holy hell, i did not know the guy was this handsome (i am heteroseksual, but not afraid to say that he has the looks) as handsome as ricky nelson, elvis and cliff richard. no wonder they kicked him ou and replaced him with an ugly 5 foot5 tall drummer. it's all politics man. they should have compensated him long ago with 10 millions or so. fucking politics.
Ringo was a much superior drummer of course, but I still feel so sad about Pete. He was their buddy, their bandmate and went through all the thought years with them, before the luck shined on the band. And his bandmates became millionaires, while he got back to his old job in sleepy little Liverpool.
According to the contemporary people; nobody knew Pete Best .
Sad and true; based on the contemporary tapes and records he was a clumsy club drummer. And based on the audiotapes - including this one - he was already in the 1960s a very ordinary person. Not even banal; ordinary...
This is almost painful to watch. Were these panelists so unhip at the time that they wouldn't have known who Peter Best was upon immediately hearing his name?
Pete has told, that George was drunk all the time in their first Hamburg trip. And George has said, that Pete was drunk all the time... So, maybe there was a battle behind Stu and Paul as well and right from the beginning.
But after listening to all the possible Pete Best related 1960s audiomaterial and seeing all the possible tv-performances: despite trying to be objective, he's an emperor with no clothes...
It's ironic that George got Pete, the only Beatle born in India, kicked out of the Beatles, then spent the rest of his fool life trying to connect with all things Indian!
@AkiroXKE That's an interesting observation but George was not really instrumental in kicking Pete Best out of the group. I also think that Pete's birthplace had little bearing on his life. It is worth noting that quite a few prominent Britons were born in India. Brigadier General Reginald Dyer, who was responsible for the Amritsar Massacre and was lauded by racist contemporaries as "the saviour of the Punjab," was born in Murree, India (modern day Pakistan). Now THAT is ironic.
1. On the dvd Pete Best of The Beatles he tells, that John was peeing on the balcony to the crowd going to church. In the biography about Paul McCartney by Ross Benson he tells, that this didn't take place.
2. On the same dvd he tells, that he and John were trying to mug a sailor. The first time I heard aboutt his was on Albert Goldman's crap biography.
So, I could say, that Pete Best is a lying half-gypsy, but I don't...
He is lying through his teeth; he was kicked out of the band, and was shocked when it occurred. He didn't quit the band, and he had no intention of doing so.
Why would you travel to America just to appear on this show and seem like a dunce? And then lie about it? He didn't choose to leave the band. He was sacked.
If I had a giant ego and I was a singer in a band but all the girls came to see the drummer I would probably want him out. We are talking about young 20 year olds. Whats even more funny is they replaced him with a drummer that not too many girls would like.Pete should have taken vocal lessons and done whatever he could do to become a singer/ Do I think the Beatles made the right choice? Yes. But they should have compensated him throughout the years.
@Johnmcartney10 So jealous he's never bad mouthed the man... if he was that jealous some tape of best calling Ringo and his former "friends" utter tossers would exist, yet even as early as the period when The Beatles broke America, Best keep any hard feelings private... unlike the other Beatles it has to be said, who spent plenty of time in those early years slagging him off.
He didn't quit, he was fired. George Martin and a bunch of others agreed on that his rhythm, tempo, sound etc...wasn't what they were lookig for. And, George, Paul, and John, didn't like him.
Dear Pete Best: If ever a Morrissey song came true to life, "Little Man What Now.", seems to fit like ''Hand In Glove." You have such class, no anomosity. And with your fame, you give it to us still with humble generosity....I remember you....we will always remember you !!! Love and affection always...Molly
"An afternoon nostalgia television show. You spoke in silhouette, but they couldn't name you. Although the panel were very polite to you. But I remember you from Friday nights 1969. ATV you murdered every line. Too old to be a child star, too young to take leads, 4 seasons passed and they axed you. Nervous juvenile, WON'T SMILE, What became of you ? Did that swift eclipse tourture you ? A star at 18, then suddenly gone. Down to a few lines in the back page of annuaI. looked up to you."
@TheDiddlysquat I'm not trying to claim Best was as talented as Paul and John, or would have had a solo career of their level. I believe that if he had stayed with the beatles he would have been hugely popular in the early days, and had some sort of solo career afterwards, just like Ringo Starr did.
@TheDiddlysquat Yes, that is my logic. Saying he was the drummer in their best days contradicts the claim that he couldn't play good enough anyway, and if Lennon contradicts himself so great then his claims best couldn't play should be dimissed.
Yes, I know Best could have been in the monkees, just goes to show their were other professionals who were willing to give him a shot! Indeed, Johnny Hutchinson refused to replace Best in the Beatles when he was asked too!
@TheDiddlysquat John Lennon said that in 1963, after best was fired. They have reasons to say bad things about him after he was sacked, but no reason to say anything good (unless it was true). Besides Lennon was obviously talking crap, because Best was in the band for 2 years! They never told Best of these claimed "plans" to sack him after someone better showed up, meaning (even if this nonsense was true) they acted like complete wankers!
Of course I think the rest of The Beatles had more charming personalities whereas he is kinda shy, but Pete certainly has good looks.
Dunno about his talent as a musician, though I really can't imagine The Beatles without Ringo. Ringo was just a sweetheart. Lennon/McCartney was the backbone and without their songs they wouldn't have been legends. Harrison also had some underrated talent, couldn't imagine the band without him either.
@thetruefreak678 That's rubbish. If you look at pictures of the beatles between 1960 and 1962, Starr is in very few of them. So that claim is disproved by photographic evidence. Indeed it is estimated that Best played on stage with the beatles more than starr did, even by 1967!
@thetruefreak678 Course they did... they don't want to look like arseholes do they? Yet, PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE proves otherwise. When Best was playing clubs with the Beatles they were playing 7 HOUR sets. If Ringo was filling in most the time then who was doing the drumming for Rory Storm and The Hurricanes? If Ringo was doing most the drumming why the riots back in liverpool when Best was fired? These would not have taken place if Ringo was doing the drumming! Evidence is stronger than lies!
@thetruefreak678 Pete Best himself stated Starr only replaced him on two occasions, when he was sick. His story matches the real evidence (i.e. all the photos). If Ringo was doing most the drumming then how come Johnny Huthcinson had to fill in between Best's dimissal and Starr joining the band? The only evidence you have to back up the story of John, Paul and George are their own words, nothing else, and it can easily be dismissed when Best's version is backed up by proof!
simply kicked out by John's cheap, pathetic jealousy. At the heart of every great genius is still a weak, common, cowardy soul. We want to think of Lennon as a hero, but he really is morally no better than an insecure, tattle taling kid.
For this kind of action, and many other stinky things he did to people close to him, I always felt the "peace" message to be pretty hypocritical. A pose he took in the later years. Unlike Dylan, who sang about peace from the moment he picked up a guitar...
