Mark Staycer fakes being fake John Lennon

John Lennon liked to fuck with us. He was not a liberal or a peacenik, he was not wicked smart or deep. But he did have a crafty sense of theater about him. He knew how cool we thought he was, and handled that aspect of his public personality very well. He never let on who or what he really was.

The movie Let Him Be, which I have here, is a typical Lennon tease. The premise of the movie is that a young Lennon fan (who looks enough like Lennon to be his son) stumbles on a discarded recording showing an older John Lennon alive. He then searches for Lennon in an area north of Toronto where the tape was discovered. He finds a man who looks and sounds like Lennon, but is in the end disappointed. His girlfriend discovers that the Lennon-lookalike does not have bullet wound scars in his back. Therefore, not Lennon.

That’s a nice tease, as it plays with the idea that Lennon was really shot. But what if he wasn’t? I am so inured now the fake death that I imagine he had left New York that day, and viewed news coverage of his death from a safe hiding place and cracked jokes about it.  They can fake death on TV very easily, as people imagine that everything they see on the news is true.

Staycer 2
Mark Staycer

Typical of Lennon, Let Him Be is a switch inside a switch. We are led to believe that a man named Mark Staycer, a Lennon impersonator, is the star of the movie, and that they have fitted him with a face mask to look like him. But deep down, we are to suspect Mark Staycer is John Lennon dressed down so as NOT to look like Lennon.

As I said, Lennon does like to fuck with us. Mark Staycer is not Lennon. He’s misdirection. But there is in the movie a man who look and sounds an awful lot like John Lennon. His name in the movie is Noel Snow, but he is really John Lennon. Yes, Lennon too faked his death. (And no, he was not on the Space Shuttle Challenger that day either.)

But it was difficult to get a straight on shot of Lennon in the movie, as they went to great lengths to camouflage him. There’s nothing useful on the Internet. So I went to the movie, and took a picture of our TV screen as Lennon was singing, behind a large microphone of course. See below the fold for the results.

Lennon Staycer 3

Lennon had a unique nose, which lines up nicely here, along with eyes and skull shape. Of course, because they did not want us to see him clearly, we cannot be sure. Further they will claim they made Staycer look like Lennon by means of makeup.

But check this out: Mark Staycer and John Lennon – they don’t begin to match up. Mark Staycer is, as I said, just misdirection. (It appears that Lennon does dress up like Staycer for a few photos, classic Intel sowing of confusion. But the character Mark Staycer is not Lennon, though Lennon plays Staycer on occasion. Confused?)

Lennon Staycer 4

There are several possibilities that confound that comparison – Staycer might have been chosen to be the fake-fake Lennon because his nose looks a lot like Lennon’s. They could have monkeyed with the photo, always a possibility when dealing with spooks. (Yes, John Lennon was an intelligence asset, as were all five of the Beatles.) Or Lennon could be in heavy makeup. My guess: It is not Lennon.

The guy who played Noel Snow was, in my opinion, John Lennon.

35 thoughts on “Mark Staycer fakes being fake John Lennon

  1. I saw the movie once and was so put off by the lead young guy’s clumsy performance and the forced conflict with his woman that I didn’t pay too close attention- I should look at the final scenes again- Was the cop that busts up the birthday concert named Edgar? Maybe I’m just projecting- Also, what parent wants an old, loud rock band to play at an adolescent girl’s birthday party? (I was a film major and made movies so I can be one of those annoying nit pickers)
    My main question about this whole affair is: If the Fab Four (five) were tools, why make this film? If Lennon isn’t really a passionate musician who still likes a little publicity, but a hired talent, one has to consider that the purpose of the film isn’t for him to fuck with us but something broader and deeper, the effects of which haven’t yet matured- Right now I’m thinking The Beatles integrity is being systematically demolished as part of the overall destruction of the culture, of craftsmanship and discipline, and links with past masters- Regardless of the fact that The Beatles may have not been what we have been sold, the idea of them being singular talents merged by providence and their own instincts to succeed as no one before or since is being deliberately exposed as a fraud, by design, to demoralize the few old bastards who might pass some of their experience to a younger generation- God knows the mindbenders don’t want this new generation of gadget addicted young’uns to be able to make their own distractions- Just today I saw two toddlers strapped in their strollers and ignoring their spoon fed lunch to play with their hand held gadgets, a video game with cartoon trains- At that age, a kid either eats, pukes or sleeps, but not these two lost souls- They were already immersed in wonderland, as Morpheus labelled the Matrix- All is lost…..urp!


