In many aspects, “The Beatles Revolution” serves as a mini-Anthology for anyone who is in the mood for a more concise documentary. Like the Anthology, “The Beatles Revolution” made liberal use of Beatles music and video clips to retell the story of the Beatles.  Although the surviving Beatles were not involved in this production, the documentary’s producers had the cooperation of the Beatles’ company, Apple, who supplied rare or previously unseen footage from their archives.

The Anthology focussed primarily on the Beatles themselves communicating their recollections. There was virtually no input from anyone who wasn’t in or very close to the band. By contrast, “The Beatles Revolution” provided a counterpoint to the Anthology by using celebrity interviews from “music, the arts, entertainment and politics” to describe the influence of the Beatles on popular culture in the ‘60's and beyond. Considering the volume of celebrities that were involved in this telecast, one could be forgiven for wondering in advance, if this show would be a fluff piece. In essence, it was quite refreshing to see stars in their own right, check their egos at the door and allow themselves to be mere fans of the Beatles in an open, unguarded way. That in itself communicated how much affection and goodwill is reserved for the Beatles, even 30 years after their breakup. Most of the comments were touching, affectionate and humorous. The use of younger celebrities such as Mike Myers and Kate Hudson successfully implied that the Beatles were making inroads with subsequent generations. There was an irony to rapper Chuck D’s choice of “The Long and Winding Road” as his favorite song. Not an obvious influence by any stretch of the imagination. The only real “cringe factor” was when N’sync referred to the Beatles as “the original boy band” as if groups of young people have always been formed and groomed by corporate entities. This comment betrayed their lack of knowledge of the Beatles and music history in general.

The cultural aspects that the Beatles were credited as having influenced ranged from films, hair styles, pop art, fashion, setting a precedent for large scale stadium concerts, conceiving popular music as an art form and the introduction of eastern philosophy into western society. Meredith Vieira’s open ended question of whether the Beatles “lit the fuse or were just sitting on top of the rocket” is one that may never be successfully answered. However, as Lenny Kravitz succinctly commented “The music is the bottom line. If their music wasn’t good, we wouldn’t be discussing them right now.” It’s that very aspect that gives such credibility to Robin Williams’ comment about the Beatles music being in his “memory banks” and part of his “genetic material”. Countless other people feel the same way.

The program seemed most effective when artistic influences were highlighted or personal antidotes were recalled. It was least successful in examining politics or providing social commentary.

Many critics of the telecast have expressed that the program over credited the Beatles for everything of significance that took place in the ‘60's, including the thawing of the cold war. As easy as it may be for skeptics to dismiss this notion, there is some truth here. Pop music and the influence of pop culture influenced Russian youth in perceiving English speaking citizens as something other than “the enemy”. Talk about giving peace a chance! In expressing his views on the Beatles, Salmon Rushdie, characterized the group as “disrespectful”. I think this is probably the first instance where I’ve heard this word used as a compliment!  As for the critics, I can understand how difficult it might be in the year 2000 to imagine how a pop music group could have so much cultural influence. However, knowing how much was changed, in music, fashion, social behavior, attitude and philosophy since the arrival of the Beatles, their influence is certainly hard to overestimate. In many ways, the Beatles encouraged a whole generation of young people to assert themselves in a way that had not happened before.

The program also touched upon the often ignored influence of the solo Beatles: George Harrison's precedent of organizing a musical event for a global cause with The Concert for Bangladesh; John and Yoko’s campaign for peace and Paul and Linda’s animal right’s activism (no mention was made of the social significance of Wings). When the dangers of Beatlemania were touched upon, you could feel an undercurrent of what eventually happened to John Lennon in 1980 and George Harrison, this past year. George’s good friend Eric Idle described the Beatles as moving targets and recalled how George had told him of the Beatles’ plane being riddled with bullet holes after it arrived in the US. Judging by the manner in which Idle spoke, it was clear that he was also contemplating more recent incidents of danger.

The program overlooked several important details for various motivations. The issue of Lennon’s “Jesus” comments was glossed over rather quickly. Apparently, it’s still a sensitive subject. The Beatles’ drug use wasn’t touched upon - probably since the program was aired during what was usually ABC’s TGIF time slot. The program employed the over 30 year media tendency to give the impression that the Beatles progressed from the Beatlemania years to Sgt. Pepper in one great creative leap. Long time fans recognize that the “Rubber Soul” and “Revolver” albums were stepping stones. The progression towards Pepper was obvious, especially on "Revolver". Filling in these gaps along with more details would have been nice but considering the target audience, the program communicated its message far better than average. It will probably succeed in generating new interest in the Beatles among younger people and it served as a light, affectionate retrospective for older fans.