As Pete said on Oprah..this is the year that he tried to commit suicide...he must be in denial. If you are a truly passionate musician and you have to go through what Pete Best went through....fuck.
I love how the emcee, when reading the names of the band he says "Paul McCartney isn't it?" OH how he will never have to be that confussed about it again!
Actually, they were John, Paul, Stu, and Pete at first, and sometimes George (when his mother would let him play with the band). When they first went to Hamburg, George was sent home for being underage.
No wonder they got rid of him. He's blatantly lying here saying he left the group on his own. He was fired by the other 3 Beatles because he sucked at drumming and they now had a record contract so he was expendable.
@krushnoi he was fired becuase they where jealous of him and he didnt fit in, he had more fans than John, Paul and George. hes not going to exactly say they sacked me is he.....the other 3 later admitted they where wrong in what they done. Read the book 'John' by Cynthia Lennon
Pete Best did not "leave" his job. He was fired. George Martin and the engineers wanted Pete Best replaced because they preferred a seasoned studio musician for recording sessions. Ultimately manager Brian Epstein was asked to fire Pete Best, and he did. Epstein and the other Beatles thought Best was great and had a terrific following but The Not-So-Fab-Three decided not to have a band mate stand between them and fortune. John, George and Paul were horrible pieces of garbage as individuals.
Pete didn't quit but got fired because of jealousy on the part of John & Paul. Pete was by far the best musician and the best looking as well. That's why he's Pete BEST. The Beatles made a huge mistake letting him go. Brian Epstein had a crush on John & wanted Pete out of the way; wanted JL all to himself. They were a mediocre band despite George Martin's efforts. It wasn't until Yoko came along that they came into their own element. JL left when Yoko made him great. And that's the truth.
Pete QUIT. Sorrttt offf... . Fact is, he was fired form RECORDING. Ringo was cleaner for recording and kept better time = less takes and less money. remember, Studio time in the 60's was extremely expensive and there weren't a lot of them. That said, Pete was still cool to perform live but he wasn;t happy with that and it led to his demise.
wow...that totally sucks for him. being fired from the biggest band in the history of the world. imagine how he must feel now seeing all of their publicity 50 years into the future. 50 YEARS THEYVE BEEN AMAZING! he must hate ringo soo much. i <3 ringo hes my favorite
@tunenito No, of course, and he never talked again to any of the Beatles; in Neil Aspinall´s funeral Paul denied to attend it because he knew Pete was going to be there and he didn´t want to run into him. (Neil was Pete´s best friend during the Beatles).
@frikinjoe Neil and Pete weren't just best friends, Neil was the father of Pete Best's half brother, Roag. Look it up. It was Neil who got so many tracks that included Pete on Anthology (figuring that Pete would get a good amount of money, finally). He just couldn't convince the Beatles to allow Pete to be interviewed for the documentary.
@meanderer06513 I know the story of Neil and Pete up to the sacking etc, and that Neil's initial stance was to leave but Pete convinced him to stay, but I always wondered if they remained friends afterwards seeing as Neil was so heavily involved with the 4 Beatles, who were, in many respects, the destroyers of Pete's dreams.
@daddykornflakes Pete Best was the only Beatle to attend Neil's funeral. Odd, seeing as Yoko Ono, George Martin, Stella McCartney and Barbara Bach (Ringo's wife) were also there.
@tunenito No, Pete has not had any communication with any of them since the day before he was sacked. I've always been a bit confused how they got around the Neil Aspinall/ Roag Best situation, because I assume Neil remained friendly with Pete?
@xxlegallybrunettexxx He was actually kicked out for being the Most Popular Beatle. You can see that he had a cool persona in the style of Bob Dylan. The Beatles were more comfortable with Ringo's goofiness and knew that Ringo wouldn't steal the spotlight like Pete. The girls went crazy over Pete. Actually Ringo and Pete were good friends, and as far I know he has never trashed Ringo. He's been cool about the whole thing considering he was more or less stabbed in the back.
He had to sit there and say he left the Beatles when we was actually kicked out. People watching probably said "what an idiot, he LEFT the Beatles??" I would have said "screw it, man, the SOBs kicked me out".
Yeah if you watch the Pete Best interview with David Letterman, currently posted here on You Tube, you'll see where Pete himself admits to being let go from the Beatles. So WWAHP is correct on his comment.
He may have been a better drummer than Ringo, but i think they probably wouldn't have changed the world as we know it if they kept him as the drummer.
@yankeecrankee Not necessarily true. We're saying that because we've seen the outcome, who knows? The outcome could've been the same or better had Pete stayed.
@tobixcupcakes nor tomorrow never knows which i think inspired psychedelic rock which inspired acid rock which inspired hard rock which inspired metal etc. this can go on a long time
Ah you gotta feel sorry for Pete kinda, because it must sting a bit watching the rest of them get so huge. I mean, the only thing he's known as is that guy who got fired from the Beatles. Being on these TV shows probably doesn't help either, just rubbing salt into the wound :( Still, I can't imagine the Beatles without Ringo, so I'm just going to Let it Be :D
Poor Pete was sacked from The Beatles.He said he wanted to start his own band and that he thought The Beatles woudnt be big but this was a fib by Pete.After listening to him I can understand why The Beatles got rid of him.Sad video of Pete Best.
just listen to him answer each question in that droning voice. None of the wit, exhuberance, charm or vitality the others Beatles oozed.....he simply didnt FIT IN!!
@tryst0 - He fit in well enough that they got huge just weeks after he joined the group and became the biggest thing on both the Hamberg Germany & Liverpool England scenes - for 2 years!!! Got them their first record deal with Tony Sheridan. That record is what kids came into Brian Epsteins store requesting & when Epstein saw the first group he said the first thing he was blown away with was their beat. Fit in so well he became the most popular member of the group.
@tryst0 I don't know about that as John seemed to possess the most of those qualities you mentioned, especially in the early days. George was the quiet one and Paul seemed to speak in serious tones. It was John who was the cut-up.
And Best is lying here. Saying that he left because he wanted to form his own band. It must have been the greatest of humiliations to get fired from the Beatles just before they became so huge.
Ringo was a far better drummer than Pete, and Pete flatly refused to get the famous Hair style the Beatles had..... so John, and paul had Brian epstein and George martin tell pete the bad news.
We'll truly never know who was better. Nobody can be sure about that. I saw him peforming on Rio de Janeiro last year, and he is very good, though his age.
@puzleman1 - Not true. Pete has said he was never asked to get the beatle cut & Astrid Kutchner has said she never attempted to give Pete the cut because his hair was to curly. Also, Pete was a good enough drummer to help them blow up in Germany & Liverpool, and get their first record deal with Tony Sheridan. He developed "The Atomic Beat", which Ringo & the other Liverpool groups copied. He became the most popular member of the group. Fans started calling the group Pete Best & The Beatles.
@puzleman1 Pete claims he was never "asked" to change his hair style. Perhaps, the remaining Beatles meant he didn't naturally follow suit after seeing their new hair styles.
Ringo was the better drummer, but i from what i gather Best didant rly fit in which was probably the main reason. as he was good enough at the kit for the Beatles in my opinon.
his chops have become way better over the years tho, shame for him but thats life i suppose.
I AM IN SHOCK ....I HAD NO IDEA PETE BEST WAS ALIVE ALL THESE YEARS....I THOUGHT HE HAD DIED AND THAT IS WHY HE WAS NO LONGER WITH THE BEATLES!!!!!!!! AMAZING.....I EVEN SPENT THE NIGHT WITH TWO OF THE BEATLES(NON SEXUAL) AND i DID NOT KNOW!!
we got fired cos he sucked at drums i heard some of the songs when he was with the beatles and goood daaamn we couldnt change the tempo of a song always the same tempo IT IS GOD WE GOT FIRED
Yeah it does suck that he missed out on the money and fame. But he made quite a nice chunk of change off the Anthology CDs. I heard it went well into the Millions of dollars. Good for him.
nonsuchfabio. He did he made a few million bucks from the Anthology, though they air-brushed his face off the Anthology cd box set.
It must have sucked that they kicked his ass out of the band. This guy must have been "What the fuck, guys. Why did you kick me out for.." Do you think he stil talks to the guys(Paul & Ringo)
Check out the interview with Letterman. He talks about the stone cold silence between him and the guys after the split. You gotta believe there really is some truth to the story that there was some jealousy towards Pete and that he attracted most of the girls that showed up to see them and, that was a big reason they ditched him.
That's so fucking sad, he's dying on the inside. Vainly trying to live through the past, he couldn't turn anywhere, the beatles would have been everywhere, where to turn? I think i remember hearing he tried to top himself
The BEATLES are my Favorite Rock N roll band of all time, however i feel horrible for pete, if he wasnt wanted in the group. help him somehow, like a new band that the beatles could helped him with, in all paul, george and john were cowards in not doing anything, after all they started the band in pete bests house.
Poor Pete. He seems like a decent guy. I think the Beatles should have written him a check or something after they took off. They are my favorite band of all-time, but there's no doubt they screwed him over. I've never been a big fan of Ringo either.
@WWAHP I can understand why he would lie. You never want to say you got fired from a job, rather it's best to say you resigned. Plus the Beatles PR machine had already stated he quit and he went along with it. In the end, he made a lot of money off Anthology. It would be ironic if he ended up the last member to pass away. Paul is a true coward & jerk for not even speaking with the guy after all these years.
@WWAHP He didn't say that. He said he left his job 2 years ago which he did. He didn't elaborate on the circumstances. Although if he had practiced harder when he first started drumming, he wouldn't have lost his job.
My essential point in all these comments has been that Pete was treated badly by the Beatles, then and afterward. On the very rare occasions any of them referred to Pete afterward, it was only to disparage and insult him. Pete deserved much better than that. He is a human being, after all. Note that Pete has never in his life said anything disparaging or insulting about John, Paul, George, or Ringo. And after all they've done to him, or not done, who has a better right?
FabFM, you and I will have to agree to disagree on the subject of Pete Best. Pete didn't need to be a McCartney clone. There already was a McCartney in the Beatles. Those closest to the group at the time, including Brian Epstein and George Martin, didn't want him to leave.
If George Martin was so sold on Lennon-McCartney as songwriters when he signed them, why did he arrange for them to record "How Do You Do It" (later a hit for Gerry and the Pacemakers) at their first recording session?
Think about it. What would have happened to John, Paul or George if they had been sacked from the Beatles before the Beatles hit it big, as Pete was, and then bad mouthed as the one who never fit in and was the odd man out, as Pete was? You can talk about the Beatles being John's band and you can talk about Paul's talent and indispensible contributions, but in the end I believe they too would have had the same fate as Pete... IF it had happened to them, too.
I never dissagreed with Harrison, and you never mentioned Lennon in your original post. However without the combination of Lennon/McCartney, the whole group would have probably ended up as a footnote in music history, not just John or Paul. The Beatles was never just John's band, from the day McCartney joined the band, it was the two that cemented the groups fate. Before he teamed up with McCartney, Lennon was in a band no different than any in liverpool.
Spoken with the benefit of hindsight. On August 16, 1962, all the classic songs, all the things that made them big lay ahead of them. Just as we'll never know what Lennon or McCartney might have done without each other, so we'll never know what Pete might have done had he stayed with them.
It dosen't matter if they "lay ahead" (even though Paul and John started writing together during the time Pete was in the band, anyway), songs like "yesterday", "hey jude", "eleanor rigby", "penny lane", "blackbird", etc etc are not written by any tom, dick or harry, especially so conistently. To say Pete Best would have contributed as much to the band as Paul McCartney is nothing but laughable!
What a ridiculous comment. From your comment you seem to think McCartney was a back up musicain in the group, rather than half of the greatest songwriting duo of all-time. There is no doubt McCartney is just as responsible for the success of the group than Lennon. Anyone who think otherwise knows nothing about the group!
As for Paul, for all his talent and ability and contribution to the success of the Beatles, I still suggest that if the others had dismissed him from the group just before they made it big (IF they had made it big without him), he would have ended up a footnote just like Pete. No disrespect meant to Paul for suggesting that. Certainly it would have been true of George, who demonstrated little songwriting talent in the early years of Beatlemania.
I doubt The Beatles would have made it big without McCartney. Take away McCartney and you take away all the classic songs, all the things that made them big. Best was just a drummer, McCartney, like Lennon, was a much more vital part of the band's system.
Again, all the classic songs and all the things that made them big lay in the future. Pete could have contributed his share to the band's success after August 16, 1962 if he had been permitted to, just like George and Ringo, but fate snatched the opportunity away from him.
Not true.The lennon-mcartney team had already started to write together while Pete was in the band - a huge factor and selling point to George Martin who gave them their contract, Espstein boasted that John and Paul were gifted song writers, this was all before August 1963. There is NO WAY John, Pete, George and some other chap would have been as big as John, Paul, George and Ringo.
Oh, and you must have never watched the beatles anthology because Paul admits he and the others should have handled the situation with Pete could have been handled better. I noticed (like Paul) John and George never spoke to Best again during their lifetime. Actions speak louder than words, and none of them took any!!
