From the opening scene of the second season of Ginny & Georgia, I was welcomed with an amazing musical score by Lili Haydn and Ben Bromfield. Whilst this show is not generally my cup of tea, the music was just so interesting. How does “Welcome Back Bitches” nail such a modern sound akin to LCD Soundsystem’s “oh baby”? How do they manage to shift between that tone and more of a somber, piano-driven number like “Not a Murderer” or the Americana guitars on “Childs Play (Hunter’s Song)”? 

I had the pleasure of speaking to both Lili Haydn and Ben Bromfield about their latest work. We talked all about their fantastic score, but more importantly, we began by talking about cats. Yes, you read that right. 

Be sure to check out the second season of Ginny & Georgia on Netflix now, and you can hear Lili Haydn’s latest single, “Woman Life Freedom,” here. 

Coastal House Media: I have a sort of fun question for each of you to start. Ben, I’ll start with you, I was looking at your website and I saw a picture of a cat on your website, so I was curious, what’s their name and age? 

Ben Bromfield: You know, we have a couple of cats in my family, so that’s Cammy. She’s now, I think 14 or 15. She’s going strong. She’s heavily medicated at this point, but she’s a sweet, happy cat. We’ve got another named Oscar who has rapidly gone from being a kitten to a pretty chunky guy. And then we’ve got our dog Jones, who is the light of my life. 

Lili Haydn: [laughs] Well, the fact that you’re showing us pictures of your cats — you’re speaking my language because I am obsessed with my cats and I have the best cat treat in the world. And my kitten is gonna rear her head, and both cats are rapidly approaching. Both of them are circling the den [laughs]. 

You gotta get your cats this [shows package to the camera] — they’re chicken breast tenders. They’re really good for them and they go crazy for them.

CHM: Since you’re both cat people then can I ask you guys each, what’s your favorite thing about having a cat? 

Haydn: Kissing them. Kissing cats is like my favorite thing to do in the world, I think more than anything else, to be honest.

CHM: Even more so than playing the violin?

Haydn: More than anything in the world. 

Bromfield: I’m always amazed by how smart they are. There’s this thing called a puzzle box. I don’t know if you’ve heard of that, but it’s more of a dog thing where like you put a treat inside a cardboard box, and then you just leave the dog [to] go for it. And then they rip it apart and it’s fine.

I made one and Oscar just absolutely hijacked it. But my other cat, Cammy, does this thing, and I love old cats because they have so much character at this point, but when you pick her up, she wraps her arms around your neck and we call her a koala-cat and she just sort of like hangs on to you and it’s the sweetest thing. She really is the sweetest cat. 

CHM: Aw, that’s adorable. Well, both of you guys have adorable cats. Lily, I was listening to your cover recently of “Kashmir,” I found it on YouTube, and I was just curious cause I know that you also opened for Robert Plant and Jimmy Page a few years back. I don’t know when that was recorded in relevance to that, but did they ever hear your cover of that song, and what were their reactions? 

Haydn: I don’t know if Jimmy Page heard it, but Robert said he loved it. And I got their blessing before I did it because they’re real artists. I mean like they’re not just some pop sensation, as you know, and they’re not just legends that have let their golden days pass them by. They’re people that seek out new music that excites them. That’s why they were open to having somebody like me open for them. They really are curious and I wanted to honor the seriousness with which they approached their music when I covered it. So getting their blessing was really important.

CHM: Well, it’s an amazing cover, and you guys are both real artists as well. I don’t know if you guys have worked on any other projects together, but how were you guys paired up for Ginny & Georgia?

Bromfield: I’m gonna start this [and then] I’m gonna throw it to Lily this time. My career in scoring started in a typical way where I was a composer’s assistant before I was a composer, and I got to work on a bunch of shows and I got to know the process really well. And the majority of that work was done for this guy, Tree Adams, who’s a dear friend and mentor — I call him my sensei. Tree is a great TV and film composer, and I [have] worked for him for five years now. He plays with his band sometimes and they were playing a gig [and] I came out to support him and sit in a little bit on keys. Lili was also there because she had her own relationship with Tree.

Haydn: I used to play violin and sing for him a lot, and then I actually reached out to him when I was trying to pitch on a show that I thought that I was right for. But I knew I wouldn’t get taken seriously as a television composer having not done TV before without somebody who was a veteran, so I reached out to him and he was generous enough to say he would pitch with me. We didn’t get that show, but he kept me in mind so that when Ben, who I actually did get to meet and jam with at Tree’s gig, when Ben reached out to Tree for recommendations for a woman composer for this show to pitch, Tree recommended me and then we had remembered that we played together. It all kind of happened very quickly. And I was actually on my way to India for a performance and I was emailing and putting my reel together at the airport, and to this day we still communicate on WhatsApp because most of our initial conversations were done internationally.

So we just threw it together. We had a sense that we would work well together because we had jammed and Tree felt like we would, and we both work on the same platform, same program — Pro Tools — and we pitched and it just came together.

But I have to say [about] our chemistry, you never really know how you’re ultimately gonna work together with somebody in a pressure situation. And it’s just been magical [and] very lucky collaboration because we complement each other’s skillsets. While we’re both very fluid improvisers, and that has allowed us to create some music that neither of us would’ve created on our own. 

CHM: Ben, you’ll answer for Lilly and vice versa. What is it about the other person’s style that attracted you to them and what did you think that they brought to the table with this score?

Bromfield: Great question. There’s a lot of things I could say about this, but I will just say [that] this is not the first time I’ve done a co-composer thing with somebody, and I think that in general, one of the things I like about it is that you get to learn from the other person. Now Lili has a very different way of thinking about music to me than me and I feel like I’ve just learned a lot from working with her about that mindset. I’m going to simplify it a bit and call it “quality over quantity,” which is great as somebody who has more experience spending a lot of time on less minutes of music than me because come from having to score and doing so much music so fast. There’s a sense where it’s not that it’s not quality, it’s just that you can’t really focus on anything [for] too long. 

So I think from collaborating with Lili, as somebody who has done those deep dives into music, even if we don’t always have time to do that for Ginny & Georgia —  because it’s a TV show — I think that I’ve gotten a lot out of that influence from her, which is something that I feel like you either need to find within yourself or you need to get inspired by somebody else.

And just to round that out, I’m now doing for the first time in my career of about 12 years or so, I’m creating music as art or not for score. I’m writing [and] releasing albums and creating music that’s just for people to listen to and I don’t feel like I would be as comfortable doing that now if it wasn’t for the influence of working with somebody who has so much experience doing that.

