Talk:The Rutles

message: I have the vinyl somewhere in my mess I will expand later. Don't delete please.
----
I reverted the recent additions as they looked at first glance to be vandalism. So then I reverted my reversion when I realized this was parody. I am unfamiliar with this group and would think that it would be easy for others who were unfamiliar to think that the whole article is suspect, except for the fact that it has been around for over a year, so it is hence probably legit. Strange group. Nanobug 13:05, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: 2003

message: I have a distant recollection that in the film Che Stadium was named after the Cuban revolutionary Che Stadium. Could someone who has the film please check this Billlion 08:18, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Che Stadium 

message: I presumptuously deleted this section, which looked bogus, and the non-specific link (bmi.com) seemed like a fool's errand.
In settlement of a lawsuit, some Rutles songs are now listed as being co-authored by Lennon and McCartney. As of early 2006, these six songs from the first Rutles CD (which were not on the original LP release) are credited solely to Neil Innes, according to the official BMI web site: "Baby Let Me Be", "Between Us", "Blue Suede Schubert", "Get Up And Go",
"Goose Step Mama", "It's Looking Good". The other 14 songs from the CD (that is, all of the songs from the original LP release) have all had John Lennon and Paul McCartney added to the songwriting credits along with Neil Innes.
However, www.bmi.com/search/ does confirm Lennon/McCartney credits to Rutles titles (which should be included in this article -- Wikipedia is not required to sustain the parody). I can't Google any mention of this lawsuit, but am restoring this with a  cos it now seems more plausible to me. More info (with citation) on this lawsuit would certainly be interesting.
(As an aside, now that George is out of the picture, will Apple sue all of the projects he greenlighted? Bad news for Monty Python & Cirque du Soleil) edgarde 17:18, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Beatles lawsuit ?

message: This song don't sound like anything the beatles done. There's a touch of A Day In The Life in there, but the melody sounds like "Isolation" off of plastic ono band. Can anyone elighten me?--Crestville 11:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I always thought it was a satirical psychedelic extension of the "Yellow Submarine Sandwich" concept. Can anyone tell me whether the word onions in the film was misspelled "onoins" as a joke based on the idea that Lennon mentioned his lover in lyrics whenever possible at the time? Or was that just something that I thought up myself? Britmax 11:11, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's spelt "onions". But the song does go "Do i have to spell it out?/C-H-E-E-S-E-A-N-D-O-N-I-O-N-S/Oh no!", so there is an Ono (oh no) reference in there somewhere. The video is amazing. I actually forgot I was watching The Rutles and thought I was watching "Yellow Submarine", though I stand by my original point, it's not as good a song parody as the others. Except for the "end note"!--Crestville 20:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: On the original LP the lyrics were "Do I have to spell it out?/C-H-E-E-S-E-A-N-D-O-N-I-O-N-S/Ono". The animation was done by the same animators that did Yellow Submarine. Apepper 10:14, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  To me it seems to have a dose of "Sexy Sadie" in the melody, plus a tip of the hat to "Glass Onion" in the title of course. White Album and "Submarine" soundtrack songs are both 1968, no? -- Neil H.
It utilizes most of the same chords as A Day in the Life, and is SLIGHTLY remniscent of said song. --Kaizer13 17:31, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I think I can also hear a bit of Only a Northern Song in it. --2003:EF:1704:4E37:E9C1:113C:52E:DD9 (talk) 20:07, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Cheese and Onion

message: I lived in Oakham (Rutland) for some years and never heard the locals described as 'Rutles'.  The nearest I ever heard was 'Rutlanders'.  I suggest this reference be deleted unless a firm citation can be found
82.152.149.195 21:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Must agree. I've been through the Rutland area ( U.K. not Vermont ),and not once were the locals called "Rutles". "Rutlanders" sounds not only most logical,but very probable. I think the person writing the "Archaeology" re-issue liner notes was trying to start a pathetic trend.--Harvey J Satan (talk) 01:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Inhabitants of Rutland?

