|
Post by DarkHorse on Aug 3, 2004 21:27:59 GMT -5
Where is it documented that John is wearing lifts? You are making another assumtion without providing any reference. Where can I see this? Do you think John and George look the same height in this video?
|
|
|
Post by matchbox on Aug 3, 2004 21:54:22 GMT -5
Do you think John and George look the same height in this video? Yes I do. I just noticed this now, but John's head does appear slightly higher than George's because John is holding his head up, while George is looking more downward. Look how much neck you can see on John, and you can hardly see Georges neck at all. But Look at their hands and shoulders. Especially the shoulders. George's shoulders appear the same as John's. None of which discounts the fact that Paul is no where near even 2" taller than John and George. Regardless, all this talk of shoe lifts and colored contact lenses is just speculation.
|
|
|
Post by LarryC on Aug 3, 2004 21:54:30 GMT -5
Man, oh man. This is why I hesitated to view this thread because it's an inane subject. In order for anyone to make a statement of fact there should be some form of evidence...at least that is what I gathered earlier on in this thread...but DarkHorse, to come out and say John is wearing lifts is like really edging into a very subjective area if you don't know from a definate source...wouldn't you agree? I mean, you can look at thousands of photos of all of them from 1962 until 1970 and see all sorts of little anomolies which would make you scratch your head...are they wearing lifts? Is Ringo wearing lifts? (if he isn't he should be hahaha) I would say that none of us were there to see inside John's shoes as he either put them on or took them off...and if there is no other point of reference, say like an interview or video footage, then therefore no real proof, the subject of lifts should not even be a topic for discussion. All we have to base any opinion on is photographs, videos, DVD, magazines, newpapers, books, etc. I would not presume to suggest that any of them wore lifts because you cannot prove it, just as I would not presume any of them were going without underwear...as we cannot prove that either....well not in THESE photos anyway ;D
Now what we have to do is work the John/George height issue out with other available evidence...who knows, we may find that John or George have been replaced as well...haha. I've actually been of the opinion that John seems to appear mostly just a smidgen taller than George, but then that hasn't been my point of focus either.
|
|
|
Post by Red Lion on Aug 4, 2004 1:15:08 GMT -5
No photographic expert here, but I see all four head to toe on even ground and Faul tops them all.
|
|
|
Post by kazu on Aug 4, 2004 4:09:07 GMT -5
You know. I actually don't see him towering over the others. John is standing on one leg and forcing his weight on one hip. George is leaning his rear on a table, but is still as tall as Paul. If you actuall measure their heights as they stand, heel on the ground to top of head, George is the tallest or the same height as Paul. Depends on which heel you use on Paul. He is also appears standing on one leg. I think it is the back on. If so, then he is doing what Lennon is, but not as much. They are all standing in a way to obscure their height. Again, though this does not prove PID or PIA, it just means that they don't stand straight in photos. Except Ringo. He always stands straight. But that is probably natural when you are the shortest of the most famous 4 musicians in the 60s. Larry, I think lifts mean the 1-2 inch heel inserts that some companies sell. Like this. www.gwheellift.com/Coincidentally, they started business in 1967.
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Aug 4, 2004 8:01:00 GMT -5
Yes I do. I just noticed this now, but John's head does appear slightly higher than George's because John is holding his head up, while George is looking more downward. Look how much neck you can see on John, and you can hardly see Georges neck at all. But Look at their hands and shoulders. Especially the shoulders. George's shoulders appear the same as John's. None of which discounts the fact that Paul is no where near even 2" taller than John and George. Regardless, all this talk of shoe lifts and colored contact lenses is just speculation. You said that John's head appears slightly taller and yet we all agreed that the video frame is tilted so wouldn't that make John even taller than George? Looking at Larry's pic and the difference at the bottom of the shoes, it looks like another inch.
|
|
|
Post by ecenzo1 on Aug 4, 2004 13:55:50 GMT -5
Something to think about: As the 47 year old son of an 84 year old mother, I can tell you this: People age with time. Please don't respond with the "well it was only four years between different "family shots." Watching my mom age over the last few years demonstrates to me that "shrinking" happens with all senior citizens. Why can't the obvious be looked at objectively? Maybe it's Paul's father that's changing height and not him. I am actually "taller" standing next to mom now than I was even a few years ago. If she's still with us in a few years, I'm shure I'll be even "taller."
|
|
|
Post by Frightwolf on Aug 8, 2004 1:01:58 GMT -5
No photographic expert here, but I see all four head to toe on even ground and Faul tops them all. I see George with his knees bent a lot, and he is only a half of a half of a half of a half of an inch shorter than Paul. So standing up, they'd be about the same height. The pic proves PIA more than PID. Thanks for the pic!
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Aug 8, 2004 7:13:09 GMT -5
The pic proves PIA more than PID. Well, no. This height thing is such a red herring, one pic isn't gonna prove PIA or PID. When I look at that pic & compare BIll with Ringo & John, I see a guy who's at least 2 inches taller than JPM. Everybody see's what they wanna see.