Haydn: Oh, that’s nice — thanks! I think it’s relevant to just say what our specific backgrounds are. I come from playing classical music as a kid and growing up with that, but I also started making records when I was 20 — and I’ve made a bunch of them. I started scoring and being a part of other people’s teams as a player and singer, so I didn’t have experience in television. But I think that the production skills [of] record making has been [useful], and there’s a melodicism that I come to the table with as a violinist and singer.

But what Ben brings to the table, first of all, just his incredible virtuosity as a player and composer. He’s a really smart problem-solver and also has an incredible work ethic — [he] just knows how to get shit done. And his experience as a consummate composer’s assistant, as a person who just knows how [to] get from A to Z just expertly, and politically, I’ve learned a lot from him in that way in terms of how I approach things more as an artist and I will sometimes speak my mind when it’s not necessarily the best political move [smiles], so I’ve learned to [say] like, “Hey, Ben, are you cool with it if I say ‘x, y [and] z’?” and he’ll say, “Why don’t you just dial that back a little” [laughs]. 

But just on a musical tip, I think he’s just so fluid. He’s got a can-do attitude so that there’s nothing that can’t be done. And so it’s like the sky’s the limit and we can do anything together. It’s really fun. 

Bromfield: I will just say that your “squeaky wheel-ness,” while that maybe at one point I thought was a liability, has also been a good influence on me because now I’m a little bit of a “squeaky-ier wheel.” Sometimes I have a tendency to be a little quiet and let things just go along. Now I’m a little more comfortable just generally asking for stuff, because if people say, no, it’s not the worst thing, and so being a squeaky wheel can be sometimes good, I think, being somebody who just says what they feel. I think I could use a little more of that. And so that’s also been a good influence. Thank you, Lili [laughs].

CHM: I’m gonna put you guys on the spot again — I don’t know who wants to take this first, but I like to ask composers this question because you guys know the work better than anybody, but if you had to describe your score in three or fewer words, what would they be? 

Haydn: I’ll start with one word; I don’t wanna do all three, I wanna pick some wisely — quality over quantity [laughs] — eclectic. 

Bromfield: I thought of that too — [that’s the] first thing I thought of. I’m trying to think if I can think of another one. Eclectic; see, that one makes it hard because I could say another one, but it only applies to some of the music, right? Is it weird for me to say female? I mean, I think that the female aspect of the show is an important thing in the music as well. Sometimes [it’s] signified by Lilly’s voice, the way we use it in the score. I dunno, it’s hard [laughs]. 

Haydn: I think about the role of feminism or the female gaze in the show — most of the creative team are women — and they wanted a female composer to be a part of it. I don’t think of myself as a woman composer — although I am on the board of the Alliance for Women Film Composers — but I think that what is relevant about that is that because this show is very much from a woman’s perspective, being a woman, I pick up on subtle emotional threads. 

In college, I had an eating disorder [so] I know what that looks like and they’re dropping subtle hints in the show. So there are moments [that] I’m attuned to, certain dramatic moments that I might not be if I hadn’t lived it, and that allows me to have a sensitivity to certain things that allows me to bring a little bit more sensitivity in the music to that moment. I think maybe the word is sensitive as opposed to female. But it’s really about being sensitive to the female gaze.

I don’t know if you’re familiar with that concept of the female gaze, but so much of what we’ve been inundated with in our Western culture has been from a male perspective. So when you get something that’s done from a female perspective, it’s a different lens and they call that the female gaze.

Another word that I’m gonna steal this from Sarah Lampert. I think she once described “Georgia’s Theme,” which is the first or maybe the second track of our Season One soundtrack, is used throughout the show and it’s represented in the season two soundtrack with some sort of remixed versions. Anyway. Sarah once described that piece as sardonic — and I really like that. I don’t know if that applies to all the music, but I think it’s a great word. And I think that there’s a sardonic element to this show that is winking at you a little bit, and I like to think that our music is helping with that and has some of that same quality. So we can say eclectic, sensitive and sardonic.

Bromfield: I like those three. 

CHM: There are parts where, to me, your score sounded more modern, like in the first episode — I think it might be even the first time your score comes in — and then there are other times where it’s more of a traditional, orchestral sound. I want to focus on that opening modern track and ask about composing that specific track because to me that sounded so unique. 

Haydn: Is that the “Welcome Back Bitches”? 

CHM: Yes.

Haydn: Well that’s fun because we often divvy up the work, but there are times when we get in a room and just play and fun things happen. And that [“Welcome Back Bitches”] was one of those instances where we were in the room, playing with keyboards like two kids in a sandbox, really. So I’m glad you like that one. 

I think what makes it unique is that we employ a lot of the pop elements of the song licenses that they use because we wanna keep the energy. It’s a modern show, so we need that aesthetic, but we also need to employ the kind of dark, more emotional elements and we also need to employ some of the more traditional scoring techniques. So this [“Welcome Back Bitches”], it’s [a] blend of all those things that turn into this kind of really interesting stew of sorts. And also the way that I use my voice, — without lyrics — I think also lends itself to having a sense of a pop hook without it actually being that, and then it becomes more like an instrument.

So I think it’s the eclecticism that helps it be unique and uniquely suited for this show, which is its own eclectic blend of influences. And what I love about the show and what I’m also really proud of with our score is how with all of its eclecticism, it’s cohesive. It could very easily be a hodgepodge of, okay, and now we’re gonna do this, and now we’re gonna do that, but it really feels cohesive and there really is a sound of show, which to me, doesn’t sound like other shows. even though obviously, we’re not creating in a vacuum and there are obviously other influences. But, to me, it sounds like our show, and the more television and film I consume, the more I can hear when somebody’s borrowing from another. 

I don’t know if you know what temp music is, but where they put in a temporary piece of music to sort of mark the spot where they want music. a lot of times in television I know exactly what they temp with because it sounds like that show or that sounds like that, and to hear those elements, it doesn’t come together as cohesively. And I feel really happy about what we’ve created.

Bromfield: It really is like [an] instrumental song — it’s [in] a song form. When we get together, we like to make music like that for the show. You know, we did that one before season two, and then we sent it to them. We wrote it together as a thematic track to be used in season two, and then we all found a place for it together. And I think a lot of the stuff we did in that session was similar — it’s kind of like its own genre of pop music. It’s pop music-influenced and it’s song-influenced, but the fact that it centers around Lili’s voice doing more of “ooh” [vocalizes notes] thing, I think is part of what makes it unique in the pop music world.

CHM: You just mentioned that when you guys jammed together and made that song on keyboards. I know a lot of songs sprout from the keyboard or piano, but were there any unique instruments you guys used throughout this score at all?

