Big big colossal Syd Barrett fan here. This sounds like a decent doc. But moved to groan aloud in the theater? Maybe I won’t try to chase it down in select theaters. Maybe I’ll just wait until it’s available on Tubi.
I do understand that sentiment, Mitch — lists like that are certainly an easy trope, and too often substituted for meaningful analysis. At the same time, pop music doesn't really happen in a vacuum, so as a pop music history obsessive (much like yourself) I have always found it interesting to trace the various strands of an artist's influence, whether obvious or not so much. Huge fan of your (ahem, influential) work, btw...
Ideally, haha! But rankings are a whole different ballgame — one I try not to play anymore, because the "greatness" of any given song or album or artist is just so damn subjective in so many ways...
Those fantasy scenes sound like a real bummer. And not covering the last 30 years is pretty much malpractice in my book. It’s almost the most interesting thing about the story.
There's a smattering of stuff included from those decades, but — with the exception of the fact that he apparently to declare bankruptcy in the early 80s, and he once walked all the way to Cambridge from London because he had no money — it really wasn't anything that the casual Syd fan wouldn't already know.
Great review, I'm a fan of Syd, but will probably wait til it hits the library here, so I can whiz past (and on) the insufferable "art projects" of the doc.
This is great. I wish I wrote it. No mention of Matilda Mother? JK. Dude also changed my life, and I listened to the audio book of “Stories” by Dave Grohl. Narrated by Dave Grohl, whose cousin changed his life😂. We should discuss ‘Animals’ the musical translation of the book book in every conceivable way. Ever consider that the revolution in the book that comes full circle, also is reflected in the 2 book end tracks? Wicked Article
That interviewer must have stuck with them. Roger and Nick mention it in this (great) clip. It's referenced in the last question, but the whole thing is worth your time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DawCpKEJFUM
OMG, Dan. This was a great read. When I was in Jr. High in the '80s, I really got into Pink Floyd with Momentary Lapse of Reason. In the small town I lived in, we had one record store that could order titles for you out of a big catalog. I found the Syd double album in there and waited. And waited. After about 9 months it finally arrived (much to the relief of the store owner, so my 14-year-old dumbass would stop pestering him about it). I listened to it quite a bit, and I found the Peel Session EP by chance on a trip to the Twin Cities. Add in Opel in 1989, and I had all of his output until Gilmour dug out a track he had tucked away decades later. But by the time I got to college, Pink Floyd weren't that cool anymore to me, and people I'd play Syd Barrett for were more alarmed that someone would choose to listen to him than see his greatness. So the Syd Barrett albums got tucked to the back only to come out when someone actually knew who he was (so not often). In the last few years since his death, I'd pull out those records more, and then I started to see his influence everywhere in the other music I liked.
I'm glad you wrote this review, as it covers the same things that would bug me. You'd think it'd be pretty easy to get a group of musicians to talk about his influence or have some scholarly type show where his influence loomed on say Bowie and how that influence played forward.
I'll be interested in watching the documentary at some point. But it's a shame more isn't done to plow new ground into what his influence was through 1 (and a quarter) Pink Floyd album and two solo albums where you can hear the frustration of everyone around him just trying to get on with it.
Cringeworthy fantasy sequences by Storm almost ruined it. Then again, Storm was the perfect person to be doing the interviews, because he was there from the beginning and knew all these people back then. It was almost more of a conversation with old friends. So, I'll give him a break. But he seriously lost it over the years IMO. His album covers had become a parody of Hipgnosis.
It was nice to see a lot of older friends talking about Barrett when he was younger, and some of the comments by rock stars were pretty good (e.g., Gilmour saying he should have gone up to see him). Also nice to get a bit more detail on things like the 1975 EMI meeting and the 1968 U.S. tour.
They played a bit fast and loose with the music. After talking about 'Madcap Laughs', a few minutes later started talking about 'Barrett' but then played a song from 'Madcap' to illustrate it. Stuff like that may have worked in terms of editing/making their point, but weren't really accurate. It felt like there was a point they were trying to make, but I would have been happier with just interviews and actual clips.
Also, there was some stuff said like "Who knows what he was thinking all those 25 years he lived up in Cambridge?" Well, his sister who took care of him probably does know exactly what he was like and the kinds of things he did and thought about. It may be personal so not to be shared (e.g., if he couldn't even dress himself or something) and I'm fine with not knowing, but it seemed like the filmmakers were trying to act like it was still a big mystery. I might have misinterpreted that bit, but again, it seemed like they were trying to make a dramatic point that was kind of not necessary.
What’s most maddening about this and other recent high-profile rock music films (‘Rocketman’ ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’) is that, being the big-budget versions and often with involvement and sanctioning by the artist, they come across as the definitive story. But often they’re flawed and, again, play fast and loose with the details - not just by accident, but because they’re big-budget and have to appeal to a bunch of “stakeholders”. This film was less heinous than ‘Rocketman’ and ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’, in which the artists deliberately spread inaccuracies about themselves. But it muddies the waters and makes it harder to know the real story, and now there won't be another Elton, Queen or Syd biography. (Don’t get me started on colorized B&W images. :) )
Such a great read… You continue to knock ‘em out of the ballpark, Dan! This line really resonated with me, “— if you’re trying to raise funds for your documentary, potential investors are generally far more dazzled by the “get” of a well-known talking head than they are by the inclusion of an obscure person who was an actual participant in (or witness to) the events your film is discussing.” I know it too well.
It’s a total bummer when you’re one of the obscure people and the Rockumentary gets completely distorted just for potential profit. That’s OK, that’s what podcasts are for. 😉
Big big colossal Syd Barrett fan here. This sounds like a decent doc. But moved to groan aloud in the theater? Maybe I won’t try to chase it down in select theaters. Maybe I’ll just wait until it’s available on Tubi.
I actually would have screamed “Nooooo!!!” at the screen during a couple of these segments if there hadn’t been other people in the theater with me! 🤣
“Nooooo!! Don’t show Syd wrestling with him self in symbolic gesture of foray into LSD induced psychosis!!!”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31g0YE61PLQ
😂
This makes an excellent chapter of a future book, Dan. I learned a lot...as a casual Pink Floyd fan, I knew next to nothing about Syd.
Right on, Matt! I highly recommend checking out his stuff (and doing so before you watch the doc).
Maybe lists of artists influenced by (somebody) should be avoided. I feel couple of different types of cringe every time I read one.
I do understand that sentiment, Mitch — lists like that are certainly an easy trope, and too often substituted for meaningful analysis. At the same time, pop music doesn't really happen in a vacuum, so as a pop music history obsessive (much like yourself) I have always found it interesting to trace the various strands of an artist's influence, whether obvious or not so much. Huge fan of your (ahem, influential) work, btw...
Hi Dan,
Thanks for your kind comments! I haven’t seen the film, but I enjoyed your take on it. From your description I suspect I’d feel the same.
I do understand the utility of lists and rankings, and while I dread them I know most people love ‘em. Anyway, this is all good clean fun, right?
Ideally, haha! But rankings are a whole different ballgame — one I try not to play anymore, because the "greatness" of any given song or album or artist is just so damn subjective in so many ways...
Those fantasy scenes sound like a real bummer. And not covering the last 30 years is pretty much malpractice in my book. It’s almost the most interesting thing about the story.
There's a smattering of stuff included from those decades, but — with the exception of the fact that he apparently to declare bankruptcy in the early 80s, and he once walked all the way to Cambridge from London because he had no money — it really wasn't anything that the casual Syd fan wouldn't already know.
Great review, I'm a fan of Syd, but will probably wait til it hits the library here, so I can whiz past (and on) the insufferable "art projects" of the doc.
Yeah, the "FWD" button on the remote will definitely be your friend here...
This is great. I wish I wrote it. No mention of Matilda Mother? JK. Dude also changed my life, and I listened to the audio book of “Stories” by Dave Grohl. Narrated by Dave Grohl, whose cousin changed his life😂. We should discuss ‘Animals’ the musical translation of the book book in every conceivable way. Ever consider that the revolution in the book that comes full circle, also is reflected in the 2 book end tracks? Wicked Article
No mention at all of "Matilda Mother," now that you mention it!
I love the interview on The Look by someone who looks to me like a Viennese psychiatrist . "Why does it have to be so terribly loud?"
I love that, too — and I love that Roger and Syd seem more amused than offended by his rant.
