Some fun Beatle pics

[lili]

[plastic paul]

To me that first pic must be doctored, it looks too much like bill.

[revolver]

Great photos, Lilli. This is one of the rare ones where Paul looks more like Bill:

plasticpaul said:

To me that first pic must be doctored, it looks too much like bill.

It seems that younger Paul could sometimes look more like Bill than later Paul.

[Doc]

Thanks Lili, you made my night.

I have a question about the identity of someone in the second picture down, the one outdoors under the trees.


The little girl sitting on Ringo's lap. Could that be Little Nicola with long hair?

[lenmac]

;DThought I'd share some of my fave pics:

[lili]

Plasticpaul posted:

To me that first pic must be doctored, it looks too much like Bill.

That could very well be. I also noticed that his forehead looked somewhat higher than it should.

Revolver posted:

It seems that younger Paul could sometimes look more like Bill than later Paul.

Or, Bill has done his best to emulate the way Paul looked when he was younger.

Doc posted:

The little girl sitting on Ringo's lap. Could that be Little Nicola with long hair?

It can't be Nicola. That photo looks like it's from 1965/66. Lil' Nicola was maybe 4 years old in 1967. That little girl on Ringo's lap looks to be 5 or 6 years old.

Those are wonderul photos, lenmac. Thanks so much for sharing them with us.

[LOVELYRITA]

Who's that man with them? Little Richard?

Look how young the Beatles are here? And that was the real JPM. No mistake about that. No Bill there.

[plastic paul]

Certainly looks like Little Richard.

I agree though that it couldn't be Little Nicola as in MMT she was 5 max and in the other pic she looks at least 6.

[Doc]

plasticpaul said:

Certainly looks like Little Richard.

I agree though that it couldn't be Little Nicola as in MMT she was 5 max and in the other pic she looks at least 6.

Right. Quite. I agree.

Besides, there's already a little too much age reversal going on around here. ;D

No, not that I mind. I'd join the Fountain of Youth Association (the FYA) myself if I could just find directions to the clubhouse.

[lili]

Little Richard, " Oh, he's just soooooooooooo beautiful !!! "
;D


For those who don't know, that's what he always says about himself. It seems that modestly isn't one of his strong points !

[Doc]

From a picture above in lili's post, a magnification of part:






Perhaps no one will see this the way I do.

I mean, I have been wrong, confused, plenty of times.

Maybe my memory is falsely triggered in this case.

But, take a good look. Look at the brunette individual standing somewhat
behind George on the left side of the photo. He is young, handsome.
True, he is partially blocked by George's head.

Isn't THAT Paul?

Just saying that THAT is----kind of what I remember. If that fellow turns out to be Geoffrey Sprayberry or even Maurice Davenport II, my apologies.

You see, I have been working like 3 jobs for a month, I have a sleep deficit, so I am a mentally very tired. So tired I guess that, when I looked closely at that pic, I was having double vision. I must be mistaken, 'cause you see, Paul is clearly talking to the little girl, sitting on the opposite side of the photo.

Two Paui's in one photograph is an anamoly that not even TKIN! has presented in all of it's 3 years. I am worried that you all will take this like another Don Knotts story. I submit this as a "could it be?", not a "sure as heck is."



But what is Paul (on the right) saying to the little girl that she finds so fascinating? Surely it isn't some kind of Double Talk? I dunno. Maybe I am so reticent to give all this up, and desperate to establish that I remember "something"(no matter how vague), that I am starting to interpret any new face in our posted photographs as "That's HIM! That's Paul!"

That could be a press guy, or an A&R rep from Capitol, or an escort, or maybe a............



security double?

[LOVELYRITA]

The look on RIngo's face is that he's not having much fun. Why? Did the little girl wet herself on his lap?

Is that Neil in the shades just off Ringo's right, or left of Ringo in this pic? He does look like he's "security".

[Doc]

lovelyrita said:

The look on RIngo's face is that he's not having much fun. Why? Did the little girl wet herself on his lap?

Is that Neil in the shades just off Ringo's right, or left of Ringo in this pic? He does look like he's "security".

Well I suppose that's it. The Beatles are flanked by 3 security gentleman. Am I having false memory syndrome? Did I mentally substitute the image of a person who might be a Beatles security associate for the image of James Paul? A childhood memory mistake? Oh, oh gosh.

