Beatle music



How did they they GET IT for this film?
---------
Aagh; you're a HEDGE!

reply

I'm wondering this myself. It was somewhat shocking the second I realized what I was listening to, as I can't recall ever hearing an original Beatles recording in a film before. This was prior to Sony/Michael Jackson assuming control of publishing rights, and well before the trend toward stacking popular films with popular music ("The Graduate" notwithstanding) -- could those be causes?

reply

No idea. It's still a mystery to me. Maybe it was part of the old contracts?

---------
Aagh; you're a HEDGE!

reply

I don't have an answer for you, but I was wondering the same thing while watching Coming Home a couple months ago...a LOT of Rolling Stones music in that one. Like the other poster said, maybe there was something with the way they did things back then? (he or she said "something with the contracts"). I'd be interested to know myself...

"How do you feel?"
"Like the Kling-Klang King of the Rim-Ram Room!"

reply


Interesting point, Hal Ashby directed both Shampoo and Coming Home.


Morons . . . I've got morons on my team!

reply

Hmmm... Interesting. Seems to be the word of this thread! :)

---------
Aagh; you're a HEDGE!

reply

Ashby had a relationship with the Stones. He was planning to do a movie with Jagger, and he directed a Stones concert film in 83.

As for Beatle music, it rarely appears in films, although Baby You're A Rich Man plays over the end credits of The Social Network.

I would assume that music rights were not as expensive in 1975. Also, there was no soundtrack album for Shampoo, so maybe that's why the Beatles would allow inclusion of their music in the film. My guess is that someone connected to making Shampoo had a relationship with someone in the Beatles or someone who controlled the publishing rights.

Mean Streets in 73 had lots of expensive music -- Stones, Clapton, etc. I assume that record labels were more willing to allow music to be used in films without charging a prohibitively expensive sum. Of course, when Lucas did American Graffiti, he couldn't afford to use Elvis Presley music.

I read somewhere that Led Zeppelin charges a million bucks if you want to use one of their songs in a movie. Remember the "Start Me Up" campaign for Windows 95? The Stones charges $10 million for use of that song. Times have changed since the mid 70's.

reply

[deleted]

As for Beatle music, it rarely appears in films, although Baby You're A Rich Man plays over the end credits of The Social Network.

Watch again. Beatle music is played background throughout last half of film: Sgt Pepper's Lonely Heart Club Band, Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, etc.

reply

Ever wonder why the #3 movie of 1975 was never released on home video for nearly half a century?

That music is why: no way they’d ever get clearances.
Another oddity is that except for the contribution of Paul Simon, all music was uncredited. Don’t know how producers got away with that.

The untitled, beautiful Simon instrumental heard throughout is an early version of Silent Eyes, one of his best works. It appeared in final form as the last track on that year’s landmark album, Still Crazy After All These Years.

reply

I didn't know that having Beatles's music in a movie is such a big deal. Has Beatles specifically forbidden the usage of their music?

reply

I think the Beatles catalog of music was owned by a record corporation at that time period. I can't think of any reason why a purchase to use the music couldn't have been made, unless you folks know something about this issue that I don't. Michael Jackson bought the Beatles catalog when he was alive and I believe the Jackson family still owns rights to the songs, which they sell for the right price for those corporations that are willing to pay the price to use them in their ads. Last I heard anyway.

reply

The music licensing alone would take half the budget today.

reply

It would've been pretty expensive back then as well.

reply

No because the music wasn't considered classic back then, so they didn't have a reason to charge much.

reply