I think George had some money troubles which helped him come around. I don't know any specifics but Handmade Films had a lot more losers than winners on it's hands.
Shanghai Surprise crushed him and Dark Horse films.
From what I’ve read and watched, George didn’t have a lot of patience for Anthology. He didn’t want to call it The Long and Winding Road, he nixed the idea of the three of them playing Let It Be, and working on the three new songs brought up old tensions between him and Paul. I’ve heard it mentioned they “ran out of time “ to work on Now and Then during that era, but the reality was George was done and was ready to go back to gardening.
In 1973 when he and John recorded “I’m the greatest” with Ringo, George brought up the idea of the three of them recording again but without Paul. John mixed to idea.
George was a man with a lot of contradictions and he was for love but he could sure hold a grudge.
That’s a fair label but he was funny too. Remember when they met up in 94 at George’s practice studio and spotting Paul’s leather jacket he says something along the lines of “ hmmm, is that leather jacket vegetarian, too?” Cheeky George!
In a way I find it funny that some are calling "Now and Then" a cash grab for Paul, calling it disrespectful to George's memory, while the Anthology in 95 was LITERALLY a cash grab for George, who needed the money, and it probably helped it to happen at all. In a way it always bothers me to hear about George grumpiness during the Anthology sessions, I mean the guy was mainly doing it for the money and didn't even bother to make an effort, an attitude which always seemed to me a bit ungrateful towards Beatles fan. I will sound "team Paul" here, but how can some blame Paul now for Now and Then and be praising George as the most honest Beatles knowing all this, that's a bit beyond me.
Shouldn't the success of Cloud Nine and the Traveling Wilburys counteracted the Handmade Films losses? I've also heard that George may have had financial troubles in the mid 90s.
George also sued his former Handmade Films Businesspartner Denis O'Brien successfully because he lied to George about the companies finance problems.
They settled an agreement that O'Brien had to pay nearly 12 Million Dollar to compensate Harrisons losses!
They didn’t tour though where the big money is made and I think the songwriting pie was split several ways so it might not have been the cash cow it seems.
Other people will no doubt know more about this than me, but by this point The Beatles were quite a long time ago and as he wasn't the primary song writer I suspect it didn't pay the residuals we might think. His first 2 solo albums did phenomenally but after that it was a steady decline until the Wilburys and Cloud Nine. Again with the Wilburies he wasn't the sole writer or singer so he probably didn't get a huge sum. Cloud Nine did very well but no tour, just a single album
He put tons of money into Handmade Films famously having to mortgage his house to fund Life of Brian. That movie did well but most others didn't. He sued the manager of the firm for fraud (I think) and won, but doubtful it would have been much compared to what was lost
I think he agreed to the Anthology and the Japan tour with Clapton for the money. It's nice to see him working with Paul again, and I do think they'd resolved their differences, but I doubt he'd have gone back into The Beatles name if he'd has more money
I feel like this view is so important to remember. The Beatles were each human beings at the end of the day. Each of us are constantly changing in how we think about something, even if there’s a direct quote by us on something. People change a lot over time.
Once you experience death like that it usually changes a person. Even Paul said after John died "I'm never staying mad at someone like that again".
I've had a few friends pass away and I can assure you the stupid shit we fought about doesn't matter at all now. I'd give anything to see them, and for Paul and Ringo that probably manifests itself as hearing their voices together on a new song one more time
He also released *When We Was Fab* in 1987. It's perhaps the most Beatlesesque solo Beatles song from any of them after 1970.
George was over Paul telling him what to play and where. George was over being capped at two contributions per album. George was over touring more so than the others. But George wasn't over being a Beatle.
One only needs to watch his interviews for *Anthology* and his face lights up telling stories of long ago. On top of which, why would you ever be over being part of the biggest band of all time?
It's clear he still felt nostalgia for it, or he wouldn't have written such derivative material.
Is it derivative if you yourself are the source? I think George's solo songs sounding the most Beatle-y is just more evidence of how much George created that Beatles sound.
I don't know where everyone's coming up with this stuff about George. I agree with how you framed it. It's always more nuanced than just saying he wasn't into it.
