Jump to content
Hamer Fan Club Message Center

Is there any reason why we shouldn't think Roger Waters is a grumpy old man?


Recommended Posts

                                                       Well he is certainly a RICH GRUMPY OLD MAN..............................his current net worth is listed at 310 MILLION DOLLARS! I guess that reinforces the notion that money can't buy happiness..................least when it comes to David . I can't see his differences with Gilmore getting resolved any time soon and at their age.......................maybe never.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is actually a good thing.   If he is busy arguing with band mates, there will be less time for him to give us his never ending thoughts on life!    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gilmour...."That is all just Waters under the bridge".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gilmour once said it himself...something along the lines of Waters just never getting over not having known his father and the impact that had on him growing up and what a drag that was on the rest of the band.  I sincerely feel for the guy (I grew up in a single parent household like a lot of Gen-Xers) but damn; Gilmour is right.  By now, Waters should have grieved over his dad's death eleventeen times and gotten the fuck over it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Willie G. Moseley said:

FIFY

Roger, shhhhhh.

 

Funniest bit: 

Quote

He says some of his friends have recently asked him: 

His friends?  Names?

And seriously, could someone write a Web-wide script replacing every instance of "Waters said" with a different photo of Polly Samson?

 

David%20Gilmour%20and%20Wife%20Polly%20SDavid%20Gilmour%20and%20Wife%20Polly%20Sdavid-gilmour-and-polly-samson-06ef4f450

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh, he is grumpy, but he has a point.  Pink Floyd after Waters left just seemed like Gilmour solo albums to me.  

Admittedly, I only just now looked at the Pink Floyd website for the first time.  It's not exactly awesome.  

Like a lot of these situations, these guys were way better together than they were apart.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ump dat dude! I saw his, "I'm Filthy Rich, But T***p is a PIG", tour a few years ago. Beyond the political sloganeering and slander, it was a great Pink Floyd tribute show, really outstanding.

Ump him right in his fucking ear. Seriously...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really, but let's not forget other hugely successful rock stars who all of a sudden find something wrong with EVERYTHING.  I'm thinking of Eddie and Alex Van Halen.  Top of the world with two different singers, who they turn on after after working with them and making millions with them for YEARS.  Then shitting on Michael "had to show him what to play, soulless voice" Anthony.  Why???  I've never looked at Eddie the same after all that bullshit grousing, and man did I love him before; just grinning from ear to ear, having the time of his life, and playing guitar like a demon.

I think it just comes with the ego of certain creative types.  Something sets them off and they go down a bad path they can't seem to get off of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pink Floyd is an incredible band. It’s been a fun go of pretending like Waters has nothing to do with their music... I bought into that years ago. Could Gilmour technically play bass better than Waters? Definitely yes. Does technically being a better “player” trump songwriting and vision?

Personally, I always loved Floyd for the depth of their songwriting and the depth of their content.

That depth is 100% attributed to Waters from my observations. That said, I don’t think any member of Pink Floyd’s contribution is incomplete, insufficient or lackluster... it was the combination of all of their collective consciousness that formed the cohesive “whole”.

I actually side with Waters on this. He’s proven himself to have a depth of character that lands him on the proper side of almost any world affair or politics event... I’m in 100% congruence with Waters’ stances on life. His heart is immense and his depth of character is not really matched in the world of entertainment IMHO.

I guess that makes me team Waters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not a political question.

Waters was a big part of the chemistry that made PF amazing and rich.

He bounced after years of acrimony and slagged them publicly for years. While PF continued to make amazing music and get richer. Whether you consider PF’s further efforts Gilmour solo projects, he was the one who stuck around and kept the ship afloat. Waters’ solo efforts were not as well received, and he had agreed to no further profits going forward because he was so confident that PF was a “Dead force, creatively”, and “those muffins will never go on without me”. IMHO, you don’t get to leave the marriage, slag your ex, and then try to extort them.

I saw PF at Yankee stadium on the Division Bell Tour, and Waters’ at Nassau for The Wall. They’re all Apples and bowling balls.  If anyone’s making the shows needlessly personal and further away from Pink Floyd it’s Waters. And I never once heard of Gilmour trying to prevent Waters from making a buck on his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree with Geoff's synopsis regarding the gents' respective evolutions from.the '80s-on. As for political leanings, I don't think there's much difference in Gilmour's and Waters' worldviews, but Gilmour seems content to let his music speak for itself while Waters quite obviously feels compelled to be as much an activist as he is a musician.  To each, his own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Real question - was Gilmour using PF Twitter or FB to post new recordings, live or otherwise, with his solo band from the last 15 years or so when they cover Floyd?  (The version of "Echoes" from Remember that Night is better than the album version in my opinion, but I'm not sure I ever saw it promoted via those PF channels.) If he was, then I can kinda see where Waters is coming from to a degree.  Ultimately he quit, and to me that trumps any other argument to me, but I would have to admit that it would be at least a tad hypocritical were Gilmour promoting solo efforts through those channels but freezing Waters completely out.  I wouldn't promote every last thing Waters does these days over there by any stretch, but a really cool version of "Mother" done under the current circumstances wouldn't be the worst thing ever.  It is actually quite good. 

