[QUOTE=Ripper22]
And jesus, zepfan...I've been here a month longer and you've got about a bajillion more posts and a handful of stars. What gives? I wanna be cool... :upset: You are one awesome poster, man. I don't know how you do it.[/QUOTE]
:bows:
I just spend time here whilst "doing homework" (meaning I accomplish little in reality). 50 ppd is not really an achievement lol. I shouldn't have stars yet, but DBJ is the man :thumb: (Rep++ for sucking up lol)

I really liked the wall movie though. My friends and I analyzed it and came to the conclusion that the only part that made no sense was the ending because it was too ambiguous. Are the children gathering the bricks to rebuild the wall, or to eliminate its existence? This has bearing on the whole movie message to boot :-/

In through the outdoor, hah, NO one talks about that album...poor Zep :(

Yes, that movie was quite intresting, I seem to have not been mentaly aware of what was going on each time I watched it (or of anything else for that matter). I plan to watch it again, and this time pay more attention. I don't want it to spoil my image of what I already have of The Wall. When you listen to that album the first time, you get your story (or, it's like that with me anyways) and it sticks with you, I don't want to watch the movie, and then everytime I listen to the album, instead of my version, I'll have the movie version, which would suck if I ended up not liking it.

...if any of what I just said made sense :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=zeppelinfan2k3]:bows:
I just spend time here whilst "doing homework" (meaning I accomplish little in reality). 50 ppd is not really an achievement lol. I shouldn't have stars yet, but DBJ is the man :thumb: (Rep++ for sucking up lol)

I really liked the wall movie though. My friends and I analyzed it and came to the conclusion that the only part that made no sense was the ending because it was too ambiguous. Are the children gathering the bricks to rebuild the wall, or to eliminate its existence? This has bearing on the whole movie message to boot :-/[/QUOTE]

Good point. A good thing to keep in mind is probably the lurking presence of World War II and its history within the Floyd concept album universe. Waters moved backwards in history as far as his concepts go, tackling everyday people and their insecurities with Dark Side of The Moon, the tensions with Syd Barrett and the record company's control over creative output in Wish You Were Here, a pessimistic commentary on Communism, capitalism, and punk with "Animals," and finally Waters' father's death in World War II when he was in the British Army in "The Wall." The first animation sequence's eagle is clearly an eagle in the the Nazi mold, and there is a huge complement of war scenes at the beginning of the film. Pink is constantly watching the same war movie over and over in his hotel room. As a child, Pink is seen taking out his father's uniform and medals and putting them on. Pink is clearly fatherless as well, and this adds up to Pink's father dying in the war, just like Waters' did in real life.

When Pink turns into a Nazi-modeled dictator, like Hitler, with an army of mindless, skinheaded thugs dressed vaguely like SS members, this whole idea becomes less clear. Personally, I think an acknowledgement of Waters' hypocrisy in speaking against the dictatorship of our human desires while he was, in effect, becoming the dictator-in-chief of Pink Floyd itself is very subtly woven into this sequence. Pink's defeat is, to me, Waters' apology to Pink Floyd for usurping the band's creative input in order to fulfill his private magnum opuses.(Keep in mind also that the movie was made in '82, after Pink Floyd's creative disintigration. The lyrics that are used as a backdrop for the Pink Hitler sequence may have had a far more normal "insane rockstar" connotation within the context of the album, but in the movie, Waters may have decided to use it as a more meaningful, complicated scenario). The next album Floyd released, "The Final Cut," deals with the death of Waters' father in more detail, and the World War II imagery does not let up for a moment. Even the atmosphere of the Trial sequence makes me feel like Pink is being tried for some sort of war crime rather than adultery and insanity.

With all this in mind, and accepting that World War II and the death of Waters' father were major factors in how the eventual movie turned out, the final sequence seems to be Pink's healing of the damage caused by the Wall. The children in the scene are dressed in older-fashioned clothes, so historically this would seem to indicate Pink, once again as a child, assisting in the clean-up of town after a German air raid. So it is, in effect, Pink Floyd cleaning up the rubble that was made of his mind by the toppling of the wall and accepting his anguish at the death of his father, and clearing his mental avenues for a fresh, healthy beginning.

Good interpretation. The album itself seems to compare their fame more than the film, they see themselves becoming objects, instead of doing what they wanted to do, just play...but now they would become brainwashed with greed rather than make music.

Wasn't Waters really little when his father died?

In short, it can be described like this;

The Wall: The story of Roger Waters

so maybe despite all his best efforts of trying to apologize to the band for seeming to lead them all the time, he just released an album about himself. MY, What a wonderful guy. He must be fun to work with.

[QUOTE=~The*Lemon*Song~]Good interpretation. The album itself seems to compare their fame more than the film, they see themselves becoming objects, instead of doing what they wanted to do, just play...but now they would become brainwashed with greed rather than make music.

Wasn't Waters really little when his father died?[/QUOTE]

Yeah, he was born in '44, a year before the war ended. I assume the anguish comes from the pain of growing up in war-torn, famished Great Britain without a father and never knowing who he was, rather than the loss that would have been if Waters had known him. Personally, I think that never having such an important figure in your life is more traumatizing than having your father taken from you by circumstance. I believe that Waters felt very deep anguish over it, despite the fact that he was very young when the actual loss occured.

[QUOTE=~The*Lemon*Song~]In short, it can be described like this;

The Wall: The story of Roger Waters

so maybe despite all his best efforts of trying to apologize to the band for seeming to lead them all the time, he just released an album about himself. MY, What a wonderful guy. He must be fun to work with.[/QUOTE]

Well, David Gilmour still won't say what his current opinion on Waters is in interviews. Just to give an idea.

You raise a good point here, but in my opinion, the album and the movie exist on two somewhat different planes. The album is very much an anti-rock star story, whereas the movie, which was released years later, is more in line with Waters' current focus on the lack of his father circa the early Eighties. Therefore, an apology for his hypocrisy with Floyd within the movie, even when it came to the album itself, is still a plausible possibility.

Hmm, perhaps that explains why he's so...unfriendly?

Page was born in 1944- and look how fine he turned out. :D

I think it's rediculous that Waters and Gilmour hate eachother. I'm sure that if waters would have tamed his ego, everything would have been fine. But since both Gilmour and waters wanted the spotlight, I guess they just became enemies. I like Gilmour better though, he seems to be a more simpler character, nicer. Waters is a great musician, and he knows it, and wants everyone to know it....all of the time. I think he's just one of those people who you could meet, and want to punch in the face it like, two seconds. But he has a reason I guess. I don't know, lots of people grew up without fathers, parents even.

Edit: I think Richard Wright is awesome as well, he had a lot of input on the music that people don't credit him enough to.

Edit2: It's settled then, Wright and Gimore= coolest people from Pink Floyd (Mason looks kind of annoying too, so sorry to leave him out as well, he can share crackers with Waters)

[QUOTE=~The*Lemon*Song~]I think it's rediculous that Waters and Gilmour hate eachother. I'm sure that if waters would have tamed his ego, everything would have been fine. But since both Gilmour and waters wanted the spotlight, I guess they just became enemies. I like Gilmour better though, he seems to be a more simpler character, nicer. Waters is a great musician, and he knows it, and wants everyone to know it....all of the time. I think he's just one of those people who you could meet, and want to punch in the face it like, two seconds. But he has a reason I guess. I don't know, lots of people grew up without fathers, parents even.[/QUOTE]

Hmm, well, I think he's mellowed out a bit with age. I do agree, though, I much prefer Gilmour. But Waters' lyrical and musical brilliance cannot be overlooked. Gilmour didn't usually write the songs. Matter of fact, on the Wall, I don't think he wrote any.

Gilmour didn't write any by himself, but he co-wrote Young lust, run like hell, and comfortably numb.

True, after Waters left Pink Floyd, their music kind of went, well, I don't want to say downhill, but it definetly didn't get better. He was an a.sshole but never the less, a brilliant a.sshole.