Where in the Anthology does Paul apologize for mishandling Pete's sacking? George admitted in the Anthology that the sacking could have been handled better. John told the Beatles' authorized biographer Hunter Davies that they were cowards when they sacked Pete. Paul, to my knowledge, has never apologized for the way it was handled.
holy hell, i did not know the guy was this handsome (i am heteroseksual, but not afraid to say that he has the looks) as handsome as ricky nelson, elvis and cliff richard. no wonder they kicked him ou and replaced him with an ugly 5 foot5 tall drummer. it's all politics man. they should have compensated him long ago with 10 millions or so. fucking politics.
GeileMickey 1 week ago
Ringo was a much superior drummer of course, but I still feel so sad about Pete. He was their buddy, their bandmate and went through all the thought years with them, before the luck shined on the band. And his bandmates became millionaires, while he got back to his old job in sleepy little Liverpool.
neonknights 1 month ago
Hello EdgarPuga!
Unfortunately - based on the Polydor recordings, the Decca sessions and the Radio Bristol performance;
Ringo would be playing and Pete would be posing... Despite trying to be as objective as possible.
And if Norman Chapman hadn't got drafted, we would be asking: Ringo who? Pete who?...
Ok, happy birthday to the fifth (=5th) drummer of The Beatles!
All the best
Jukka
jrahde 2 months ago
happy birthday pete best
Hattergirl1000 2 months ago
If there were 5 original beatles, what was Ringo doing while Peter was playing the drums?
EdgarPuga 2 months ago
@EdgarPuga Ringo was with Rory Storm & the Hurricanes. The 5 original Beatles were John, Paul, George, Pete, and Stu Sutcliffe.
ILoveVitas909 1 month ago
Hello kennyaltman !
According to the contemporary people; nobody knew Pete Best .
Sad and true; based on the contemporary tapes and records he was a clumsy club drummer. And based on the audiotapes - including this one - he was already in the 1960s a very ordinary person. Not even banal; ordinary...
All the best
Jrahde
jrahde 2 months ago
This is almost painful to watch. Were these panelists so unhip at the time that they wouldn't have known who Peter Best was upon immediately hearing his name?
kennyaltman 3 months ago
Hello AkiroXKE!
I've been wondering about that too! :)
Pete has told, that George was drunk all the time in their first Hamburg trip. And George has said, that Pete was drunk all the time... So, maybe there was a battle behind Stu and Paul as well and right from the beginning.
But after listening to all the possible Pete Best related 1960s audiomaterial and seeing all the possible tv-performances: despite trying to be objective, he's an emperor with no clothes...
All the best
Jrahde
jrahde 3 months ago
It's ironic that George got Pete, the only Beatle born in India, kicked out of the Beatles, then spent the rest of his fool life trying to connect with all things Indian!
AkiroXKE 3 months ago
@AkiroXKE That's an interesting observation but George was not really instrumental in kicking Pete Best out of the group. I also think that Pete's birthplace had little bearing on his life. It is worth noting that quite a few prominent Britons were born in India. Brigadier General Reginald Dyer, who was responsible for the Amritsar Massacre and was lauded by racist contemporaries as "the saviour of the Punjab," was born in Murree, India (modern day Pakistan). Now THAT is ironic.
aneil68 1 month ago
Hello you all!
I have to tell you the following things;
1. On the dvd Pete Best of The Beatles he tells, that John was peeing on the balcony to the crowd going to church. In the biography about Paul McCartney by Ross Benson he tells, that this didn't take place.
2. On the same dvd he tells, that he and John were trying to mug a sailor. The first time I heard aboutt his was on Albert Goldman's crap biography.
So, I could say, that Pete Best is a lying half-gypsy, but I don't...
jrahde 3 months ago
Pete who?! The brother of George Best?!...
jrahde 3 months ago
He is lying through his teeth; he was kicked out of the band, and was shocked when it occurred. He didn't quit the band, and he had no intention of doing so.
JeffersonDinedAlone 5 months ago
you could cut the tension with a knife
csvictory12 7 months ago
Why would you travel to America just to appear on this show and seem like a dunce? And then lie about it? He didn't choose to leave the band. He was sacked.
cosg9531 8 months ago
he didn't leave, he was taken out by George Martin
MrGamersLand 9 months ago
Omg!!! :O aww he was sooo handsome!!! <3
miss212AUT 9 months ago
If I had a giant ego and I was a singer in a band but all the girls came to see the drummer I would probably want him out. We are talking about young 20 year olds. Whats even more funny is they replaced him with a drummer that not too many girls would like.Pete should have taken vocal lessons and done whatever he could do to become a singer/ Do I think the Beatles made the right choice? Yes. But they should have compensated him throughout the years.
guitarraveboy 10 months ago
HE WAS FIRED!! Why? 'Cause he had more charm and charisma than the other 3.
BCK 10 months ago
@BCK acutally b/c he wasnt as great a drummer than ringo. All the Beatles said it.
indeed1234 10 months ago
He's jealous of Ringo
Johnmcartney10 10 months ago
@Johnmcartney10 So jealous he's never bad mouthed the man... if he was that jealous some tape of best calling Ringo and his former "friends" utter tossers would exist, yet even as early as the period when The Beatles broke America, Best keep any hard feelings private... unlike the other Beatles it has to be said, who spent plenty of time in those early years slagging him off.
FabFM 10 months ago
he didnt leave the beatles, they fired him
darius595 10 months ago
Sort of a has been that never was...he must have been a bigger man because he had a good sense of humor about not being in the group.
ekocentric 10 months ago
He didn't quit, he was fired. George Martin and a bunch of others agreed on that his rhythm, tempo, sound etc...wasn't what they were lookig for. And, George, Paul, and John, didn't like him.
Ecclipze 11 months ago
Can anyone write who BESS MYERS was? Actress? Incredibly beautiful and charming...
RisforRockit 11 months ago
@RisforRockit Bess Myerson was a former Miss America winner,who was also on many game shows
TheDorr71 11 months ago
Dear Pete Best: If ever a Morrissey song came true to life, "Little Man What Now.", seems to fit like ''Hand In Glove." You have such class, no anomosity. And with your fame, you give it to us still with humble generosity....I remember you....we will always remember you !!! Love and affection always...Molly
mollymaemorrissey 11 months ago
"An afternoon nostalgia television show. You spoke in silhouette, but they couldn't name you. Although the panel were very polite to you. But I remember you from Friday nights 1969. ATV you murdered every line. Too old to be a child star, too young to take leads, 4 seasons passed and they axed you. Nervous juvenile, WON'T SMILE, What became of you ? Did that swift eclipse tourture you ? A star at 18, then suddenly gone. Down to a few lines in the back page of annuaI. looked up to you."
mollymaemorrissey 11 months ago
why is that woman such a bitch lol?
billybob7ful 11 months ago
@TheDiddlysquat I'm not trying to claim Best was as talented as Paul and John, or would have had a solo career of their level. I believe that if he had stayed with the beatles he would have been hugely popular in the early days, and had some sort of solo career afterwards, just like Ringo Starr did.
