Paul McCartney Really Is Dead: The Last Testament of George Harrison (2010 Video) User Reviews

Obviously fraudulent but still fun to watch

[tpaladino · 5/10 · 27 March 2011]

Yes, this film is entirely fraudulent. Yes, very little of it makes sense. Yes, it's insulting to the viewers intelligence. All of this is true.

But it's still fun to watch. The writer paints what can only be described as a hilariously creepy alternate history of the Beatles. You can of course write a list ten feet long of all the facts and details the film gets wrong, but that is entirely besides the point.

If you're a Beatles fan and can view this with a sense of humor rather than as a legitimate documentary, you'll surely get a bit of entertainment out of it.

Plausible story, but some wrong "facts"

[bjm-992-609205 · 5/10 · 4 March 2011]

As a fan of The Beatles, I have done a lot of reading on the "Paul is Dead" or "PID" theories. This movie was enjoyable to watch, but I would not call it a documentary... if anything it should be labeled as "based on a possibly true story".

There is a wealth of information online about this "hoax" and this movie should be included with other "evidence" for or against. If you really want to know about the "hoax", this should not be the only thing you look at! Personally I believe there is more to this story than just The Beatles playing a joke on the world... but who knows?

Without giving any spoilers, I will try to outline 4 "facts" presented by the movie that are wrong. However, these may be considered "spoilers" by some, so hence the post is marked as containing.

1. The time-line of recording of The Beatles albums is wrong. Example: 'Let It Be' was the last album released, but was not the last album recorded. 'Abbey Road' was recorded after 'Let It Be' but released before.

2. At around the 55 minute 50-57 second the film shows a picture from the inside cover of 'Magical Mystery Tour'. Stop the movie at this point and go find another copy of this same picture by using an internet search (or the actual album if you have it) and compare.

3. There is a point in the movie when a phone number is mentioned as a clue. The phone number is 7 digits... a UK phone number, even 35 years ago, is 10 digits (w/ area code). If one assumed London, OK maybe, but distribution of this was worldwide and this seems VERY far-fetched.

4. There is another point in the movie when a date is revealed as a clue from an album cover. This is not in UK format and even contradicts the recording at other points in the movie.

There are probably more, but there were the 4 that stood out to me.

Another question is why these recordings were sent to this specific company in the US. Newspapers, Radio, 24 hour TV news channels were around long before this recording was said to be made. Seems the BBC, CNN or the NY Times would have been a more likely choice.

So, my opinion - again as a fan of The Beatles - is that movie is not a bad way to spend an hour or two of your time, but I do not like how it was told. Is it fiction or non-fiction? You decide.

Better ways to get a point across

[OldFlattop · 4/10 · 6 September 2010]

This thing had the serious look and feel of one of the old "Faces of Death" videos, and that took its integrity away right from the start. Unfortunately, "Faces of Death" had a much higher reality factor than this "documentary." Discard any notion that the alleged Harrison tapes have any reasonable provenance. 1) The voice is obviously not Harrison's. 2) The story told is far too detailed. If Harrison was attempting to lay out the conspiracy, it is doubtful he would explain what everyone already knew. More likely, he would say, "Remember all those clues about Paul? Well, they were all intentional and here's why." 3) The quality of the tapes is far too good to have been recorded on a micro-cassette recorder. 4) Harrison would have certainly remembered that he worked on "Rubber Soul" before the alleged McCartney death.

The intention is clearly to use a fictional framework to propound a theory of government involvement with the Paul McCartney death hoax. A better way to go about it would have been the time-honored documentary tradition of actually talking to people. Certainly, you could drum up at least a handful of interviewable people who would relish the notion of damning Her Majesty's government. Even supermarket tabloids can get independent verification of obvious lies.

So, as a documentary, this one fails. As an informative piece about the McCartney death rumors, it provides no information that has not been seen or heard elsewhere. I saw nothing here that was new to me, but, then again, I've followed this rumor since 1970.

If you are new to the McCartney rumors, this would be a good place for basic information. Books on the subject are plentiful, and the Internet (really) is a good source of information.

In a way, it's a shame to treat this subject in such a slipshod fashion. The McCartney death hoax is a powerful sociological issue. Personally, I believe that the Beatles set out to create the rumor, and toyed with us for several years with clues. I do not buy the MI5 angle whatsoever. I do, however, subscribe to the theory that the co-opting of the Beatles' lyrics by Charles Manson had a chilling effect on what might have been the eventual revelation of the hoax as real and not necessarily ill-intentioned.