[url]http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Plaza/3619/thewallmovie.html[/url]
:eek: The plot thickens, nice discussion you guys are having :thumb:

[QUOTE=~The*Lemon*Song~]Gilmour didn't write any by himself, but he co-wrote Young lust, run like hell, and comfortably numb.

True, after Waters left Pink Floyd, their music kind of went, well, I don't want to say downhill, but it definetly didn't get better. He was an a.sshole but never the less, a brilliant a.sshole.[/QUOTE]
The Division Bell is still one of my favorite albums actually.

Ah! Really? I don't really like that album...it seems to gospel-y. But if you like it, that's cool, I know alot of people who do. To each his own.
I think Momentary Lapse of Reason is ok though, but only because "Learning to Fly" is on it.

Yes, I like this discussion as well, I like how it actualy deals with PInk Floyd :D
Instead of: "Omg, I LOVE DSOM!"
...it's sad, I'm a newbie, [I]I[/I] should be saying such things.

...or [I]should[/I] I?
I'm a smart newbie, one who actualy knows classic rock instead of claiming to and saying stairway is the best song.
But enough about me, I'm turning into Waters here.

Yes, no more head enlargement for you. :p

[QUOTE=~The*Lemon*Song~]I think it's rediculous that Waters and Gilmour hate eachother. I'm sure that if waters would have tamed his ego, everything would have been fine. But since both Gilmour and waters wanted the spotlight, I guess they just became enemies. I like Gilmour better though, he seems to be a more simpler character, nicer. Waters is a great musician, and he knows it, and wants everyone to know it....all of the time. I think he's just one of those people who you could meet, and want to punch in the face it like, two seconds. But he has a reason I guess. I don't know, lots of people grew up without fathers, parents even.

Edit: I think Richard Wright is awesome as well, he had a lot of input on the music that people don't credit him enough to.

Edit2: It's settled then, Wright and Gimore= coolest people from Pink Floyd (Mason looks kind of annoying too, so sorry to leave him out as well, he can share crackers with Waters)[/QUOTE]

Gilmour has always been my favorite in the group, his guitarwork never stops amazing me. It would be cool if him and Roger would make up, but I dont see that happening anytime soon.

Out of the whole group, I gotta say Nick is the weakest link. From what I know, he hasnt written too many songs(or any), and his drumming wasnt anything special.

Hey! Why'd you change your name, Gilmour? I liked you that way...

[QUOTE=zeppelinfan2k3]:bows:
I just spend time here whilst "doing homework" (meaning I accomplish little in reality). 50 ppd is not really an achievement lol. I shouldn't have stars yet, but DBJ is the man :thumb: (Rep++ for sucking up lol)

I really liked the wall movie though. My friends and I analyzed it and came to the conclusion that the only part that made no sense was the ending because it was too ambiguous. Are the children gathering the bricks to rebuild the wall, or to eliminate its existence? This has bearing on the whole movie message to boot :-/[/QUOTE]


I'd say they're rebuilding it. If you listen to Outside The Wall on max volume, you can hear them saying "isn't this where" at the end. Likewise, if you listen to In The Flesh? at max volume, it says "we came in?" at the beginning. If you have it looped, its just like a normal sentence. My interpretation is that, even when the Wall comes down, you still go back in, and the Wall comes back up.

[QUOTE=~The*Lemon*Song~]Gilmour didn't write any by himself, but he co-wrote Young lust, run like hell, and comfortably numb.

True, after Waters left Pink Floyd, their music kind of went, well, I don't want to say downhill, but it definetly didn't get better. He was an a.sshole but never the less, a brilliant a.sshole.[/QUOTE]

Thats what Waters would like you to believe. Every guitar solo on that album? Written by Gilmour. When Waters finished ABITW pt. 2, it was just an acoustic guitar. Nothing but the chord progression. Without Gilmour, it would've just been another Pigs on the Wing. Gilmour had way more influence than Waters gives him credit for.

[QUOTE=DeusExMachina]I'd say they're rebuilding it. If you listen to Outside The Wall on max volume, you can hear them saying "isn't this where" at the end. Likewise, if you listen to In The Flesh? at max volume, it says "we came in?" at the beginning. If you have it looped, its just like a normal sentence. My interpretation is that, even when the Wall comes down, you still go back in, and the Wall comes back up.[/QUOTE]

That's on the album, true enough, but NOT in the movie. Read my post and tell me if you think I'm onto something, because the movie and the album exist on slightly different planes of thought as far as I'm concerned. Waters wrote the script for the movie years after the music, and may have changed the movie's scenery and progression of events to fit a current opinion that had changed since the making of the album. The album and the movie are not one and the same.

As to that little production decision, keep in mind it could just be a joke. It is where we came in. Not everything in Floyd is neccessarily a brilliant conceptual choice.

PS: therefore my conclusion at the end of the movie "The Wall" (not the album), is that the damage of the Wall's collapse is being cleaned up. There is an element of the "isn't this where we came in," in the sense that we are again seeing Pink as a young boy, but all the other things are very important. The World War II imagery is even more relevant to the movie than the rock star sequences, and it is much more integral when it comes to figuring out what's going on. There's a much deeper history to Pink's failure as an adult than simply the obvious decadence of rock star life. This is where being a history buff counts. :thumb:

[QUOTE]The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, Ohio had a Wall display during their psychedelic exhibition. The following was written on the back of the display by Roger Waters:



The Wall


In the Old Days, pre-Dark Side of the Moon,
Pink Floyd played to audiences which,
by virtue of their size, allowed an intimacy of
connection that was magical.


However, success overtook us and by 1977
we were playing in football stadiums.


The magic, crushed beneath the weight of
numbers. We were becoming addicted to
the trappings of popularity.


I found myself increasingly alienated in
that atmosphere of avarice and ego until
one night in the Olympic Stadium, Montreal,
the boil of my frustrations burst.


Some crazed teenage fan was clawing his
way up the storm netting that separated
us from the human cattle pen in front of the
stage screaming his devotion to the demi-gods
beyond his reach.


Incensed by his misunderstanding and
my own connivance, I spat my frustration in
his face.


Later that night; back at the hotel
shocked by my behaviour I was faced with a choice.


To deny my addiction and embrace that
"comfortably numb" but "magic-less" existence
or accept the burden of insight, take
the road less travelled and embark on the
often painful journey to discover who I was
and where I fit.


The Wall was the picture I drew for myself
to help me make that choice.


Roger Waters
Summer, 1995[/QUOTE]


[URL=http://www.allfloyd.com/misc/Waters.html]http://www.allfloyd.com/misc/Waters.html[/URL]

[QUOTE=Ravyn][URL=http://www.allfloyd.com/misc/Waters.html]http://www.allfloyd.com/misc/Waters.html[/URL][/QUOTE]

I do not doubt that this incidence--the frustration of being a rock star--was the inspiration for the Wall. But Waters' eventual journey through his mind and his history--his figuring out "who he was and where he fit"--led him past the rock star life and back to his childhood and the death of his father. The movie even more so, as Waters was now no longer a rock star and the ideas in his head about his life being more developed: the war becomes a central feature. The problems in the present inspired Waters to look for the problems in the past, and the story changed over time to be about those historical problems. They directly influenced the problems Waters had in the present.

[QUOTE=Ripper22]That's on the album, true enough, but NOT in the movie. Read my post and tell me if you think I'm onto something, because the movie and the album exist on slightly different planes of thought as far as I'm concerned. Waters wrote the script for the movie years after the music, and may have changed the movie's scenery and progression of events to fit a current opinion that had changed since the making of the album. The album and the movie are not one and the same.

As to that little production decision, keep in mind it could just be a joke. It is where we came in. Not everything in Floyd is neccessarily a brilliant conceptual choice.

PS: therefore my conclusion at the end of the movie "The Wall" (not the album), is that the damage of the Wall's collapse is being cleaned up. There is an element of the "isn't this where we came in," in the sense that we are again seeing Pink as a young boy, but all the other things are very important. The World War II imagery is even more relevant to the movie than the rock star sequences, and it is much more integral when it comes to figuring out what's going on. There's a much deeper history to Pink's failure as an adult than simply the obvious decadence of rock star life. This is where being a history buff counts. :thumb:[/QUOTE]

I think you definitely could be on to something. However, the movie only came out two years after the album. Waters started working on the movie pretty soon after the album came out.

[QUOTE=Ripper22]Hey! Why'd you change your name, Gilmour? I liked you that way...[/QUOTE]

:lol: I that name made me feel lame

[QUOTE=Gilmour]:lol: I that name made me feel lame[/QUOTE]
I hope you won't regret that in the future :lol:

[QUOTE=DeusExMachina]I think you definitely could be on to something. However, the movie only came out two years after the album. Waters started working on the movie pretty soon after the album came out.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, ok. But it's still a smaller factor in the album too: "Bring the Boys Back Home" and all of the early "Mother" and "Babe" songs are all relevant to WWII. In addition, the sound of a plane crashing in "In The Flesh?" would also indicate this. It shows that Waters was at least thinking about the role his father's death played, although the album is clearly more rock-star-centric than the movie.

Agreed. The album definitely has WWII themes, but they're much more relevant in the movie. He also links the megalomaniac rockstar/WWII themes in the movie. For instance, the beginning sequence, showing scenes of the battles interspersed with the mindless mass going to the concert.

What do you guys think of later Floyd albums?

Like, [I]Division Bell[/I] and [I]Momentary Lapse of Reason[/I].

Personally I like them. They don't touch on the genius of earlier material, but they still decent records.

I like em. Still the same sound though, they learned well from Waters (I say this because he wrote most of their old stuff, and they still sound similar)

I agree with the consensus here. They are very good albums, (Floyd's worst is better than several bands best), but they pale in comparison to Meddle, The Wall, etc.

good abulms......just not pink floyd's standard

anyone here know what kinda drums nick mason used?

[QUOTE=thelizardkingcc]anyone here know what kinda drums nick mason used?[/QUOTE]

My guess would be ludwigs.

Edit: Turns out that he used Premiers for Pink Floyds prime. He used a Ludwig kit in the 80s and sometimes on live tours.

I think AMLOR leave something to be desired... however, I am a huge fan of The Division Bell. I think its a great album. Roger Waters, in an interview, said "its a very good imitation of pink floyd," and i'm assuming thats the closest thing to a compliment he will ever say about David Gilmour's work. Besides, if you ask me, David Gilmour's current work is way better than Roger Waters' curren work. I mean, listen to Smile, from the David Gilmour DVD, and then listen to the two new Waters songs from his website. No comparison at all. Plus, Roger Waters solo albums aren't that good. Radio KAOS is alright, but the rest are pretty average. And I am not a huge fan of The Final Cut.

I'm going to see the Australian Pink Floyd in a few days, the trailers look awesome :) . Could somebody give me some insight on how it is overall?

[QUOTE=Orange Fog]I'm going to see the Australian Pink Floyd in a few days, the trailers look awesome :) . Could somebody give me some insight on how it is overall?[/QUOTE]

It's incredible. You won't regret going. They play great songs (as if everything by Pink Floyd wasn't great), and sound pretty much spot on. Did to me at least, but I saw them awhile ago, back when I didn't know much about music... Are they still performing DSOTM?

It'd be nice if the Australian Pink Floyd show would tour Aus again. :p

I saw the Pink Floyd laser show last night. The whole thing was WWII based basically, except for when they were just showing laser graphics.

[QUOTE=Tangy zizzle]What do you guys think of later Floyd albums?

Like, [I]Division Bell[/I] and [I]Momentary Lapse of Reason[/I].

Personally I like them. They don't touch on the genius of earlier material, but they still decent records.[/QUOTE]

I have Dark Side of the Moon and Mometary Lapse of Reason. I listened to DSOTM and was blown away, then I listened to MLoR, and was still impressed, just not as much.