Hypothetical question re: the movie "Yesterday"

[gamecockcat]

Saw it a couple of weeks ago and thought it was pretty entertaining. Basic premise, failing musician has an accident and wakes up in an alternate universe where The Beatles never happened.

Hypothetical question(s):
If The Beatles came out today, could they be a major rock at or even close to the phenomenon they were in the Sixties? First, the music industry has changed to the point that rock/pop of the type the Beatles wrote just doesn't move the needle very much anymore. Second, artists make almost all of their money touring and playing live which the Beatles quit doing in 1966. Without the tons of cash their singles and album sales generated early in their career and thus 'freed' them from the need to tour, would they have been able to write Sgt Pepper's, Abbey Road or the White Album?

 

[Ryan Lemonds Hair]

Music has changed drastically over the past decade and it isn't for the better. Now it doesn't matter as much about the music as being an attractive person who can work the stage. History would have missed out on legends such as Bob Dylan, The Rolling Stones, George Jones, etc if todays music moguls had been in charge in the 60's, 70's and 80's.

 

[Nicholascat]

If they started with rubber soul they'd still be popular but not like they were in the 60s. Any earlier materiel and they'd be considered a retro mercy beat band which I doubt would go over very well today and boy bands aren't supposed to play instruments.

 

[UKwizard]

The Beatles were an influence to so many artists that have come since so if they didn't come around until now who knows what music would look like between 1960 and now.

I will say this whether it is their early pop tunes or their later experimental songs it is all fantastic in my book. I mean "I Want to Hold Your Hand" is so simple but it speaks to very nature human of what humans want and need.

 

[wildcat1973_rivals160373]

Yes. They were that good.

 

[-Mav-]

Hypothetical question(s):
If The Beatles came out today, could they be a major rock at or even close to the phenomenon they were in the Sixties?

Of course not, there's only two of them left and they're already really old. Duh.

 

[Kooky Kats]

They discovered Jimi Hendrix and shaped Eric Claptons sound...

So without them, no English invasion and Pat Boone would be the GOAT.

 

[TurnipDaBeet]

No

Musicians dont make $ selling music anymore

It’s all “branding” & image controlled

People thought Prince lost his mind when he went by the symbol but in reality it was his fight against big record COMPANYS/WB taking most the profits artists truly EARNED through its physical format ie records/lp/cd’s

Simon Cowell helped usher in this new age of puppet mastering entertainers & pushing out real artists

Boy Bands & disney artists of mid late 90’s was the beginning. Music started suffering during this time.

The Beatles wouldnt last very long today. Make a hit first album. Break up. Then become solo acts.

 

[TurnipDaBeet]

That philosophy then spread to all of the entertainment industry

Why have a band or big group of talented actors/musicians when you can film & control fools (reality shows) & make bs reboots/sequels/comic book popcorn ****

Thus giving birf to INFLUENCERS & viral sensationalism.

Infamy leads to fame rather than true talent.

 

[anthonys735]

Entertaining movie. I really enjoyed it.

Their music would still be great but I'm not sure they're the transcendent figures without the timing.

 

[kyboy1998_rivals34276]

Movie was ridiculously bad. Beatles were really good though.

 

[etowncatfan]

Just like anything else. If you are the First one you will reap the Financial Rewards! The Beatles were the First One to combine Rock in Roll and Folk music and the Blues!!

 

[Blue63Madison]

If you have to question the Beatles — meaning John and Paul — then I seriously wonder if you really understand “The Beatles”. John and Paul are the Beatles. More John in the early years, but then Paul. I mean, look at what those two did after they split. Both would be legendary HOFers, even if the Beatles never existed.

 

[Henogee1975]

Their early concerts only lasted about 30 minutes. That’s crazy

 

[gamecockcat]

If you have to question the Beatles — meaning John and Paul — then I seriously wonder if you really understand “The Beatles”. John and Paul are the Beatles. More John in the early years, but then Paul. I mean, look at what those two did after they split. Both would be legendary HOFers, even if the Beatles never existed.

Maybe so. But, if you throw the Beatles into today's music world where it's about marketability, music being assembled rather than written, performers making the vast majority of their money from live performances vs. album/singles sales, etc., do the Beatles (John and Paul in your opinion) survive long enough to be 'The Beatles'? Do they survive long enough to write Rubber Soul, Sgt Pepper's, The White Album, etc.? Without the Beatles success, no way would Lennon and McCartney have been able to make it on their own, imo, in today's music. Lennon would NEVER have been marketable and McCartney would probably have been a songwriter for Taylor Swift more likely than out in front of the microphone.

I thought it might be an interesting idea to discuss. Good reply.