Rarely Write Reviews, But had to warn others...

[amy-707 · 1/10 · 3 October 2010]

First off, this should be classified as a MOCKumentary.

This was so terribly awful I'm considering trying to get my money back for the rental. Not only was it pure fiction and laughable at it's very best, but quite disrespectful to all the men that make up the Beatles (whether you love or hate their music)... most of all, it's appallingly distasteful to George Harrison and his family. It's amazing to me the writer/director of this "documentary" hasn't been sued for libel and defamation of character.

The worse part of it all is that it might have been an interesting film if it had just been an assembled history on the conspiracy theory itself, without the so obviously fictional and badly acted George Harrison "tapes" of narration.

If you're going to rent this, don't waste your money or time. Spend NOTHING on it. Matter of fact, they should be paying people to watch it because it's just THAT bad.

Insulting

[hausrathman · 1/10 · 19 March 2011]

According to this lame would-be documentary, George Harrison purportedly spills the beans about Paul's death in 1966 and his replacement by a double in his "last testament." Being a giant Beatles fan, I was willing to give this film a look on Netflix Instant View. I'm glad I didn't actually rent it because I would hate to think I had spent any money supporting this crap. The whole "Paul is Dead" conspiracy was an amusing bit of drug-addled inanity forty years ago but come on. This might've made an amusing five minute YouTube video if it didn't take itself so damned seriously. It is insulting, not only to the Beatles themselves, but to its viewers. If you're going to take the time to make a film like this, at least do a little research. There is a dizzying number of factual inaccuracies. And, at the very least, get someone who might've sounded like a fifty-something George Harrison. The actor playing him sounds like he learned everything from a few 60's interviews. Sadly, since those interviews didn't use all of the words in the script, he obviously had no idea how someone from Liverpool would pronounce the words. My George Harrison imitation is better than his, and I suck. (So does this film.)

Utter nonsense. Awful.

[barryjames-mc · 1/10 · 3 September 2010]

Wow! The worst documentary I have ever seen. Surely only a moron could have heard these tapes and thought that this was George Harrison. I am English and I can promise you that this is the worst fake Liverpool accent I have ever heard. It sounds like a hack like Mike Myers incorporating various regional dialects from the U.K thinking that he's doing a spot on impression.

The "George" character who narrates this rubbish slips up so many times it's embarrassing. He pronounces an MI5 office called "Maxwell" as "Moxwell" because it is what this talentless oaf thinks a Liverpudlian would say. There are so many errors in inflection that a shaved chimp could have easily concluded that this is not George Harrison. The story is SO ludicrous that it is the kind of rambling gibberish that a maniac might write on his cell wall in his own feces. This is the kind of insane nonsense that sad sacks make up, spread on the internet and fill the deranged sad lives of those who believe in patently false conspiracy theories. There is not even a scintilla of verisimilitude in this tragic nonsense. If it had been marketed as a comedy written and directed by an unfortunate soul with severe mental issues, I might give it a modicum of credit, maybe 2 stars instead of one.

Fascinating Bull S**T!

[PACman66 · 7/10 · 2 September 2010]

I remember the early 70's when there was a huge hubbub about whether Paul was dead, and this documentary, while it covers all of the alleged "clues" and hidden backward messages in the albums.. . I've always been interested in this particular conspiracy.

However, the "setup" for this particular movie, I have a very hard time swallowing. You have to remember George Harrison was supposed to have recorded all of this narration on a little tiny mini cassette recorder. There's NO WAY the narration I'm hearing on this documentary was recorded on one of those little things. The narration is way too clean… Like it was recorded in a state of the art recording studio.

The main problem with conspiracy theories it that there are always loopholes, weak links. If we are to believe "George Harrison's" testimony, why doesn't he make even one reference to George Martin, the Beatles long time Producer? Wouldn't Martin also know they had an impostor in the studio with them? Harrison doesn't say anything about George Martin being under any oath, unlike the rest of the Beatles.

I really enjoyed this film, but I don't buy the conspiracy theory. This film is a great treasure trove of the Paul is Dead clues. .. But the "Lovely Rita" portion alone… That makes this "documentary," one hard sell. Someone should take the bones of this doc and make a "real" movie... As I think there's more fiction then fact in this movie.