FabFM 1 year ago
@TheDiddlysquat Yes, that is my logic. Saying he was the drummer in their best days contradicts the claim that he couldn't play good enough anyway, and if Lennon contradicts himself so great then his claims best couldn't play should be dimissed.
Yes, I know Best could have been in the monkees, just goes to show their were other professionals who were willing to give him a shot! Indeed, Johnny Hutchinson refused to replace Best in the Beatles when he was asked too!
FabFM 1 year ago
@TheDiddlysquat John Lennon said that in 1963, after best was fired. They have reasons to say bad things about him after he was sacked, but no reason to say anything good (unless it was true). Besides Lennon was obviously talking crap, because Best was in the band for 2 years! They never told Best of these claimed "plans" to sack him after someone better showed up, meaning (even if this nonsense was true) they acted like complete wankers!
FabFM 1 year ago
They kicked him out because he was the only attractive one!!
TwistedSister09 1 year ago
@TwistedSister09 bwahaha thats what I thought.....but then there's Paul lol
ILoveVitas909 3 months ago
He IS cute.
Of course I think the rest of The Beatles had more charming personalities whereas he is kinda shy, but Pete certainly has good looks.
Dunno about his talent as a musician, though I really can't imagine The Beatles without Ringo. Ringo was just a sweetheart. Lennon/McCartney was the backbone and without their songs they wouldn't have been legends. Harrison also had some underrated talent, couldn't imagine the band without him either.
It just wasn't meant to be...
lushie 1 year ago
@lushie "The Beatles played their best gigs in Hamburg" John Lennon, once said. That was when Pete was their drummer!
FabFM 1 year ago
@FabFM John, George, and paul also said that Pete would turn up late for gigs and they had to get ringo in anyway.
thetruefreak678 1 year ago
@thetruefreak678 That's rubbish. If you look at pictures of the beatles between 1960 and 1962, Starr is in very few of them. So that claim is disproved by photographic evidence. Indeed it is estimated that Best played on stage with the beatles more than starr did, even by 1967!
FabFM 1 year ago
@FabFM In the Beatles anthology stated by the beatles themselves they said starr ended up playing at mst of the gigs
thetruefreak678 1 year ago
@thetruefreak678 Course they did... they don't want to look like arseholes do they? Yet, PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE proves otherwise. When Best was playing clubs with the Beatles they were playing 7 HOUR sets. If Ringo was filling in most the time then who was doing the drumming for Rory Storm and The Hurricanes? If Ringo was doing most the drumming why the riots back in liverpool when Best was fired? These would not have taken place if Ringo was doing the drumming! Evidence is stronger than lies!
FabFM 1 year ago
@thetruefreak678 Pete Best himself stated Starr only replaced him on two occasions, when he was sick. His story matches the real evidence (i.e. all the photos). If Ringo was doing most the drumming then how come Johnny Huthcinson had to fill in between Best's dimissal and Starr joining the band? The only evidence you have to back up the story of John, Paul and George are their own words, nothing else, and it can easily be dismissed when Best's version is backed up by proof!
FabFM 1 year ago
Wow. Pete seems really shy... and kinda cute. lol XD
sms23lvr 1 year ago
poor pete
Mrjimmy498 1 year ago
i was one of " THE BEATLES "
arturoman93 1 year ago
I could listen to this guy talk for hours. He and George Harrison were the best speakers. John was OK, but Paul drove me crazy
BCK 1 year ago
"And Paul McCartney, isn't it?"...lol That was great!
tonydalcon 1 year ago
A shy guy could never been a Beatle
jazorzo 1 year ago
simply kicked out by John's cheap, pathetic jealousy. At the heart of every great genius is still a weak, common, cowardy soul. We want to think of Lennon as a hero, but he really is morally no better than an insecure, tattle taling kid.
For this kind of action, and many other stinky things he did to people close to him, I always felt the "peace" message to be pretty hypocritical. A pose he took in the later years. Unlike Dylan, who sang about peace from the moment he picked up a guitar...
butterf1yz 1 year ago
@butterf1yz you sound like mark david chapman
Flerg3 1 year ago
@Flerg3 and?
butterf1yz 1 year ago
@butterf1yz Pete got Best along with Pete. Paul and George not so well, it was those two who start to sack Pete from the band.
tauroscorp 1 year ago
As Pete said on Oprah..this is the year that he tried to commit suicide...he must be in denial. If you are a truly passionate musician and you have to go through what Pete Best went through....fuck.
adampower1973 1 year ago
I love how the emcee, when reading the names of the band he says "Paul McCartney isn't it?" OH how he will never have to be that confussed about it again!
stullyo2003 1 year ago
Actually, they were John, Paul, Stu, and Pete at first, and sometimes George (when his mother would let him play with the band). When they first went to Hamburg, George was sent home for being underage.
bobjfs 1 year ago
Why in the F u c k Americans are laughing at him for ? What's so funny ?
urkingod 1 year ago
No wonder they got rid of him. He's blatantly lying here saying he left the group on his own. He was fired by the other 3 Beatles because he sucked at drumming and they now had a record contract so he was expendable.
krushnoi 1 year ago 2
@krushnoi he was fired becuase they where jealous of him and he didnt fit in, he had more fans than John, Paul and George. hes not going to exactly say they sacked me is he.....the other 3 later admitted they where wrong in what they done. Read the book 'John' by Cynthia Lennon
snico 1 year ago
@snico Yes this is true
williwo 1 year ago
@krushnoi they said he left before he even said anything
billybob7ful 11 months ago
George Goebel?
ugslamma 1 year ago
Pete Best did not "leave" his job. He was fired. George Martin and the engineers wanted Pete Best replaced because they preferred a seasoned studio musician for recording sessions. Ultimately manager Brian Epstein was asked to fire Pete Best, and he did. Epstein and the other Beatles thought Best was great and had a terrific following but The Not-So-Fab-Three decided not to have a band mate stand between them and fortune. John, George and Paul were horrible pieces of garbage as individuals.
Ramubay 1 year ago
Pete didn't quit but got fired because of jealousy on the part of John & Paul. Pete was by far the best musician and the best looking as well. That's why he's Pete BEST. The Beatles made a huge mistake letting him go. Brian Epstein had a crush on John & wanted Pete out of the way; wanted JL all to himself. They were a mediocre band despite George Martin's efforts. It wasn't until Yoko came along that they came into their own element. JL left when Yoko made him great. And that's the truth.
unclejuniorsoprano 1 year ago
@unclejuniorsoprano Hahahahahahah this homosexual troll is hilarious
atombomber25 1 year ago
@unclejuniorsoprano you are crazy.......
ballaesmeralda 1 year ago
Pete QUIT. Sorrttt offf... . Fact is, he was fired form RECORDING. Ringo was cleaner for recording and kept better time = less takes and less money. remember, Studio time in the 60's was extremely expensive and there weren't a lot of them. That said, Pete was still cool to perform live but he wasn;t happy with that and it led to his demise.