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Aug 8, 2004 7:34:38 GMT -5
I'm not surprised that these MMT pics would show up in a height thread. Coz these are the main pics that trip me up on the height issue. JOhn having an extra inch in his heels & there being a (very) slightly slanted set would make for a good illusion, but I just noticed something. Compare Bill with Ringo.,... look where Ringo's feet & head are in comparison. Bill is a few inches taller, much more than a 1 inch difference there. JPM was not that much taller than Ringo. Maybe an inch & a half at the very most. That guy in MMT is 3-4 inches taller than Ringo.
|
|
|
Post by matchbox on Aug 8, 2004 10:37:49 GMT -5
Pauls is leaning to his left on that picure.
My point on this thread is that John, Paul and George are all very close to the same height before and after '66. Speculation on platform shoes etc. are moot IMO because they can not be proven.
You will show examples that support your position, and I'll show examples that support mine. I believe this is a red herring issue because there are so many examples that contradict each other.
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Aug 8, 2004 10:41:43 GMT -5
You will show examples that support your position, and I'll show examples that support mine. I believe this is a red herring issue because there are so many examples that contradict each other. Yes exactly. Now that's a statement most everybody here can agree on!
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Aug 8, 2004 11:29:28 GMT -5
Pauls is leaning to his left on that picure. My point on this thread is that John, Paul and George are all very close to the same height before and after '66. Speculation on platform shoes etc. are moot IMO because they can not be proven. You will show examples that support your position, and I'll show examples that support mine. I believe this is a red herring issue because there are so many examples that contradict each other. Actually, eyesbleed's pic shows why your example does not hold water because the feet were not even which is witnessed by the red line on the bottom. To me that clearly shows that John is taller than George by at least 1 1/2 inchers in the pic which he wasn't in real life. He was the same height. So that, combined with the odd way John is descending the stairs in that video, is the basis for my conclusion that John was wearing shoes with lifts in them in that video.
|
|
|
Post by Frightwolf on Aug 8, 2004 11:35:29 GMT -5
I can show you a picture of Paul pre-66 that look taller: There ya go. Point is is that you can find pictures pre-66 that look taller just like you can post-66 that DON'T.
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Aug 8, 2004 12:12:23 GMT -5
All you have to do is watch the Ed Sullivan performances and you can see the whole entire bodies of John, George and Paul. Nuff said!
|
|
|
Post by Frightwolf on Aug 8, 2004 14:04:27 GMT -5
All you have to do is watch the Ed Sullivan performances and you can see the whole entire bodies of John, George and Paul. Nuff said! Watch Let It Be and you can see the entire bodies of John, George, and Paul. Nuff said! You just HAD to think of an excuse for that photo showing pre-66 Paul being so tall. That pictures contradicts the entire Faul is taller argument. Just end it!
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Aug 8, 2004 14:48:13 GMT -5
Watch Let It Be and you can see the entire bodies of John, George, and Paul. Nuff said! You just HAD to think of an excuse for that photo showing pre-66 Paul being so tall. That pictures contradicts the entire Faul is taller argument. Just end it! Show me what you are talking about in Let It Be! The concert on the roof? Faul looks taller!
|
|
|
Post by Frightwolf on Aug 8, 2004 14:50:42 GMT -5
Show me what you are talking about in Let It Be! The concert on the roof? Faul looks taller! He was closer to the camera in a lot of the scenes. PAUL (not Faul) is the same height. On the rooftop I believe Paul has that school boy look and heels, but I'm not paying attention to shoes. Throughout the whole movie, they are the same height. Are you being serious or purposely lying?
|
|
|
Post by Frightwolf on Aug 8, 2004 14:53:37 GMT -5
I just watched the Strawberry Fields video... all the same height.
|
|
|
Post by Frightwolf on Aug 8, 2004 14:59:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Frightwolf on Aug 8, 2004 15:00:39 GMT -5
Watched Revolution just now. Everyone looks the same height so far, and I saw ALL their bodies.
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Aug 8, 2004 15:02:42 GMT -5
You saw their bodies, feet to head, standing next to each other from the front angle? That's the angle in the Ed Sullivan performances.
|
|
|
Post by Frightwolf on Aug 8, 2004 15:04:49 GMT -5
You saw their bodies, feet to head, standing next to each other from the front angle? That's the angle in the Ed Sullivan performances. I certainly could in Revolution (all the same height). And yes, there are scenes where you can see their whole bodies. I'll see if I can dig up a copy of LIB or find one for borrowing so I can prove it to you.
|
|
|
Post by Frightwolf on Aug 8, 2004 15:07:30 GMT -5
In the Rooftop John look a little shorter because he's so far away. I also have a video of One After 909 and I think I see a little bit of a heel in Paul's shoe. That should explain your problem.
|
|
|
Post by Frightwolf on Aug 8, 2004 15:15:01 GMT -5
Darkhorse will probably never watch the Revolution video or Strawberry Fields again because he'd hate to admit that Paul is the same height.
He also will never check that site I linked him too because he's afraid it might show that PIA.
You should be happy that PIA. Such overwhelming evidence points to this and yet you keep your mind shut. Don't believe Lennon -- you're making it hard to live with your eyes closed.
I'm off to work. This should give you some food for thought during the day -- try actually having an open mind and serious discussion can happen.
|
|