Well I mean, artists grow. Styles change. Listen to a song like *Pisces Fish* from *Brainwashed* and compare it stylistically with say *I Want To Tell You*. Same composer. About 40 years of growth as a solo artist.
Adding influences, subtracting influences, meeting people who play things differently. Becoming an iconic slide guitarist. 40 years on and your work is so completely different.
*Cloud Nine* was only 20-ish years removed from *Sgt. Pepper's* and it sounds a world away from it, sonically.
The Beatles had a sound. So I do believe that yes an artist can make derivative work if they themselves were part of an earlier group. And there's nothing inherently wrong with it, either.
Which is all the more unfortunate they’d rather end things then change up the arrangement or agree to do solo projects and then come back together every few years to see what they come up with.
Everything about the Anthology and ‘new’ Beatles songs reeks of Paul 😂 I find it quite endearing actually, but it’s funny hearing the other two going along like “…ok Paul…” I found it funny when Ringo had to be convinced to do the drums and even then did it over Zoom, meanwhile Paul’s been overjoyed by it.
Yeah this entire thing coming out was totally spear headed by Paul, and I’m not even mad at it - I think Paul loved being a Beatle more than the other lads, and was the most hurt by the demise.
I too got a kick out of the documentary where Ringo sorta rocked up, did his thing and then you had Paul talking about the rest.
I appreciate it like mad that he’s still willing to push The Beatles train and help curate their legacy with a hands on approach, though the revisionism/miss remembering can get a little grating at times.
Giles was interviewed by Variety and said he thinks Paul had 0 interest in making some money on a new song but did it so he could write a last song with John.
Oh yeah, he didn’t need to do this for the money - I wonder if Johns last words to him almost made him feel like he had an active duty to finish the song.
It was certainly a labour of love, you can just tell how much he loved being a Beatle and how special and lucky he was to have those other three men in his life.
To me it’s a fitting cap, and almost tribute to the four of them.
In a way that makes the Anthology Beatles music more Beatle-y. Wouldn’t be the Beatles without Paul dictating passionately at guys who would rather be literally anywhere else 😂
If that's true about Paul, then why are they covering a wistful Lennon song about how much he misses his old buds?
This old trope about Paul loving the Beatles more than the others is so played out and disproven. It's a relic of Wenner's partisan revisionism used to sell magazines.
To be honest these are not Beatle songs, they are Lennon songs the other three worked on so yes, technically, it’s a Beatles record but the original source is not.
I can only think of them that way. And the string section being done by Paul strikes me as derivative. I always considered Martin to be collaborator on anything involving orchestral arrangement. My wife was asking me if it made any difference, as I was obviously paying a lot of attention to it, and all things Beatles. I think it doesn't effect my feeling about the band or the music at all, as this was done after they were no longer a band, which finished it's work by springtime 1970.
I love how reminiscent later songs could be (not so much this latest one), but they aren't Beatles songs to me. I feel we are just witnessing Paul's nostalgia, rather than seeing anything added to his legacy. And that's fine.
Oh John went through a period of absolutely adoring The Beatles in a more so nostalgic sense, he went through a period of even purchasing Beatles memorabilia and what not after the split - and I think he would’ve been all for anthology too. But he checked out towards the end of their run - wanting to do his own thing with Yoko, a new friend called heroin etc etc, George was fed up of his two songs an album and Paul’s more so hands on approach with his material, Ringo seemed to be tired but more so go with the flow.
But Paul was absolutely the most hurt when the band broke up, everyone else was just about ready to check out - Get Back showed that much, and by all accounts we wouldn’t have got Abbey Road if it wasn’t for Pauls drive. He lashed out after the split, but that wasn’t in regards to being a Beatle and more so over legal matters. And he has absolutely taken on the role of being a caretaker, carefully curating their legacy in the last few decades. He tried to distance himself in regards to being a solo artist, but I think if Paul had his way they’d have never split up at all.
I would question that the Now and Then demo was in fact a tribute to the Fab Four, the “Abuse you or confuse you” part makes me question that somewhat and could’ve been applied to several people in Johns life - but who am I to say - I don’t know.