6ixStringZ 1 year ago 2
wow...that totally sucks for him. being fired from the biggest band in the history of the world. imagine how he must feel now seeing all of their publicity 50 years into the future. 50 YEARS THEYVE BEEN AMAZING! he must hate ringo soo much. i <3 ringo hes my favorite
xxlegallybrunettexxx 1 year ago 23
I wonder if Ringo and Pete talk to each other now?
tunenito 1 year ago 7
@tunenito No, of course, and he never talked again to any of the Beatles; in Neil Aspinall´s funeral Paul denied to attend it because he knew Pete was going to be there and he didn´t want to run into him. (Neil was Pete´s best friend during the Beatles).
frikinjoe 1 year ago
Comment removed
meanderer06513 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@frikinjoe Neil and Pete weren't just best friends, Neil was the father of Pete Best's half brother, Roag. Look it up. It was Neil who got so many tracks that included Pete on Anthology (figuring that Pete would get a good amount of money, finally). He just couldn't convince the Beatles to allow Pete to be interviewed for the documentary.
meanderer06513 1 year ago
@meanderer06513 I know the story of Neil and Pete up to the sacking etc, and that Neil's initial stance was to leave but Pete convinced him to stay, but I always wondered if they remained friends afterwards seeing as Neil was so heavily involved with the 4 Beatles, who were, in many respects, the destroyers of Pete's dreams.
daddykornflakes 11 months ago
@daddykornflakes Pete Best was the only Beatle to attend Neil's funeral. Odd, seeing as Yoko Ono, George Martin, Stella McCartney and Barbara Bach (Ringo's wife) were also there.
FabFM 10 months ago
@tunenito They don't. None of the Beatles ever contacted Pete Best again after 1962.
FabFM 1 year ago
@tunenito No, Pete has not had any communication with any of them since the day before he was sacked. I've always been a bit confused how they got around the Neil Aspinall/ Roag Best situation, because I assume Neil remained friendly with Pete?
daddykornflakes 11 months ago
@xxlegallybrunettexxx No he was fine with being fired he says
2Guys1Contour 1 year ago
@xxlegallybrunettexxx I don't think he hates Ringo, I mean, who could hate Ringo? lol
toasteroven427 1 year ago
@xxlegallybrunettexxx He was actually kicked out for being the Most Popular Beatle. You can see that he had a cool persona in the style of Bob Dylan. The Beatles were more comfortable with Ringo's goofiness and knew that Ringo wouldn't steal the spotlight like Pete. The girls went crazy over Pete. Actually Ringo and Pete were good friends, and as far I know he has never trashed Ringo. He's been cool about the whole thing considering he was more or less stabbed in the back.
williwo 1 year ago
@xxlegallybrunettexxx He was totally jipped.
ekocentric 10 months ago
@xxlegallybrunettexxx they were originally friends
gtarsk8er 9 months ago
He had to sit there and say he left the Beatles when we was actually kicked out. People watching probably said "what an idiot, he LEFT the Beatles??" I would have said "screw it, man, the SOBs kicked me out".
ssur55 1 year ago
nobody actually knows what transpired except for those who were involved with whatever happened between everyone. so dont guess at it.
jazzynet1 1 year ago 12
He looks defeated to me with his head down.
planetcheck 1 year ago
I feel a bit sorry for him, but I love Ringo. He put the Beat in the Beatles :D
WeGloss 1 year ago 2
Stuart Satcliffe and Pete Best are far more handsome then at least two of beatles.
Cartholomew 1 year ago
Yeah if you watch the Pete Best interview with David Letterman, currently posted here on You Tube, you'll see where Pete himself admits to being let go from the Beatles. So WWAHP is correct on his comment.
cyberbob1220 1 year ago
I've never heard Pete speak...
OroRosa9 1 year ago
He may have been a better drummer than Ringo, but i think they probably wouldn't have changed the world as we know it if they kept him as the drummer.
yankeecrankee 1 year ago
@yankeecrankee Not necessarily true. We're saying that because we've seen the outcome, who knows? The outcome could've been the same or better had Pete stayed.
lifestraight 1 year ago
@lifestraight That's right as Epstein marketed them remarkably well.
VonFisch1 1 year ago
Wow, Pete is gorgeous! Poor guy, I do feel bad for him. But I guess it was for the best (no pun intended).
paperbackwriter1964 1 year ago
Pete is the Best even now and forever! He does always BEAT! That's all folks/
TheAlardyce 1 year ago
Ringo is Cooler and has a better sounding accent and there wouldn't be hard days night with out Ringo lol
tobixcupcakes 1 year ago 3
@tobixcupcakes nor tomorrow never knows which i think inspired psychedelic rock which inspired acid rock which inspired hard rock which inspired metal etc. this can go on a long time
drrobertoboogie97 1 year ago
How many noticed that after Pete's secret was revealed, Henry Morgan sat there like he was constipated. Not a rock fan I guess?
rhodeisland95 1 year ago
I think we learn enough about him here to know why the Beatles in fact FIRED him.
1967mustanggta 1 year ago
@1967mustanggta lol Y do u think?
lifestraight 1 year ago
he was the best looking
kissmyARToxo 1 year ago
Ah you gotta feel sorry for Pete kinda, because it must sting a bit watching the rest of them get so huge. I mean, the only thing he's known as is that guy who got fired from the Beatles. Being on these TV shows probably doesn't help either, just rubbing salt into the wound :( Still, I can't imagine the Beatles without Ringo, so I'm just going to Let it Be :D
stephkills 1 year ago
they keep on saying PETER
the guy said peter just AFTER pete said his name T.T
what the heck
streetrat12 1 year ago
Pete hardly looked sullen or defeated here. I thought he handled himself well.
Lennon4life1968 1 year ago
He tried to kill himself at one point you know.
clonecomanderfox 1 year ago
@clonecomanderfox Did he? When?
viceisthename 1 year ago
@viceisthename `After the Beatles hit it big.
clonecomanderfox 1 year ago
@clonecomanderfox Okay
viceisthename 1 year ago
he didnt look too happy at the end.
algavin47 1 year ago
well actully PreacherofArrakeen pete best did perfrom his own band after the beatles kicked him out. this is a classic interview.
jeffcool78 1 year ago
cool i like it .
jeffcool78 1 year ago
ringo fucking shit
MAGALTMALDITABASURA 1 year ago
"The job he had was as the drummer..."