    1. Good points – I did forget to mention that it is a bad movie. But if you read the Mathis paper, you might pick up on the resemblance between the young actor and Lennon, leading us to suspect that perhaps he got the part because he is John Lennon’s son. Beyond that, however, the music sounded like Lennon, the attitude was Lennon, and the lyrics cry out “I was there!”

      I am going to write about John Denver one of these days, as I have (and you have seen) a video said to be made in 1993 that looks more like 2009, when it was put up on YouTube. It is Denver singing Mother Natures Child. Also note that Paul (or Mike) McCartney outed himself in front of his family residence. So you could be right. It could be systematic. I was more inclined to think these guys are drawn to porch lights like fireflies.


      1. The egos are there but I know real musicians, some with impressive track records (pun), and unless they give themselves over to The Man and do as he says without hesitation, they never get as far as they could- That’s because musicians are C.R.A.Z.Y.!!!! Without Tavistock or MI6 or whoever plotted and executed The Beatles project, those lads would have never gotten out of the Liverpool dives- And the turnover in personnel would have guaranteed it- Musicians are impulsive and disorganized and run on high octane intuition and are incredibly self-destructive career wise, not to mention the occasional addiction, usually to speed derivatives- The massive ego that needs to wow an audience is the same ego that won’t concede to another band members concerns- Infighting kills more careers than drugs or alcohol, IMO-
        Case in point: I work with two real musicians with track records and they are involved in a group project that everyone should have known about two or three years ago, but because of internal strife, and despite the lead singer being VERY well connected, they are still playing local joints and the long unfinished album remains on the shelf-

        Liked by 1 person

        1. So, the Staycer project is part of a larger fucking with us project …”…that the purpose of the film isn’t for him to fuck with us but something broader and deeper, the effects of which haven’t yet matured.” We need to trace the origins of the McCartney video then. I tried with the Denver video, half-heartedly, emailing an address whose sponsor claimed to have been part of the production team in 1993. But that expensive quality video would not be made to sit on the shelf, would have been released when the Denver market was hot, around 1999 or so. For it to sit on the shelf ten years and for no revenue makes no sense.

          There is an underground of savvy people who pick up on these things, so it should not surprise that even savvier people lay out golden apples for us.


          1. honestly, the deeper meaning is probably the title of the movie. Let Him Be. Stop investigating John Lennon, he has played his part, his tenure is over. The movie provides two things for him, closure with theorists about whether or not he is alive and a facet for him to excercise his ego.


          2. If he needs a means by which to exercise his ego, fine. If he wants to appear in movies, then he invites public scrutiny. We are not looking for him, we are leaving him be. We are merely getting the word out to folks that he is alive, or at least was in 2008. But no one is going through trash in Toronto looking for his discarded mail. At least I hope.


            1. You are right. I didn’t see the movie but I do know John is alive and have many recordings of him speaking and playing new songs, some he wrote. He is also a Christian which is the most important point I want to make.
              God Bless,


              1. Steve, you are surely “in the know’ and you know what you are talking about!
                I’m one of the few people who is not an insider who knows what’s going on in the matrix.
                The reason why you called Lennon a Christian is because another pseudonym for John Lennon is Pope Francis! He may call himself a Christian by name but he & the Catholic church is far from being Christian. The Catholic church is a pagan in nature and is false Christianity! No real Christian would belong to a secret society, take blood oaths & take part in a trauma based mind control psyop played on society which is just the tip of the iceberg. Lennon is a Freemason and they are all Luciferian satanists! I actually believe Lennon is the false prophet antichrist but that’s just my opinion. Lennon’s other pseudonyms are Robin Gibb, Steve Jobs, Peter Sellers, Buddy Holly and many more!
                The same shit has been going on with all famous people so this isn’t just an isolate incident. John Lennon once said that we live in a society controlled by madmen, he was talking about himself…


      2. To make things more interesting, I would say I’ve been blessed with an excellent memory and great detail. In the early 1970’s a local new report here in ri closed out with a story from new York. A new York reporter, question Lennon on the status on his imagration, he was hopefully optimistic about the out come.then the reporter ask what will you do John if it doesn’t work out, ( I guess I could always move to Canada change my name to something like Noel snow) John giggled got in the limo and drove the time I didn’t give it much thought. Now a movie let him be a character by the name Noel snow. I’m 10000000% I know this interview happened like it was yesterday, good luck trying to dig this up I believe it was 5 news in New York.