message: We can read quite a lot in the article of that George loved the project, but I think it ought be interesting to include what the other three Beatles thought about it, maybe also a comment by George Martin if it exists. --Tlatosmd 00:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Idle has said on several ocaissions that George , besides encouraging The Rutles , and appearing in "All You Need Is Cash" , also acted as technical advisor , because he had a really good memory. ( Stage set ups , equipment , etc. ). George also loaned them guitars. Ringo Starr told Idle , cryptically , that he only liked it after 1968.Ringo also loaned them a limo. Paul McCartney was angry about it. Not because of it being a parody of The Beatles or anything , but it was released just before McCartney's "London Town" album ,and numerous promotional interviews got bogged down with "Rutles" questions! He later reconciled these feelings,after meeting Idle at a party. ( These are all from bits and pieces of stories Idle has told during his live tours.). One fan fuelled rumour is that someone asked Lennon what he thought ,and he SUPPOSEDLY sang a few lines of "Cheese & Onions". And ,above all, The Beatles/Apple Corp. had to sign off on use of the old Beatles footage used. Is all this relevent to the main entry? I dunno. It's the same question Neil Innes gets asked a hundred times at every Beatles related convention! So , maybe it is. Harvey J Satan (talk) 20:35, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reactions by the original 

message: I happen to think that the Rutles songs are indeed masterly (masterful?), affectionate tributes. However, there's a lot of that type of thing in this article, and with no citations it seems very POV, so I'm taking those descriptors out. Mrquizzical (talk) 23:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Affectionate and Masterly Songs 

message: It has been some time since I last saw the movie, but the "Their History (Fictional)" Section resonates as a transcript of the narration of the movie. Someone should check, because if it is such a transcription, then this section is a transcription, then the section constitutes a copyright violation. Acsenray (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds more like (at least the first couple of sections) that it's been taken from the Rutles' official page. Which doesn't really help much does it? Anyway, it's not word-by-word, but perhaps someone should rephrase it to avoid any problems eh? --Kaizer13 (talk) 11:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I too have noted the extreme similarity between the "History" text and the fictional account.  While it bears a strong similarity to the movie's narration, I think it more closely follows the text from either the website or the CD booklet (which may well be exactly the same text).  I will look for my CD and see if this can be verified, but I strongly suspect that there's a potential copyright violation here. EJSawyer (talk) 20:02, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

text: Someone has uploaded the 1978 All You Need is Cash film to YouTube here:   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 18:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

text: I'm deleting the fictional discography. As noted by another person in the Talk, it isn't Wikipedia's job to be a parody ... those albums were never made, and there's nothing significant about a list of names making fun of real Beatles albums. See my other comments about overall rewrite. Leptus Froggi (talk) 11:08, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good Call Leptus! Since this article is about a work created by Eric Idle & Neil Innes , all the other items NOT written by Idle or Innes were unneeded baggage! Harvey J Satan (talk) 20:40, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violation? (Their History (Fictional)) 

