Talk:Let It Be (1970 film)

message: Fans await to this day the official release of this film on DVD.  When Neil Aspinall was last at Apple, he said that initial restoration opened Pandora's box, so it was shelved yet again.
:On amazon.com of all places, I find purported DVD releases of the film, sometimes sold with a rare concert or other programme, imported from possibly Japan, Eastern Europe, mainland China, or South Korea.  Some claim that it's public domain (which it certainly isn't, as far as the west is concerned).  The picture quality might not be up to par (as with most pirates and bootlegs; many stem from this era) with a proper version.  This is one of the only Oscar winners not legally available on video.
::My copy I did on my DVD recorder from a low-quality third-generation VHS copy said to be from a nursing home.  Better than nothing, though if a true DVD comes out, I'ma get that and give away the DVD-R.  I see pirates at the CD record fair twice a year.  I save my money for rarer goodies.
:::Beatle People of the world unite and get Apple to reissue this lost gem!  We can't just "Let It Be"!Sposato (talk) 23:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  DVD releases 

message: Do we consider this still a stub or is it a grown up adult article now? --kingboyk 19:09, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think by the criteria at Wikipedia:WikiProject_The_Beatles/Article_Classification it is 'Start class'. I'll destub it now. --kingboyk 03:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still a stub? 

message: Is that photo of Ringo (behind drum baffles) and Paul (playing guitar) reproduced the opposite way round?  McCartney is left handed, but playing right handed here (also, if you look at the guitar, it appears as a left handed guitar played upside down!  Surely not right...) Lec CRP1 19:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is reversed—the guitar is a right-handed guitar, that Paul is playing left-handed; and Paul's part in his hair is reversed. Jimcripps 02:32, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Reversed image now corrected. - Zakko 04:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both Paul and Ringo are southpaws. Sposato (talk) 23:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Film still

message: :Image:Getback roof.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 23:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Getback roof.jpg

message: Rater than try to do a bunch of piecemeal additions and changes, I did a pretty extensive re-edit of the entire article. The main change was to structure it per the style guidelines of WP:Film. I added some material and refs, trying to focus on the film aspect of the Let It Be projects without getting too bogged down in tangential aspects. I hope this provides a solid basis for further expansion and refinements. --Mainstream Nerd (talk) 00:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite

message: Perhaps there should be some mention of the "A/B Road" bootleg tapes that came about as part of the recording process for the film? This article provides a good starting point for research, including the names and authors of a couple of books on the matter. —Robotech_Master (talk) 08:51, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  A/B Road bootlegs? 

message: Documenting, via the Sulpy book, that performances of songs X, Y, and Z are in the film and at what times in the sessions the film excerpts took place. Vidor (talk) 01:12, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: *Should we maybe summarise which songs are originally from which album?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.37.54 (talk) 13:12, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  song list footnotes 

message: I looked around and I realized there is no solo page for the rooftop concert. Wikipedia and the internet in general has a striking lack of information about what happened that day, other than what ended up in the cut for the Let It Be film, there should be information available about the days, the times, the police perspective and perhaps more eyewitness perspective. Seeing as how that event was one of the most iconic moments in the 20th century, as well as being the final performance of the century's greatest band, I think it deserves a page all its own.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.137.112 (talk) 21:21, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Rooftop performance article?

message: :The police eventually make their way to the roof and try to bring the show to a close, as the show was disrupting businesses' lunch hour nearby.
And exactly, what does that mean?  Somebody couldn't drink their martini because the music was too loud?  What does it mean to disrupt a lunch hour? Viriditas (talk) 09:55, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: On a related note, a guy says in the video: "it’s’ a bit of an imposition to absolutely disrupt all of the business in this area". I think he refers to the fact that the volume of the music was altering the peace of the area, by disturbing and interfering the usual state of things. May be the article should omit the "lunch hour" interpretation, and just transcribe the comments of the people.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arturotena (talk • contribs) 05:40, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disruption? 

message: I suggest that no more links to U_tube pages should be "presented" here, as all of 'em would be "irregular" and would be removed from U_toube, sooner-or-later [if WP lists them: sooner]. Having "repaired" a broken link to "full_version" ~34min of 'rooftop concert', a while ago, I think I know what I'm talking about: Target file was removed on request of EMI, a little while later...
Any "~_intelligent" person would be able to find out relevant footage. [w.] 00:04, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  NO_MORE "dirty" links... 

