|
Post by FlamingPie on Dec 23, 2004 0:14:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Dec 23, 2004 2:53:00 GMT -5
FP, my hairdressers have told me over the years that one can usually "train" their hair to part where they wish. I choose to part my hair on the side. However, when my layers grow out, it insists on parting in the middle. Nothing I can do until I have it cut again. So where he parts his hair (whichever "he" we are referring to ) probably isn't very definitive for PIA or PID. I believe what PID-ers find interesting is the time period when the change occurred .
|
|
|
Post by Red Lion on Dec 23, 2004 3:04:23 GMT -5
FP, my hairdressers have told me over the years that one can usually "train" their hair to part where they wish. I choose to part my hair on the side. However, when my layers grow out, it insists on parting in the middle. Nothing I can do until I have it cut again. So where he parts his hair (whichever "he" we are referring to ) probably isn't very definitive for PIA or PID. PID-ers, I believe, find the time period when the change occurred interesting. Eloquent as always.
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Dec 23, 2004 16:27:11 GMT -5
I believe what PID-ers find interesting is the time period when the change occurred . Which is around the moped accident? I gave you my theory about this.
|
|
|
Post by Red Lion on Dec 23, 2004 16:50:36 GMT -5
Which is around the moped accident? I gave you my theory about this. Nice try but the part never moved until JP was replaced.
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Dec 24, 2004 4:14:01 GMT -5
Again, the part is usually set by a naturally occuring cowlick in the hair pattern. Paul and George had very common, typical hair patterns. Mine, frankly, is similar and resists revamping and always has. Attempts to go against it are frustrating. Long term training and gels and special hair stylings eventually backfire. You just can't fight a stubborn cow-lick.
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Dec 24, 2004 4:18:01 GMT -5
Which is around the moped accident? no. The moped accident occurred around the end of 1965. Paul was seen for most of 1966 looking "same as always".
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Dec 24, 2004 11:26:27 GMT -5
no. The moped accident occurred around the end of 1965. Paul was seen for most of 1966 looking "same as always". Exactly!
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Mar 14, 2005 16:08:23 GMT -5
The moped accident occurred around the end of 1965. Paul was seen for most of 1966 looking "same as always". But he did have the chipped tooth in the Rain and Paperback Writer videos. Those must have been made in early 1966.
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Mar 14, 2005 21:41:05 GMT -5
The first time thoses two videos were made was in April of 1966. JMO. Again, see how Paul was edited out from under the wysteria between Ringo and John. When the camera pans across them, Paul is absent from the shot as they do a quick dissolve eliminating the footage of a large close-up of Paul's face. A close-up that was apparently removed and we will never see it. The fact of the camera doing a pan shot following a medium shot showing their seating position is very indicative of this. Why leave Paul out? Because the shot was probably considered incendiary. Some people saw it as originally cut,I presume, in April, May of 1966. Didn't it air on Ed Sullivan? But no one had VCRs yet. Just 5 years later though.........Nobody has a good enough memory of it though, to ever make a point of it...... Doing a chipped tooth and a lip and cheek scar are tow of the easiest taks movie make-up artists routinely do. Even in the ancient world of 1966. I think, JMO, that the person we see with chipped tooth and scar in Rain and PW is Sir Paul of today............maybe utilizing hyaluronic acid as an underskin plumper-upper. For 3 hours it gives you wonga cheeks. Every chipmunk in town'd be jealous.
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Mar 14, 2005 22:03:59 GMT -5
Oh I don't know about that. I would say it's definitely JPM in both of those videos.
