|
Post by sunsoflight on Nov 9, 2008 15:24:58 GMT -5
Three Blind Mice. See how they run...
|
|
|
Post by faulconandsnowjob on Nov 9, 2008 16:21:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sunsoflight on Nov 9, 2008 16:55:14 GMT -5
This is true, both Fauls are seated at the table on opposite sides. One blonde with a mustache, one dark hair and no mustache. The guy in the white pants does not resemble Paul McCartney, yet he is the one singled out as the double in the other posts.
|
|
|
Post by sweetlorettamartin on Nov 17, 2008 16:44:54 GMT -5
I believe there are at least two "Fauls". The dude with the mustache, called Strawberry Fields Faul is different from the dude many call "Faul" or "Bill".
Now there is the man called "Mountain Man" and I'm not sure if he's the SFF with a beard, or a different man. I've never seen a side by side pic of the bearded Faul, like on the Mc Cartney cover of 1970, with SFF and "Bill".
As the song goes "It's all too much for me to take"!
|
|
|
Post by ph0neyprophet on Nov 23, 2008 20:43:03 GMT -5
Here's the way I see it [in order from left to right].
Paul, Vivian Stanshall, Iamaphoney.
|
|
|
Post by B on Nov 23, 2008 20:55:09 GMT -5
in this picture, I presume:
|
|
iwasyou66
Hard Day's Night
i was you..
Posts: 20
|
Post by iwasyou66 on Jan 1, 2009 10:21:24 GMT -5
in my opinion there's definately at least two faul's. the court room and soleil pictures looked like different men. The man on the right (better quality picture) is the Faul that appeared in the Let It Be movie. (the eyebrows and eyes are the key). the other Faul was puffy, his eyebrows didn't have that 'McCartney style'.. this being the slightly raised right eyebrow.. and his features didn't match the other.
As for the MMT lunch, our 'Magical Mystery Faul' on the left, 'Bonzo Faul' in the centre (surely not Viv. in the film it didn't look like him at all, but he had the obvious features that make it possible for him to quickly change into faul) and then last but not least... on the right.. it looks kinda like Denny Laine.. maybe used as a stand-in for parts of the film.
ACTUALLY, as i've thought of something while i'm typing.
going along with the thoughts that lead to Paul not dying at all, and still remaining in the group as Neil Aspinall (not to bring up old apples =P). but is it possible there was a phase where he too had prosthetics? because then he could take them on and off. anyway, he could have been there on the day they filmed the bonzo scene (which is why faul is dressed up as viv) and thats where they're having lunch.
sorry if that trailed off and didn't make sense. like i said, i'm typing as i'm thinking so yeah =)
|
|
|
Post by mommybird on Jan 4, 2009 20:29:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Dec 1, 2018 23:45:27 GMT -5
I realize this is an old thread, but it is mind-boggling to me that anyone -- particularly anyone on a board such as this -- could possibly mistake the TWO Old Fauls presented at the OP for the same man. Mind boggling. & they're both wearing cheap wigs. There was, also, a third "Paul" during the Mills-Divorce-Era. I believe this older "Paul", above, right, has retired from performing (if he was ever used for performances), but he's been seen strolling with Nancy. The heights of the 3 (or 4) remaining Pauls vary greatly. Please, take note of the usual "crinkles" below/aside the eyes of the "Paul" on the left: this is not a feature all the Pauls shared and is useful for telling them apart. Also, note that this "Paul" on the left has that peculiar curled skin fold at the right edge of his mouth (others have referred to it as a "skin pocket"); if you keep an eye out for that skin curl, you will find that this "Paul" matches the '64 Ed Sullivan "Paul".