message: "The film was first released on VHS, Betamax and LaserDisc in 1981 by Magnetic Video, and on RCA CED videodisc in 1982, but all were deleted within a few years." Did they go into everyone's  home and erase their VHS copies? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleted from the respective catalogs. Also known as "out of print". - dcljr (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The word "deleted" has itself been deleted, which is unfortunate as we have an article that I would link to: Deletion (music industry). --kingboyk (talk) 22:33, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does this mean? 

message: This is available on DVD on Amazon.  The home release section needs updating.  Mezigue (talk) 17:15, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are bootlegs. Piriczki (talk) 17:28, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not available? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Let It Be (1970 film). 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/20090907081141/http://www.beatlesmovies.co.uk/let-it-be/background.asp to http://www.beatlesmovies.co.uk/let-it-be/background.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120914004427/http://whereseric.com/eric-clapton-faq/band-history-and-lineups/eric-clapton-and-beatles-was-clapton-ever-invited-join-fab to http://whereseric.com/eric-clapton-faq/band-history-and-lineups/eric-clapton-and-beatles-was-clapton-ever-invited-join-fab
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) 19:12, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "In the next scene, Harrison is absent, and the other Beatles are seen playing in freeform style as Ono sings. " I've seen a bootleg clip showing this, but I've seen the movie many times, and it is NOT in the movie.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 06:48, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a long time since I've seen the official film, so I can't rely on my memory. But I have read mention of this contrast – uncomfortable "Two of Us" exchange followed by freeform jam with Ono – in a few sources discussing the film. I will double-check this now, though, in the Mojo Special article, Stephanie Fremaux's book The Beatles on Screen, etc  ... JG66 (talk) 06:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've binned it – perhaps just for now, who knows. I've looked quickly at Martin O'Gorman's "Film on Four" feature in the Mojo Special but not the other sources. It's quite possible that writers are confusing chronological events with their description of the film's segments, and perhaps the fading memories of the band members were/are doing the same. Since Klein instructed Lindsay-Hogg to cut much of the content featuring Ono, have to say it would seem unlikely that the jam scene made the final cut (whereas footage of J & Y waltzing to "I Me Mine" at Twickenham definitely did). JG66 (talk) 07:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence? 

message: It's a bit vague down there.  Will the original LET IT BE film be released on home media (DVD and/or Blu ray)?  That was the original plan back in 2018.
COVID, etc. etc.
Now, it's vague.  Something about a streaming documentary.  Fine.  But what about the ORIGINAL film, which this article itself is about??  Is it still slated to have a home media release??  Anyone??  71.226.227.121 (talk) 11:39, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  2021 HOME MEDIA release 

message: "Let It Be would be made available on the streaming service Disney+ on 8 May 2024, marking the first time it had been broadcast or publicly screened since its original theatrical release"
?? Let it Be was broadcast on BBC TV in 1979. https://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/20a16e3bb8cb4bc48354c04955abb7bf
:Repertory cinema houses screened it throughout the 1970s...in Canada at least. JeanPaulGRingault (talk) 02:17, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  2024 re- release 

message: Twice now my EL addition of a link to the film from the Internet Archive has been reverted by User:Maxbmogs. Before I take it further can anyone tell me if I'm going against any policy or guidelines by adding the link? I'm not up for an edit war, however lengthy or short. Tom Reedy (talk) 22:16, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unexplained reversion 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Procedural move. I'm reverting my recent move per WP:RMUM. While I still think the shorter title is the correct one and the finger wagging is unjustified given that the previous RM was 10 years ago and the INCDAB rules have changed since then, but there's no value in holding a full RM here.   — Amakuru (talk) 11:51, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Let It Be (film) →  – Per WP:PRIMARYFILM we don't do partial disambiguation for films. The page-view ratio here is basically identical (except both topics are 10x less popular) to Willow (2019 film)/Willow (1988 film) in which the consensus was to fully disambiguate. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 10 February 2024 

message: Is the 2024 version of the poster really necessary? It's not significantly different from the original and the 1970 version basically conveys the same thing. Ggoofy14 (talk) 16:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  2024 film poster