Haydn: Actually, the keyboard we used on that song is a fancy new keyboard that I just got — it’s a Hydrosynth, which is a really fun synthesizer. Ben has a lot of great synthesizers and he’s like “Keyboard Guy,” but I had been lusting after this keyboard for a couple of years and somebody had told me like, “You have to get this.” And it has this ribbon controller where you can do this portamento thing; you can slide from really low to really high and it gets that kind of weird, like your stomach is turning inside out kind of vibe, which I love [laughs]. That was the keyboard on this track. 

We also incorporate rock and roll stuff. We have some different instruments [I] play a lot of my string instruments and we do a lot of sound design as well. For some of the modern influences we pulled in a programmer friend of mine who works with Kesha and Kanye West and like some big pop artists [because] we wanted to have authentic beats. So we used a couple of those beats in the show. 

There’s like an instrument in the upper register that’s sort of going and that’s like [volcalizes]… I forget what it’s called…

Haydn: Ribbon Controller. 

Bromfield: Yeah. And then you can also hear it in the piece called “George’s Theme (Dark).” It’s happening with the bass in that one [and]  it’s a very cool effect. And each time you get a synthesizer like that, they all have their individual quirks, and that’s one really cool quirk of the Hydrosynth. And other than the fact that the sounds and the effects on it are really cool, the Ribbon Controller is really neat and it’s a fun way to do that — not every synth can do that.

Haydn: It’s modeled after a classic synth from the seventies called the [Yamaha] CS-80, which I had the pleasure of working with on my first album, and then sound design where you’re basically messing [around when] you’re creating sounds, you’re recording yourself doing this kind of stuff and tapping on your face and scratching things.

[In] episode eight, where we did the musical, the episode [is] mostly in the style of the musical, which was sort of classical music-influenced. I got out my violin and started doing all my little classical tricks. But one of the cues was influenced by my cat, actually, who’s not going to meow on cue, unfortunately, but she does meow [on cue] a little bit. She’s kept her little “Pixar kitten meow,” and you can hear that in one of the cues. I just did a little reel on my Instagram if you wanna hear it. It’s on the soundtrack also called “Max and Bracia Backstage” — please check it out. 

CHM: Since you both live in LA that makes it a bit easier — I know some co-composers I’ve spoken to were in separate areas of the world, so that made it a little harder — but I was curious what the day-to-day kind of thing looks like. Were you guys always working together or were you guys, you know, separately and then collaborating over Google Drives and stuff like that?

Bromfield: [Are] you familiar with the [concept of a] spotting session? [It’s] the meeting that we have with the showrunners, so when we first watched the show down and we figure out all the cues and we might use this one thing, or this might be a licensed song or whatever, and then we’ll figure out how much music we need to write and what scene.

So from there, Lili and I will typically divide it up and we’ll each take a first pass separately in our own studios. Also, I should mention, we started working on this show right when the pandemic broke out. So season one, we didn’t get together at all—  

Haydn: We had one session together! 

Bromfield: Before COVID, yeah. 

Haydn: It was like pre-COVID and then before our next session, he said, “You know, I don’t think we should be in the same room anymore [laughs]; we probably should isolate.” So, yeah, we only had one session, but that one session was very fruitful. 

Bromfield: Yeah, we got our company cue out of that session that gets used all the time and reused all over the score. But yeah, we generally work in different places, but also it’s funny to mention that we work at different times. Lilli is a total night owl, and I’m typically — if things are going right — up at 7:30 trying to work out and then start my day and in bed by like 11 or 12, she’s working all night. And so that sort of signifies our yin and yang-ness that we have. I think with our creative approaches as well. 

We didn’t have to do this much with season two. Season one was, I think, a bit more hectic, mostly because of COVID, [and] if we got something that we had to turn around [or] we got notes back at the last minute, she [Lili] probably was gonna be up anyway, so that that kind of works. There’s obviously all sorts of stuff going on in the morning and I’m willing to do that. 

So we work in different places, [and] we sometimes work at different times, but we do work on the same pieces of music because we send stuff back and forth to each other. We’re both working in Pro Tools as Lili mentioned, and we’re on Dropbox. We don’t share any videos on Dropbox because we’re all very careful with that. But what we do is we’re sending a Pro Tool testing back and forth, forth, and we’re adding stuff to each other’s cues. Typically, we’ll both try and complete a cue as much as we can on our own and then send it to the other person to add stuff. And then they might send it back. And then a lot of the time with the music before it gets approved, we end up having a live session over Zoom with the creators. 

This is a thing that I’m usually driving at this point — it’s usually on my rig. We’re all in on this session and I’m sharing the screen and Lili and I are solving problems in real time. It’s challenging but very fun and we make great music that way. 

Haydn: But it would not be possible if Ben weren’t such a rockstar on the technical side of it as well. Without each of our skillset sets, this would not be possible. It’s a unique show to the show’s credit, the show creator Sarah Lampert, has a vision and also Debra [J. Fisher], her partner, both have a vision. But Sarah, in particular, has an exacting nature and she doesn’t stop until she gets exactly what she wants. I have the same exact kind of OCD as her [laughs] — that’s why I step out often because like I don’t stop until I’ve exhausted every possibility and however long it takes. 

It can be challenging because we know that we’re not gonna be settling for anything less than something that is magical. And the funny thing is, we’ll be watching — I don’t know if you have this experience, Ben — we watched it, my husband and I, and cues that are you can barely hear, they’re almost subliminal [and] like, yeah, that took us a week.

Bromfield: I can relate to that, sure [smiles].

Haydn: We do wanna just talk about the musical before we all part ways, of course. The musical was really important this season and it’s really kind of a subplot [that is]  mirroring and representing character evolution and character development and the relationships that are in the plot. 

Ben and I have different backgrounds that allowed us to do that. Ben’s musical theater background and my songwriting background, as a recording artist, and the confluence of that really just lent itself to something that we’re both really proud of. 

The second season of Ginny & Georgia is streaming on Netflix. 

In my family, a good metric to measure how good a film was is how quickly me or my dad — the physical media buyers in the family — purchase it when it hits shelves months after its theatrical run. If we liked the film, the time ranges usually vary between immidetly upon release, wait a few months in hopes of Target or Best Buy putting it on sale, or the classic “wait until Black Friday” strategy (if it’s Criterion, we wait until July or November). But as our collections have grown and wallets have emptied, buying new releases — no matter how much we loved them — upon release is a rarity.