And they held it so well.
That interviewer must have stuck with them. Roger and Nick mention it in this (great) clip. It's referenced in the last question, but the whole thing is worth your time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DawCpKEJFUM
OMG, Dan. This was a great read. When I was in Jr. High in the '80s, I really got into Pink Floyd with Momentary Lapse of Reason. In the small town I lived in, we had one record store that could order titles for you out of a big catalog. I found the Syd double album in there and waited. And waited. After about 9 months it finally arrived (much to the relief of the store owner, so my 14-year-old dumbass would stop pestering him about it). I listened to it quite a bit, and I found the Peel Session EP by chance on a trip to the Twin Cities. Add in Opel in 1989, and I had all of his output until Gilmour dug out a track he had tucked away decades later. But by the time I got to college, Pink Floyd weren't that cool anymore to me, and people I'd play Syd Barrett for were more alarmed that someone would choose to listen to him than see his greatness. So the Syd Barrett albums got tucked to the back only to come out when someone actually knew who he was (so not often). In the last few years since his death, I'd pull out those records more, and then I started to see his influence everywhere in the other music I liked.
I'm glad you wrote this review, as it covers the same things that would bug me. You'd think it'd be pretty easy to get a group of musicians to talk about his influence or have some scholarly type show where his influence loomed on say Bowie and how that influence played forward.
I'll be interested in watching the documentary at some point. But it's a shame more isn't done to plow new ground into what his influence was through 1 (and a quarter) Pink Floyd album and two solo albums where you can hear the frustration of everyone around him just trying to get on with it.
No Jakob Dylan? Hard pass.
Great wtiting, Dan — as always.
Cringeworthy fantasy sequences by Storm almost ruined it. Then again, Storm was the perfect person to be doing the interviews, because he was there from the beginning and knew all these people back then. It was almost more of a conversation with old friends. So, I'll give him a break. But he seriously lost it over the years IMO. His album covers had become a parody of Hipgnosis.
It was nice to see a lot of older friends talking about Barrett when he was younger, and some of the comments by rock stars were pretty good (e.g., Gilmour saying he should have gone up to see him). Also nice to get a bit more detail on things like the 1975 EMI meeting and the 1968 U.S. tour.
They played a bit fast and loose with the music. After talking about 'Madcap Laughs', a few minutes later started talking about 'Barrett' but then played a song from 'Madcap' to illustrate it. Stuff like that may have worked in terms of editing/making their point, but weren't really accurate. It felt like there was a point they were trying to make, but I would have been happier with just interviews and actual clips.
Also, there was some stuff said like "Who knows what he was thinking all those 25 years he lived up in Cambridge?" Well, his sister who took care of him probably does know exactly what he was like and the kinds of things he did and thought about. It may be personal so not to be shared (e.g., if he couldn't even dress himself or something) and I'm fine with not knowing, but it seemed like the filmmakers were trying to act like it was still a big mystery. I might have misinterpreted that bit, but again, it seemed like they were trying to make a dramatic point that was kind of not necessary.
What’s most maddening about this and other recent high-profile rock music films (‘Rocketman’ ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’) is that, being the big-budget versions and often with involvement and sanctioning by the artist, they come across as the definitive story. But often they’re flawed and, again, play fast and loose with the details - not just by accident, but because they’re big-budget and have to appeal to a bunch of “stakeholders”. This film was less heinous than ‘Rocketman’ and ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’, in which the artists deliberately spread inaccuracies about themselves. But it muddies the waters and makes it harder to know the real story, and now there won't be another Elton, Queen or Syd biography. (Don’t get me started on colorized B&W images. :) )
Oh man - the Madcap/Barrett songs were indeed totally mixed up! That was really fucking distracting…
Such a great read… You continue to knock ‘em out of the ballpark, Dan! This line really resonated with me, “— if you’re trying to raise funds for your documentary, potential investors are generally far more dazzled by the “get” of a well-known talking head than they are by the inclusion of an obscure person who was an actual participant in (or witness to) the events your film is discussing.” I know it too well.
It's a real bummer, isn't it?
It’s a total bummer when you’re one of the obscure people and the Rockumentary gets completely distorted just for potential profit. That’s OK, that’s what podcasts are for. 😉