I Do A Better George Harrison Impersonation

[michaelfscotto · 1/10 · 8 December 2018]

Built around the supposed secret final tapes of George Harrison, the producer claims three independent firms could not verify if the voice on the cassettes is George's. That's code for "there ain't no way it's George, but legally we just have to say it's 'inconclusive.'"

Apart from getting the dates wrong (as noted in the goofs), the verbiage is not George. This is obvious to anyone who has heard George interviewed over the decades. The Liverpudlian accent is atrocious as well.

The Paul Is Dead tale is so idiotic, it lingers only as a running joke for Beatles' fans. As a fan, I decided to watch this documentary for the comedic value and hear how close (or how far) the impostor could get to George. After initially laughing at fake George, I increasingly grew angry at the disrespect shown for Paul and George.

Some of these things I'd recommend just for a laugh, but this disrespectful joke falls flat. It's a sham and George's family deserves an apology. Next time, call me... I do a better George impersonation.

This movie is hilarious

[havok3595 · 7/10 · 4 April 2011]

We were having a really bad day and decided to see this on Netflix streaming because it looked interesting. It definitely delivered in being the bar none most obviously fabricated thing ever.

I can take with a grain of salt George supposedly narrating an hour and a half worth of "evidence" in a stunningly quiet hospital room, and even asking his wife for the taping equipment. But...it's so specific that there's no way. Add to that: Capital, not the Beatles, selected the song listing for Yesterday and Today, which was a very sore spot for the Beatles.

Yellow Submarine was recorded for Revolver, not Yellow Submarine, which additionally was a soundtrack, not an album. Far moreso than, say, Hard Day's Night or Help since the Beatles only contributed one album side to it.

Hello Goodbye and Strawberry Fields Forever were not on the original Magical Mystery Tour release, but were added later because the original double EP format was unable to be released stateside (they previously existed as singles).

Let It Be was in the can before Abbey Road was recorded.

And so on and so forth.

It kills me that the people putting this together were so sloppy yet packaged it as some kind of definitive proof. I laughed for hours after it was over. And the William to Paul transformation video was spectacularly hilarious, even as over-saturated as it was.

Wow............I don't even think I can give this a star rating (but since imdb forces me too..).

[TheRowdyMan · 1/10 · 20 April 2011]

Most Beatles fans will already know the infamous urban legend of Paul McCartney being replaced by The Beatles with a look-a-like to cover up his death. This "documentary" adds the original spin that MI5 was in fact behind the mass deception. But that's were anything resembling a half interesting film ends. Instead, sit back for a dry as toast check list of "clues" as read by "George Harrison" from his death bed.

Tonally, the film plays its "documentary" angle as poe faced as any cheap TV docu-drama. It's hard to get any "so-bad-it's-good" joy of it because it really is a dull, endurance test that is occasionally tasteless. From gory "dead McCartney" pictures and final scenes cross the line from being stupid to just plain offensive. Making this more like a Faces of Death style feature than a fanboy alternate history film.

Even to take this at face value as serious air-tight case for conspiracy fails. Most of the bullet point presentation of "factoids" is littered with several obvious mistakes that any Beatles fan (it's main and probably only audience) would pick up without having to reach for their Mark Lewisohn books. One glaring example; the first three albums with "clues" were actually released before the supposed death date of McCartney given in the film's own timeline - so the film even fails within it's own lore!

As a mockumentary, it's over long and boring. Fake "George" drones on monotonously through "clues" with all the passion of a high school kid reading a book report they lifted directly from Wikipedia. The voice of "George Harrison" is terrible, doesn't remotely resemble a Liverpudlian accent and, like the endless lists of "clues", will wear down your patience.

Shame because the film makers miss out on a chance to expanded on the insane lore of rocks most infamous conspiracy theory. In the right hands, it could of been a fun idea or, at least, a mildly interesting piece of fan fiction, but instead it's a mess that's both amateurish and sleazy.

Causal Beatles-fans and non-fans should stay very clear of this one, as not even the most hardcore fans will get anything out of this other than ticking off another Beatle related product on their lists to watch.

Excellent Satirical View of Popular Culture and How We All React to It

[kaaragaara · 10/10 · 20 June 2011]

Okay, first of all, you're probably wondering why I rated this a 10 out of 10. The short answer is that it is undoubtedly one of the most thought-provoking films I have ever seen. No, NOT because of its profound analysis of something that is reliable... I am still trying to grasp everything that this film brought to light. (Thought- provoking, see?)