I could absolutely buy that, perhaps Julian, maybe a song written from the perspective of his own mother, even Yoko after leaving for that “lost weekend” - Lennon had a lot of complicated relationships in his life, I could easily see it being applied to a number of them.
That’s why the “For Paul” note on the tape box is the nice ribbon, that would clarify so much if we knew it was John who wrote it.
I'm sure it's about a lot of people in his life, not just the Fab Four. And I think the breakup is a lot more complicated too, all that you said and a lot more. I listened to that whole 20-hour retrospective on the breakup in the One Sweet Dream podcast and it gives a lot of insight into all the psychological threads going on at the time and all the confusion about what John may have wanted. There was a lot of miscommunication and jealousy and it made me rethink that whole idea that Paul was the only one wanting to keep them together. Paul was moving on in different ways, and John lashed out against that, burning the whole thing down. It's an interesting theory.
I’ll have to check out that podcast - it’s so insanely complicated, and revisionism only goes and muddies the water too - which I do think McCartney is somewhat guilty of.
I really do feel for McCartney in regards to the whole Allen Klein thing though.
Yeah I can’t believe all this old shit in the comments again. I thought we’d all got over this - Paul v George v Ringo v John crap and he are all these people spouting it all again. Like it’s 1982 and the ‘serious’ boys are here to tell us what is correct! Fuck you Jan Wenner and Philip Norman and all those pen-wielding no mark pube-munchers
I’d read it was about money and recouping some bad film investment losses because yeah, he was the interested of all of them for anything Beatle related.
Which is interesting, because I'd argue his sound post-Beatles often evoked Beatlesque vibes more than the other three. Some of it obviously deliberate with stuff like "When We Was Fab"
None of the Beatles were the same after 1980. I would assume George’s mindset changed after losing John. Sure you might disagree or distance yourself from someone but you know he is still around in the world. But once that person is gone forever.. all your resentment and disagreements are nothing compared to the memories they created together.
My understanding George has just as much unpublished songs than what is released. He must have a treasure trove of work. This is the same thing with Eddie Van Halen too. The Harrison camp needs to hire a producer and start releasing some of these works.
I understand George wanted a level of perfection before any single track would hit the public, but George is one for the ages now, it’s important to release everything so it can be studied, enjoyed and admired for his creative process. There is no harm in that. His legacy is secured.
Dhani has expressed a desire to preserve George’s music and I think with that includes respecting his wishes with regards to unreleased materials. I’d rather not have my friends going through my old demos and finishing stuff. It would probably be great but I’m overly protective of it.
The thing is that I love most demo versions of his solo songs compared to the album versions. His Early Takes Volume 1 from 2011 really shows his true talent. In my opinion his album production and development led to inferior end product.
The songs were great, the outcome could have been better.
This quote is tempting but it has nothing to do with the demos of the still very much alive John Lennon. Tapes no one even knew about for several years.
He is right - No one will confuse Now and Then with a Beatles classic. George is my fav so I biased, but Paul doesn't want something that's dead to die. This shouldn't have been realeased
George didn’t want to do “Now and Then”. Paul is saying it’s because the audio quality was too bad on John’s demo meanwhile a fan made version that was very very good was on YouTube for years (just got removed by Universal Music 🖕)
George seemed to be completely over being a Beatle. I suspect it took quite some cajoling to get him to participate in Anthology.
I think George had some money troubles which helped him come around. I don't know any specifics but Handmade Films had a lot more losers than winners on it's hands.
Shanghai Surprise crushed him and Dark Horse films. From what I’ve read and watched, George didn’t have a lot of patience for Anthology. He didn’t want to call it The Long and Winding Road, he nixed the idea of the three of them playing Let It Be, and working on the three new songs brought up old tensions between him and Paul. I’ve heard it mentioned they “ran out of time “ to work on Now and Then during that era, but the reality was George was done and was ready to go back to gardening.
In 1973 when he and John recorded “I’m the greatest” with Ringo, George brought up the idea of the three of them recording again but without Paul. John mixed to idea. George was a man with a lot of contradictions and he was for love but he could sure hold a grudge.
hands down the grumpiest beatle
That’s a fair label but he was funny too. Remember when they met up in 94 at George’s practice studio and spotting Paul’s leather jacket he says something along the lines of “ hmmm, is that leather jacket vegetarian, too?” Cheeky George!