  2. there is a chap some years ago on YouTube making very cryptic videos, hinting at being John Lennon. Kind of laughable at first, but one of the videos seemed to have been filmed from the window of the Dakota… And then the comments section, whoever it was sure “sounded” a lot like Lennon!
    I am of the same mind as you with this part of the story. I do indeed think that John faked his death, but Mark Staycer is not John- but probably knows a lot more than he is willing to say.
    Thanks for the write up!!


  3. If you follow the lead of Miles and get your hands on the DVD you will find the interviews as intriguing as the premise of the movie. Staycer does a better Liverpool accent than his half assed american accent. Also, You can still obtain the CD that contains many tracks not in the movie. There is no way that music was written to accompany a crappy movie. It has some very good Lennon pieces on it. I don’t buy the story that it was put together by a guy who in the interviews said he didn’t even own any Beatles music until he was put on the project. Even Miles states that it looks like they went out of their way to make Staycer not look like Lennon. The interview even shows them making the fake nose for John and there was virtually no material added. I agree that Noel looks more like John because that’s when they let him perform without being made up to be someone else. Bottom line is that purchasing the DVD and the CD are really key pieces to making any sense of all this.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I ordered the CD (from “Abracadabra”) but it never came. I got mixed results when comparing Staycer to Lennon, meaning that they could have used him both ways, but decided that if Staycer was a different person one time, that was probably the point, to use him as misdirection while Lennon worked behind him and then disappeared again. And Staycer usually wears dark sunglasses, no accident, making this type of comparison difficult and too guessy to be useful.



    CDbaby is the site I ordered it from. It also has some clips you can listen to. People also have to remember that this is not a 40 year old John we would be listening to. Funny thing is that there is very little info on the CD packaging itself. Odd of Musicians to not want credit for their work. If you really want to go off the deep end,,, some guitar rifs on the cd sound like George 🙂


  5. Well, I know I sure found it curious with all the Beatles memorabilia that Staycer has. Being a Beatle collector myself, besides being insanely jealous- it is hard to imagine where/how he got some of those things.


  6. You are right. I didn’t see the movie but I do know John is alive and have many recordings of him speaking and playing new songs, some he wrote. He is also a Christian which is the most important point I want to make.
    God Bless,


  7. I never knew about this guy Mark Staycer and this movie ‘Let Him Be’ until a couple of weeks ago when I was looking at some other things on Youtube. Then there’s this guy Gary Gibson who impersonates John. I did find the album, by Abracadabra called ‘Listen to the Picture’, available on ITunes. If the movie was made in 2009 John would be 69. If I closed my eyes and listen it could be John in that home recording studio. I have not seen the whole movie just trailers. The height look right and taking into consideration the age. I find it somewhat amusing that this band with someone sounding like John would be called ‘Abracadabra’. with roots back to Hebrew meaning ‘I create what I speak’. John always spoke in allegory. It would be so like him to sit back and laugh and probably be profoundly moved by the love that the world has for him and his music. To Steve above who said ‘John is alive’. Have you met him face to face? I, too, would be interested in not only what he’s writing musically but as importantly his voice in the current political circus. John could be ‘Christian’ but I always felt he was so beyond ‘labels’ and if you look at the lyrics of the song ‘God’ He starts out with ‘God is a concept’. The part that threw me off in the trailer that I saw was when the cake is brought and his reaction which didn’t seem like him at all. Nothing would make me happier to think that John is alive, living in rural Ontario, unbeknowst to but a few in the world. It made me wonder if it really is John..has Paul been in on this for 37 years? The only was to find out for sure would be DNA. Then it could not be refuted. At the end of ‘God’ John sings..’The dream is over. What can I say? The dream is over. Yesterday (multiple meanings) I was the dreamweaver. BUT NOW I’M REBORN (more multiple meanings) I was the walrus. But now I’m John. And so, dear friends. You’ll just have to carry on.The dream is over.’ What dream is over? The Beatles? The illusion of John being alive. John is a very intelligent song writer and trickster.Finally searching for the actors in ‘Let Him Be’ it does list Mark Staycer. I felt let down but then again it’s all an enigma…the unknowing wanting to know, without reservation, the truth. I enjoyed everyone’s comments and look forward to more.