The film is obviously very flawed in its information and makes plenty of factual errors that I won't bother to list... read the other reviews. However, as I was watching it, I realized these errors but I was so engrossed that I kept watching it. It made me want to believe the whole story about the "hospital tapes" of the obviously Fake George (We'll call him Forge) and really think that James Paul McCartney has been dead since 1966.

That is one reason I am giving this movie a perfect score of ten. The Last Testament of George Harrison had me laughing with disbelief because I WANTED to believe it. It's hilarious, and the other reviewers are right to dub it a mockumentary. The film is very good at doing what it wants to do: weaving an intricate story (most of which I'd already heard) about a conspiracy and compacting it into a nice little gift- wrapped package for anyone who can understand how it exploits the original conspiracy. I sincerely hope that Sir Paul McCartney sees this. I'd love to see HIS reaction.

This film mocks those who don't know a lot about the subject matter and who may actually believe what Forge says without any evidence about HIS credibility. I tend to think the factual errors were made on purpose. Why else would they be so glaringly obvious, while the rest of the film is well-made? Of course, that unearths paradoxes, creating the existence of a conspiracy within a conspiracy film... which is why this film is really so great. It pokes fun at conspiracies and exposées while being slick and subtle.

This is first-rate entertainment. For those who rated it a one, I can see why, if you didn't take the time to enjoy the entertainment value. You all just misunderstood what this film is actually about and probably assumed it is a disgrace to the Beatles' legacy, which it isn't. Most will know that the Beatles were amused by their fans and the media and annoyed by them as well. (That's why they stopped touring... they got an overdose of fame and the bad consequences of it.) This film kind of shows this in a very indirect way. It sides with the Beatles, not against them. It's really siding against us, the viewers, who actually give a rat's ass about the Secret Life (and possibly Death) of a person we'll probably never meet or get to know, anyway. We'd have to care about Paul McCartney, a stranger, to watch it in the first place.

The purpose of this "documentary" is to reflect everything bad about popular culture... It really has little to do with the Beatles. It's about the culture surrounding them and us, the viewers. Would Beatles fans REALLY have committed suicide at hearing the news of Paul's demise? Is the job of secret government agencies partly to protect the people from their own celebrity-worshiping mania? I tend to think that a widespread riot/panic would have occurred if Paul had died in 1966. Part of enjoying this film is exploring your own motives for idolizing people like the members of the Beatles. I was able to laugh at myself as well as the screaming girls chasing the Beatles everywhere they went.

If you take the time to look past the surface, I'm sure you will enjoy watching The Last Testament of George Harrison and I recommend it to all Beatles fans. (It's currently instant on Netflix!) The so-called "evidence" is all speculation, but isn't that all that any conspiracy theory has to offer? Anyone can watch this: believers of the conspiracy, nonbelievers, and people who have no decided opinion, because it doesn't really try to convince you one way or another. It's a comedy, folks. The downside to this film is that some people are probably fooled by it, because it is quite convincing if you don't realize it's a parody and don't know the lovely Beatles sequence of events. However, there is nothing that should be done to change this because putting a "warning" (what you are about to see is all made up or unsubstantiated) on it would ruin the quality of the film, and the fun paradoxes would be gone. After all, who wouldn't like to hear Forge talk about Faul, Fohn and Fingo and create a new puzzle? The filmmakers have invented their own conspiracy with the creation of the Featles! I love this fantastic film!

More Exploitation Than Documentary

[Michael_Elliott · 28 January 2012]

Paul McCartney Really is Dead: The Last Testament of George Harrison (2010)

*** (out of 4)

Producer-director Joel Gilbert usually does documentaries on Bob Dylan but he reaches out to try and explain why the Paul McCartney who has been touring the past forty years is actually a double and that the real Paul died decades ago. According to Gilbert, he received two audio cassettes, which are supposed to contain the last testament of George Harrison. We then learn that three different labs couldn't tell if this really was Harrison or not. From here we learn that McCartney was killed on November 9, 1966 when he had a car crash after giving a woman a ride. From here the audio tape talks about why they decided to cover up his death and what clues they wanted fans to know so that the group wouldn't be hated for covering it up.

