The Beatles - I wanna be your man

[OomissbellamyoO]

QUICHE

[AmonCOCO]

lol, the beatles legs are SO LONG. especially paul.

[verilu97]

@AmonCOCO omg! it's true i never noticed!!

[99Quench]

I saw both The Stones and The Beatles live. Couldn't hear much because of the all screaming. I was one of the odd ones who wanted to listen but felt compelled to join in with the screamers [how stupid was that!]. Anyway, both versions are good on vinyl but I have to say that this was not the Stones at their best on the day that this recording was made. It is a myth that all Beatles fans disliked the Stones at the time.

[Starbucksiislovee]

42 people need a man.

[anonymousmessenger23]

Omg rolling stones version is awful D': cant beat the original

[netboy04]

There is a perception that the Stones were the bad boys and the Beatles were the clean cut ones. Fact of the matter is, all of the members of the Stones were from the suburbs and the country side and the Beatles grew up in arguably the toughest neighborhood in all of London. Liverpool was a nasty place.

[dohertym22]

@netboy04 Liverpool is 250 miles away from London mate. I'm from Liverpool and its nowhere near as bad as what people say it is. Compared to some of the Cities surrounding it its pretty soft. Birmingham and Manchester suffer higher crime-rates. Its blown out of all proportion. However, I wasn't alive in the 50's when they grew up and since Liverpool was the second most bombed place in the country so it may have been worse then. There are still bad places here but I find Woolton rather pleasant.

[dohertym22]

@netboy04 Liverpool is 250 miles away from London mate. I'm from Liverpool and its nowhere near as bad as what people say it is. Compared to some of the Cities surrounding it its pretty soft. Birmingham and Manchester suffer higher crime-rates. Its blown out of all proportion. However, I wasn't alive in the 50's when they grew up and since Liverpool was the second most bombed place in the country so it may have been worse then. There are still bad places here but I find Woolton rather pleasant.

[molly13bored]

Ringo. You boss. You are too amazing.

[naquagesicnoon]

Mick's voice + Beatles' version = Eargasm

[95WOWJUNKIE]

I love both

[shifty11able]

I want Beatles there not stones

[wojiaokatya]

hate the stones... sorry.

[carioseye]

i guess i like The Beatles version better. (no offense Rolling Stone fans, just that i like The Beatles somewhat better) ; )

[NinaAri525]

I like both versions. But sorta The Beatles are better, no offense Rolling Stones fans.

Well I like both versions...

[NatWolff43567890]

Beatles Are Better than Stones

[crazybatmantopaz]

Ehh Beatles are better....But the Stones aren't that bad, just the Beatles kick ass!

[PersausDcw]

The Stones version is actually much, much better... pure rock and roll, no pop shit.

[thedoc241000]

The Rolling Stones...at their best, THE GREATEST rock and roll band of all time.

[baseballkid3497]

Fun Fact: The song was actually written by The Beatles, but they wanted to help out the Rolling Stones, so let them play the music first.  It was the Rolling Stones' first no. 1 hit. (Source: Mark Lewisohn The Complete Beatles Chronicle)

[jjarupongc]

not Beatle

[myawesomeboy]

35 rolling stones fans!

100 beatles fans!

[conorucd]

eh this is the stones ffs

[HankDidThat]

I like the Rolling stones version better, the song just doesnt fit the image the beattles had back then and like the voice in off said (i think its Lenon talking...), "They did it first ,but we did it with Ringo after"

[mdplyr442]

justin eat ur heart out

[Legostarwarsfan311]

Beatles win! Rolling stones suck

[crazytwilightfan11]

The stones version of this isn't as good as the Beatles. And you know the part at 1:17 where the shouting and random noises start? I forget if it's Ringo that actually does that or if it's John. I read it somewhere but I can't remember. Do any of you?

[madonmusic0]

@crazytwilightfan11 John. ringo is on the drums

[searching4hope5415]

BEATLES WIN!!

[fashot14]

be my man..! the four of you beatles!! :D

[MusicMachine21]

I saw those lips and said that's not one of the Beatles-lol

[lennongirlbeatles10]

the rolling stone

[jaimy0the0artist]

the beatles look normal, but lets nottalk about the rolling stones

[Rick31797]

thats terrible ..The stones..

[odiseo81]

los rolling les limpian el culo a los beatles.

[babasetomash]

the stones sucks

[dchs11]

meh.... the beatles' version sounds like poppy, happy, baby-please-take-me-in. the stones' version however, sounds like they wanna be more than just your man.

[darthmoop]

Beatles version is way better, 2 reasons, 1. Its The Beatles, number 2. It has way more energy

[funkmasterjee]

The Beatles version is FAR superior

[HabboFrasier]

John has give this song to Mick in an café. But the song became such a succes, so the beatles did it by themself to ( my english is not so good, because I'm from Dutch)

[TheRrodriguez1]

My dad told me i got a beatiful voice similar to the beatles

[Tarkovful]

@TheRrodriguez1 daddy lied....

[maryariel89]

beatleeeees all the way!

[c40wilches]

rolling stones ? pfffff , the beatles !!!!! wiiiiii

[vabosa]

Wow they butchered this song. The Beatles FTW.

[shayna1108TheBeatles]

BEATLES ARE WAYYY BETTER!!!!!!!!!!

[Domokun461]

WTF These guys suck!!!

[Diddlify]

George I Wanna be Your girl ♥ <3 <3

[devaom420]

@Diddlify i feel you.

[creekxx13]

<3 I want to be your girl ♥

ps. yes you are mine baby ♥

[TwilightBeatles]

okay, don't title youre video The Beatles - I wanna be your man if you're going to put some rolling stones junk on it. BEATLES FOREVER

[michuvede]

i prefer beatles

[bball4life140]

Ringo sang much better than the stones!

[thearmyproductions]

Beatles sings the best in everything, the stones couldn't you know that funk you know that the beatles did in this song is a 100000000000000000000000000000­00% better than the stones. Rock on Beatles :)

[scout2468]

Stones cant sing this song for shit

[TininSkywithDiamonds]

actually I prefer Rolling Stones version . it's sounding more natural to me, but everybody got a different opinion

[ilikelimes18]

like the beatles version better :)

[KCwellard]

They couldn't even pull of a Ringo song!

[1jaishree]

guess i should read the description. I was very confused for a minute there! HUH? Mick Jagger? what????!? lol

[rickyman223]

Beatles do it way better

[ilikelimes18]

oh yeah :) i give you l00000000000000000000000000000­00000000000 thumbs up

[luke4428]

yea, john tap your foot like crazy

[romeodies12]

if anybody else there would be like old

he too would be great

everybody is great by our emotions

whether they lack the talent of what they deserve like them fools beatles they are maybe little bit that we can listen but not that much that people used to say

[crossbowman100]

the rolling stones cant sing this son for crap

[crossbowman100]

beatles win you keep on play the beatles

[crossbowman100]

youre gonna give me a stroke listening to this

[Diddlify]

The BeaTles !!

[Adamodevadam]

It looks, Ringo was better singer than Mick :DDD

[banjosolid]

the beatles win in everything there the greatest band of all time lol theres nothing they lose at haha

[SonicHeadK240]

@banjosolid hells yeah!

[melekers]

I almost didnt recognize the song ! Stones sucks in this music

[DuckTapeMan98]

the stones are good and the beatles,

I LIKE THEM BOTH! : )

[fenerbahceli1818]

BEATLES WİN

[7robbob]

the beatles wrote this song

they sing it better they have a better attitude and smile to it

the rolling stones looked heavy or on weed or something then

still there 2 great bands and 1 thing every1 thinks michael jakson is better than the beatles he is not hes not even better than the rolling stones

[showboy29]

sounds like a record player in a bucket

[Awesometiger55]

the rolling stones suck singing this song!!!!!!! ROCK ON BEATLES

[beatlespaullover101]

the beatles sung it sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo­o much better

[candyear]

Could they have gotten a worse recording of the Beatles. This is a ridiculous waste of time. Both these bands are far better than anything that came after them so why worry about who's better. People get a life.

[Kenoman29]

Yes, its true that the Beatles gave this song to the Stones, and then the Beatles did it afterwards. Hey, the Beatles weren't stupid.....like John Lennon said, "We gave this song to the Stones, but we weren't gonna give them anything great."

[TheBeatles196]

the rolling stones suck the beatles are way better and ringo sounds alot better singing

[DanW2X]

funny how the Beatle's drummer is a better singer that the stones lead singer

[7robbob]

@DanW2X

ha ye true ringo has been known to be a really bad singer

but i think mick jaggers singing style sounds like that

[SonicHeadK240]

@7robbob i thinks he's a GREAT singer screw those other people :P

[MsRingaStarr]

@7robbob fuck you =]

[Diddlify]

i think the Beatles are better ,sorry

[angellonelo]

rolling stones suck they're just a cheap copy of the best band...THE BEATLES

[jmabowen]

Micks version sorry this just didn't work for the beatles

[TheCrocxxx]

micks kicking it

[Misspretty75]

Mick's voice is so sensual, *...*...But to me the Beatles' version is better, ^^".

[carioseye]

@Misspretty75 who's Mick?

[xemily91]

um, usually when the video title says "the beatles-I wanna be your man", it's usually the beatles, singing...oh I DUNNO, I wanna be your man. k, thanks.

[da4ti2]

The Beatles are much better!

[Metallicanoob201]

well the rolling stones deserve more credit but i prefer the beatles :)

[BeatleJBNBBJFKfan]

ringo did it better

[thebeatles2341]

the beatles did this song much better retard so shut up

[Cheere96]

O_O soggetti.

[Trekchick]

Yeah I like the Stones a lot but the Beatles did it better. Like just about anything else.

[jackandevanrock]

the rolling stones version is alright BUT THE BEATLES VERSION KICKS ASS

[theflyshowmethesky]

I like the Rolling Stones a lot, and I dig their version of this song but Ringo is just so absolutely adorable so I have to like the Beatles version better

^_^

[Trekchick]

I second that

[FFSuKNTfkr]

never have I thought the beatles were this gay

[Speedbowl]

Lets see..... you listen to rap & hip-hop, right little boy?

[FFSuKNTfkr]

lol no ... pretty much everything except rap n hip hop. Looks like you failed the psychic test.. which automatically means ur a doosh.

[theNEWESTcabloober]

learn how to spell DOUCHE

[Trekchick]

HAHAHAHA!!! little boy pwned

[vildar9]

rap aint music idiots why you watch this if you hate this, moron

[aky98]

@FFSuKNTfkr the beatles ROCK <3

[FFSuKNTfkr]

they sing like they got carrots up their ass

[vildar9]

yousuck

[shreadhead96]

i like both bands but the beatles take the cake with this song

[LEBUZINHE]

Damn... Rolling Stones part is Horrible!!!

nothing like the Beatles

[thearmyproductions]

I agree man

[Shiek07]

The Beatles have more harmony when singing this song rather than Stones.

Its about the unison in the voices colliding together to sound perfect, and the Beatles pulled it off waaaay better.

...I love Ringo...! <3

[nightcrawler511]

can u explain harmony plz

[Stanchitoman]

idk i think both are great

[castiganvilter]

THERE AREN'T THE BEATLES

[UR55378008]

meh, i love the stones and the beatles but the rolling stone's cover wasn't that great

[Cheere96]

fuck! :P THE BATLES CAN NOT BE IMITED!!!!!! :p

[bcjaliu]

yeah..the Rolling Stones doing this song = RocknRoll

the Beatles doing this song = Silly Cartoon Characters that drank too much coco

..don't worry I like the Beatles too :)

[stratman123]

For a great example of the Stones "rocking out", search here for "Rolling Stones-Rice Crispies"!

HAHAHAHAHA!!!

[Olivewings]

Omg, which is SO OBVIOUSLY BETTER.

xD

[ILoveRingo214]

the beatles are wayyyy better, and they wrote it :) i like the stones too though

[alberito93]

did u realise? usually the drummers get less "spotlight" then the rest... but in this case.. the beatles, the fab 4 is the best.. could be the best band ever!

[4449ela]

both!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

are good

[Olivewings]

Uhh.

No.

[daracenak]

both versions are good

[BeatleLover0437]

no offense to The Rolling Stones but they sucked singing this song

THE BEATLES are waay better

[hoardan007]

The Rolling Stones are complete shit. The Beatles version is way better. Plus they wrote it

[maunten66]

por supuesto que la mejor version es la de !LOS BEATLES!.. sinduda.

[bringmetheKYLE]

in my opinion, beatles did so much better on this song

[gnuonageoj]

The Beatles version is way better.

[Shesleavinghomex3]

yeahh it is.

I'd never heard the rolling stone version...its almost awful.

[ImaBeatlesboy]

its the video its all tin-like its actually good

[MikoSergio]

Its a Stones song. Stones came frist and are better.

[Christohart7]

No, this song belongs to Lennon/Mccartney.

[butmeemec]

its i wanna hold your hand dumbass

[Fab4RPGJ]

loss of hearing? its i wanna be your man. dumbass

[sasquatch628]

Beatles are much better!!

[skatekid032]

i like the beatles verison more only because its faster

[THEum3k]

I have to say, I prefer the Beatles' version.

[pabloplacenti]

cualquiera los stones son mejores papa

[beatlefan999999]

aqui se dan cuenta de que the beatles, fueron los mejores, k aunque duraron cerca de 11 años , superaron alos stones, que actualmente siguen tocando.

[theurge14]

The Beatles killed it... no contest.

[VtheXenomorphQueen]

Killed it? They wrote the song.

[bsasam]

0:38

[KatieTheRockNRoller]

I like The Beatles version better!

