i know i wasted 90 mins of my life.

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

Despite excellent performances by Dorff and Ian Hart, this film is a horrible melange of poor screen writing and a lack of any desire for historical accuracy. It is a horrendous misrepresentation of Sutcliffe and Lennon, and Ian Soiftley seems determined to just fill each scene with angry shouting and pointless and senseless actions to cover up the lack of character development and the lack of any reasoning for the characters' behaviors. The characters come across as the most superficial of clichés and stereotypes. One should avoid this film entirely for it is slanderous and superficial, despite being about some of the most complex and fascinating people in the history of music. The saddest thing being that people will see this film thinking it is an accurate portrayal of the people whose lives the film is based upon, and the deep and complex relationship that Sutcliffe and Lennon actually had in real life, but the inaccuracies abound. Spoiler Alert: The film shows an entirely fabricated scene that has absolutely no basis in fact whatsoever, in which Sutcliffe in a jealous rage attacks a platonic male friend of his girlfriend, Astrid. I have done research on this, and there is no basis in fact whatsoever and in truth, both Lennon and Harrison have been quoted in stating how gentle and nonviolent Sutcliffe was. This is just one of the many scenes that seem to indicate that the screenwriters just wanted to cash in by making a film about the Beatles without any true research, and to just fill each scene with as much violence and rock and roll as they could to make up for the mindless screen writing. The film limps to its closure without the viewer having any idea why any of the characters said or did anything that was played out in the film. Lennon comes across as a whiny, angry, homophobic mess, and Sutcliffe comes across as a moody jerk with no emotional depth or logic. Given the subject matter, this could have been quite a film. For a much more accurate and riveting film about Lennon and Sutcliffe, view the made for TV movie titled "Lennon."

As a huge Beatles fan this movie was actually much better than i had expected. Not sure how accurate all the smaller details were but it seemed to capture the raw energy of the early Beatles years and depicted very well just how unpleasant much of the that time must have been - a far cry from the sterile manufactured pop industry today. I really enjoyed the dialogue, interaction between the characters and the music even though there was no room for a genuine Beatles number. Whilst a massive Beatles fan generally in particular I am a massive fan and have huge respect for John Lennon as probably the greatest popular musician of all time. When you bear in mind his childhood and family background it should come as no surprise that he was such a tortured soul and, as one of the other comments puts it "had such a chip on his shoulder". We are just lucky that this manifested itself in his incredible writing and soulful singing (surely he has the most underrated voice ever - just listen to Mr Moonlight (Beatles for Sale)or it's only love if (help) you don't agree). My overriding thought at the end of this movie was just how close Stuart Sutcliffe and Lennon were and thus what a massive impact his death must have had on him. Very sad but generally an enjoyable uplifting movie. A must for all Beatles fans and pretty good entertainment for anyone else.

This movie is the Beatle fan's worst nightmare: 1. Ian Hart doesn't resemble John Lennon 2. I don't believe that John had an affair with Astrid, he was in love with Cynthia at the time. 3. The movie showed the band going to Hamburg twice, neither of those visits involved Brian Esptein, who met them in Germany. 4. George Harrison, 17 at the time, looks about 25. 5. As you already may have noticed, the movie doesn't contain a single Lennon-McCartney composition. It also never portrayed the conflict of Rock 'n' Roll music: jazz music was still popular at the time. 6. In Hamburg, the audience was hard to please. In one club, the German audience threw chairs at them, in another, drunk men got on stage and took over the mike. 7. Also,Backbeat didn't quite capture John's abrasive behavior on stage. In the movie, neither of the band mates appeared drunk, nor did they swear/yell profanities at the audience; which is whatreally happened according to one biography on the Beatles.A Hard Day's Night is much better. If you are looking for an accurate film, you've come to the wrong place, mate.

This is an excellent depiction of the Beatles ' Hamburg days .But the movie real heroes are actually Sutcliffe,Lennon and Astrid.The movie was made some years after Goldman's infamous book and there are hints at an homosexual relation between John and Stu ("you're jealous of me!"Astrid would have said to John!) but the director does not insist and he finally depicts a true friendship.He pits Stu's down-to-earth world against Astrid's chic elitist intellectual one : they go to the pictures to see Melville's "Les enfants terribles" (actually a Cocteau story),and she seems to be very fond of the French culture:Cocteau,Sartre ,Edith Piaf ,Rimbaud,;and she was ahead of her time since fifteen years later,rock singer Patti Smith had the same idols.The scenarists also sketch a parallel between the Klaus Voorman/Astrid relationship and "les enfants terribles" Ian Hart is an excellent John Lennon,in turn cynical,violent,delicate,nasty,hateful;Gary Bakewell resembles Paul,but he is not given a single moment to shine ;as for Georges ,he is completely insignificant.The music is very exciting .Even when Stu (Dorff) sings his ditty in a gleeful croak ,it's rock and roll ! At the end of the movie,the dialog begins to ring false.Everybody acts as if the Beatles were to become huge ;at the time ,who could have predicted such a career?It's a rebuilding of history a posteriori.And if the final lines about Astrid,Stu and Klaus are useful,those about the Beatles are overkill:everybody knows that they were the biggest group of all time.A must for Beatles' fans anyway.