This documentary is getting a lot of hatred from fans of the Beatles but I must say it's quite hilarious in parts. I really don't see this as a documentary but it's more like an exploitation movie that's taking a myth and trying to pass it off as the truth. I will admit that I enjoy myths and hearing about them but there's so many unanswered questions here that you can't help but laugh. For starters, early in the film we're told that Lennon was about to tell the truth but was killed eight days later. Harrison then says that he was about to tell the truth but was attacked by the "fan" and almost died. Of course, the hint here is that the British government was trying to shut them up. Even more laughable stuff is the actual way the McCartney was killed and how they went about getting a double. The "audio tape" doesn't sound like an audio tape at all. It's clearly a narrator. Another problem is that you have to wonder why, if all of this was true, someone would send the evidence to Joel Gilbert. Why not ABC, CNN, NBC or someone who could really get the story out there?

Gilbert even uses this documentary to say Bob Dylan wasn't involved in a motorcycle crash in 1966 but instead used this as an excuse to go into drug rehab. It's funny because there are people out there who believe Dylan was killed in this crash and was replaced by a double. The same thing people are claiming about McCartney. PAUL MCCARTNEY REALLY IS DEAD: THE LAST TESTAMENT OF GEORGE HARRISON is something that conspiracy theorist might believe but I think most people are going to notice that countless holes in the plot. Not to mention what this so-called "double" has been able to do after The Beatles broke up. We're told Lennon "covered" most of the writing in The Beatles but who took on Wings and everything that followed? As silly as this is, I must admit that I found it incredibly entertaining from start to finish. Again, seeing all these "clues" was interesting because it shows how someone can take something and spin it in any direction.

Entertaining watch if.....

[don_alessio · 7/10 · 9 June 2011]

...you go in with the correct mindset.

As a Beatles fan who was born in the mid 70's I didn't experience the true Beatle Mania like most did. i also didn't experience the "Paul is dead" craze. I have also never really had an opinion on whether he is dead or not. I think that attitude helped this movie be more entertaining to me.

It was interesting to go through the various tidbits of information and play along with the storyline. However, it does remind me a bit of my college papers when I would have a certain agenda and then set out to find the fact-ish elements I needed to add a sense of validity.

Like I stated before, if you don't have a bias on whether Paul is dead or not you will find the movie interesting, maybe even eerie at points.

A comedy not a documentary

[nolangirl · 2/10 · 12 September 2010]

This film had me laughing out loud. Its outlandish claims apart, the voice of George Harrison wasn't even a good impersonation and I agree with the other poster that it had pretty good sound quality for the format it was recorded on and how old it is supposed to be. These guys are laughing all the way to paying off the wasted cost of even making such a joke. It is not a documentary, its a very lame comedy. I saw Paul recently and he looked alive, well and his tribute to George was completely legit.

I do look forward to seeing the biopic about Ringo's long life as a double agent. Beatles did not spend the most creative time of their careers relying on the muse of trying so desperately to let the truth out about a long proved urban myth.

Come on, guys, this is obviously a joke

[asiduodiego · 4/10 · 25 March 2011]

As a fan of the Beatles, and a hardcore one, this is the most hilarious piece of hogwash I've seen. Anyone familiar with all the "Paul is dead" buzz, will find all this stuff hilarious. But, for anyone else, all this would look as just random conspiracy bull####. But, let's be serious, this thing is OBVIOUSLY a joke: the facts of the history of the Beatles are completely wrong and it gets the price for the "worst imitation of George Harrison ever"

This thing has some value as a compilation of all the crazy theories of "Paul is dead" of the 60s, and the plot is so ridiculous, it's hysterical at points: I couldn't stop laughing with all the idea of "trying to make Paul soul's to get inside Faul"

I found this stuff hilarious, but, it's just for hardcore fans of the Beatles, with morbid sense of humor.

P.S.: Paul really died when he formed "Wings"

4/10

A very un-researched hoax, weakly disguised as a documentary.