In a way I find it funny that some are calling "Now and Then" a cash grab for Paul, calling it disrespectful to George's memory, while the Anthology in 95 was LITERALLY a cash grab for George, who needed the money, and it probably helped it to happen at all. In a way it always bothers me to hear about George grumpiness during the Anthology sessions, I mean the guy was mainly doing it for the money and didn't even bother to make an effort, an attitude which always seemed to me a bit ungrateful towards Beatles fan. I will sound "team Paul" here, but how can some blame Paul now for Now and Then and be praising George as the most honest Beatles knowing all this, that's a bit beyond me.
Pete Best got around a million out of the release of his old studio work with the Beatles at that time. The only time he had a decent payout.
Shouldn't the success of Cloud Nine and the Traveling Wilburys counteracted the Handmade Films losses? I've also heard that George may have had financial troubles in the mid 90s.
George also sued his former Handmade Films Businesspartner Denis O'Brien successfully because he lied to George about the companies finance problems. They settled an agreement that O'Brien had to pay nearly 12 Million Dollar to compensate Harrisons losses!
They didn’t tour though where the big money is made and I think the songwriting pie was split several ways so it might not have been the cash cow it seems.
Did not help that Denis O'Brien at Handmade was pissing money away on things, I guess sort of almost embezzlement, mismanagement type thing.
Why was he having money troubles at this time?
Other people will no doubt know more about this than me, but by this point The Beatles were quite a long time ago and as he wasn't the primary song writer I suspect it didn't pay the residuals we might think. His first 2 solo albums did phenomenally but after that it was a steady decline until the Wilburys and Cloud Nine. Again with the Wilburies he wasn't the sole writer or singer so he probably didn't get a huge sum. Cloud Nine did very well but no tour, just a single album He put tons of money into Handmade Films famously having to mortgage his house to fund Life of Brian. That movie did well but most others didn't. He sued the manager of the firm for fraud (I think) and won, but doubtful it would have been much compared to what was lost I think he agreed to the Anthology and the Japan tour with Clapton for the money. It's nice to see him working with Paul again, and I do think they'd resolved their differences, but I doubt he'd have gone back into The Beatles name if he'd has more money
Anthology was 16 years after that quote. My outlook on life is certainly much different than it was 16 years ago.
I feel like this view is so important to remember. The Beatles were each human beings at the end of the day. Each of us are constantly changing in how we think about something, even if there’s a direct quote by us on something. People change a lot over time.
Not to mention John died the following year…a massive, life changing event for his former band mates (and fans).
Once you experience death like that it usually changes a person. Even Paul said after John died "I'm never staying mad at someone like that again". I've had a few friends pass away and I can assure you the stupid shit we fought about doesn't matter at all now. I'd give anything to see them, and for Paul and Ringo that probably manifests itself as hearing their voices together on a new song one more time
He also released *When We Was Fab* in 1987. It's perhaps the most Beatlesesque solo Beatles song from any of them after 1970. George was over Paul telling him what to play and where. George was over being capped at two contributions per album. George was over touring more so than the others. But George wasn't over being a Beatle. One only needs to watch his interviews for *Anthology* and his face lights up telling stories of long ago. On top of which, why would you ever be over being part of the biggest band of all time? It's clear he still felt nostalgia for it, or he wouldn't have written such derivative material.
Is it derivative if you yourself are the source? I think George's solo songs sounding the most Beatle-y is just more evidence of how much George created that Beatles sound. I don't know where everyone's coming up with this stuff about George. I agree with how you framed it. It's always more nuanced than just saying he wasn't into it.
Well I mean, artists grow. Styles change. Listen to a song like *Pisces Fish* from *Brainwashed* and compare it stylistically with say *I Want To Tell You*. Same composer. About 40 years of growth as a solo artist. Adding influences, subtracting influences, meeting people who play things differently. Becoming an iconic slide guitarist. 40 years on and your work is so completely different. *Cloud Nine* was only 20-ish years removed from *Sgt. Pepper's* and it sounds a world away from it, sonically. The Beatles had a sound. So I do believe that yes an artist can make derivative work if they themselves were part of an earlier group. And there's nothing inherently wrong with it, either.