The one to buck the trend was The Father, Florian Zeller‘s first film adaptation out of the trilogy of his plays — The Mother, The Father and The Son. While I enjoyed it personally, the film hit way too close to home with my own grandmother who had dementia similar to Anthony Hopkins‘ character. That grandmother was my father’s mother, and despite my own belief that it’d hit even closer to home, he enjoyed it and made an effort to buy it once it went on sale.

All of that is to say, The Father is held in such high regard in my family. The Son will hold a special place in my heart as the casting of Vanessa Kirby was one of the first news pieces I wrote for the first outlet I interned at, so it feels like this film has come full circle for me. That’s why it was such an honor to speak with Zeller ahead of the nationwide release of The Son. I picked his brain on adapting his stageplays for the big screen while also finding out the interesting way Jackman landed his role. Oh, and I finally got clarification on the continuity of Hopkins’ characters in The Father and The Son (which has bothered me since seeing The Son).

Coastal House Media: I just wanted to start by talking about how out of your plays/films that I’ve seen, they’ve talked about such human emotions and situations. For example, The Father was very relatable for me because my grandmother had dementia towards the end of her life and it was hard to watch as a result, but it felt so real. So I was just curious if your plays/films are born out of experiences that are personal to you.

Florian Zeller: I would say yes. I don’t know how it could be something else than personal, but it doesn’t mean that these [are] my stories, you know? It means that [these are] emotions that I’m familiar with — territories that I’m no stranger to. When I did The Father — as you said, it’s about dementia — I knew a bit [about] what it was to go through this kind of process and to be in a position when you want to help someone and you cannot do it because I [was] raised by my grandmother and she got dementia when I was 15 or something. But when I was writing the script, I was not really thinking about her; I was thinking about emotions that I knew, and for The Son [as well]. 

The Son is about [a] father trying to help his teenage son going through depression. And again, it’s coming from a personal place, but I very quickly realized that so many people are concerned by this kind of situation, so many people have experience as [a] father or as [a] mother, you know when you are in a position where you do not know what to do anymore to help your son or your daughter or anyone else, and it was the reason why I wanted to make a film. I mean, it’s not enough to want to tell your own story to make a film, it’s because you wanna share emotions and you feel like you could be relevant for everyone to share these emotions. 

CHM: And from a more technical standpoint, I’m curious about what it’s like for you to get to adapt your plays. Of course, you have more space to work and you can show more than just what you’re limited to on a stage, so do you ever feel like with either The Father and/or The Son that your plays get to be even more realized or explored through that medium? 

Zeller: No. Just to shoot a play is not very challenging and it’s not very meaningful, so you have to find a way to find a cinematic language that would add something, you know? And for The Father, the conviction started like that, whereas the idea that [something] on-screen could be done that couldn’t be done on stage. And it was about trying to create this very subjective experience for the audience, to really experience what it could mean to lose your own bearings and as if you were in the main character’s brain, somehow.

And for The Son, I also felt that there was a reason to do it on screen, but it was a completely different strategy and it was not about trying to put you in the main character’s brain. My intention was to tell that story from the parent’s perspective — those who are around someone who is suffering and they do not know [what] to do to help. They have questions that they have no answers [for]. They are trying to open the door to help, but they have no keys, in a way. And because I really wanted for the audience to experience this feeling of being important because I know that there [is] so much shame and so much guilt and so much ignorance on this topic that I really wanted to raise these questions and to open a conversation — and my way to do that was to make that film. 

CHM: I haven’t seen the play version of The Son, but I was curious because The Father, the film, felt like a play because most of it takes place in Anthony Hopkins’ character’s apartment whereas The Son jumps a little bit in scale. A lot of it still takes place in Peter [Hugh Jackman]’s apartment, but was this jump in scale similar to the play at all?

Zeller: I mean, it [was a] decision, but every story requires something different. When you started thinking about adapting a play into a film, the first advice you get is always to try to write new scenes outdoors to go as far as possible from the stage and most of the time, it’s probably good advice. But this is not what I did in The Father, because I really wanted to use the set as an abstract lab where you would be lost as an audience. 

And if I had written a single scene outdoors, it would’ve broken this convention. So it had nothing to do with theatre, it has to do with cinema [and] the idea of being in an apartment and to use the apartment as a way to tell the story of being lost. And for The Son, I wanted to have something more straightforward, very linear and as simple as possible and try [not] to do a gimmick about that topic (depression) but to try to dare to be very simple in order to reflect my approach, which was to try to face this pain without shying away and also without trying to explain it or without trying to justify it. That’s the difficult and slightly uncomfortable thing about it. 

There is no simple explanation about why sometimes you are in pain, and it takes a lot of courage to accept [that] there is no meaning, no justification when you’re going through such a pain [and] you need someone or something to blame for because it’s unfair when you see that it looks so easy for everybody and for you, everything is so difficult.

And in [this] story (The Son), this is divorce. The characters are talking a lot about the divorce and Nicholas [feels as though] this is because my parents got divorced and the father feels so guilty that he feels maybe [it’s] all my fault. But that’s not my perspective. To me, there [are] so many layers, psychological, but also chemical, biological reasons why you can feel in pain. So it was not to try to simplify things to say [that] because of divorce, it could lead to this situation. 

It would make no sense, for example, to blame anyone for having a heart issue or stomach issue — and I think it’s the same for mental [health] issues. It makes no sense to blame anyone for experiencing this pain. And the more we could see mental health issues as we see physical issues, meaning without guilt, the more we could help people to go through these kinds of situations.

CHM: You have a lot of established names and a younger actor as well in The Son — can you talk to me about the casting process for this film? 

Zeller: Yeah, the casting process started with Anthony Hopkins. We did The Father together and it was such an emotional experience, to do a film together, [that] I really wanted to see him again. Also, just after The Father, there was COVID and so we hadn’t seen each other for two years or something, and so when I finished the script, he was the very first one who read it and he told me, “Okay, I really want to be part of it.”

And I was really happy about it because I do adore him and also, so many people came to me after The Father saying, “Is he okay?” as if he was going through dementia. And I was like, “Yeah, he is. He is in great shape. He’s just an extraordinary actor,” so it was funny for us to do the exact opposite because in The Son he’s so cruel. He is not losing the situation, he’s controlling the situation so well. 

And then I’m starting [to] dream about the cast and that’s all I knew about it. It was Anthony involved and that’s it. And I received that letter from Hugh Jackman. This is unconventional, but this is how it happened: He knew the play, The Son, he knew that I was working on the adaptation [and] he knew The Father. And so he wrote this letter to me saying, “If you’re already in conversation with someone, please forget my letter. But if you’re not, I would love to have 10 minutes to let you know why I should be the one to do this part.”

