I've gotten the impression that the critics working for magazines like Rolling Stone while the 60s were still happening (and all those classic albums were coming out) by and large took a sort of turning-30 holier-than-thou hipster attitude towards most of those bands and that includes the Beatles, before they were even done. We all know Abbey Road got panned in RS, something they'd never do today. Lester Bangs infamously took pot shots at the Doors, calling Morrison "Bozo Dionysus." But I know the Ram RS pan, by future Springsteen manager Jon Landau, was infamously brutal, and for some reason cited the song "Heart Of The Country" as the worst thing ever recorded, or something like that.
And you can go look on Christgau's very own website and see that he tore All Things Must Pass a new bunghole. Like a C- or something (which is basically an D- from him.)
It's up to you to decide how to feel about it--I disagree with negative opinions of these albums but it's sort of fascinating to think RS once did this sort of thing, as opposed to today, when any "classic" artist gets automatic four-stars-out-of-five (if not five-out-of-five) for whatever new release they crap out.
It would be weird, that being said, to imagine the Lennon albums getting panned in RS, because it was to RS that he busy pouring his ugly soul out in those days and talking about how he hated being in the Beatles after 1966 or whatever.