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Dec 3, 2018 0:12:05 GMT -5
I realize this is an old thread, but it is mind-boggling to me that anyone -- particularly anyone on a board such as this -- could possibly mistake the TWO Old Fauls presented at the OP for the same man. Mind boggling. That's Faul on the Ed Sullivan show. Paul pic from 64
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Dec 30, 2018 14:40:03 GMT -5
If that was Paul on Sullivan in '64 then who is this: and who is this: and who is this: and who is this: and who is this: And these are but a few of the pre-66/pre-Billy Pauls. Who are they?
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Jan 3, 2019 9:00:19 GMT -5
The Paul pic from 1964 I posted was from the NME awards performance of that year. You have posted some pics of the real Paul McCartney there K. The one that was on the cover of With The Beatles.
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Jan 5, 2019 17:12:46 GMT -5
The "real" Paul? Which one is that? This one or this one: ?? There are or were two "original" Pauls, at a minimum. "Paul McCartney" is imaginary.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Jan 6, 2019 10:04:49 GMT -5
Well I'm calling the real Paul the one that disappeared. What makes me think he's the real one, is how much of a better performer he was than Faul, and how Faul used prosthetics in order to look like him.
In the two pictures you posted, Faul is the top one and Paul is the bottom one. I have no answer as to how long this operation was in the works - it could have even begun when they were toddlers.
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Jan 6, 2019 15:28:39 GMT -5
Would we agree the kid on the left is 'paul' in both pics above?
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on Jan 8, 2019 15:52:30 GMT -5
Well I'm calling the real Paul the one that disappeared. What makes me think he's the real one, is how much of a better performer he was than Faul, and how Faul used prosthetics in order to look like him. In the two pictures you posted, Faul is the top one and Paul is the bottom one. I have no answer as to how long this operation was in the works - it could have even begun when they were toddlers. Especially if these Beatles were raised in masonic families whose allegience is to the Queen and other Cabal members. Is it just too much coincidence that The Beatles were surrounded by high ranking Masons and not be Masons themselves?
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Jan 8, 2019 19:38:27 GMT -5
Would we agree the kid on the left is 'paul' in both pics above? The individuals in both photos are identified as being, Left to Right: Paul, Mary and Mike McCartney. The boys identified as Mike appear to be the same boy, but's impossible to say so with true certainty because of the angle of the boy's head in the 2nd photo. The women identified as Mary, may or may not be the same woman; the more I compare their noses and brow ridges, the less alike they look. The boys on the left of both photos, who are supposed to both be 'Paul McCartney', are obviously not the same child.
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Jan 8, 2019 19:53:21 GMT -5
Well I'm calling the real Paul the one that disappeared. What makes me think he's the real one, is how much of a better performer he was than Faul, and how Faul used prosthetics in order to look like him. In the two pictures you posted, Faul is the top one and Paul is the bottom one. I have no answer as to how long this operation was in the works - it could have even begun when they were toddlers. I must disagree: Kiddo Paul #2 neither 'disappeared' nor was he the deep throated early Beatlemania-era 'Paul'. Further, many men, who publicly assumed the role of 'Paul McCartney', were seen for some period of time and, then, vanished. The one I can't get over is that Small Paul in the early years Scotland pix, who appears to be unable to stand on his own.
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Jan 12, 2019 12:07:07 GMT -5
Would we agree the kid on the left is 'paul' in both pics above? The individuals in both photos are identified as being, Left to Right: Paul, Mary and Mike McCartney. The boys identified as Mike appear to be the same boy, but's impossible to say so with true certainty because of the angle of the boy's head in the 2nd photo. The women identified as Mary, may or may not be the same woman; the more I compare their noses and brow ridges, the less alike they look. The boys on the left of both photos, who are supposed to both be 'Paul McCartney', are obviously not the same child. I ask because the ears on the kids (left) in these pics certainly look different. "or this one" pic on bottom - ears stick out more on this Paul.
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Jan 13, 2019 7:42:35 GMT -5
Yeah, definitely different ears, different faces, different skull structure, different kids entirely --- but *both* officially "Paul McCartney".
|
|