[vincejs-954-669775 · 1/10 · 19 January 2011]

If you're thinking of viewing this movie to educate yourself on the Paul McCartney is dead conspiracy, do yourself a favour... use Google instead. The results will be more accurate. What the producers of this film failed to do was any kind of research whatsoever. From the pathetically fake Liverpool accent of the alleged George Harrison on the tape to the mixed up time lines, this whole production just doesn't have a clue! For starters, 3 of the albums containing songs and cover art that are used as evidence for the theory were all recorded and released prior to the alleged date of death. Add to this that both of Paul's parents were supposedly present at his funeral even though his mother died long before the Beatles had even formed, mixed in with Heather Mills being the woman responsible for his death, 2 years before she was even born... the misinformation provided is mind boggling. The whole story is centered on Beatles USA album releases and takes no account of the UK album releases. For those who aren't aware, the Beatles released all their albums for UK release and Capitol records in the USA later released their own dissected versions for the American market. It's as if the producers weren't even aware that these songs and albums existed elsewhere prior to the US releases. A simple Google search would have shown them that Abbey Road was recorded after Let It Be, but they chose to go by release dates stating that Let It Be was their last recording. The real Harrison would have known that, without the need to Google. Later on in the film a Youtube video is shown where George Harrison, being interviewed by the Australian media, is distinctly saying "Faul" (for False Paul) instead of "Paul", yet if you look up the interview yourself on Youtube you discover he's actually saying "Paul" every time with a very pronounced P. I think by the end of the film they'd realised no one was going to take them seriously, so they started doctoring photos of Paul in Photoshop, giving him an almost Pinocchio style nose and bucked teeth on pictures that are all freely available on the internet in non-doctored form. Had they made this a documentary on the theory it might have been a credible film. Marketed as the truth though, it doesn't hold water. I'm giving this one two thumbs down!

Hated it

[motorhedmadness · 1/10 · 23 March 2011]

Ugh what were the film makers thinking when they put this out?? The telling of how "Rita" was in the car with Paul was almost plausible. The wreck happened in 1966. However when they said Heather Mills was the new name given to the mysterious "Rita" by MI5, there was one small problem. Heather Mills was born in 1968, so how could she have been Rita in the first place?? Truth be told PAUL IS ALIVE!!!!!!! If you are going to document something and present it as truth, one would think the film makers would have done some research before presenting such bull. I only hope Sir McCartney, or Heather Mills for that matter find a legal reason to sue the producers under to keep them from trying to change history in the future. The creators of this "Movie" should explore something they are good at, writing fantasy films.

Badly made, even for a farce

[frogacuda · 22 March 2011]

The only defense of this film I've read is that it's intended as a hoax or a mockumentary, but even that doesn't excuse the horrendous acting and completely lack of any attempt to fit within its own premise (that we are listening to some kind of confessional microcassette recorded by George Harrison in a hospital bed after his attack). In actuality, this audio is a precisely scripted, studio-recorded narration of a completely horrendous impression by a person who struggles to even maintain a plausible Liverpool accent and is obviously not even British. None of these choices help enhance any "comedy" that might be there, it's just bad filmmaking.

I'm not sure if this movie is going for hoax or joke, but it fails on both accounts. Forget any hope that there's an interesting contribution to the conspiracy theories around Paul McCartney's supposed death, there's not even any humor to be found. It's just a dumb, pointless film that you'd have to be profoundly retarded to fall for.

Awesome in the right mindset

[jakesapir · 7/10 · 20 July 2013]

To see the quality of this movie, you have to ignore the idea that anyone might take it as truth; it was never meant to fool anyone. You even have to ignore the idea that it's a satire of the conspiracy theories, though it is. But this film's real strength is as a piece of speculative fiction. What if Paul really did die? How did the Beatles come up with all of these clues, and where did the references come from? It tells the tale of an alternate universe where the assassination of John Lennon and the attempted assassination of George Harrison are interconnected by the death of Paul McCartney. It not only chronicles the theories that actually existed, but in fact adds new ones. It's a dedicated look into a what-if situation.

I think the biggest problem is that it's too long. The concept wears thin after a while.

Entertaining effort, but don't pay to see it.

[calvincoleman2 · 3/10 · 12 February 2011]

I thought this was entertaining, but its quick to figure out if you know anything about the history of the Beatles that times and dates are way off. The "supposed" George Harrison narrating this sounds very scripted with studio quality sound, not to mention he supposedly narrated this on a micro cassette in the hospital, which is totally silent for the entire length of the movie. No background machines, nurses, intercom, etc.

It brought up many thought provoking ideas on how it all could have been done and kind of made you think that it could be true, but again, the time line inaccuracies coupled with at times seemingly made up information completely overshadow whatever points are trying to be made.