And of course, when you receive this kind of letter, you wanna meet that person because it’s really something special for an actor to be brave and honest enough and humble enough to do this. And when we met, we talked a lot about many things, but it’s not something he said; it’s more something I felt about who he is. The fact that he was not trying to be this actor looking for a part, or he was not detracted by the performance that could be done here, it was just a man, you know? And I felt that he was as a father and as connected to that issue that he knew what it was about. He knew these emotions and that it would be the opportunity for us, through the camera, to allow himself to be himself and to try to reach something that was truthful and honest. And that’s something very difficult to do, I think, for an actor. And I was really impressed during the shooting to see him daring [and] exploring all the time the true emotions that he has in himself. And I think that’s why, in my opinion, his performance is so honest. 

CHM: I’m running low on time with you, but this question has been bothering me since I saw the film, so I gotta ask you of all people given that this is your baby. So I had heard that The Son is a “prequel” to The Father, but this confused me with Anthony Hopkins’ characters. I know in The Son he’s in America, but I think in The Father, he’s in England. Can you just explain the continuity to me?

Zeller: To me it’s not a prequel. [They’re] not the same characters. It’s the same actor, but you’re right — One is American [and] one is British, so it’s already different. And what [is] meaningful to me is that to have similar stories that are not [with] the same characters, not the same stories, but somehow they are connected, you know? The themes and something [is] connected in between these stories, and so as a viewer, you have to question the connections, the conversation almost between these pieces, and I like what it brings to the table, meaning that as a viewer you have room to question the meaning of this.

For example, as a viewer, I remember that I really loved this Polish director Krzysztof Kieślowski, who did the [Three Colours] Red, White and Blue and it’s three different stories. They have nothing to do with each other, but it’s just you trying to understand the layers, the conversations, and that’s it. Nothing more. [They’re] different stories. 

CHM: My last question for you is: Are you going to adapt The Mother and would Anthony Hopkins be a part of that? 

Zeller: I dunno. I really don’t know [laughs]. We did The Mother in New York, on stage, right with Isabella Huppert, and she’s one of the greatest actresses — I love her very much. But I don’t know. I don’t know yet. 

The Son was released for an awards-qualifying limited run on November 25 and will be released nationwide on January 20.

It’s no secret that Paul McCartney is my favorite artist of all time. Many days of my childhood were spent blaring the music of the Beatles and McCartney on my little iPod touch. To this day, his CDs reside in the center console of my car. But this isn’t news to those who know me (or read our interview with McCartney’s guitarist Rusty Anderson). Suffice it to say, I was thrilled when the email for a new book, The McCartney Legacy Volume 1: 1969-1973 arrived in my inbox. I was able to chat with the authors Adrian Sinclair and Allan Kozinn about the first installment in their series. Due to the length and density of this interview, I’ll just get into it and let the interview “Take it Away.”

Coastal House Media: Thank you guys both for your time and congratulations on the book. I’m very excited to actually get to read it all. Paul McCartney is my favorite artist and I really love anybody that can nerd out about him, so I’m very excited to chat about him with both of you guys. Let me just start by asking, how do you know each other and how did you just decide to write a book together?

Adrian Sinclair: That’s a very long story. We met online through Beatles forums, so we’d known each other for quite some time. And then I conceived this project [The McCartney Legacy] — although it started off very differently from how it came out — I decided I wanted to work with an actual writer given that my background is broadcast on television. I thought: Who better to work with than a genius like Allan [Kozinn]? 

When I first started this out, it was gonna be more like Mark Lewisohn‘s The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions — it was gonna be like a walk through Paul’s recorded history — but then the more we delved into the project and the further we went along the track, we quickly realized that you couldn’t separate Paul’s life from his art. It’s just impossible. The two coexist, they go hand-in-hand, so we decided really after what was the “eureka!” moment, I suppose, was when I was interviewing drummer Denny Seiwell.

We were just talking to people who’d worked with Paul in the studio; recording engineers, musicians, former members of Wings, people like that, and at the end of a Skype interview with Denny Seiwell, he said to me just very casually, “Oh, you know, when I was in Wings, my wife Monique used to keep these little diaries. I was wondering if that was something you might be interested in hearing about,” and of course, I raised an eyebrow and I said,” Yeah, we’d love to hear any information you might have in those diaries,” because obviously, it would’ve been useful for the recording sessions book as well as anything else.

Anyway, long story short, about seven hours of Skype calls later with Denny [and] we’d been through his entire time in Wings in really microscopic detail and I said to Allan at the time, “I think we’ve got more than a recording session’s book here. I think really we should be looking at expanding this and really getting the most out of the information that we’ve just been given.”

So that really was the turning point, and that’s really when it became more of a fully-fledged bio[graphy] of Paul’s life than just a recording sessions [book]. 

Allan Kozinn: That plus we were talked into it by Mark Lewisohn to a degree. He had wanted to know how this was going and he was visiting me at one point and we sat down and had a really long talk about the fact that there’s a need for a serious McCartney bio and [take] what we’ve been collecting and actually do it seriously as a biography, not just a sessions [book].

And so we sort of explored that with our agent and it turned out that it was a good idea. So it became what it is. 

CHM: And let me ask you guys because you are on two opposite ends of the world, how did you guys manage to work together? I feel like that has to be hard working on a book together. I don’t know if you guys are using Google Docs where you guys can both edit the same things or if you guys writing different parts of the book. 

Kozinn: It’s actually not as hard as you might think because it’s almost as if we have an open line on WhatsApp. If either of us has a question about anything, the other one is at the other end of WhatsApp and we monitor them pretty closely. No more than certainly an hour will go by, but usually, we get an immediate answer and we talk a lot on the phone and given that the major places of Paul’s career are both the United States and Britain, it’s great having one of us in each place. 

In terms of the way we’ve divided the workload into broad terms is that Adrian has been doing a lot of the interviewing and research, and I’ve been doing a lot of the writing. Adrian also has written quite a few chapters of the book and I’ve done some interviews and research as well. I mean, I have a sort of a research library of not just McCarney, but all Beatles stuff in my house here. And among other things pretty much every issue of Rolling Stone, which has been pretty handy for this project. I knew it would come in handy for some reason — I never threw any of them away [laughs] — so we’ve gone through a lot of that. 