[JoJo]

The only "Mystery man" is the guy Doc pointed out. That is for sure Neil to Ringo's right, and Brian Epstein is wearing the shades to his left.

[LOVELYRITA]

I thought at a glimpse that it may have been Mel but the hair is clearly Brian's style.

But the other dude behind George...does he have a dimple? Or is that just not clear on the picture being enlarged?

Notice the expression on George's face? He doesn't look like he wants to be there either.
The only one interested in the child is Paul and I'm assuming the blonde in the picture was the girl's mother...

[beatlies]

A reminder: regardless of who it is that is obscured behind George, the fact is that they used doubles for JPM before he disappeared and was permanently replaced. Something had been disrupting JPM for years before the last recorded footage of him in 1966.

[LOVELYRITA]

Thinking about this "something" that had been disrupting JPM....Maybe I should start another thread, but I'll put it here for now...when the Beatles first became famous, they didn't think it would last long, they thought they would just end up being songwriters down the road, not really being performers.

Just wondering if by the time they had become famous, Paul and John and George were together since their early to mid teens. That they got their fame, but they didn't like the touring and what it turned into, a circus of maddening screams from the females. Maybe Paul got tired of the circus life and wanted to just record in the studio? Maybe this public image of a mop top was not what they really wanted, after all, it was a Brian move to make them "marketable". The thing they were most famed for was probably the least thing they wanted from their fame.

Maybe they got tired of the "babykissing" and having children sit on their laps for publicity shots, like the one posted above. Perhaps the "cuteness" was wearing heavy on them and it was just more than he could handle and he wanted out?

Posing in the hokey poses for the teen mags, and having all of the marketing of their images and not getting much of the money, having to record the music the record company dictated, all had to contribute to the "wearing out" of the Beatles by the mid 1960's. Maybe Paul wanted out to the point where he bucked the "system" and they had him systematically replaced. Plus one of their "decoys" were being prepped for the replacement. Not to lose any of the money coming in for the Beatles image, they just arranged for the "end of touring" and the time out of the spotlight, time to get their replacement surgically prepared as well as mind control procedures.

Maybe this was discussed on another thread before I came to the forum, pardon me if I repeat some of what may have been discussed. But it just seems like fame was not what they thought it would be and it took its toll on the group.

While we see "fun" pics of the boys, I wonder when was the turning point that it became work and not as fun to pose in these cutesy pics. When it became forced, rather than coming naturally? Because if you see some of the pics, not necessarily in this thread, but pics in books and mags, there is a turning point where it just looks like it's a routine rather than enjoyable.

When a person is not famous, fame and fortune looks all glittery and gold. But once one gets there, and has all the pressure, and the facade, it's not so shiny and valuable.

We should be happy to be "nobodys" in the sense of not being famous and in the spotlight.

[lenmac]

I always thought this pic was very telling.

[plastic paul]

To be fair, Brian put them in suits to make them less teddy boy-ish and appear more clean cut, but Astrid ad Stu turned them onto the mop top look, still interesting point.

[LOVELYRITA]

That may be true Plastic Paul, it's been a while since I have dove into Beatles bios and such. I had thought that it was Brian's idea on the mop tops...but irregardless for the who behind it, the fact is they were not the clean cut guys they appeared to be. They lived in Hamburg in the raunchiest part of rauchy and you cannot possibly be "squeaky clean" living with pimps, prostitutes and drug dealers.

Let's face it they were not buddhists monks in Hamburg.

The cutesy mop tops were the only way they could get into every home in America, and around the world. In those days, right after the JFK assassination, the world, esp. America, needed 4 lovable lads to help heal their pain.

As time went on, they were to be transformed into an influential band in the areas of religion, sex and culture.

Now, what I'm not sure about, was JPM wanting to push this agenda "too soon" and that's why they took him out? Or was it because he didn't want to go with this program that they snuffed him out? The one story I had read about it confused me a bit.

But they were the perfect "types" to reach the young people at a most painful and confusing time in history.

[Doc]

lenmac said:

I always thought this pic was very telling.

Everyone deserves a vacation now and then.

[lili]

A wonderful photo of our boys:

[lili]

Very Christmasy.


These two are from an earlier, happier time for them:

[mommybird]

I found this online: