Exposé of the movie, “Paul Really is Dead: the Last Testament of George Harrison,” a film by Joel Gilbert
Despite its promising title, “Paul Really is Dead: the Last Testament of George Harrison” (PRID) is a disinfo hit piece of the poorest quality. Change in belief comes about when good information is presented in a believable manner. To convince people they have been duped by a double of Paul McCartney requires compelling evidence, such as forensic analysis. This movie contains the poorest so-called “evidence” available out there on the Internet. The people behind Paul’s assassination have seeded the Internet with much disinformation regarding the Beatles and especially PID (Paul is Dead conspiracy theory). A modest amount of investigation reveals PRID to be a vehicle for presenting PID in the worst possible light.
It appears that the filmmakers were handed the script and told to find a George Harrison voice double to narrate. Even if they did receive the tapes as they claim, they admit upfront that the recording could not be authenticated as being from George Harrison. Despite this, they continuously refer to the narrator as being George. This smacks of purposeful dishonesty. The fact that it is not George Harrison’s voice should be readily apparent with a simple comparison between the narrator of the film and a recording of the real George Harrison.
Paul was killed in 1966, yet many so-called “clues” from 1965 and early 1966 (pre-replacement) are referenced in the film. Even if one does not consciously catch the mistakes, one’s consciousness does register them. Even though the truth is Paul was replaced, the resonance effect is somewhat over-ridden by the false information. The viewer feels an initial realization that s/he is being presented with Truth. This feeling is blotted out as the false information accumulates, tipping the scales in the viewer’s mind. Once this occurs, the mind that was once open to PID slams shut.
Careful analysis of this movie reveals it to be a deliberate attempt to squash any openness to PID as even a possibility. The narration by the voice double is a constant bug in the ear whispering to the viewer that s/he is being presented with false information. In other words, the initial lie that George Harrison recorded the tapes already puts doubts in the viewer’s mind, which is constantly reinforced. Apart from that, the viewer is told that Paul is Faul, which the subconscious recognizes as untrue. Other false information offsets the core truth that Paul was replaced.
Dealing with the opposition to the truth coming out about James Paul McCartney (JPM) is no easy task. This author has attempted to point out some of the problems with this film. I encourage you to add your own observations in the comments. Below are some discrepancies in the film that I have observed (in no particular order).
____________________________
1. “George” says he met Paul when he was 14 and Paul was 16. Paul was only 8 months older, so how could he reckon that? Paul was born on June 18, 1942 and George was born on February 25, 1943. The date they met appears to be in February 6,1958 [http://www.beatlesbible.com/1958/02/06/george-harrison-meets-quarrymen/]. At that point, George was 14, but Paul was still 15.
2. “George” says Paul was killed on the night of November 9, 1966. The next morning, MI5 informed the other Beatles, and they spent two days in an MI5 safe house. The next day, the Beatles announced they would stop touring.
In reality, Brian Epstein announced the Beatles would quit touring on September 11, 1966.
3. “George” said there was a Paul lookalike contest in 1966, and claimed there was no winner announced, but that “William Campbell” was the secret winner. I believe the film makers did not realize that there was a Paul lookalike contest in 1965 in which Keith Allison won.
4. “George” said John Lennon called Faul “False Paul.” A biography of John Lennon (I believe by Ray Coleman) said that John actually called him “Faux Paul.” This is more in keeping with John’s witty turns of phrase, as this sounds like “faux pas,” which could be a double entendre.
5. “George” references “visual clues on album covers” which were pre-death and replacement. The filmmakers say Paul died in November 1966, so why are they trying to use “clues” on the following that preceded Paul’s death?
Butcher Album / Release Date:1966-01-01 [http://www.sortmusic.com/_b/the-beatles-albums,id152101,len.html]
Rubber Soul / release date Dec. 3, 1965 http://www.thebeatles.com/#/albums/Rubber_Soul),
Revolver / Release Date August 5, 1966 [http://www.allmusic.com/album/revolver-mw0000189174])
6. “George” says the record company the Beatles started was A Paul Corporation, but really it was Apple Corps (a play on apple core or even a Paul Corpse).
7. “George” said he wrote a song “Taxidermist” as a clue, because Paul was taken to one, but that the song was changed to “Taxman.” This makes no sense as taxidermy is “the art of preparing, stuffing, and mounting the skins of animals and especially vertebrates” [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/taxidermy] Paul may have had a wax effigy made of him for Sgt. Pepper, but I highly doubt he was mounted on someone’s wall as a trophy.
8. “George” said Paul’s "parents" attended Paul’s funeral, but Paul’s mom had died when he was 14. How could she have attended?
9. “George” said the album “Yesterday & Today” came out after "Revolver" but that is incorrect.
