Roger Waters Time Redux

I think it is a tragic last gasp of a bitter old man trying desperately to rewrite his own history. Make no mistake, there is nothing "progressive" about this remake, and let's be honest, remakes are inherently diametrically opposed to any hint of progressiveness. Waters' failed attempt at continued relevance has proven how irrelevant he has become. 

moshkito wrote: progaardvark wrote: ... Having said all that, it pales in comparison to the original. It's missing that raw energy that complemented the lyrics. I'd give it a 5/10. Nice for a long elevator ride. This was better than the Money redux. That felt like he put the song in a dishwasher and added a heaping bowl of pseudo-intellectual drivel. When he took it out of the dishwasher, he dressed it up with fuzzy socks and a propeller beanie. Hi, There is only one thing that bothers me, with some of these comments ... I can't believe how we WORSHIP the GODS of antiquity, specially when it comes to the arts. None of you have (more than likely) heard 5 different versions of the 5th, and how they differ from Stokowski to Karajan to Bernstein ... and yet we sit here and contemplate how much we can lash and hit on RW because he wanted to redo a few old songs ... so what? The interpretation is actually very nice, and stands up well, although the last part kinda falls off the surface of the song, and I think that is where (in the album) things were "adjusted" to make a transition ... which caused some of the lyrical, or musical events to have a smaller life than it originally had. This sacred purity of the originals is really sad for me ... it says we don't appreciate music in its various forms ... we have to suck up to the GODS of the hit, instead! Please stand up for PROGRESSIVE music ... and different interpretations, often have a new tone and idea about it all ... heck, where is the rap version of MONEY?

Stressed Cheese wrote: ...Second of all, people would likely still hate it, because it f**king sucks ass.

If you're not changing some things, what's the point of doing DSOTM again? On the other hand, if you change so much, why base it off of DSOTM in the first place? I'll tell you why. Seems like Roger had some prose or vague ideas that he knew wouldn't make for an attention-grabbing enough album, so he used DSOTM's 50th anniversary, which he knew would get 100x the media traction than another RW original album. Added bonus is that he can use this to rail against Gilmour/Mason/Wright, which only helps the media attention. This whole thing isn't a passion project, it's just cynical.

Octopus II wrote: Not sure what to make of it really. Was it really necessary to remake The Dark Side Of The Moon?

Maybe Roger needs the money. He should write a song about that. Oh, wait...

Nogbad_The_Bad wrote: Sorry its dreadful, the whole clock, drum, instrumental intro in the first two minutes has been replaced with dreary poetry, the soaring guitar section in the middle has gone, drums are much more in front but and much slower and more boring.

You’re describing the essence of “redux”.

moshkito wrote: Nogbad_The_Bad wrote: Sorry its dreadful, the whole clock, drum, instrumental intro in the first two minutes has been replaced with dreary poetry, the soaring guitar section in the middle has gone, drums are much more in front but and much slower and more boring. Hi, I wonder if we say that because we have heard the "original" so many times. No one answered the question how would you feel if it had never been done and this was a new song ... and maybe the issue here is that we're not capable of looking at it as a new song ... we have to "compare it" ... and as such, there are a lot of differences, but those don't necessarily make it worse, unless you have Tiny Tim doing the vocals for you ... or Pee Wee Herman! If I listen to it as something new, my review is already listed above ... the last part is showing how the album was "transitioned" to make room for the next piece and "keep it" within a "concept" atmosphere, which the next song, for me, in that case, would not fit! But like another song later, maybe if it was sung by Roy Harper, we might enjoy and appreciate the thing better! I'm not a fan of that song, btw, but the visuals were far out in the show.

Oh I agree, but we do have the original and it wonderful. One thing this has done is make me go back to the original which I haven't listened to in ages due to overplay. It's still wonderful.

Nogbad_The_Bad wrote: Sorry its dreadful, the whole clock, drum, instrumental intro in the first two minutes has been replaced with dreary poetry, the soaring guitar section in the middle has gone, drums are much more in front but and much slower and more boring.