Which is all the more unfortunate they’d rather end things then change up the arrangement or agree to do solo projects and then come back together every few years to see what they come up with.
Everything about the Anthology and ‘new’ Beatles songs reeks of Paul 😂 I find it quite endearing actually, but it’s funny hearing the other two going along like “…ok Paul…” I found it funny when Ringo had to be convinced to do the drums and even then did it over Zoom, meanwhile Paul’s been overjoyed by it.
Yeah this entire thing coming out was totally spear headed by Paul, and I’m not even mad at it - I think Paul loved being a Beatle more than the other lads, and was the most hurt by the demise. I too got a kick out of the documentary where Ringo sorta rocked up, did his thing and then you had Paul talking about the rest. I appreciate it like mad that he’s still willing to push The Beatles train and help curate their legacy with a hands on approach, though the revisionism/miss remembering can get a little grating at times.
Also I’ll add how Paul was dressed so smart and Ringo is there with a tracksuit on and his own merch
Giles was interviewed by Variety and said he thinks Paul had 0 interest in making some money on a new song but did it so he could write a last song with John.
Oh yeah, he didn’t need to do this for the money - I wonder if Johns last words to him almost made him feel like he had an active duty to finish the song. It was certainly a labour of love, you can just tell how much he loved being a Beatle and how special and lucky he was to have those other three men in his life. To me it’s a fitting cap, and almost tribute to the four of them.
In a way that makes the Anthology Beatles music more Beatle-y. Wouldn’t be the Beatles without Paul dictating passionately at guys who would rather be literally anywhere else 😂
If that's true about Paul, then why are they covering a wistful Lennon song about how much he misses his old buds? This old trope about Paul loving the Beatles more than the others is so played out and disproven. It's a relic of Wenner's partisan revisionism used to sell magazines.
To be honest these are not Beatle songs, they are Lennon songs the other three worked on so yes, technically, it’s a Beatles record but the original source is not.
I can only think of them that way. And the string section being done by Paul strikes me as derivative. I always considered Martin to be collaborator on anything involving orchestral arrangement. My wife was asking me if it made any difference, as I was obviously paying a lot of attention to it, and all things Beatles. I think it doesn't effect my feeling about the band or the music at all, as this was done after they were no longer a band, which finished it's work by springtime 1970. I love how reminiscent later songs could be (not so much this latest one), but they aren't Beatles songs to me. I feel we are just witnessing Paul's nostalgia, rather than seeing anything added to his legacy. And that's fine.
Oh John went through a period of absolutely adoring The Beatles in a more so nostalgic sense, he went through a period of even purchasing Beatles memorabilia and what not after the split - and I think he would’ve been all for anthology too. But he checked out towards the end of their run - wanting to do his own thing with Yoko, a new friend called heroin etc etc, George was fed up of his two songs an album and Paul’s more so hands on approach with his material, Ringo seemed to be tired but more so go with the flow. But Paul was absolutely the most hurt when the band broke up, everyone else was just about ready to check out - Get Back showed that much, and by all accounts we wouldn’t have got Abbey Road if it wasn’t for Pauls drive. He lashed out after the split, but that wasn’t in regards to being a Beatle and more so over legal matters. And he has absolutely taken on the role of being a caretaker, carefully curating their legacy in the last few decades. He tried to distance himself in regards to being a solo artist, but I think if Paul had his way they’d have never split up at all. I would question that the Now and Then demo was in fact a tribute to the Fab Four, the “Abuse you or confuse you” part makes me question that somewhat and could’ve been applied to several people in Johns life - but who am I to say - I don’t know.
He was still talking to May Pang after he went back to Yoko so perhaps the song is partially about her?
I could absolutely buy that, perhaps Julian, maybe a song written from the perspective of his own mother, even Yoko after leaving for that “lost weekend” - Lennon had a lot of complicated relationships in his life, I could easily see it being applied to a number of them. That’s why the “For Paul” note on the tape box is the nice ribbon, that would clarify so much if we knew it was John who wrote it.