“Yesterday & Today” / Release Date:1966-01-01 [http://www.sortmusic.com/_b/the-beatles-albums,id152101,len.html])
Revolver / Release Date August 5, 1966 [http://www.allmusic.com/album/revolver-mw0000189174])
10. “George” said “I’m Only Sleeping” was what Paul looked like dead. If Paul had been decapitated, burned, and lost an eye in the supposed car crash, why would he look like he was sleeping?
11. “George” claims John Lennon wrote “Yesterday” for Paul. “Yesterday” was released on “Help!” on 6 August 1965 (UK) [http://www.beatlesbible.com/songs/yesterday/], more than a year before the narrator says Paul died.
12. “George” claims a doll on the Sgt. Pepper album cover has a split head to show Paul’s supposed head injury in the accident, yet at the beginning of the film, he claimed Paul had been decapitated. Interestingly, the filmmakers do not reference Jayne Mansfield, who appears on the album cover and who was actually killed in a car crash.
13. “George” claims he said “oh, bury my body, o untimely death” at the end of “I am the Walrus.” In fact, “The voices at the end of the song came from a BBC broadcast of the Shakespeare play King Lear...” [From Songfacts at http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=138]
14. “George” says Faul’s picture on the White Album sleeve was Faul's passport photo. However, one may not typically wear glasses in passport photos.
15. “George” says John puts open palm sign over Paul’s head on cover of “Yellow Submarine,” when it was clearly the sign for Il Cornuto.
16. “George” claims “Yellow Submarine” was a reference to Paul’s death in that it symbolized coffins buried under a sea of green grass. This song, too, was released prior to Paul’s replacement. It appeared on “Revolver,” which was released on 5 August 1966 (UK) [http://www.beatlesbible.com/songs/yellow-submarine/]
17. “George” claims Russ Gibb announced on Oct. 12, 1969 that Paul was dead, but in reality, Tom Zarski called in that night to “rap” about Paul being dead. It was news to Russ Gibb at that point.
18. “George” says John came up with the idea of the “Let It Be” album after “Abbey Road.” The Beatles began recording “Let It Be” a year before they started recording “Abbey Road.”
“Let It Be” Recording Date February 1968 - April 1970 [http://www.allmusic.com/album/let-it-be-mw0000192939]
“Abbey Road” Recording Date February 22, 1969 - August 20, 1969
19. “George” claimed Faul had gone into hiding in “Central England,” when in fact, Faul had moved to Scotland. Paul had bought the farmhouse in Campbelltown on June 17, 1966 [source: http://www.beatlesbible.com/1966/06/17/paul-mccartney-purchases-high-park-farm-kintyre-scotland/.
20. “George” claims John “latched onto” Yoko Ono in 1970, but in fact, he met her on November 9, 1966 (the other 9.11.66 [http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/john-lennon30.htm]). Her continuous presence in the recording studios has been blamed by some for the Beatles breakup.
21. “George” claims “Rita” - the passenger in the car the night of Nov. 9. 1966 - was Heather Mills. This is impossible, as Mills was not born until 12 January 1968 [http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1457728/bio]
__________________________________________________
|
Tina Foster is the author of
Email Tina at faulconandsnowjob at hotmail dot com.
I could not believe when I got such grotescaly wrong information from that movie! Of course that was on purpose and to spread disinfo, keeping people away from the subject PID.
ReplyDeleteHi Tina, nice exposee, coming from UK and growing up with the Beatles, you naturally become familar with accents, and right from the off anyone living in UK could tell you that the narrator was not the voice of George Harrision simply because the narrators accent is almost of someone from the Birmingham area of UK. George had a more nasel liverpuddlian "street accent ", as did the other beatles. (less so with paul). There are two predominat "liverpool" accents, one is what I call the street accent spoken by the everyday folk, the other has the edge taken off it and is less nasel......the question remains with so many other inacuracies as you have pointed out correctly, why present such a poor piece of disinfo..........mike (vitalis news)
ReplyDeleteYup - This movie is just heaping more trash on the truth. The more trash to wade through the harder it is to get to the truth. The aim is to misdirect peoples focus into a multitude of dead end roads, scatter their resources and exhaust and frustrate their willpower.
ReplyDeleteExample - there are hundreds of books written on the JFK assassination; each one seems to send the reader down a different path.
The way I approach a puzzle is to remove each piece of information that I can prove to be false and then look at what remains.
I still haven't been able to prove if Paul was killed or died; I have proven to myself he was replaced in 66 and that he and Faul were switching themselves in and out of performances since at least 65.
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil
2. Become incredulous and indignant
3. Create rumor mongers
4. Use a straw man
5. Sidetrack opponents w name calling, ridicule
6. Hit and Run
7. Question motives
8. Invoke authority
9. Play Dumb
10. Associate opponent charges with old news
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions
12. Enigmas have no solution
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic
14. Demand complete solutions
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses
17. Change the subject
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad
19. Ignore facts, demand impossible proofs
20. False evidence
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor
22. Manufacture a new truth
23. Create bigger distractions
24. Silence critics
25. Vanish
Hi Anonymous,
DeleteThis is not a Facebook page or any Facebook comments, so no thumb to give for liking your comment.
