Twist and Doubt: Are The Beatles biopics bound to disappoint?
Sam Mendes‘ much-anticipated Beatles project was always going to be an ambitious affair, as is the case with most retellings of the Fab Four’s story. However, this particular project—with a film dedicated to each Beatle’s perspective—undoubtedly aims to present an interconnected chronicle of their lives and careers in a format never before attempted. Impressive, right? Right?
Before delving into the forthcoming features, let’s look at The Beatles’ legacy. Enriched by countless narratives, memoirs, biopics, and interviews over time, the story of these four musical aficionados isn’t always easy to untangle, even if their legacy seems straightforward. After all, their journey, marked by as many disagreements as immense milestones, was anything but simple.
So, when it was first announced that Mendes would be taking on not only one biographical feature but four—one for each member—before the casting was even confirmed, many gravitated more towards the sceptical than the celebratory, wondering how on earth any director could ever pull off such a monumental challenge. Surely, even an Oscar-winning director would encounter immense difficulty capturing the lives of one of the most mythologised groups in all of music history?
“Each one is told from the particular perspective of just one of the guys,” Mendes explained at the CinemaCon convention in Las Vegas. “They intersect in different ways – sometimes overlapping, sometimes not. They’re four very different human beings. Perhaps this is a chance to understand them a little more deeply. But together, all four films will tell the story of the greatest band in history.”
However, these aren’t just four films slated to be released consecutively over a stretch of time. Mendes also revealed that they will be released “in proximity” over April 2028 while unveiling the cast members selected to step into such monolithic shoes: Paul Mescal as Paul McCartney, Joseph Quinn as George Harrison, Barry Keoghan as Ringo Starr, and Harris Dickinson as George Harrison.
Since the dawn of The Beatles’ reign, their legacy has been one of immense complexity—both by media exposure or lack of, as well as behind-the-scenes tiffs and the series of events leading to their eventual dissolution. The Beatles’ music might be easy to get behind, as subjective as that experience may be, but their story—full of nuances determining who said what, who felt what, and who caused what—remains largely rooted in mysterious lines that are often untraceable by historical recollections.
While that’s not to say that Mendes and his team won’t apply due diligence where it counts, rolling out four feature-length movies from the varying perspectives of each member seems to point to a broader issue about the enhancing overcomplication of The Beatles: Will this serve to clarify their story or convolute it? If the latter, will it tarnish The Beatles’ legacy or alienate fans by pushing them to lose their grip on the people and stories they once thought they understood?
Of course, it’s easy to say that such a move stems from a desire to honour and enrich the band’s legacy, with the different perspectives offering insight not only into the dramas behind closed doors but also into the contributions of each member. After all, it’s likely that most will be drawn to the McCartney and Lennon stories, but discovering previously undetected gems in the others’ narratives might shine a light on Harrison and Starr, creating connections that some may not have otherwise formed.
Still, achieving that feels easier said than done. After all, with most band accuracies having been taken to the grave in some instances, what about the blanks that haven’t been filled by the voices that witnessed the scenes unravel? It isn’t difficult to recreate the story of The Beatles from the outsider’s perspective, but when handling something as intricate as individual peoples’ stories, capturing this essence seems to evade simple, well-researched film teams.
Is the cast a poor reflection of The Beatles?
Let’s look before the fame. Who were The Beatles? They were four lads from Liverpool, all unknown, passionate about their craft, and in need of a break so they could share their talent with the world. Now, let’s look at who will be representing these working-class heroes in the biopic. Hollywood buzzwords.
There was a huge chance here to champion underdogs in cinema. The studio could have cast people who represent the stars of the story, talented unknowns in need of a break. Instead, they have essentially looked at what actors are hot right now and offered them a role as whatever character they can squeeze them into. There is no resemblance, and it makes for a mish-mash of a cast that looks more like a marketing scheme than a solid lineup.
We can only assume Tom Holland was busy. The decision to cast Joseph Quinn, Barry Keoghan, Harris Dickinson and Paul Mescal can only be described as bizarre. Not only will it end up being a poor representation of The Beatles, but it will also play further into the confusion that the nature of these movies will likely cause.
We’re already dealing with storylines that conflict with one another, where protagonists are suddenly antagonists and those we were rooting for suddenly become the villains. The audience is being asked to do a lot by following these films and staying on board with the mythical nature surrounding many of The Beatle’s stories. On top of that, putting successful movie stars in the role furthers this confusion even more as people have preconceived ideologies about the actors, and, naturally, we associate them with some of their other roles rather than what we are currently watching. It’s a fault on behalf of the viewer, sure, but it’s also human nature and will impact how people enjoy these films.
These actors, who are in their prime and do not meet the basic criteria for the characters they are playing, suggest that very few risks will be taken in these films. We’re likely going to get a surface-level story with a passable portrayal of the character. It’s difficult for us to be thrown well and truly into the depths of these complicated people when that depth is being portrayed by someone who shares no resemblance. The potential storylines of these releases have cast doubt upon them thanks to the casting of A-listers.
Of course, it’s not wise to go into the film with our head full of negatives, as much as this article may give off that impression. These people are A-listers for a good reason: they’re good actors. There is a range of talent on display here, and while having four films portray one story is ambitious, it is equally interesting, which means we could be in for a treat with these movies. If the actors are at the top of their game and the ambitious concept is executed efficiently, who is to say that Sam Mendes and Co aren’t on to a winner? However, the concept’s ambitious nature is another way these films could fall flat.
You can have too much of a good thing.
The final way these films might confuse the audience is by over-exposing them to the story of The Beatles. Granted, each member has a unique personality and puts their own spin on the band; however, it would be reckless to suggest that these attributes justify 10 hours’ worth of film.
There is a very real chance that these movies are simply going to be too overwhelming for an audience. What are the ramifications if somebody misses a film or decides they aren’t interested in seeing everyone? The onus on an audience has never been greater, and such overexposure to The Beatles could very well be the thing that ruins these movies.
Not to mention, the impact of The Beatles is hardly something that has gone undocumented. There have been countless books and articles written, documentaries recorded and social media posts argued in. Can these films really give the avid Beatles fans something that they don’t already know? There is a risk that so much content for a story which has already been told multiple might be a huge mountain to climb with a poor view at the top.
