Is Broadstreet a bad film?

[Harrythebannister]

You have to love it for what it is, and not what you think it should be! Its a parody, and no its not Oscar material, however, it is clever. Have you ever gone back and looked at AHDN. Very similar genre. Besides, I could watch Paul sleeping if they made it on video!!!

I have a copy if you're interested!!!

[dpantz]

I really enjoyed Broadstreet when it first came out on video around 1985. I was 11 years old and never saw "Help" or "A Hard Days Night" yet, so this was my first Beatles-related movie experience.

To this day I occasionally watch "Broadstreet" and can't help but be fascinated by how incredible it really looks. I mean it looks like A LOT of money was spent on the sets, costumes etc, (maybe too much) although the story had some holes. But it doesn't turn my stomach at all...there are a lot of memorable quotes and clips in it, although it may be for Macca fans the most, and to also hold the attention of my brothers who were not Beatles fans at all.

There is a good balance of Beatles and Macca tunes...I love the brief "Band on the Run" clip and of course any shot of Paul's car. Sir Ralph Richardson was great and the monkey was creepy... but memorable, just like all the cast members, including Tracy Ullman.

When I was 11, I was obsessed with England, so all the exterior shots of the Thames and London Bridge set to Mccartney music were well worth the price of the "Broadstreet" video alone...it was like taking a tour of the UK to me! I particularly loved the whole "Eleanor's Dream" sequence which reminded me of the great Hammer Horror films. Some of the most beautfiul imagery are in this part of the film. I still like the updated futuristic version of "Silly Love Songs".

Paul didn't necessarily deserve the slams in the press he got when "Broadstreet" first came out, because it was the first film the director did and Macca wrote. The album is great, although some fans wished there were more Mccartney originals, the Beatles reworkings were unnecessary, yet updated they sounded great on cd!

It wasn't the worst film ever made, though. If Mccartney had done it today it would have really have been a major risk. He's much better at releasing animations and kids books, instead of a big budget film about a rockstar. It was done during the 1980's when MTV was all about musicians being "actors" in big budget films (see Madonna's career). Broadstreet had more appeal in the 1980's than it would have now, so it seems a bit nostalgic now to see Paul in it.

To me "Broadstreet" is a better film, and maybe more of a film with a plot than say "Magical Mystery Tour" but like "MMT" they are both full of some of the best videos..."Broadstreet" just happens to be a film of them and rather expensive videos, that makes the Keith Macmillan/KEEFCO Macca and Wings promos from the 1970's look like public access television adverts!

A bad film???...seek out "Howard the Duck"..."Broadstreet" looks like "Gone with the Wind" next to that crap!

[chris]

allow me to salute paul fan for being either the only honest one here...or at least being the only one to remove his rose colored glasses. this movie...is crap. i was one of seven people to see this flick on opening day at the theater. that was on a friday. by sunday...it was no longer playing at the theater.

the live performances were fine. even good. but the dialogue...and the acting? come on people...you know this movie sucks big time. admit it. i can even put up with the eleanor rigby scene.

here is the plot. paul makes record. tapes get lost. they have to be found by deadline. sound familiar? this movie was much, much better when it was titled a hard days night...and it was ringo that had to be found, not the missing tape.

it was made during arguably his worst phase in his career. this followed pipes of peice, did it not? even paul said he would have made massive changes to the film.

and at least people can still purchase howard the duck. know why? because more people liked that flick than this one. if i really concentrate...i can still recall the stench that this movie left on my clothes as i left the theater that dreary night.

[Harrythebannister]

I'm surprised you even bothered to go to the theatre to see it, Chris!
I had prior engagements that night. An hour of watching paint dry followed by an episode of Coronation Street!
Great stuff!!

[chris]

thanks, big h...you could have invited me over, i would have saved a few bucks and been even more entertained.

[dpantz]

i didn't mean to insult or pick any fights with Howard the Duck fans...I didn't expect this sort of Spanish Inquistion, either...

...NO-ONE EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!!!

Broadstreet shouldn't be about the "acting"...you are obviously not dealing with actors...Madonna couldn't even act her way out of a bag.

[Genuine_Indian_Guru]

allow me to salute paul fan for being either the only honest one here...or at least being the only one to remove his rose colored glasses. this movie...is crap. i was one of seven people to see this flick on opening day at the theater. that was on a friday. by sunday...it was no longer playing at the theater.

the live performances were fine. even good. but the dialogue...and the acting? come on people...you know this movie sucks big time. admit it. i can even put up with the eleanor rigby scene.

here is the plot. paul makes record. tapes get lost. they have to be found by deadline. sound familiar? this movie was much, much better when it was titled a hard days night...and it was ringo that had to be found, not the missing tape.

it was made during arguably his worst phase in his career. this followed pipes of peice, did it not? even paul said he would have made massive changes to the film.

and at least people can still purchase howard the duck. know why? because more people liked that flick than this one. if i really concentrate...i can still recall the stench that this movie left on my clothes as i left the theater that dreary night.

I really don't hate it....It to me, is just a long music video with a plotline. As a serious film, yep it sucked. Rose coloured glasses, perhaps, but who cares really. There are worse films in the world.

[chris]

i didn't mean to insult or pick any fights with Howard the Duck fans...I didn't expect this sort of Spanish Inquistion, either...

i'm not sure there are really any howard the duck fans. i have, sadly, seen both movies. but if i had to see just one of them again...

i'm still thinking...

and for me at least...it is about the acting every bit as much as when jim belushi, or bruce willis sings...is about the singing.

[Crisstti]

Oh, come on. The film isn't really bad. Just too long. I got a little sleepy, and I'm a huge fan. Half an hour less, I'd say.
As for the plot, who cares?, since when is that a requisite for a musical?.

As for worse films, I can think at least of Anaconda, Twister, Cold Mountain.

And no film can beat The Russian Ark in boring. That's the only film I have actually fell sleep while watching.

[mervap]

Perhaps if , like Crissti says, it were only a longform music video....maybe 30 min., with all the boring acting taken out...just the music scenes left. Hey! Do it like the silents and provide the narration in writing onscreen, i.e. "Meanwhile, back at Abbey Road, Paul has just finished telling Ringo some really boring stuff. He picks up his Epiphone and..." !

Or not......either way.