You said, "The way I approach a puzzle is to remove each piece of information that I can prove to be false and then look at what remains.
I still haven't been able to prove if Paul was killed or died; I have proven to myself he was replaced in 66 and that he and Faul were switching themselves in and out of performances since at least 65."
And that remind me of a famous quote made by Sherlock Holmes, " When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however impossible, must be the truth."
I'm agreeing with you about Paul was replaced by an impostor in 1966, since the evidence presented by the Italian forensic expert is scientifically proven and too good to be denied. And video evidences are also some strong proofs that support the idea.
However, that doesn't mean its a strong proof that PID.
IM2centsO, either PID and PIA are plausible, until the real truth unveiled and eliminating either one.
While waiting for the time to come, PID vs PIA polemic is still open for a healthy debates and discussions.
Many people speculating on the way Paul possibly being killed in 1966. For me, all of that possible to happen. Somehow, I keep wondering about how many people think that Paul is still alive but in the different way.
IM2centsO, if Paul did surviving murder attempts on him, there're 2 possibilities can happen :
One, permanent brain injury zaps the life as the member of The Beatles out of him. If still not to the point of dying physically, he is unable to live truly as the injury zaps away his sweet personality, ability and musical talent.
Two. Wait, how many people think that Paul being kidnapped and being kept inside the dungeon of draconian era or the insane assylum not known to public, in order to keep him silent ? Being put on strong dose of potent psychiatric drugs by the mad doctor on daily basis, until he get in catatonic status for so long time. If he is able to escape it someday then go to public and claiming that he's JPM, nobody will believe him and thinking he's a madman since Sir Faul already taking and living with his identity.
Tina, I'm sorry since this is sound more out of the topic...
To add to your list...
ReplyDeleteThe film contains a sequence in which Harrison is interviewed on Australian television. During the excerpts shown, Harrison repeatedly refers to McCartney as "Faul". This seems almost like a smoking gun. Unfortunately, the original video is available on YouTube and Harrison pronounces the name as "Paul". The original has been carefully edited to achieve this effect.
This film is rather interesting. It was produced by the fly-by-night film company Highway 61 Entertainment founded in 2005 with CEO Joel Gilbert. It is described as a "mockumentary" on the movie's web site but doesn’t seem to fit the format.
ReplyDeleteThe film does not appear to attempt to be comedy as would normally be the case for a mockumentary. In addition, it should be relatively easy in a mockumentary to perceive that it is, in fact, a spoof. However, there are no disclaimers or any other information that would support that the contents were to be taken less than seriously.
The use of actual names throughout is odd since this should leave the producer open to legal action from the Harrison estate or any other parties mentioned. It should have been of particular concern that "Harrison" seems to claim that McCartney had pre-knowledge of Lennon's murder. The movie website includes reviews by reviewers that seem to take the contents seriously.
It seems somewhat farfetched to attempt to claim that the film seriously makes the case that Paul was replaced. The dramatic "Harrison" voice-over is too easy to debunk. Further, certain supporting evidence, such as the Harrison Australian TV interview have been falsified. Harrison's voice is edited to change his pronunciation of McCartney's name to "Faul". This too is almost too easy to refute.
The credits are very sparse and include two "researchers" identified as Daniella Arnold and Lance Lewman. In fact there is a voice actor named Lance Lewman in Atomic Cafe, one of Gilbert's other projects (I have seen claims on the web that Lance Lewman actually provided the "George Harrison" narration).
Finally some of Gilbert's other projects practically scream CIA/Mossad. These include:
Farewell Israel: Bush, Iran, and The Revolt of Islam (2007)
Atomic Jihad: Ahmadinejad's Coming War For Islamic Revival And Obama's Politics (2010)
Dreams from My Real Father: A Story of Reds and Deception (2012) an Obama "expose"
I think that it has brought some people who might find PID "important" to the proverbial table due to the fact that it found it's way on to Netflix. :)
ReplyDeleteI would just like to add, as I saw the disinfo purpose of this film from the very beginning, the production cost on this film must have been quite something! As a song writer and video maker I noticed that someone had gone to great effort to write and record a lot of Beatles-style songs and record them in the fashion of the era. This is not something anyone can just do. It would take time and money. Also, the graphics are fairly complex, with lots of animation, something which again takes time (and therefore money) to produce. This film was not an amateur, budget production. Someone intended this to be convincingly bad so as to discredit the real research. The high production value gives it gravity on an unconscious level for the viewer, but the terrible voice actor and factual mistakes push it into the realm of the unbelievable, this sealing the deal finally for the new seeker that the PID rumour is not worth investigating.
ReplyDelete