Since their formation in 1960, The Beatles have been the subject of countless books and documentaries. Few bands have reached the same level of fame, raising an inevitable question: after more than six decades of biographies, archival research, and retrospectives, can anything more be said about The Beatles?
In the new documentary “Man on the Run,” Academy Award-winning director Morgan Neville attempts to answer that question by shifting the focus away from the band itself and instead assembles the story of Paul McCartney’s life in the decade following the breakup, a period that was crucial in reshaping his identity as an artist.
As a knowledgeable Beatles fan, I was skeptical that Neville could contribute anything new about McCartney or The Beatles.
The documentary picked up McCartney’s life where Peter Jackson’s “The Beatles: Get Back” (2021) left off: at the dissolution of The Beatles. After nearly a decade at the center of popular music, John Lennon quietly left the band in the fall of 1969. The public, however, remained unaware of the breakup until McCartney himself announced that he was leaving The Beatles in 1970.
For many musicians, leaving one of the most famous bands on the planet would have presented two options: become a nostalgia act or fade into the background. Both Lennon and McCartney rejected both paths. Lennon’s activism and his revered album “Imagine” (1971) made him an icon of counterculture. “Man on the Run” portrays McCartney as an “everyman,” particularly through his writing on the everyday details of life, such as farm routines and family meals. It’s funny to say McCartney was a simple man, living a simple life, even with “Man on the Run” trying to push this narrative. By this point, he had already amassed a huge fortune and had become one of the wealthiest musicians in history.
It’s pretty clear that McCartney used his role as the film’s executive producer to change his portrayal in the media: he’s a family man who enjoys doing honest work, from reshingling the roof to writing music, making albums, and even touring without childcare.
It is true that McCartney and Lennon chose different post-Beatles paths. In retrospect, so much of The Beatles’ history is shaped by the shocking murder of John Lennon in 1980. In the years between the band breakup and his death, Lennon captivated the public with his political protests and his music. Meanwhile, McCartney retreated from the spotlight. He went with his wife, photographer Linda McCartney, to live on a modest farmhouse on the rural west coast of Scotland. There, far from the press and scrutiny that came with being a Beatle, McCartney attempted to start over.
His solution was to form a new band, Wings. “Man on the Run” emphasizes McCartney’s perseverance. While the other Beatles members were praised for their early solo work, Wings faced mixed reviews. Through experimentation and a relentless focus on craft, however, the band finally found its footing in popular music, with the release of “Band on the Run” (1973). It was a commercial and critical breakthrough that demonstrated that McCartney could succeed on his own terms, marking it a triumphant chapter in his post-Beatles career. In the span of the 10 years following the breakup of The Beatles, Wings garnered six Billboard #1 songs, whereas Lennon only had two.
Despite Wings scoring more hits than Lennon in his solo career, Lennon has been more frequently covered in documentaries, which may stem from the perception that McCartney’s solo career was more mundane than Lennon’s, but “Man on the Run” succeeds by framing McCartney’s solo career as a new beginning, rather than being launched by his previous Beatles fame.
The most interesting part of the documentary follows McCartney and Wings on tour and the unique challenge of taking McCartney to small towns, nightclubs, and universities. The documentary shows that McCartney could have used his Beatles fame to perform in stadiums, like his former bandmates, but instead he opted for small venues. For a guy that was out of the spotlight, he sure was heavily recorded in interviews and media appearances, even if the documentary makes it appear that this wasn’t the case—another clear sign of McCartney’s impact as executive producer.
Though the film is meant to focus on McCartney’s quest to define his musical career, it does so in the shadow of The Beatles. The film was frequented by constant reflection on The Beatles and personal anecdotes shared by McCartney about his former band members. As an adult, McCartney had never been separated from The Beatles. He joined The Beatles—first called the Quarrymen—when he was 15 years old and went straight from school to touring professionally, making his transition away from The Beatles particularly difficult.
The film ultimately portrays McCartney as having succeeded in his post-Beatles career, which is something that I only partially agree with. Even with commercial success, Wings could not achieve the stardom or originality of The Beatles. The Beatles were not just pop stars. They were masters of technical innovation. Sure, McCartney experimented with home recording techniques and notably played every instrument on his debut solo album, “McCartney” (1970), but The Beatles changed the game and redefined popular music by blending genres, including rock and roll, folk, classical, and traditional Indian music. They also became experts at recording albums, and experimented with recording techniques such as playing certain parts of the song backward, notably acting as the backward vocals in “Rain” and the backward guitar solo in “I’m Only Sleeping.”
But what really made The Beatles stand out compared to other bands can be seen in the “Get Back” documentary, where the four Beatles members rehearsed and recorded their final album, “Let It Be” (1970), in one month. The four basically shared one brain—they could predict what the others would play: the timing, the right note, pulling together the perfect complement at the exact moment. This couldn’t be achieved with Wings, because as hard as McCartney tried to mimic this, the other members were always his backing band.
While “Get Back” captured the intuitive musical connection between The Beatles, the footage of “Man on the Run” focuses on McCartney learning to navigate his own solo career: it’s filled with grainy home recordings of McCartney at his Scottish farmhouse, spending time with his family, and recording music. In terms of music, the film features a mixture of popular songs, deep cuts, and unreleased tracks from McCartney’s solo music.
While much of the documentary has a rough, archival quality, it offers a unique glimpse into his life after “Let it Be.” Although much of the footage was previously unreleased, the content of the interviews, especially the ones featuring McCartney, included stories he has told many times before. Notably, McCartney recalls his heated arguments with Lennon. To humanize his friend, McCartney shared stories about how Lennon would lower his glasses and say, “It’s only me,” reminding him of their lifelong bond. For Beatles fans, this is a well-known story, and repeated in many interviews.
It feels significant that a documentary finally focuses on McCartney’s post-Beatles work, since his immense contributions to The Beatles often overshadow his later career. To this day, McCartney is still a huge touring act, but Wings’ music takes a backseat to his Beatles hits in sold-out concerts.
Though the film may not be the most original or captivating music documentary that I have ever seen, it did reframe the way that I view his solo career. The stories themselves may not be new, but seeing up close how an artist rebuilds his career from scratch and on his own terms makes it worth watching. As a Beatles fan, I enjoyed it and would recommend it to fans of the band, as well as anyone interested in one of the most creative minds in the history of popular music.
