Let It Be

Part 3 - Release and Reception

Reviews were almost unanimously scathing. The album package, which consisted of an elaborate box housing the record, a souvenir book of film stills and dialogue from the sessions (produced through Apple's publishing division), was heavily criticized by reviewers for its short weight of twelve songs and the high price which the inclusion of the book necessitated. Indeed, the album was generally regarded as ‘a cheapskate epitaph’25 by the majority of critics, and the film fared little better. Although publications with youthful and/or underground sympathies predictably praised the documentary's form and candour, the mainstream British press, despite some praise for the soundtrack music, bombarded the film with criticisms. While some of these were justified land there can be little doubt that the film is unsatisfactory in some respects), many contemporary reviews seem in retrospect to betray a hostility which, no doubt born of the sentimental, conservative notion that the Beatles should be making elaborate, ‘feel good’ comedies and nor ‘serious’ documentaries (and especially not minimalist, sombre, and theatrically released ones), display a blind refusal to accept or even toconsider the film on its own generic terms. To criticize the film's sparsity of insight is one thing, but to lampoon, as did the Daily Sketch, a cine-direct documentary for its less than crystal-clear sound and Picture quality,-’26 or the Beatles, for being ‘dull and unfunny’ (as did the Evenins Standard),27 is rather like a horror buff pouring scorn on aromantic drama for it not being sufficiently terrifying. In this sense, many of the press complaints mirror the earlier banalities that Magical Mystery Tour had ‘no story’. Yet while the ‘documentary’ Beatles of 1970 were as unpopular with critics as the ‘avant garde’ ones had been some three years earlier, the fans were not so easily deterred. Although it was less commercially successful that the Lester films, Let it Be and its accompanying soundtrack album achieved significant posthumous commercial success in both Britain and America. Moreover the Beatles were awarded an Oscar for Best Score. Despite constant rumours of a DVD reissue, and the recording of interviews with key crew members in preparation for an eventual official release, Let it Be remains unseen by all but the most ardent of the group's fans, who have been forced to make do with the scratchy bootleg copies circulating British record fairs since the advent of video.

Yet for those fans lucky enough to see it, the ‘real-life’ authenticity of Let It Be continues to exalt a musical spontaneity and voyeuristic pleasure which is by nature absent from the other movies. According to Jonathan Cott and David Dalton, ‘It is one of the paradoxes of reverence that we always wish to know the most intimate details of those we idolize, even when the details are not flattering ...’28 1 have mixed feelings about the film in this sense. As both fan and film enthusiast, it is, for me, both the ‘worst’ and the ‘best’ Beatles movie, unsatisfactory (although interesting) as a piece of film-making, and fascinating for both its musical and non-musical content. That said, it is not unreasonable to suggest that time has been kinder to Let It Be than it actually deserves. One suspects that, shorn of its historical significance, it would exert much less interest and mystique than it now does (should I say, could?) and in this sense it is interesting to make an analogy between the film and Van Gogh's final painting, Cornfield with Crows. In his fascinating book Ways of Seeing, John Berger brilliantly demonstrates how the ‘baggage’ of historical context determines the retrospective perception of cultural artefacts,29 and Let It Be, like Van Gogh's final painting, carries plenty of ‘baggage’. If the Beatles hadn't split, and if Van Gogh hadn't killed himself, their final works would perhaps attract lesser interest from their devotees, although the degree of this ‘lesser interest’ is ultimately and inevitably unquantifiable. But the Beatles did split, and that split sent tremors throughout the global cultural landscape. As Mark Hertsgaard points out, their split took on ‘a far larger historical significance than the demise of mere pop stars; rather, like the assassination of presidents or the July 1969 moon landing, the breakup of the Beatles was regarded as one of the defining events of the sixties. Indeed, seizing on the fact that the split came a scant four months into the new decade, media pundits invariably interpreted it as a sign that the sixties era of optimism and goodwill had conclusively ended.’30

In the final anaysis, it is this ‘historical significance’ upon which, rightly or wrongly, the reputation of the film will probably be ultimately judged. Whatever criticisms can be levelled at the film, it must be acknowledged that its timing, like virtually everything else in the Beatles’ canon, was alchemic. As the reviewer for Time magazine so succinctly put it, Let It Be is ‘instant history’.31

© Bob Neaverson 1997 - 2008