denny Laine) and the rest were salary players who couldn't get commissions and royalties. It's Paul fnatasy dominating his own Beatles much like fellow egomaniac/control freak John did with his Plastic Ono band. This is why Paul himself is in the Rock Hall of Fame and not Wings, who unless my data is wrong, were the most successful rock act of the 1970s in terms of record sales.
Problem alwyas been with solo Paul is that while he's prolific with a steady output and doesn't get enough credit for his eagerness to experiment and flex outside his comfort zone (consider his reggae work in the 1970s), he's can be rather hit and miss. Not all the "miss" songs are bad per say, just too forgettable.
Of course that isn't as bad as it sounds considering that happens to most artists in varying degrees one way or another. Hell Paul a few years ago had a Top 40 UK hit in
"Dance Tonight," which isn't necessarily one of his better works, but its a delightful little number none the less.
I just think that like John, his work sometimes pointlessly suffered from not having someone with authority edit him whether it be a John or George Martin.
The one knock I have against McCartney's solo output would be that like way too many singers/bands in the 1970s, he got too wrapped up in the post-production studio tinkering of songs which overwhelmed in layers upon layers whatever good potent tunes he could have cooked up. Consider "Silly Love Songs," which in lyrics is Paul defiantly embracing his reputation and telling his critics (like John) to go piss up a flagpole. But those lyrics are swamped by the production. That particular song is asking and demanding a lean mean kickass cover without the layering.
But even then that's him more in the late 1970s. His first solo album MCCARTNEY, the one he literally recorded at home during winter 1969 is quite good, free of that studio bullshit above and RAM is even better.
Anyway, Lennon/McCartney together were geniuses as far as I'm concerned. Do you ever wonder, had John lived if the two of them would mend fences (even to a degree) and still be composing together on occasion at least? The two matured Beatles perhaps reinventing themselves in some manner. Broadway play music maybe????? We'll never know.
Sure. Beates had that official documentary long in production and development which later would become the Beatles Anthology, and I'm sure eventually those 4 would have gotten back and done something whether it be a concert or a single or something to give that shared past a proper respectful burial instead of being done in by bruised egos, lawsuits, and public feuding.
Surprisingly (perhaps),I have not seen "The Two of Us" that you speak of or any other biography type film that I can think of. Most of my knowledge of the Beatles is their music and whatever part of their personal lives (and I guess there was quite a bit) that was made public throughout their careers.
TIS
TWO OF US was a VH1 television movie and I don't believe it got a DVD release. However its floating around on YouTube in 10 something "parts" and you can watch it there.
Like any TV production you have to accept the budget limitations (i.e. "1970s" is a street with 2 guys with afros and a Nova) and the crazy fact that they couldn't afford to play any Beatles songs, so instead we get a Peter Frampton tune. Which is like making a movie about Robert DeNiro but only affording to play a clip from HIGH SCHOOL MUSICAL.
Neverless, TWO OF US was pretty good. A fictional meeting between the two in 1976, but based on the fact that during that decade despite their past grudges real and petty, they would occassionally hang out together. They were apparently even on friendly speaking terms when John got shot.
Which is what gets me and most everybody. What if during that time one of those two had laid down their pride and simply said "hey care to give your two cents on this song I'm writing?"
What if?A
Google search for
Sam-Taylor Wood brings up only one site on the first page that takes her marriage and pregnancy to Aaron Johnson as its focus. First, it's
The Daily Mail; second, it isn't a review of the film.
That doesn't amount to a scandal.
Well there's your problem.
It's worthwhile and moves pretty quickly. It's centered around his peace, civil rights and feminist activism which evidently irritated a lot of people in power.
Its hilarious how the Nixon White House/FBI were truely afraid of this self-described "phoney radical" and wasted God knows how many hours and manpower to find out how even off the drugs, he wasn't that big of a threat except in certain people's imagination.
Quite much like the (white) right wing's paranoia over rap over the last 25 years. Right Lilo?