I started out enjoying this, but as time went on, and I myself seemed to know more about Beatles history than the "supposed" George Harrison, I began to realize I had wasted my money.

Entertaining lies

[harleygirl1898 · 7/10 · 12 April 2021]

I wanted to believe but the fact rubber soul came out after his death you can tell that George isn't real either it's great and at times believable but at the viewers expense. And who wouldn't want to have fun with backwards masking John would be the jokester that would do it. They were the Beatles they were burnt out wanted to do their own stuff. This focumentary was a good attempt at trying but even George couldn't mess up all that information or his voice.

Interesting but hard to completely believe as much as it seems real

[breakdownthatfilm-blogspot-com · 5/10 · 26 June 2016]

Conspiracy theories are one of those touchy topics for some people. In a day where as easy as the public has access to almost anything at the touch of their fingertips, one would think hardly anything would be private. Yet some people still believe there are individuals higher up that have their own agenda and continue to push it to this day. Whether it's true or not has yet to be proved and that goes for any other conspiracy theory. Even more of a reason as to why only select groups of people believe in certain theories is because there are so many for each case. Some of which contradict other theories, while some add or remove events or reasons from others. This is why when theories have conflicting proof, many people do not believe the ploy being made. Whether it's been about a celebrity or infamous criminal, there's been several suspicions made for these people. For this film, the premise is to prove that Paul McCartney from the popular English rock group The Beatles, truly is dead via narration George Harrison.

Directed by Joel Gilbert, a producer/director to other documentaries and some conspiracy films, this documentary is the official one made for this case. There have been other films made but as for reaching the public's eye, this is probably the one. According to Gilbert at the film's introduction, his studio, Highway 61 Entertainment received an unknown package in July of 2005 with no return address. Inside it contained mini cassette tapes labeled with writing saying "The Last Testament of George Harrison". In these tapes the voice speaking reveals supposedly the entire true story that indeed Paul McCartney is dead and the one we know of today is actually the winner of a look alike contest who took his place. This alone (like any conspiracy) does raise some eyebrows because, the whole idea is crazy and questions the very nature of how incidents are handled. However, even before bothering to listen to the rest of the story from the cassettes, there are already some glaring holes in this story.

Looking at the packaged received date alone is a problem. The package was delivered in 2005? So who delivered it? George Harrison died in 2001 so who would Harrison entrust to deliver this important information? Also why wait until 2005? What's the significance? Another glaring issues is that Gilbert also states he had the tapes sent to three different forensics labs to determine the authenticity of the voice and match it to Harrison. The answer - "the results were inconclusive" he states. Okay,...then just play the tapes as is anyway and let the audience think for themselves. But no, instead Gilbert hires actor Lance Lewman to perform as Harrison and dub over the actual tapes. Is this to make the story sound more realistic? It won't if the audience knows it's an actor re-dubbing the actual audio material. It's almost like Gilbert knew the actual recording wasn't close so they decided to make it sound close. That doesn't sound honest and it's very questionable on an ethical level.

Then there's the matter of execution to this documentary. The way it changes from chapter to chapter is fine but each chapter has clips of what looks like re-enactments but edited to not be very clear in its presentation. This is also a bit strange because it can confuse the viewer. Is it supposed to help the audience think up of what was happening while the story is being told? Even some of the photos used don't exactly look entirely correct and there's a lot more evidence to sift through. How did Lennon have roughly 50 more songs to make after McCartney's death and they all pertain to McCartney if Lennon and McCartney wrote these songs is another weird coincidence. At the same time though, even with all these inconsistencies, some of the evidence is oddly enough real. Things like the backwards replaying and hearing "Paul is Dead, Man, Miss Him Miss Him" or "Turn Me on Dead Man" is quite eerie. And it's not just the recordings that make this story sound plausible to some degree.

Seeing all the albums being analyzed for deeper meanings and having certain areas pointed out that appear on all the albums that came out after McCartney's "supposed" death is strange in its own right. Why is it that the McCartney double is depicted with hands only over his head or how come he's always the only Beatle not facing the same way as the rest? It's always McCartney, so there has to be some kind of reason behind it. Since this is a documentary dealing with history, a cinematographer was not needed. But the historical pieces and archive footage from the past is well appreciated and helps give the viewer a better understanding how certain events led to the rest (or so its claimed). The music composed by Wayne Peet is another nice touch. Especially the main tune used in the introduction, the light flute triplets sound like it belongs in the 60-70s and stirs the intrigue a little more when it comes to understanding what allegedly happened in 1966. Who knows, maybe McCartney is who he is or not.