And you hear someone say, "Oh my... Ringo..."
And the expression on Best's face there...
As much as Ringo IS my favorite, who CAN'T feel sorry for him there? Look at his face... he looks devestated and crushed and humiliated- all at once.
Poor Pete...
obiwanobiwan13 1 year ago 4
Poor Pete was sacked from The Beatles.He said he wanted to start his own band and that he thought The Beatles woudnt be big but this was a fib by Pete.After listening to him I can understand why The Beatles got rid of him.Sad video of Pete Best.
lottaluck 1 year ago
@lottaluck After listening to him u can understand? What in this video says he deserved getting fired?
lifestraight 1 year ago
Haha it's funny how when they mention Ringo they show that random clip of him messing with a cigarette XD
freklfacejpgr 2 years ago 3
just listen to him answer each question in that droning voice. None of the wit, exhuberance, charm or vitality the others Beatles oozed.....he simply didnt FIT IN!!
tryst0 2 years ago 4
@tryst0 - He fit in well enough that they got huge just weeks after he joined the group and became the biggest thing on both the Hamberg Germany & Liverpool England scenes - for 2 years!!! Got them their first record deal with Tony Sheridan. That record is what kids came into Brian Epsteins store requesting & when Epstein saw the first group he said the first thing he was blown away with was their beat. Fit in so well he became the most popular member of the group.
playserious 1 year ago
@tryst0 I don't know about that as John seemed to possess the most of those qualities you mentioned, especially in the early days. George was the quiet one and Paul seemed to speak in serious tones. It was John who was the cut-up.
VonFisch1 1 year ago
Makes me remember the Simpsons episode where Homer takes Chief Wiggam out into the woods and leaves him there. lol
PreacherofArrakeen 2 years ago 2
And Best is lying here. Saying that he left because he wanted to form his own band. It must have been the greatest of humiliations to get fired from the Beatles just before they became so huge.
PreacherofArrakeen 2 years ago 2
Gotta be the saddest video with Pete I've seen.....
74norton850 2 years ago 2
Ringo was a far better drummer than Pete, and Pete flatly refused to get the famous Hair style the Beatles had..... so John, and paul had Brian epstein and George martin tell pete the bad news.
puzleman1 2 years ago 8
We'll truly never know who was better. Nobody can be sure about that. I saw him peforming on Rio de Janeiro last year, and he is very good, though his age.
berfariabrazil 2 years ago
@puzleman1 - Not true. Pete has said he was never asked to get the beatle cut & Astrid Kutchner has said she never attempted to give Pete the cut because his hair was to curly. Also, Pete was a good enough drummer to help them blow up in Germany & Liverpool, and get their first record deal with Tony Sheridan. He developed "The Atomic Beat", which Ringo & the other Liverpool groups copied. He became the most popular member of the group. Fans started calling the group Pete Best & The Beatles.
playserious 1 year ago
@playserious LOL I read the same article I believe.
lifestraight 1 year ago
@puzleman1 UNTRUE. THESE ARE UNPROVEN RUMOURS. Read PETE BEST THE MOST POPULAR BEATLE: Explains it all.
lifestraight 1 year ago
@puzleman1 Pete claims he was never "asked" to change his hair style. Perhaps, the remaining Beatles meant he didn't naturally follow suit after seeing their new hair styles.
VonFisch1 1 year ago
@puzleman1 - that's an assumption or rewritten history. Pete's hair is wiry and curly and the style simply wouldn't work on his hair.
tippyray 1 year ago
Ringo was the better drummer, but i from what i gather Best didant rly fit in which was probably the main reason. as he was good enough at the kit for the Beatles in my opinon.
his chops have become way better over the years tho, shame for him but thats life i suppose.
EbsNhexz 2 years ago
I AM IN SHOCK ....I HAD NO IDEA PETE BEST WAS ALIVE ALL THESE YEARS....I THOUGHT HE HAD DIED AND THAT IS WHY HE WAS NO LONGER WITH THE BEATLES!!!!!!!! AMAZING.....I EVEN SPENT THE NIGHT WITH TWO OF THE BEATLES(NON SEXUAL) AND i DID NOT KNOW!!
caliopie45 2 years ago
which ones?
babykooksy 2 years ago
@caliopie45 (non sexual?) but admit it i know you want it
rjames2401 2 years ago 2
we got fired cos he sucked at drums i heard some of the songs when he was with the beatles and goood daaamn we couldnt change the tempo of a song always the same tempo IT IS GOD WE GOT FIRED
nolineintheorizon 2 years ago
why did peter get fired
Ironwoodownr 2 years ago
I believe their producer didn't feel he was up to the recording task, and called in Richard Starkey (aka Ringo).
Pete Best's metering was off. Ringo had more experience, and could hold a tempo.
MorningGlass55 2 years ago
Comment removed
maccabeat 2 years ago
poor guy
itsjustanillusion 2 years ago
That has have sucked to been kicked out of the Beatles, this guy could have made millions of dollars, and never worry about money.
phoneix91 2 years ago
Yeah it does suck that he missed out on the money and fame. But he made quite a nice chunk of change off the Anthology CDs. I heard it went well into the Millions of dollars. Good for him.
nonsuchfabio 2 years ago
nonsuchfabio. He did he made a few million bucks from the Anthology, though they air-brushed his face off the Anthology cd box set.
It must have sucked that they kicked his ass out of the band. This guy must have been "What the fuck, guys. Why did you kick me out for.." Do you think he stil talks to the guys(Paul & Ringo)
phoneix91 2 years ago
Check out the interview with Letterman. He talks about the stone cold silence between him and the guys after the split. You gotta believe there really is some truth to the story that there was some jealousy towards Pete and that he attracted most of the girls that showed up to see them and, that was a big reason they ditched him.
nonsuchfabio 2 years ago
nonsuchfabio. If I was that guy, I would have really pissed off.
phoneix91 2 years ago
That's so fucking sad, he's dying on the inside. Vainly trying to live through the past, he couldn't turn anywhere, the beatles would have been everywhere, where to turn? I think i remember hearing he tried to top himself
mgcazper0 2 years ago 2
i would've
frankie1089 2 years ago
The BEATLES are my Favorite Rock N roll band of all time, however i feel horrible for pete, if he wasnt wanted in the group. help him somehow, like a new band that the beatles could helped him with, in all paul, george and john were cowards in not doing anything, after all they started the band in pete bests house.
Sutter42 2 years ago 11
@Sutter42 Not only that, but Pete Best and his mum helped manage the Beatles in the early days getting them gigs, and played with them for two days.
lifestraight 1 year ago
Nice guy or not, this was a business decision that the Beatles had to make. If he wasn't as good as Ringo, then they made the right choice.
dhucke4assembly 2 years ago 2
I think he probably didnt wanna go along with their agenda, so they let him go.
jdigitalseven 2 years ago
Poor Pete. He seems like a decent guy. I think the Beatles should have written him a check or something after they took off. They are my favorite band of all-time, but there's no doubt they screwed him over. I've never been a big fan of Ringo either.
badtown88 2 years ago 2
Why did Pete lie and say he quit the Beatles, when in actuality, he got fired?
