There was great public demand for a Beatles reunion during the 1970s. For example, in September 1976, American promoter Sid Bernstein, who had booked many of the Beatles' historic American appearances in 1964-1966, published a full-page ad in the New York Times publicly requesting the group to reunite and offering millions of dollars. On April 24, 1976, Saturday Night Live producer Lorne Michaels parodied such offers with an on-air announcement that he would pay the Beatles $3,000 if they would perform on his program together. He joked, "divide up any way you want. If you want to give less to Ringo, that's up to you." John Lennon discussed the Saturday Night Live episode, as well as his relationship with McCartney, in a September 1980 interview for Playboy: Paul McCartney also remembered the event for an interview: " said, 'We should go down there. We should go down now and just do it.' It was one of those moments where we said, 'Let's not and say we did.' "
Overview
Two of Us opens with the following introduction: The screenplay consists of a series of long conversations between John Lennon and Paul McCartney. The discussions between Lennon and McCartney explore a number of issues including the breakup of the Beatles and the difficulties that developed between them after Lennon married Yoko Ono. According to Lindsay-Hogg, "most of the film two men and four walls... you can't get more intimate than that." Critic Kevin McDonough argues that, "in less talented hands, Two of Us, like any Beatles-reenactment movie, could have been an awful exercise in bad wigs and Liverpool accents. Instead, Lindsay-Hogg and first-time screen writer Mark Stanfield have created a small masterpiece, a variation on My Dinner With Andre meets The Beatles."
Structure and characters
Critic David Bianculli likened Two of Us to a three-act play with the following structure: Nanciann Cherry wrote that, " are superb, capturing accents, mannerisms, and behavior of their two famous characters. More than a fine job of imitation, Harris and Quinn get beyond the trappings of fame and show us two men, former best friends, who have gone separate ways and no longer know how to recapture that friendship." Critic Ed Bumgardner wrote that:
Production
Jim DeRogatis interviewed Lindsay-Hogg about his involvement with the film. Lindsay-Hogg stated that he became involved with the project because the screenplay, Of the screenplay he further stated, "Mark Stanfield is a good writer and a Beatles fan who has a lot of knowledge Some of that stuff was ad-libbed by the actors because they really got into this, but Mark also wrote characters instead of stereotypes or caricatures." In another interview, Stanfield discussed the decision to create a fictionalized account of actual people: "I didn't give it a lot of thought. Certainly it's been done before, from Shakespeare through something like Melvin and Howard. And, more recently, in films like Gods and Monsters. Shakespeare in Love, for that matter." The film's technical advisor, Martin Lewis, conducted extensive research, drawing upon both his, as well as Michael Lindsay-Hogg's personal knowledge of The Beatles:
Paul McCartney
To further prepare for the role of Paul McCartney, Aidan Quinn traveled to Liverpool with actor Ian Hart. While there, he visited a number of places including McCartney's childhood home. Quinn discussed McCartney's reaction to the film in an April 18, 2004 interview: "Just after I finished the film, I went on holiday and Paul McCartney was staying at the same place. I met him and we became quite friendly. Later, he saw the film and fortunately he liked it. It would have been terrible if he'd hated it."
Soundtrack
The original soundtrack by David Schwartz does not include any songs by the Beatles because "the producers could not get clearance from the notoriously difficult copyright holders, a company owned by Michael Jackson." Critic Jim DeRogatis notes that, "the movie was over before it struck me that the soundtrack was devoid of any Beatles songs Such is our saturation in all things Beatles-related that their actual music isn't even missed in the movie. And maybe that should tell us something about getting back to what really matters in this group's legacy." Critic Kevin Thompson further argues:
