Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Twilightfa Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

Salubfoto It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

Bessie Smyth Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

julieaustin-17524 I just rewatched the movie, which I own on DVD. I am glad they made this movie, and that it has survived. Today I will join friends who have been gathering every year for over thirty years to sing Beatle songs. I sang the music of the Beatles over and over, LPs stacked on the stereo in my early teens, and saw them on Ed Sullivan the first time they appeared on his show. Just today I read that Paul McCartney wanted to capture the Merry Pranksters bus, and, that in England, people would hire a bus, be driven around the countryside, drink and be merry. I'll ask my English friends about that. I've been to England three times now, to visit a friend I made on Facebook. (Yes, it can work, and work very well.) I can appreciate more things about the movie since my increasing experiences, and increasing friendships. If you are a serious film buff, you won't find what you are looking for in this movie. If you grew up with the Beatles, and feel they are a part of you, if you were around for the drug culture of the oh so troubling Vietnam Era, perhaps you will appreciate an unpretentious expression of a time of mourning for the band. I find it creative. The production makes for an effect of brain fog, a memory, a scrapbook, a collage. Like those seen on easel's at funerals today. That is why I like the unscripted format. It is the "boys knocking about". Ringo's spontaneous laughter is great. A chance to see them closer to being who they are, not who people thought they were, or thought they should be. Maybe even a "film-buff" can appreciate that. Honesty.

Adam Peters (53%) Before the days of the music video, publicising music on TV was a bit more tricky than it is today, but the Beatles had more clout (and money) than most so they could create a just shy of an hour long TV movie, first aired at Christmas to tens of millions, plugging songs from their new hit record. Well that was the plan anyway, but the end result is something of a mix of the good, the bad, and the very odd. Quite honestly though this is one of the better TV movies I've ever seen simply because it is so far removed from the typical dull and uninteresting dross you usually get with films that never see the inside of a cinema meaning you cannot help but admire its sheer craziness and fun. Plot wise there is nothing here at all, things just happen a pure random, while the Beatles themselves oddly don't actually do a great deal in terms of actual performances and are largely lost in their own film, with good old George Harrison hardly getting more than a couple of lines. It's clear why many disliked this, it's too weird and evidently cobbled together to be a hit with the drunk masses after eating too much turkey and chocolate, but looking at it now purely as a slice of 60's madness with a superb soundtrack, Monty Python style comedy, and sheer nostalgic fun meaning this is more noteworthy than most would have you think, just don't have high expectations beforehand.

Theodore Keating (Spoilers) Mostly the songs are rather unconnected little moments of joy, but the way that Mr. Bloodvessel's little speech-- "I am concerned, that you enjoy yourselves.... within the limits of British decency"-- segues into "I Am The Walrus" is just *perfect*. More broadly it's just, you know, quite a trip. I'd never heard of a "mystery tour" (day-trip to nowhere in particular) before reading the little pamphlet that came with the DVD, and it's a swell little idea. Also, I just love Paul, and it's kinda neat how this was to some extent Paul's little project.... It's great how he performs "The Fool on the Hill". It's just as good "A Hard Day's Night"-- actually the bit with Ringo and his aunt is a little reminiscent-- as well as an interesting contrast. It's a nice little picture of where the band was at the time, as well a bit of an image as to why they gave up touring in favor of a different kind of.... they certainly seem to have a bit more fun, is what I mean. And really no matter what anybody else says when the little doors of the old TVs were opened up to this little offering in 1967, I think it must have been quite the gift. (9/10)

MartinHafer When this DVD began, I was surprised how degraded and faded the film was. It just goes to show you that not everything about the Beatles was adored. In fact, when this made for TV film was shown on BBC, it bombed...badly. So badly that the film wasn't shown on American TV--which made me curious to watch it! I occasionally like to watch film failures--either to marvel at how bad they are or to re-assess and see that they weren't so bad after all.If I try to describe the film's plot, I really can't. It's all a rather incoherent stream of consciousness piece that looks like the four guys just chucked ANYTHING into the film--and in some cases, I am pretty sure this is what happened. In between some terribly unfunny comedy bits, there are a few music videos and in many ways it seems like a much, much lower budgeted version of Paul McCartney's later vanity film, "Give My Regards to Broad Street".As I sat watching this film, I looked through some of the IMDb reviews. Some hated the film or saw it as a disappointment. Others, however, were such die-hard fans of the group that I honestly think a sizable minority would have loved the film if it consisted of the Fab Four picking each others' noses for 60 minutes. The film is an artless mess and demonstrates that occasionally extremely talented people delude themselves into thinking this talent extends to many other aspects of their lives. In this case, Paul McCartney appeared to think he was creating something new and different....and in a good way. Well, it's not--at least not in a good way. Now it is NOT because of the surrealistic aspects of the film. Some folks can make this work (such as the folks who did "Monty Python" just a year later) but if NOT done right, it can come off as very amateurish and puerile---like this film. Any way you cut it, it's a terrible film despite some nice songs. But, when it comes to their songs, the ones used in this movie look like castoffs from their other movies--stuff that is far from their best work. The same can be said for the entire movie, actually. The film earns a 2, as the music, at times, is a nice break from the rest of this mess.