WWAHP 2 years ago 14
Ahhhh, great question ....
tunenito 2 years ago
@WWAHP I can understand why he would lie. You never want to say you got fired from a job, rather it's best to say you resigned. Plus the Beatles PR machine had already stated he quit and he went along with it. In the end, he made a lot of money off Anthology. It would be ironic if he ended up the last member to pass away. Paul is a true coward & jerk for not even speaking with the guy after all these years.
rusty1491 1 year ago
Perhaps somekind of agreement..?
timotastic 1 year ago
@WWAHP He didn't say that. He said he left his job 2 years ago which he did. He didn't elaborate on the circumstances. Although if he had practiced harder when he first started drumming, he wouldn't have lost his job.
Lunarmoonbase2 1 year ago
@WWAHP That's what he was told to say. The guys felt threatened by Best, he missed some gigs, Ringo sat in, and he was replaced.
stigmajosh 1 year ago
@WWAHP simply, who would pick up a drummer that was fired from a band no less the Beatles.
Ursugarspice 1 year ago
what would you say
releasetheelves1 1 year ago
RINGO IS BEST DRUMMER AND IS FUNNY AND STILL ALIVE HA!!! sry. No I'm NOT high, just a bit of eustress...,
StaraziaSelin66 2 years ago
My essential point in all these comments has been that Pete was treated badly by the Beatles, then and afterward. On the very rare occasions any of them referred to Pete afterward, it was only to disparage and insult him. Pete deserved much better than that. He is a human being, after all. Note that Pete has never in his life said anything disparaging or insulting about John, Paul, George, or Ringo. And after all they've done to him, or not done, who has a better right?
amac1511 2 years ago
oh screw you, ringo's the best drummer EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! but i agree, pete should've been given a chance with maybe another band or something.
hmm, i thought they came from liverpool! maybe just ringo, i dunno.
StaraziaSelin66 2 years ago
Uh... they did come from Liverpool.
24liam24 2 years ago
ringo the best drummer ever???? lol thats too funny. I Love Ringo but come on.
John Lennon quote " Ringo isnt even the best drummer in the beatles"
jsm1113 2 years ago
@jsm1113 John Lennon also said that Ringo was the Best Drummer in Rock, Read The Beatles Anthology Book..
romans52345 1 month ago
FabFM, you and I will have to agree to disagree on the subject of Pete Best. Pete didn't need to be a McCartney clone. There already was a McCartney in the Beatles. Those closest to the group at the time, including Brian Epstein and George Martin, didn't want him to leave.
amac1511 2 years ago
If George Martin was so sold on Lennon-McCartney as songwriters when he signed them, why did he arrange for them to record "How Do You Do It" (later a hit for Gerry and the Pacemakers) at their first recording session?
amac1511 2 years ago
Think about it. What would have happened to John, Paul or George if they had been sacked from the Beatles before the Beatles hit it big, as Pete was, and then bad mouthed as the one who never fit in and was the odd man out, as Pete was? You can talk about the Beatles being John's band and you can talk about Paul's talent and indispensible contributions, but in the end I believe they too would have had the same fate as Pete... IF it had happened to them, too.
amac1511 2 years ago
I never dissagreed with Harrison, and you never mentioned Lennon in your original post. However without the combination of Lennon/McCartney, the whole group would have probably ended up as a footnote in music history, not just John or Paul. The Beatles was never just John's band, from the day McCartney joined the band, it was the two that cemented the groups fate. Before he teamed up with McCartney, Lennon was in a band no different than any in liverpool.
FabFM 2 years ago
Spoken with the benefit of hindsight. On August 16, 1962, all the classic songs, all the things that made them big lay ahead of them. Just as we'll never know what Lennon or McCartney might have done without each other, so we'll never know what Pete might have done had he stayed with them.
amac1511 2 years ago
It dosen't matter if they "lay ahead" (even though Paul and John started writing together during the time Pete was in the band, anyway), songs like "yesterday", "hey jude", "eleanor rigby", "penny lane", "blackbird", etc etc are not written by any tom, dick or harry, especially so conistently. To say Pete Best would have contributed as much to the band as Paul McCartney is nothing but laughable!
FabFM 2 years ago
I bet that if Paul or George had been fired from the Beatles in August 1962 or before, they would have been a footnote in history, too.
At least John and George were able to admit that they treated Pete shabbily before they passed on.
We're still waiting for Paul to do so.
amac1511 2 years ago
What a ridiculous comment. From your comment you seem to think McCartney was a back up musicain in the group, rather than half of the greatest songwriting duo of all-time. There is no doubt McCartney is just as responsible for the success of the group than Lennon. Anyone who think otherwise knows nothing about the group!
FabFM 2 years ago
As for Paul, for all his talent and ability and contribution to the success of the Beatles, I still suggest that if the others had dismissed him from the group just before they made it big (IF they had made it big without him), he would have ended up a footnote just like Pete. No disrespect meant to Paul for suggesting that. Certainly it would have been true of George, who demonstrated little songwriting talent in the early years of Beatlemania.
amac1511 2 years ago
I doubt The Beatles would have made it big without McCartney. Take away McCartney and you take away all the classic songs, all the things that made them big. Best was just a drummer, McCartney, like Lennon, was a much more vital part of the band's system.
FabFM 2 years ago 5
Again, all the classic songs and all the things that made them big lay in the future. Pete could have contributed his share to the band's success after August 16, 1962 if he had been permitted to, just like George and Ringo, but fate snatched the opportunity away from him.
amac1511 2 years ago
Not true.The lennon-mcartney team had already started to write together while Pete was in the band - a huge factor and selling point to George Martin who gave them their contract, Espstein boasted that John and Paul were gifted song writers, this was all before August 1963. There is NO WAY John, Pete, George and some other chap would have been as big as John, Paul, George and Ringo.
FabFM 2 years ago
Oh, and you must have never watched the beatles anthology because Paul admits he and the others should have handled the situation with Pete could have been handled better. I noticed (like Paul) John and George never spoke to Best again during their lifetime. Actions speak louder than words, and none of them took any!!
FabFM 2 years ago
Where in the Anthology does Paul apologize for mishandling Pete's sacking? George admitted in the Anthology that the sacking could have been handled better. John told the Beatles' authorized biographer Hunter Davies that they were cowards when they sacked Pete. Paul, to my knowledge, has never apologized for the way it was handled.
amac1511 2 years ago