roadrunn This movie receives such high praise from other reviewers, because other films about the Beatles beginnings are so bad.Contains much that is out of order and completely falsified. Stewart Sutcliff's death is presented more than six months before it happened.The Beatles are told that they have a recording contract while in England, while actually Brian Epstein (their manager) cabled them in Germany to let them know.The first time they meet George Martin (their producer) it is actually long after they met him historically.They tell Brain they want Ringo in and Pete out before they even meet George Martin, and it was George Martin along with George Harrison who were the biggest advocates in getting rid of Pete.Dick Row (Decca executive) is presented in a scene giving his famous lone (which was actually delivered over the phone) as George Martin walks in (who worked for competing record company EMI).There are numerous of these historical inaccuracies. There is a scene where John Lennon chastises Brian Epstein for not getting a record contract that I have never heard of. And at that point Brian had raised their appearance fee from 16 pounds a performance to 100 pounds, making the confrontation unlikely and contrived.Also this film has the Beatles playing songs years before they were written or recorded by previous groups.The Decca recording session on January 1, 1962 presents them playing songs that are not in the actual set.Has the Beatles in the wrong costumes and playing the wrong song for their opening appearance for Ed Sullivan.Almost worthless as history, but it does have some of the music.

Shaolin_Apu The idea of making a film about the Beatles sounds doomed idea, as no production can catch the idea of the actual historic Beatles. Then it is perhaps best not to try to recreate the past, but to produce an illustration that works best with the other available Beatles material. This is exactly what 'Birth of the Beatles' offers to us, the simple story known to us without any extravaganza.*** SPOILERS here on *** Be warned that not everything is that accurate as some Beatles-graduates might expect. The Beatles are seen performing songs that hardly were even composed by that time. The Beatles perform "Ask Me Why", "P.S. I Love You" and even "Don't Bother Me". The Beatles-graduates should see that if the Beatles on the film only performed songs that they actually did at Hamburg, the younger viewers might not anymore recognize the Beatles they have learned to know them. Of that original Hamburg repertoire only "Johnny B. Goode" and Stu Sutcliffe's "Love Me Tender" are retained.The guys who play the Beatles in this production scarcely look like the originals, but the rest of the film still make good viewing as the film is for the rest fairly accurate. The guy who plays Lennon does it good and the rest of the band are not bad either. Brian Epstein is great and the moment when he sacks Pete Best from the group is probably the most memorable scene in the whole film. Also as a bonus you get to see the original Cavern club in the film.

semprini20 We all know that dramatic adaptations of historical events are almost never 100% accurate, otherwise they would not be "adaptations". However I felt that this film reflected a certain consultant's true feelings.Now I know I wasn't there and Pete Best was, but it seems odd to me that this movie (on which he acted as a primary consultant) contradicts other people's recollection of certain events. For example Pete Best is portrayed as a strikingly handsome, highly proficient drummer. This simply isn't true (the drumming proficiency). Many people will say that Best was at best (no pun intended) a mediocre drummer (one can also hear on the Anthology that Best's drumming lacks the drive, timing, and bounce that was distinctive to Ringo's). It seems that Best feels that his dismissal from the band was a grave injustice and a plain old bad idea. They even go as far in this film as to say that EMI (i.e. George Martin) liked his playing, and according to George Martin himself, it was he who told the Beatles that they'd have to use a session drummer because Pete's playing just wasn't good enough.Other than these glaring discrepancies and some chronological conjecture (Stu Sutcliffe died some time after the rest of the Beatles had left Hamburg for good) this is an average made-for-TV movie on one of the greatest bands of all time.

genesisj As a knowledgeable fan I recommend this film as faithful to the facts and well acted. As an 11 year old living in Istanbul I heard some friends talking about a new music sensation that caused girls to scream. I thought hmmmm, if girls like them, they must be crap. My only records until then were Haley Mills, The Everly Brothers & Ricky Nelson. Soon after while on vacation with the family at a military cafeteria in Ismir I heard a song (which I later learned was 'Love Me Do') and was floored by the difference between it and every song I had ever heard until then. When I heard the 'Meet The Beatles' album of my older brother I was hooked for life. Having read the definitive book of their beginnings (by Davis) I was surprised that this movie followed the facts very well with the exception of leaving out most of the sex and some of the drug use (it did touch on the use of methadrine/dexadrine). >