message: For some reason many Rutle-philes,have assumed that the mysterious " Kevin" is in fact a reference to " Pete Best" , this of course is wrong.
Firstly who is "Kevin" ? On the 1976 release "The Rutland Weekend Songbook" , The Rutles are captured on vinyl for the first time - live - and their line-up is listed as Dirk, Nasty, Stig &  Kevin.
As most would guess,Eric Idle was in a hurry with the album liner notes and inadvertently wrote "Kevin". Let's face it,Eric was sloppy with the whole original Rutles concept. In the first film Eric is "Dirk" but represents his friend  George Harrison.David Batley plays "Stig" whom is the Paul McCartney parody. Nasty only has a last name! ( And yet,there's " The Children Of Rock-N-Roll" by  RON Lennon a few tracks later on the same album! ). Obviously he didn't forsee the  Rutlemania  that would be coming within two years time! Even the birthplace of The Rutles changed from  Rutland to  Liverpool!
So,here's why "Kevin" isn't " Pete Best":
* In The Rutles leather jacket photo,the lads are: Dirk,Ron,Stig & Barry. Barry clearly representing the spot where  Pete Best  would be in The Beatles equivalent photo.
* On the original " I Must Be In Love (Live)" recording,the announcer says The Rutles are wearing their  M.B.E.s.  Pete Best wasn't in the band long enough to receive the  M.B.E.
*The original recording is also a song from The Rutles first film " A Hard Day's Rut", Pete Best was out of The Beatles before they made their first film.
Is  Leppo ,  Pete Best?
*No.  Leppo is described as a "friend of Nasty's from art college",and his position in the band was  "someone who mainly stood at the back" , descriptions usual associated with   Stuart Sutcliffe , John Lennon 's chum from Art College.
Basically, The Rutles never had a " Pete Best".
Baring all this in mind,and if you still wish "Kevin" to be a part of The Rutles universe as opposed to a hastily scribled note by  Eric Idle,there actually is a solution! One Man played drums for The Beatles live , after  Ringo Starr joined the band,and after they got their  M.B.E.s. This One Man is  Jimmy Nicol , whom filled in for part of the 1964 Beatles European tour when Ringo had his tonsils removed and was bed-ridden.
"Kevin" IS " Jimmy Nicol" ! ( Which would also show that once again viewers of "Rutland Weekend Television" got the cheap end of the stick. )--Harvey J Satan (talk) 01:22, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What about identifying "Kevin" as Andy White? He drummed only once with the Four-(minus-one-)Headed Monster, which was for the single version of Love me do. During the audition at EMI, they'd still had Pete with them, and when they turned up with Ringo to record their first single, George Martin didn't allow him in and brought White in. After Love me do had struck #17, the lads were allowed to have the drummer they wanted to record the Please please me album. See the Anthology where Ringo says, "Well, he didn't play that well on the single that I couldn't copy it when we did the album." --79.193.43.2 (talk) 01:02, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Andy would be a valid answer , had he played after the Fabs got their M.B.E.s. ( That's the one trip up in Idle's announcement.) Harvey J Satan (talk) 20:09, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Why "Kevin" Isn't "Pete Best": The Case Against!'' 

message: Not long after All You Need Is Cash first aired in Britain, a conspiracy theory appeared: the Rutles sound like the Beatles, because the music was written and performed by the Beatles themselves as a self-parody. The first time I heard this claim - on a radio station in Liverpool, ironically enough - was when a spokesman ( for Lennon ? ) had publicly issued a statement denying the rumour.
If anyone has a citable reference, would it be worth mentioning in the article, as public reaction to the movie ?
Neil Innes & Eric Idle have both confirmed in interviews , that two Beatles actually did sing a Rutles song! it was "Ouch!". ( But it was at George's Friar Park home with George ,  Ringo , Innes , and Idle. ).Otherwise , no Beatles were used during the making of the songs. Harvey J Satan (talk) 01:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Rutles music was written and performed by the original Beatles"

message: EJSawyer (talk)
:I don't see copyright violation in the article as a whole. For other reasons, explained below, I'm removing the "Rutles albums (fictional)" section. That was the closest the article came to a violation, since it does not reflect actual album releases, but is in essence a copy of an extended joke. Leptus Froggi (talk) 11:49, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Disabling copyvio tag.  No copyright issues could be found, possibly taken care of in the reply noted above. -- Whpq (talk) 02:23, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright query

message: "The Rutles singing "I Must Be In Love", a pastiche of a 1964 Lennon-McCartney tune." - makes it sound as if it was written to be like the Beatles.
"He had written "I Must Be In Love" which he realised sounded very "Beatley" " - makes it sound as if it happened by accident.
I can't say which is right!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.183.103 (talk) 12:55, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: There is a contradiction in the section "Rutland Weekend Television (1975-76)"