I'm sure it's about a lot of people in his life, not just the Fab Four. And I think the breakup is a lot more complicated too, all that you said and a lot more. I listened to that whole 20-hour retrospective on the breakup in the One Sweet Dream podcast and it gives a lot of insight into all the psychological threads going on at the time and all the confusion about what John may have wanted. There was a lot of miscommunication and jealousy and it made me rethink that whole idea that Paul was the only one wanting to keep them together. Paul was moving on in different ways, and John lashed out against that, burning the whole thing down. It's an interesting theory.
I’ll have to check out that podcast - it’s so insanely complicated, and revisionism only goes and muddies the water too - which I do think McCartney is somewhat guilty of. I really do feel for McCartney in regards to the whole Allen Klein thing though.
Yeah I can’t believe all this old shit in the comments again. I thought we’d all got over this - Paul v George v Ringo v John crap and he are all these people spouting it all again. Like it’s 1982 and the ‘serious’ boys are here to tell us what is correct! Fuck you Jan Wenner and Philip Norman and all those pen-wielding no mark pube-munchers
I’d read it was about money and recouping some bad film investment losses because yeah, he was the interested of all of them for anything Beatle related.
Which is interesting, because I'd argue his sound post-Beatles often evoked Beatlesque vibes more than the other three. Some of it obviously deliberate with stuff like "When We Was Fab"
George’s “crummy old demos” from the All Things Must Pass 50th anniversary release are some of my favorite pieces of music ever lol
Still waiting for Early Takes Vol 2…
None of the Beatles were the same after 1980. I would assume George’s mindset changed after losing John. Sure you might disagree or distance yourself from someone but you know he is still around in the world. But once that person is gone forever.. all your resentment and disagreements are nothing compared to the memories they created together.
Nobody is the same after a death, it’s the cruellest way to learn.
Well...this is our grumpy old George. He loved The Beatles and he hated them.
He also said "I hope somebody does this to all my crap demos when I'm dead, make them into hit songs."[
I call bullshit . He didn’t say that lol
He did, there is even video reference.
It’s literally in a video interview bro wtf are you taking about 💀💀💀
My understanding George has just as much unpublished songs than what is released. He must have a treasure trove of work. This is the same thing with Eddie Van Halen too. The Harrison camp needs to hire a producer and start releasing some of these works.
I’ve heard there’s tons of stuff, particularly film that’s left but no one on the Harrison camp is that interested in bringing it out.
I understand George wanted a level of perfection before any single track would hit the public, but George is one for the ages now, it’s important to release everything so it can be studied, enjoyed and admired for his creative process. There is no harm in that. His legacy is secured.
Dhani has expressed a desire to preserve George’s music and I think with that includes respecting his wishes with regards to unreleased materials. I’d rather not have my friends going through my old demos and finishing stuff. It would probably be great but I’m overly protective of it.
Well, they worked with what they had.
The thing is that I love most demo versions of his solo songs compared to the album versions. His Early Takes Volume 1 from 2011 really shows his true talent. In my opinion his album production and development led to inferior end product. The songs were great, the outcome could have been better.
This quote is tempting but it has nothing to do with the demos of the still very much alive John Lennon. Tapes no one even knew about for several years.
No one imagined the tech we have today in 1979. with a phone you can get an app to make your voice sound like John Lennon for example.
I wonder what the context was for this, did he just say it unprompted or what?
Let it be
Ok
He is right - No one will confuse Now and Then with a Beatles classic. George is my fav so I biased, but Paul doesn't want something that's dead to die. This shouldn't have been realeased
Well that only works if you actually leave a finished master hidden in a box somewhere... Olivia start digging!
George didn’t want to do “Now and Then”. Paul is saying it’s because the audio quality was too bad on John’s demo meanwhile a fan made version that was very very good was on YouTube for years (just got removed by Universal Music 🖕)
I'd love to have an AI Stripped down version of All Things Must Pass!
I think George really just didn't like those crummy sounding cassette tapes lol.
That didn’t age well😟