[Beatles4ever63]

THIS IS THE ROLLING STONES!!!!

[maunten66]

la armonizacion de los beatles siempre fue muy superior a cualquier conjunto musical y ademas ese angel que tenian para cantar enamoraron al mundo.

[pclvmuzic]

Funny to see Ringo's voice come out of John and Paul's mouths :)

[chitoraccoon]

nocabe duda que como the beatles no hay otros.

mis respetos para the rolling stones, pero no alcanzanron el nivel creativo en la armonización y arreglos de esta canción.

the beatles #1

[lasticos]

es mejor el de los beatles. no esta mas la de rolling stone `pero no hay comparacion.

beatles the best

[edulandazurico]

deacuerdo, la de los beatles es infinitamente superior. la voz de ringo es genial!!!!! BEATLES FOREVER!!!!

[viejaslocasrnr]

Desastre!!!

comparada con the rolling stones

[mariwana92]

first were the rolling stones and the the beatles

[nightcrawler511]

werent the beatles first then rolling stones?

[v50super]

Written by: Lennon-McCartney

Recorded: 11, 12, 30 September; 3, 23 October 1963

...was also recorded and released in 1963 by The Rolling Stones as their second single.

[v50super]

McCartney and Lennon were passed by a taxi containing Jagger and Richards while walking down London's Charing Cross Road. So they shouted from the taxi and we yelled, 'Hey, hey, give us a lift, give us a lift,' and we bummed a lift off them. So there were the four of us sitting in a taxi and I think Mick said, 'Hey, we're recording. Got any songs?' And we said, 'Aaaah, yes, sure, we got one. How about Ringo's song? You could do it as a single.'

[scarletspidey5]

so did the beatles write it?

[69xox69xox69]

THE STONES do the song exactly the same way the Beatles do it. The beatles do take it to a little more POP sound..as the Stones give it a touch of bluesy sound....but thats their roots, more thann the beatles. you people saying this is better or best are nuts.....its just that you are strongly faithful to your favorite band.... but ya gotta remember..The Stones..did do it first. thats important. the first is ALWAYS the best.

[wasupman120]

im gonna list the reasons your post is stupid 69xox69xox69 1. you say they are exactly the same then you say they are diffrent. 2. it doesnt matter if it their roots or not both versions are great. 3. then you say that the only reason like this song more is because they like the beatles but isnt that exactly what your doing. 5. it doesnt matter who did it first its who did it better i personaly think they both are amazing 6. the first isnt always the best, play halo 1 then halo 3 for example

[69xox69xox69]

first...i love the way you list every thought you have by number..this is very orderly and useful. but u are all over the place..let me finalize this with this. the stones version,,it was written for them by j/p...and they do a fantastic job doing it the stones way.then the beatles figured,,hey we wrote it.lets do our cover of it ..our way. ..and they do it the beatles way.neither is better ,,neither is best. people who think one is better than the other,,,,,is splitting hair's w/a dull knife.

[nightcrawler511]

but did the beatles write it yea they did i understand tht the rolling stones played it first but they took it from the beatles(I THINK THT THEY TOOK IT FROM THEM)

[69xox69xox69]

dear nightcrawler,,, in a night club one night,

at the table....john and paul wrote the song on a napkin,,,,,and gave it to jagger,,and said here,,,do this song,,make it a record for the stones,,,, and they did,,,, THEN,,,the beatles said ,,hey lets us do it too,,after the stones already released it as a single

....true story. take care

[nightcrawler511]

lol

[RedTango]

This isnt the Beatles, it's the Rolling Stones!

[DenverDaddy]

Keep watching.  Stones first, Beatles follow.

[scarletspidey5]

anyone notice john's not using his VOX python strap for his rick!? Awesome video!!!!

[ringomainia]

3 things:who the f... r the rolling stones,the rolling stones suck,and u r a disgrace 4 putting The Beatles next 2 the rolling stones

[barcelonaboy73]

Sin ninguna duda alguna prefiero la version de los incomparables Beatles. Ellos eran lo maximo de esa epoca.

[slim22rj]

beatles are the best.

fuck the rolling stones

[donnpatc]

I heard a version of this when I was a little kid. Older brother's 45. When I found out, later on, that both bands had done it, I wondered which version I'd heard.

Shoulda known. My older bro was a big Beatles fan.

[722erodz]

beatles rule!!! mount rainier.

[CourageFan101]

ringo sings wayyyyy better

[asinette]

sauf que ce sont les stones et non pas les beatles!

[pheanixking]

I like the beatles' better... I like the cleaner musical style of the beatles more then the dirty bluesy style of the stones