This conspiracy documentary does bring up some valid points and coincidences but there's a lot of contradicting and confusing evidence as well. With a re-dubbed narration and strange re-enactment footage, it doesn't solve or confirm anything. Thinking about it does sound disturbing though and the music helps with that too.

A film that invites you to laugh at it

[pugg54 · 8/10 · 3 May 2011]

Firstly, parts of this film contain quite offensive suggestions about The Beatles. However, these can be defended as part of the overall tone of the film and it invites you not take them seriously.

This is clearly meant to be a joke, and it is a very funny one if you are watching the film correctly. The film showcases genuine conspiracy "evidence" at its core, but alters the story about The Beatles to make this evidence fit. What you are left with is how the Faul conspiracy theorists must then see the last four years of the band, and it is a laughable view.

I found myself laughing out loud at the jumps in logic, especially the vicious attacks aimed at Paul after '66 (and poor Ringo as usual) - especially his use of drugs as if he was the only one who ever did any. I won't give any specifics but you will be shocked at the blatant disregard for facts, and that is exactly what the film is trying to get you to do.

I can't award it any higher than 8 because it's not technically that well made. I don't think the tape idea was very good because rather than use excerpts with narration they have George basically narrating the whole thing as if he could see the film in his head when he recorded it. Saying that, it does add to the ridiculous nature of the film because the accent is AMAZINGLY BAD. I found myself laughing at the way the narrator said certain words and it must have been done badly on purpose. One of my personal highlights is the way he says Frank Sinatra. It also jumps from vague Liverpudlian, to cockney all the way to South African.

In summary: You shouldn't watch this if you believe any of the conspiracy nonsense, you should watch it if you find yourself seeking out conspiracy theories in order to make yourself laugh. That's the audience for this thing and in my view it does it well.

Take it with a grain of salt and enjoy

[dickklip · 7/10 · 20 April 2011]

Despite the inaccuracies, tricks, and plain lies, this is an interesting and entertaining movie to watch, especially if you're a Beatles fan and remember the controversy in the late sixties (which I do). I agree, however, with those that say this should have been labeled a "mockumentary" and did a great disservice to George Harrison and his legacy. I'm surprised they could get away with that.

Still, I found it fascinating because it taught me many new things about the conspiracy theory of that time, when we were all trying to figure out the symbolism on the albums (and in the albums) about whether Paul was really dead.

On the factual side, however, and here's where the spoiler alert applies:

1. The voice was clearly NOT George Harrison, and even the impersonation was terrible, especially the fake Liverpool accent. 2. Why would George, if he were to leave a tape, do it a manner which conveniently provides a narrative (without hesitation or mistake) to fit a 90 minute format? 3. Why send it to Highway 61 productions instead of the news media? 4. As the movie goes on, the assertions become even more ridiculous such as saying that the girl with Paul the night he died in Nov. 1966 was put into a government witness program and later lost her leg in an accident then forced "Faul" (short for Fake Paul), to marry her under her new name of Heather Mills. I found this one particularly outrageous because Heather was born in 1968, two years after the accident! 5.Surprisingly, I never saw it mentioned that the MI5 go-between, Maxwell, would have most certainly been the subject of the Beatles song, "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" although it may have been in there and I may have missed that part, because I was only half watching by the end.

I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that if you take it with a grain of salt, and just watch for the entertainment value and the various "clues" that were indeed left at the time, it's still a fun watch. I only hope that younger viewers aren't fooled into believing the overall premise.

good fun at first...disrespectful at end

[bill426392 · 4/10 · 28 February 2011]

Being I have been a HUGE Beatles fan for 40+ years...I found most of this movie to be good fun. Most Beatle people know about the Paul McCartney death hoax and all the clues surrounding this.....I found the end of this movie to be really disrespectful of the memory and legacy of John and George...blaming Faul..lol...(Paul)......for the deaths of these icons...really sucks..also any new or young Beatles fan who watches this may think the movie is factual. So if you fall into one of these categories...it is NOT!!..my rating of this movie is based on the comedic value of it. Totally a Mocumentary...not a documentary...Turn me on dead man