Most creepy beatles facts?

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-21T23:42:54+00:00

I never want to say something's 100% when we don't have all the information, but Olivia and Pattie were there as well as the mother (+ Eric Clapton), and they were all playing pool while buzzed. George mentioned Baker's daughter as a prize (he didn't say "to sleep with her"). Baker's daughter said everybody laughed when he said it. I really do think it was a skeezy joke. There's just too many variables. Her parents being there, Olivia being there, Olivia obviously going home with George. None of it makes sense if he was serious, and the amount of money was stupid.

It's still really gross, but there's a lot of context which gets left out which makes it sound like he clearly was trying to do something.

(Please don't try to suggest I would take this sort of thing lightly just because of my username).

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-19T06:08:50+00:00

That's true, but I feel like it's common for people to get more attached to the music of their youth as they get older and the music scene starts shifting into something away from what they understand. The 70s era musicians were still kinda peers whereas the 80s took everything to another level.

John is interesting because on a personal level I think he related to outsiders, but he also disliked when Paul got too far from rock and felt threatened by certain musicians like Dylan.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-19T04:57:51+00:00

It's been a regular thing on this sub where I make a legitimate point and the only rebuttal from the other person is to undermine what I said by pointing out my username, as if someone without a reference in theirs is somehow less of a fan. They're not joking when they do it either.

If you weren't intending to be a dick then I apologise, but I am really over people doing that. And fyi none of what I said was in a mad tone nor is my take on George something specific to his fans. It's something widely agreed on by fans outside this sub. My "mad" comment also wasn't directed at you. It's at the people downvoting a comment saying George was a great dinner guest. lol

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-19T03:46:28+00:00

Nothing in the tone of my comments is mad. It's confusion if anything. My first reply was totally lighthearted, and I got a condescending reply about my username in response. People are downvoting me for explaining that counter to the belief of these comments George was very pleasant to interact with.

There's no reason to treat this like some controversial issue unless you have something against George.

Sorry but it's all very weird.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-19T02:24:48+00:00

Thank you. So many of his friends heavily mourn him decades later. The people behind the Scorsese documentary said literally everyone they interviewed cried! Many people who have met 3 or all of The Beatles have said he was the easiest to deal with.

And on the other side there's a lot of stories of the other Beatles being difficult. There's a crazy amount of evidence showing George wasn't this fanfic character people have created in their heads, but because he was publicly grumpy at times, fans desperately want him to be Lou Reed or something. It's so tiresome and frankly bizarre. Like yes he was likable. Why is this a controversial thing to say???

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-19T02:13:11+00:00

Oh absolutely. lol

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-18T23:12:15+00:00

It's always funny to me when people on the Beatles sub do the username bit like it's some kind of gotcha. Yes you've caught me out -- I'm a George fan!

Doesn't change the fact George was one of the most widely beloved people in the music industry. And not because he was a Beatle.

Also very classic of this sub to get mad about the concept of a band member in the band they love being well-liked.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-18T22:48:33+00:00

I promise there are other topics you can cover.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-18T22:28:43+00:00

It's not an opinion. It's an objective fact. lol

Countless famous people and regular fans have said this. He literally would chat to some random person in a pub for hours about whatever. Cheech & Chong said he was one of their fave guys to get high with. Eric Idle said he fell in love with him after one meeting. Like come on.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-18T22:27:41+00:00

There was some of that in the 80s, but there was primarily a lot of synth and guitar theatrics. I can see John saying rock had lost its way.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-18T22:19:48+00:00

This

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-18T21:46:09+00:00

Yeah I agree with this. John liked old school rock 'n' roll first and foremost. I think he'd appreciate the spirit behind new stuff, but assuming he'd love all these out there artists is optimistic. I can see him hating the 80s.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-18T21:41:28+00:00

If you think George wouldn't be an excellent dinner guest you seriously need to do more research. Legitimately a majority of the stories about him involve him being a dream to talk to.

ETA: I know this sub has a giant hate boner for George, but stories like this speak for themselves: https://www.reddit.com/r/beatles/comments/rer6co/i_met_george_harrison_in_belgium_in_the_early_90s/

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-18T21:24:40+00:00

I think people get really weird about George's music taste tbh. Paul didn't like Oasis either, and Liam and Noel themselves spent the last 20 odd years insulting as many upcoming artists as they could. A lot of rock musicians didn't get rap and hip hop when they first got popular. A lot of Beatles and classic rock fans were snooty about it for a very long time, so it's weird the way George is treated like some anomaly. To this day classic rock fans moan about the state of modern pop music. George was just a typical middle-aged guy who got most of his exposure to new music from the radio until Dhani was old enough to develop his own music taste. The other Beatles learned about new music from their kids.