  8. The guy singing at the end of the movie, and the guy singing on the album are 2 different people. If it were true, The guy singing in the white shirt(Noel Snow) in the movie is Lennon. The guy singing on the album is probably Staycer. There is no way some unknown film director wrote those songs. There are no credits on the album. The lyrics are too good! John never wasted a lyric. Who knows what’s true or not, but if he has been alive this whole time, we will never know…


  9. Actually, you’re wrong on the ending of the movie. I’ve watched the movie Let Him Be, and in the end his girlfriend does find out it is John. A minute before the end, when she spends the night and John offers her coffee in the morning, she gasps and says “Oh my god your back.”
    It’s a nice thought for him to be alive somewhere, but that’s just because some people can’t come to grips with the fact he was murdered almost 40 years ago.
    John is dead.


    1. I think that scene was thrown in to reinforce the notion that he was really shot, and survived his wounds. Just more misdirection. He didn’t die then, wasn’t shot, but was removed from view either due to lack of real talent or to kill hope in the population. Or both. My take is that he was an overblown and overhyped lightly talented guitar strummer who did not write the music attributed to him and did not do any instrumentation other than muscle memory stuff in the early days. His “death” is replete with rabbit holes, CIA, man in the door, shots fired the wrong direction, all par for this sort of hoax. Complete phony, probably still alive somewhere.


      1. The wound seen seems calculated to protect his manufactured integrity. Having been shot, he is justified in faking his death. Having merely faked his death, he is unworthy of his public myth.

        I think the strongest motive for once popular artists to fake their death is simply profit. Lennon was at the end of his marketability. Double Fantasy had been panned by many critics. This Hegelian Kabuki show caused this marginal album to go double platinum. It also caused sales of all of his other music to spike and to become a permanent industry, a fate that would never have materialized had he merely faded away into middle age and complete irrelevance as just another rich, sold out jerk.

        In short, these hoaxed deaths (e.g., Denver, Bowie, Morrison, Hendrix, Cornell, Bennington, Petty, Williams, etc.) make all involved far richer than they would be in the absence of a dramatic, well-publicized death. These people are also narcissists by nature. They get to move on and watch millions mourn.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I agree in total … well, almost. Let’s take three other faked deaths: Bobby Fuller, Janis Joplin, Brandon DeWilde, who became Bill O’Reilly, Amy Goodman and Thom Hartmann, respectively. That’s a conservative, very liberal and moderate liberal newscaster, in order. There’s little there in the way of residuals for former life’s work. Joplin was overhyped and promoted as a musical genius by power of suggestion, but I doubt any of her stuff sold that much then or now. (She was a set of twins, by the way, easily seen once you know that.) The other two … nothing. Yet there they are, still implanted (they are getting old, I am in past tense I realize) in the system and leading the festival of lies called news. There is much more to fake deaths than mere money. The whole scene is part of “All the world’s a stage.”

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I know far too little about Bobby Fuller or Brandon DeWilde to speculate, but I suspect the Joplin Estate made considerably more than the living “Joplin”. She still gets hype from various PR machines, most recently from Neoconservative Propaganda Radio (NPR). I should have included Bill Hicks in my list. After hitting and holding a low plateau and entering a terminal popularity dive, he and his handlers clearly decided to take his peculiar talents in a different direction. I see you have done excellent work on that case. But, sure, some of the talent from the intel stable gets recycled if managers believe it can be put to better use elsewhere. Or, as in the case of “hysterical woman”, the same talent can be recast in similar roles until deemed ineffective or risky.

            I’d enjoy having a look at any photo studies you’ve done on O’Reilly, Goodman, and Hartmann, the latter two being among the most treacherous and disingenuous disinfo ops in history (i.e., Cronkite-level).


          2. I should add, since we are on the Mark Staycer comment thread, that I sort of gave up on Lennon/Staycer, that is, there was one Staycer who was a dead ringer for John Lennon, and another who was not. It was going place I did not care to tread.


Leave a Reply to joe mamma Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s