Adrian has been in the British Library a lot spending lots of time getting things from around the world, plus our interviews. So it has all come together that way. I mean, we never decided, “You write this chapter, I’ll write that chapter,”  it’s been as we’re going along, I’ll be working on part of it and Adrian will say, “I’d like to do the chapter on the University Tour,” or whatever it is, and you know, and he would do that, and then I would look at it and sort of edit it and add things, subtract things, raise questions, or whatever and he would do the same thing with the chapters I’m writing. 

So it really is a collaboration. I’ve never written with anyone before — I’ve always been a solo — but this has worked out really, really well from my point of view. 

Sinclair: Yeah, I think like you said, the one magic thing that we’ve got is having in a way kind of works in our favor that we’re on both sides of the Atlantic because Allan has all the connections in America, and what I didn’t realize when I moved to where I live now is that there are two branches of the British Library and one of them is seven miles from my house. So I can be in the British Library in 10 minutes. So I spent an awful lot of time there.

You’ll see things like in the book, there’s a chapter about Paul and Linda going for a trip to Scotland in 1970, all of the information there came from the British Library. We knew that they were in Scotland because we’d read Paul’s Life magazine [where he] said that they’d been in Scotland, they’d been on a boat, and I went to the British Library and I took out every newspaper from every outpost you could conceive in the north of Scotland and we suddenly found this trail of breadcrumbs all the way to the Shetland Islands, and we had the entire story then. So really, it’s kind of worked well for us that we [have] this transatlantic partnership. 

And also, given the scale of this project, we kind of understand now why Mark Lewison is taking so long between volumes. There are two of us. We can divide the work, we can edit each other’s work, we can cast [a] critical eye over each other’s work whereas Mark’s working alone. So in a way, it works out quite well that we’re a partnership taking on such a big project. 

CHM: So this is Volume One, are there more to come? 

Sinclair: Right now, we’re writing Volume Two, which will take the story up to 1980, and then we think we could probably do the rest in two more volumes. I say two, just because when we started, I had lunch with our editor and she said, “How many volumes do you think there will be in total?” and I said, “Five,” and the look of horror on her face made me say, “I mean, maybe four,” [laughs] so it may be four. The thing is, the parts we’re doing now are very intensive because he’s always doing something. But from say, you know, the mid-eighties on, an awful lot of what he was doing has been touring. And while we do what we can to cover the tours thoroughly, and if there’s anything interesting that happens on any tourist stop or we write something in between shows, or whatever, we wanna have all of that, but we won’t need to describe every single show that he’s done since 1989. So we’ll be able to fit more years in a volume than we have been in this first volume.

Also, you know, because it’s the start and because it’s coming out of the Beatles and because the end of the Beatles needed some explanation too, and Paul’s position within that maelstrom, all needed to be explained a bit. And so this first one [is] only ‘69 to ‘73, but so much happens in that. I mean the text is 720 pages — I don’t know what it is with the index and everything else — and that’s with stuff cut. There’s plenty more to come. 

CHM: Let me ask both of you guys really quick, ’cause, I know you guys span five albums over the course of this book, right? Do you guys have a favorite album that you guys covered in this book?

Sinclair: That’s a really interesting one. I think when we were writing about the albums, each album becomes your favorite as you are writing about it. I developed a real fondness for Wildlife when we were writing about that and began to really appreciate some of the secret hidden nuggets in Paul’s collection, you know, like “Some People Never Know” and “Tomorrow.” I mean, if you spoke to most McCartney fans on the street, they’d never have heard of those songs, but they’re probably two of the greatest melodies that he wrote during that period. 

And then you also come away from writing about Band on the Run realizing that of all the songs on the album, “Nineteen Hundred and Eighty-Five” is the greatest song on the album, which, maybe before we’d written this book, you might not have had such a deep appreciation for that song, but when you explore that as a piece of music, as a composition, it’s just stunning, you know?

So yeah, but I’d say that while we were writing the book I think Wildlife became my favorite album.

Kozinn: I think for me it was probably Ram. Although when I say Ram, I really mean Ram and about half of Red Rose Speedway because I’m thinking of the Ram sessions [laughs]. And in the Ram sessions he recorded an awful lot of stuff, a bunch of which ended up on Red Rose Speedway and a bunch of which ended up as outtakes from Red Rose Speedway, you know, [songs that he] wanted to get on Red Rose Speedway but that was when they were gonna make it a double album and it got cut down to a single album. So a lot of good stuff sort of fell out. 

But the Ram sessions, I think, were amazing. And it’s an amazing story that takes up a large chunk of the book because he was working on that from October 1970 through maybe March [or] April 1971. And it [The McCartney Legacy Vol.1] includes that whole period [where] he has to go to London for the course court case of “Paul versus the other Beatles and Apple [Records]”, he has to go again because his publisher challenged whether Linda [McCartney] helped him write “Another Day,” so it’s really an action-packed bunch of chapters, but certain things in it, those sessions like “The Backseat of My Car” and “Little Lamb Dragonfly,” especially. I knew the songs, [but] I never had really focused all that much on them. Really focusing on what made those songs tick, how they came together, how they were recorded and then what the final product was really eye-opening for me. 

And I have to admit, Wildlife was always probably one of my least favorite albums of maybe not just Paul but any [of the] former Beatles’ albums [laughs]. But like Adrian was saying, as we sort of got into looking at the recording process and the writing process of that album, a lot of it began to grow on me, especially the stuff on side two, which is where the couple of songs Adrian mentioned are from. There really is a lot of good stuff on that album that gets overlooked because its general reputation is so out there. But we’re hoping that with a lot of these things, people who like McCartney generally but haven’t really focused on everything he’s done, [that when] they read the book, they’ll have a new appreciation as well for what he’s done and how he’s done it. 

CHM: Since you guys are both experts on the subject matter, I wanna ask this question I’ve had since I was probably five years old. I grew up listening to Band on the Run a whole lot and “Jet” is one of my favorite songs of his career both solo and with Wings. The line that always drives me insane is the “suffragette” or “suffra-jet” line, and it’s always been an internal debate in my mind. What is the real line and why is it written that way?

Sinclair: I think it was probably written as a play on words. “Jet” was the name of his dog and around that time, David Bowie had “Suffragette City” out, so I’m guessing that that probably entered his consciousness through Bowie’s song. At the end of, I think the very last word in
“Suffragette City” is jet, isn’t it? “Suffra-jet,” I think it ends on. So I think that probably entered his consciousness through that. 