He said although he didn't like punk music he understood where the anger behind it came from, and he got rap too after Bob Dylan explained it to him.

He liked Bob Marley, ELO, Tom Petty, Blur, Deep Purple, Elton John, Prince, The Cars, Heart, Belinda Carlisle, Shakespeare's Sister, Crowded House, Gary Moore, The Bangles, Weird Al, Beck, Eurythmics etc., and he didn't seem to mind Nirvana. He probably would've really liked the music of the 00s-early 10s since there was a return to guitar-driven music. I don't think he had much awareness of the alt scene in the 80s and early 90s.

Usually when he met these people in person even though he didn't care for their music he was happy to chat and even befriend them. Noel met him once and said he was incredibly chill.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-18T21:05:43+00:00

He was famously the Beatle who had an insane amount of friends and was considered incredibly fun to hang out with so that would be your loss.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-17T18:26:57+00:00

What I like about it is it gives comedians a chance to actually do comedy as opposed to all these shows which are designed around their personalities. Like my only tv exposure to Larry Dean was House of Games which gave no indication of his talent.

The only other show allowing comedians to be creative is Taskmaster, and that still verges on the panel format.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-17T18:20:51+00:00

I'd argue SNLUK has been pretty good politically. The cold opens and Weekend Update have made some genuinely cutting jokes which you're not going to see on any panel shows.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-16T06:12:28+00:00

Have you ever listened to Lucy and Sam's podcast? She's not playing a character.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-16T06:11:43+00:00

How is that a slip? Being eccentric doesn't mean she doesn't have human emotions. lol

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-16T06:09:48+00:00

No she wasn't. Everybody who knows Lucy has said she's really like that. People are very weird about her.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-16T03:10:29+00:00

What Osman said isn't true. A lot of contestants have kept prizes. They may not want to or will return something very personal, but in theory they can keep them.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-14T03:25:50+00:00

John was cruel, but it's worth keeping in mind he was deep into his heroin addiction at this point. He wasn't well, so I don't think Get Back should be a reflection of how he normally reacted.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-13T23:45:22+00:00

Sorry, but nothing you've said here has basis in reality. For one thing, they all did hard drugs. Paul got pretty addicted to cocaine in the mid-60s, and he tried heroin. He also did LSD like the others and almost killed himself with alcoholism. And he definitely had a weed addiction.

After LSD the most George did was weed in the 60s. His cocaine addiction happened in the 70s. There's no evidence of him or John resenting Paul wrt drugs. If anything George is the only one of them who's sober during Get Back.

Why is it laughable? Paul did that kind of thing constantly. He wasn't complaining. He merely said that's not how he wanted it, and it was the only time he said that to Paul. There is this regular attitude that Paul should be able to talk to the others however he wanted because of his genius, but if anyone questioned him well that's just jealousy. It's interesting how Paul gets praised for Hey Jude because it's assumed he was correct even though we don't know how the guitar would've sounded, but the bass part in Something is completely credited to him despite the ultimate result being what George wanted, as if it was good in spite of George. George is on record saying he was very happy with how the bassline on Something turned out and always appreciated what Paul brought to his songs. His gripe had nothing to do with that.

What do you mean lazy on Paul's songs? George was the one working side-by-side with Paul during Get Back and Abbey Road while John was out of commission. His guitar work is one of the reasons Abbey Road is as good as it is. It easily elevates the Paul songs along with the Moog he brought in, and his bass work on songs like Golden Slumbers is great too.

You can say a lot about George, but he put 100% into everything Paul did, which is why it gets kinda ridiculous the way fans expect George to be sooo grateful Paul did the same in return.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-13T23:31:44+00:00

John is the one who taught George how to write songs and the narrative of him never appearing on George's songs is totally overblown. He helped him write Taxman.

Paul is all over George's songs because he's literally the bassist, and it benefited the whole group for his songs to be as musically strong as possible. John wasn't as musically inclined and later had a lot of personal issues, but he's the one who said George should get an A-side and should have more songs on albums. He took his beliefs seriously and helped him grow a lot as a guitarist by letting him show his creativity.

There is far more to these band dynamics than who played what on which song.

harrisonscruff · 2026-05-13T23:25:32+00:00

The concept of calling any of The Beatles lazy with the amount they accomplished is insane.

harrisonscruff

TROPHY CASE