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Mar 14, 2005 23:31:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Mar 15, 2005 0:32:39 GMT -5
i have to agree there.. Paul just does not look right there.. those clips have always made me wonder! expecially if you watch anthology and see Paul after these clips were made. He looks like normal Paul again... I feel the same about parts of the "Help" movie too. Maybe there was a double for a while before he died, but for what reason?... filling in when Paul wasn't feeling well. There was the whole thing about him being found in a bathroom of a hotel in 66 vomiting violently from tension. I am beginning to think maybe he literally did 'blow his mind out in a car' or maybe even got 'hung about' in that tree in Strawberry Fields.. who knows
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Mar 15, 2005 12:59:51 GMT -5
I think in the 1966 videos and the movie Help Paul is simply wearing his hair diffferently, i.e. not mop top and more parted in the middle so he looks more like Faul. The first photo that Doc posted still looks like Paul and i say that because I have seen the video. I know he looks a lot like Faul too in that pic but to me it's still Paul.
Ostriches scare me.
|
|
|
Post by -Wings- on Mar 15, 2005 14:20:40 GMT -5
Yeah, I still see Paul there too. I think we're just conditioned to spot the moptop that anything else doesn't look right. The face is still Paul's though, and not with the noticable differences that Faul has.
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Mar 15, 2005 18:50:09 GMT -5
There was the whole thing about him being found in a bathroom of a hotel in 66 vomiting violently from tension. Where did you read that PennyLane? I never heard that one.
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Mar 16, 2005 0:30:57 GMT -5
It's from the book McCartney by Chris Salewicz. There is a bit in the book that talks about the death threats from militant students they recieved then goes onto the whole manilla thing, and then Johns "popular jesus" comment and the death threats from the KKK. Then it says and i qoute: "After rain caused a show in Cincinnati to be postponed for a day, Paul was discovered back at the group's hotel vomiting violently from tension. It was hardly surprising that by the last day of the tour, that the Beatles had had enough, it was their last live show ever" poor paulie
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Mar 16, 2005 0:32:27 GMT -5
yes.. them too
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Mar 16, 2005 0:37:54 GMT -5
Forgive me for saying this, I dont say it in judgement--we all love the Beatles and Paul here, but from your book quote about the vomiting--the author says "from tension." Sure it wasn't from "withdrawal?"
Maybe they kept him clean through Candlestick Park. Then, they went to L.A. Maybe Paul eagerly tried to "hook up" in L.A. Maybe he scored. Maybe something went terribly terribly wrong. "Ask any policeman on the street. There's plenty there for you to meet..." Where is there? LA? Blue Jay Way? The street where they found him?
Forgive my morbiduty.
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Mar 17, 2005 3:03:17 GMT -5
interesting.. you make a valid point. You know I think something weird happened.. i don't think it was woops Paul died accidently in a car crash, there is not a good enough reason to cover that up, and for what.. the beatles broke up 3 years later.. it seems pointless. I think suicide or foul play make for better reasons for a cover up.
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Mar 17, 2005 8:57:37 GMT -5
Forgive me for saying this, I dont say it in judgement--we all love the Beatles and Paul here, but from your book quote about the vomiting--the author says "from tension." Sure it wasn't from "withdrawal?" Maybe they kept him clean through Candlestick Park. Then, they went to L.A. Maybe Paul eagerly tried to "hook up" in L.A. Maybe he scored. Maybe something went terribly terribly wrong. "Ask any policeman on the street. There's plenty there for you to meet..." Where is there? LA? Blue Jay Way? The street where they found him? Forgive my morbiduty. Ya, that's an interesting interpretation..... & quite possible. There's a scene in Help that got my attention because Paul looks so pale. His skin's all pasty lookin' & he generally seems to not feel very good. Possibly very hungover &/or strung out. But having been there a time or 2 myself, that pasty looking skin was the first thing to catch my eye when I watched that scene. *the scene I'm referring to is in the 1st quarter of the movie when Paul's leaving his apartment & is stopped by the lady from India as they check & see if he's the one wearing the ring.
|
|
|
Post by Michelle_My_Dear on Jul 12, 2017 13:38:21 GMT -5
good pics....original paul almost seems to have NO part...as in just a nice full head of hair that falls forward while in pictures that he appears less attractive (the replacement??) his hair splits almost in the middle and wants to center part or part the other way. Have you seen Miles Mathis's article on Paul having a possible twin? Mathis really focuses on the hair parting issue. mileswmathis.com/paul8.pdf
|
|