But that’s kind of the way that Paul’s songwriting engine worked quite a lot, you’ll see that in the book. He’ll be reading a newspaper or a magazine, or he’ll see a billboard, and all these things just kind of enter his subconscious, and then he plucks them out when he’s writing his songs. He must have an incredible capacity to absorb the world around him and then translate that into song and into music because it happens so frequently. Even with little songs like the unreleased song from the Red Rose [Speedway] era, “1882,” was all based on things he’d read in the British press about the IRA tarring and feathering traitors. So he read that in a British newspaper and then he decided to evolve that into a tale that was based in 1882. Things like that happen quite frequently with Paul and probably still to this day. 

CHM: I know you guys also kind of go deep into the recording sessions too, and I need to get into the McCartney chapter cuz I love, “Maybe I’m Amazed.” I mean, that’s a pretty well-known song, but I’m always been curious about the recording of that song. I feel like that’s one of his greatest vocal performances but when he sings that song live, even back in the seventies, he’s never been able to sing it the way he did on the album… I feel like that was almost lightning in a bottle. Does your chapter on McCartney go into that at all?

Kozinn: I think with “Maybe I’m Amazed,” one of the really interesting things about it is that when he started the McCartney album, all he had really for new stuff was two little snippets: [“Maybe I’m Amazed” and] “The Lovely Linda,” and that would be something. Neither of them were really completely finished songs, especially “The Lovely Linda.” I mean, he even said, “This is just a trailer — I’ll finish it later,” which he never did so far as we know. And then to go from there to “Maybe I’m Amazed,” which is really up there with his Beatles-era work, that was maybe a quicker recovery than people often imagined. 

And that was recorded not at home, but in the studio. So apart from it being really a full-fledged, brilliant song, he had facilities to record it that he didn’t have for the part of the album he did at home. It just sort of worked out really well that it came together during that part of the making of the album.

CHM: I want to talk a little bit about some of the, I guess “criticisms” that he’s had in the past. One of the ones that has always been fascinating to me was “Hi, Hi, Hi,” which I believe is not on Red Rose Speedway, right? 

Sinclair: It’s a single. 

CHM: So in that case, is that covered in the book? 

Sinclair: Yeah, yeah. Everything’s covered. 

CHM: Okay. I just didn’t know if songs not on an album would be included. But did “Hi, Hi, Hi” have some controversy with its lyrics?

Sinclair: Yeah, it got banned by the BBC. I mean, they wrote that song when they were just about to go on tour in the summer of ‘72, so they said basically before they went on tour, they felt like they had a gap in their setlist where they wanted a rocker. So they all disappeared after Spain and had a holiday in a villa, and what came out of that holiday was “Hi, Hi, Hi.”

So really, “Hi, Hi, Hi”  is an embodiment of the Spanish sunshine and probably a lot of pot smoking, red wine [and] Spanish tapas. So it’s got that kind of “summer-y” energy about it. But when Paul got home, he had this lyric, “I’m gonna lie you on the bed/Getting ready for my ____,” and he needed to find a word to fill in the gaps. So he plucked a lyric from a French play to slot in there and he felt that that would get past the censorship test at the BBC. But the second that they heard it, they thought the sexual content of the song was inappropriate. And after one play on BBC radio, it was banned.

Kozinn: But that was because the word he used was “polygon” and they heard it as “body gun.” I think he said in an interview later, “I actually like ‘body gun’ better,” but he was trying to come up with something that would be unobjectionable and in a way not mean anything, but mean whatever you wanna make it mean. Then “polygon,” it’s a shape. So he put that in there. 

It’s kind of interesting actually because what he was doing, and I don’t know if he did this consciously, but by making that the issue, by making it into a sexual thing that people are gonna be listening to and [asking] “Is he saying what I think he’s saying?” completely distracted them from the fact that the chorus is, “I’m going to get high, high, high,” [laughs] you know? And originally, I think when he originally wrote it down, it was [spelled] h-i-g-h and then it was changed to h-i, which, on the surface [is] kind of harmless, but it really was “gonna get high, high, high,” and it sounds like what it is, or it is what it sounds like. But having the sexual thing in there distracted the BBC from the drug issue and that was kind of funny. 

Sinclair: But I think that Paul’s problem at the time with that was I think number one on the British charts was “My Ding-a-Line” by Chuck Barry — which didn’t get banned — and the lyrics are, “I want you to play with my ding-a-ling.” He gets away with that and Paul can’t say the word “polygon” [laughs]. 

CHM: I assume that both of you guys watched the Get Back documentary last year, but did anything from that footage in the series play a part in this book at all? Or was the book finished by then? 

Kozinn: Well it was finished by then, but there was a long editorial process, so we were able to go back and there are certain things like the meeting with Dick James, where he comes in with a publishing catalog that he has bought on behalf of John [Lennon] and Paul. So Northern Songs, which we think of as the publishers of the Lennon-McCartney catalog, actually own some other catalogs. To most people watching Get Back, that was just like, Okay, who cares? but we care because Paul later went into buying publishing catalogs and this was sort of an interesting moment where you see in that conversation, Paul is saying, “We own all these and what are the titles?” and he’s going through the list of titles. He’s obviously quite interested in it and he always gives credit to the Eastmans, his in-laws, for persuading him to buy publishing companies as an investment.

It goes back earlier than that, obviously. The Eastman’s advice there was kind of crucial to Paul’s fortune, let’s say. I mean, he’s done extremely well with that advice, but it wasn’t totally out of the blue. He already knew a bit about buying publishing companies and owning publishing companies other than his, so that was an interesting moment that we ended up adding to the book. 

Sinclair: We were advised by our editor [that] when Get Back came out to revisit the chapters that we’d written which discussed the [Let it Be] sessions. I think essentially what we’d written didn’t change a huge amount, did it? There were a few factual things we were able to smooth out, thanks to Get Back, but there were also a few things that caused a bit of a problem for us. There’s something in the Get Back film where Paul’s sitting at the piano and he says, “I wrote this song morning,” was that “The Back Seat of My Car” [or] “Another Day,” Allan?

Kozinn: I think it was “The Back Seat of My Car.”

Sinclair: And he says, “I wrote this song this morning,” but actually, the song that he then played was an edit; so that actually happened 15 minutes later. So some people might watch the Get Back film and think that Paul wrote “The Back Seat of My Car” that morning, but that wasn’t the case. So we had to revisit some of the original audio as well to make sure that those things were accurate. 

Kozinn: We have all the Nagras, so we could check if he says, “I wrote this this morning,” and sits down and plays it, whether that really happened that way or it didn’t. And he actually had played some other song that never became a full-fledged song. It might have been “Another Day,” actually, I can’t remember, but either “The Back Seat of My Car” or “Another Day” happened [about] 15 minutes later. 