message: I'm much a fan of the Rutles ... I own The Rutles and The Rutles2 DVDs, The Rutles 1978 CD, and Rutles Highway Revisited. But the article needs to be reworked to remove fan / blog / essay-type language. Some information isn't at all important (such as the pseudo album list). Some is off-topic, such as other films George Harrison financed. There's too much fan language, and uncited fan language, at that ... "it did not prove as popular as the film", "made it quite clear", "as would happen frequently during the Rutles existence", "and then some".
The factual information is fine, but the selection of what parody jokes to explain is not, particularly. Especially not when the material being parodied has little to do with the Rutles or the Beatles. There's no real point in explaining what "The Fifth Rutle" is, and especially not comparing it to the Marx Brothers. And most especially because it isn't so much a reference to the Marx Brothers, as it is a reference to a theme of Beatle fan magazine material in the 1960s (Along the lines of "Who is the Fifth Beatle?").
I'm making a few needed changes, but there's other work to be done, for example the whole "Fictional history" section should be reduced to a paragraph. The synopsis isn't especially helpful, nor is it very interesting. The Beatles lives and decisions as a whole had social significance ... a bunch of one-off jokes strung together about a group that did not exist do not. Choosing which of the movies' jokes to repeat is highly subjective (choosing such-and-such a joke as important, while another isn't).
A good rule of thumb is that if something doesn't read fairly "dry" ... the way an Encyclopedia Britannica article does ... or as a New York Times article does ... then there's a fair chance isn't suited for Wikipedia, either. Leptus Froggi (talk) 11:44, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Rewrite Needed 

message: Hi. This quotation comes up at the very beginning. However, there is no reference. Who knows which songs are being referred to?
Jackcauffle (talk) 15:33, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "releasing two UK chart hits." 

message: Currently , there is a notation at the bottom of this entry , for Utopia's "Deface The Music". Whereas ,it's a brilliant record , and a parody / pastiche of The Beatles ... it has nothing to do with THE RUTLES. Otherwise , you're going to need to attach a lot of other artists whom also parodied The Beatles. Harvey J Satan (talk) 20:20, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-Related References 

message: I have researched the non-cited claim in the article that Rob Reiner was inspired by the Rutles movie to make the Spinal Tap film. In fact, Reiner in taped interviews explains the origins of his movie and it had nothing at all to do with the Rutles work. These interviews are easy to locate on youtube. If someone would like to offer evidence to the contrary I would be more than happy to review it. Therefore, the line about there being a connection between the two films is being eliminated.99.32.160.175 (talk) 05:33, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing ''Spinal Tap'' reference 

message: What does "The Rutles (The Prefab Four[1] pronounced "ruttles"[2])" mean?  Please correct this.  Thanks, Maikel (talk) 09:09, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mashed words 

message: Now that the original Rutland Weekend Television clip is available , in a more pristine version , on the SNL dvd collections … the ORIGINAL Rutles are easier to spot. The announcer notes them as "Dirk,Nasty,Stig and Barry" , the order they are shown is: Eric Idle , Neil Innes , John Halsey and David Batley. ( John stands out , as he is much shorter than the others. ). 
Ergo , when "the band" is shown playing in the "A Hard Day's Rut" film:
Eric Idle = "Dirk" = "George Harrison" ,
Neil Innes = "Nasty" = "John Lennon" ,
John Halsey = "Stig" = "Ringo Starr" ,
David Batley = "Barry" = "Paul McCartney".
Confusing , right? Only Neil Innes played the same name/character in all versions!  75.104.174.56 (talk) 16:35, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Original Rutles Line-Up 

message: I "get" that whoever added the section is a BIG Rutles fan … but … how far does the triviality need to be spread? 
( And it's slightly incomplete , as it doesn't list all of the songs noted on the "Tragical History Tour" album cover , nor the "Rutland Weekend Songbook" run on title , something along the lines of , "Allyouneediscashwhichultimatelycan'tbuyyouhappiness" ).
But , having said that , "All You Need Is Cash" is only ever used as the title of the first film. Within the film , only glimpsed on the "Tragical History Tour" album cover , it's "All You Need is Lunch". Same thing with "Can't Buy Me Lunch" … only the title of the 2nd film , never noted as a song. "The Lunch You Make Is Equal To The Lunch You Take" , is mentioned , by Tom Hanks , no less , as a LYRIC from a song. ( Which would be from , a-yet-to-be-done , parody of "The End". ).
I would dare to suggest , truncating the "mentions" , and let folks discover them for themselves while viewing the films. 
( Or , transferring them as trivia to the Wiki entries for the two films. )
Not so sure , the complete run down of all the Bootleg tracks is a necessity either. Should probably be a separate entry altogether … since , for the most part , they are just a mishmash of the same material. ( i.e. Bonzo Dog , solo Innes works , RWTV outtakes , SNL , and the Rutles Demos from the first album sessions. ) 75.104.163.77 (talk) 17:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mentioned" songs / albums , is a confusing mess. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on The Rutles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927141608/http://www.neilinnes.org/articles/RutQ96.htm to http://www.neilinnes.org/articles/RutQ96.htm
*Added archive https://archive.is/20121209044407/http://www.neilinnes.org/rutles.htm to http://www.neilinnes.org/rutles.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:38, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't think that all of those listed as associated acts actually meet the requirements. -- Beardo (talk) 18:50, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Associated acts 

message: There was never a band. That the first assertion in the entry is "The Rutles were a rock band...," is utter nonsense.
The Rutles never existed.
Should you take issue with this, ask Eric Idle, as he has said as much, recently.
-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.131.114.163 (talk) 01:45, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled, unsigned

message: A couple things I noticed while adding some songs to the list:
- Rutles songs cannot parody other Rutles songs. They might reference them, but that's not a parody.
- Rut-A-Lot is not a Rutles song, it is a compilation of Rutles songs. Imitation Song is not a Rutles song, it is a Neil Innes solo song re-released under The Rutles name.
- The parodies for "Love Life" mentioned The Battle Hymn Of The Republic. What the fuck? Think about it logically, why would Innes parody that song? It's not even a Beatles track.
These are just a couple things to keep note of when editing that page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grouchyjelly (talk • contribs) 
:I removed the section per WP:NOR and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Every song by the Rutles is a parody. Binksternet (talk) 22:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of songs parodied by The Rutles 

message: Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia’s non-free content criteria before inserting non-free images with insufficient rationale for use in this article. Adeletron 3030 (talk • edits) 02:52, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-free content 

message: theres a formatting difference between my new additions to the rutles page and older additions please tell me which one you think is better
All You Need Is Cash
or
All You Need Is Cash 

Theenglishman124 (talk) 00:31, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As a consequence, I've restored the section headers of three sections you edited to what they were before, per MOS:NOSECTIONLINKS. If you prefer your style, with the links in the section headers, this is the wrong venue to take up this question. You would have to get the MOS guideline changed first, and then you can make this change. To do that, please make your proposal at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. To save you time, I can tell you in advance that such a proposal would be exceedingly unlikely to gain consensus; however that's the correct venue, if you want to take it up nevertheless. Good luck, Mathglot (talk) 02:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: yes thank you for solving the issue i will make sure to use the rfc thing correctly next time Theenglishman124 (talk) 03:47, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  No problem, User:Theenglishman124. It's understandable, as the very name "Request for comment" itself is misleading: it seems to imply it's just an invitation to have a conversation, but it really isn't that. If it were named for what it really is, it would be called an Rf30dodbloueihafaowmhnetabspldicspafaaebaeeoaate (that stands for: "") but that's a wee bit hard to remember, so "Rfc" it is.  Mathglot (talk) 04:12, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  formatting links to main articles