It’s a great documentary. I love Get Back. But if you’re writing a book based on that, you have to be really careful and go back to the original audio recordings to find what actually happened. The one great thing about Get Back was that we’d been listening to these Nagra audio recordings for decades and what you imagine is happening is quite different from what you see happening in the Get Back film. 

Listening to the Nagras I’d have thought that for most of the sessions, John has just sort of slumped in [and out of] his chair, absolutely not interested. You look at the Get Back film, he’s there, he’s on, he is interested and the audio is the same, but when you add a picture, it gives you a completely different perspective.

CHM: Looking ahead at the next book, since this one cuts off at ‘73 and in ‘75 was the “Wings Over Europe Tour,” I forget what the actual tour was called. But then Wings went on a big world tour then, right? This is my interpretation of it, but it felt like Paul kind of resisted some Beatles stuff. I know he played a few songs in ‘75, but it seems like in ‘79, he started opening up a little bit. That’s where “Let It Be” started being played a little bit. I’m just curious if the next book will kind of tackle any of that. 

Sinclair: Yeah, I’ve been reading a lot about that recently because one of the keys to our project, to not only understanding the story but getting the story as accurately as possible is to find interviews from as close to the time as possible. So when we’ve got Paul talking about writing songs, we go as close to the time as we can get music for us, magazines, anything we can get our hands on where he is talking about songs. When it came to the “Over the World” tour, we actually have Denny Laine to thank for that. 

What happened in 1975 was that they were round at Paul’s house in London and they were jamming in Paul’s back garden and they started to jam some Beatles songs. Denny Laine was pushing Paul in that direction. Paul was always opposed to it. He didn’t want to do it on the ‘72 tour or the ‘73 tour, even when it was suggested to him because it felt too close. I think he still had a few wounds from the breakup of the Beatles. And then, yeah, Denny Laine persuaded him [on] the ‘75-’76 tour that he should embrace the music that he’d written with the Beatles. And that’s why they introduced a few numbers on that big tour. That’s probably the reason why that tour was so successful. Not only did he have a great catalog of songs at that time that he’d written with Wings and solo but he delved into his Beatles catalog as well. And really, that’s kind of what the audience came along to hear. 

And Paul was the first to admit that in interviews at the time. He’d say that he almost felt embarrassed that people just wanted to come to see him rather than Wings. But really, when you’re Paul McCartney and you’ve been in a band as big as the Beatles, that’s what people come to see. They don’t come to see Joe English or Jimmy McCulloch, or maybe to a lesser extent they might come to see Denny because Denny’s got some big songs, but they came to see Paul. So yeah, the world has Denny Laine to thank for that and to this day Paul still plays some of those songs in concert that he did in ‘75. He played some of the songs he played in ‘75 at Glastonbury —  so that has had a ripple effect through five decades. 

Kozinn: There is another factor that goes back to the era of our book, which is that Paul’s big issue in 1969 with the Beatles was them engaging Alan Klein as the manager. Alan Klein’s contract ended in ‘73. So in ‘73, he still wasn’t playing Beatles things with Wings. But on the James Paul McCartney television show, he played “Yesterday” [and] he played “Blackbird” at the live concert that’s at the end of that show in the full recording of it. Wings did a version of “The Long and Winding Road,” [that] didn’t make it to the TV special. They also played it that night at what became their London debut at Hard Rock Cafe. It was a charity show late at night, so he began opening up at least psychologically a bit after Alan Klein’s contract was not renewed by George, Ringo and John. He also began talking [about] the constant interview question of: Will the Beatles get back together? [which] at first was just sort of brushed aside, and then it began after 1973 becoming, sometimes, “No, we’re not gonna do that,” and sometimes, “Well, you never know. We might,” [laughs] so it became a little confusing for the other members of Wings, too, hearing him say, “Well, yeah, I might do something with the Beatles again,” you know?

So there are the roots of that. It had also something to do with Kline being out of the picture. 

CHM: One feature I love with the McCartney “Archive” reissues are the bonus tracks which range from radio edits to demos. I feel like McCartney seems more open about releasing that stuff than other artists — take U2, a band I love, for example — but is there a reason for this?

Kozinn: McCartney’s reissue series has varied over the years — some have more outtakes and demos than others, and I think that has to do with a number of things, including when in the series you’re looking at (the early issues didn’t have much in the way of outtakes or demos; later ones like Flowers in the Dirt had plenty), as well as what exists in the archives for each album. Compared with what’s available on bootlegs, he has actually offered relatively little, and we know of quite a few things in his archives that remain entirely untapped. There was a 30-plus song demo tape from Spring and Summer 1970 – before he left for New York for the Ram sessions – that he has released none of. And there are four-track demos for Band on the Run, made before Denny Seiwell and Henry McCullouch quit, that I’d love to hear.  

I once had a discussion with him about outtakes and bootlegs, and it was interesting: he said he likes bootlegs, but he had some real misgivings about releasing that material officially because he’s afraid it will muddy the waters for young listeners who don’t know the official discography yet. I said what seemed logical to me — that there would be liner notes in which everything would be explained. But he pointed out that when the outtake versions are played on the radio, the deejay is not going to read the liner notes, and someone listening could easily walk away from hearing an outtake thinking that it was the finished version. And since he works quite hard to make the finished versions finished, he is reluctant — or was at the time of that interview, which was 1990, well before the Beatles Anthology and most of his archival sets — to release the unfinished versions. 

Sinclair: Oddly enough, Paul is not known for including bumpers crops of outtakes in his archives sets, but his box sets are getting better (all the time). McCartney’s early archive box sets didn’t harbor many bonus tracks, but Paul has included more media in his reissues since he re-signed with Capitol Records (the first deluxe sets were issued on Concord Records — part of the Starbucks group). Paul has never been a big fan of outtakes, his view is that outtakes didn’t make the album for a reason, this is likely why some of his reissues may appear thin when compared with, say, Bob Dylan who puts out every take of every song he has ever recorded in his deluxe sets. All that said, the recent Capitol Records books have been much richer in content – the early mix of “Wild Life” that dropped in 2018, for example, was sublime.

CHM: Rapid fire question for both of you guys before I let you go: now that we’re almost 50 years removed from all that, do you think if all four members of the Beatles were still alive, do you think they would’ve reunited and played a show or reunited in some capacity?

Sinclair: Yeah, definitely. 100%. 

Kozinn: They might have reunited around the time of the Anthology to do something. Maybe [the] “Free As a Bird” [sessions], or something else. Whatever they had to do. But they might have reunited for a recording. I doubt they’d have given a concert. I don’t know.

The McCartney Legacy Volume 1: 1969-1973 is available now. For more information, click here.