At this point, the Rick is dead, taking any hope of any kind of reunion with him.  The money has been made, and the venom spit.   Regardless of legalities, Roger is a huge part of what Pink Floyd will be remembered for if we're all being honest, so why not?  But perhaps, Gilmour, knowing Waters better than any of us, may just be worried that any small acknowledgement of Rogers officially might snowball into unintended consequences. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet, without him, the band couldn't write. "Momentary Lapse of Reason," was not written by the remaining members. 

Roger Waters is a remarkable lyricist. Something that is overlooked by most. He is a remarkable composer. He is self indulgent, especially since post, "The Final Cut," or possibly before. 

Grumpy? For sure. But that was Pink Floyd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ting Ho Dung said:

Roger Waters is a remarkable lyricist. Something that is overlooked by most. He is a remarkable composer. He is self indulgent, especially since post, "The Final Cut," or possibly before.  

For me, "Animals" is PF's crowning achievement. Though the lyrics may teeter on Orwellian finger-wagging, they are brilliant (and not steeped in RW mourning the absence of Syd Barrett) and as button-pushing as any by Dylan. 

RW is often described by media as, "activist/musician." Some of that activism has been viewed as anti-semitic. That's his decision, certainly not something I support, but I don't necessarily hold that against him. I'll form my own opinions, thanks very much.

Johnny Carson was once asked why he doesn't openly support political causes or candidates. He said, "why alienate 50% of the audience?"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/24/2020 at 5:30 PM, LucSulla said:

Real question - was Gilmour using PF Twitter or FB to post new recordings, live or otherwise, with his solo band from the last 15 years or so when they cover Floyd?  (The version of "Echoes" from Remember that Night is better than the album version in my opinion, but I'm not sure I ever saw it promoted via those PF channels.) If he was, then I can kinda see where Waters is coming from to a degree.  Ultimately he quit, and to me that trumps any other argument to me, but I would have to admit that it would be at least a tad hypocritical were Gilmour promoting solo efforts through those channels but freezing Waters completely out.  I wouldn't promote every last thing Waters does these days over there by any stretch, but a really cool version of "Mother" done under the current circumstances wouldn't be the worst thing ever.  It is actually quite good. 

At this point, the Rick is dead, taking any hope of any kind of reunion with him.  The money has been made, and the venom spit.   Regardless of legalities, Roger is a huge part of what Pink Floyd will be remembered for if we're all being honest, so why not?  But perhaps, Gilmour, knowing Waters better than any of us, may just be worried that any small acknowledgement of Rogers officially might snowball into unintended consequences. 
 

 

Here’s the difference: He froze himself out. G/PF put up with his bitching once, that’s more than enough. Waters legally bounced from the partnership, and further drove a stake in the heart of any familiarity by publicly slagging them. For that, I submit that Gilmour can post anything he wants through HIS bands channels, and Waters can STFU.

Why does Waters get to bounce indignantly, bitch in a publicly condescending way, and then whine when he realizes they want no part of his bullshit?

And I actually celebrate the whole catalog, including The Final Cut, which could be argued was a mediocre Waters album disguised as a PF album when they were trying to make the marriage work. (Ben? Yay, Nay? 😆)

Marriages break up and it’s encumbant upon the adults to act like adults. Some marriages have great kids despite one or more shitty parents. Gilmour stuck around and kept custody of those kids, and had more, to anyone’s opinion of their relative merit. I say you don’t get to bounce out, slag everyone off, and bounce back in when you feel like it or it suits your purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, geoff_hartwell said:

And I actually celebrate the whole catalog, including The Final Cut, which could be argued was a mediocre Waters album disguised as a PF album when they were trying to make the marriage work

Ben should know the factual answer to this, but I presumed it was released as a Pink Floyd album to satisfy the remaining requirements of the band's record contract.  Not sure there was any other reason they would have done another record together after grudgingly making The Wall to pay off their tax debt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, geoff_hartwell said:

And I actually celebrate the whole catalog, including The Final Cut, which could be argued was a mediocre Waters album disguised as a PF album when they were trying to make the marriage work. (Ben? Yay, Nay? 😆)

Uneven PF album, would have been impressive as a RW solo album. But the title track is one of my top 5 favorites by them.

52 minutes ago, Biz Prof said:

Ben should know the factual answer to this, but I presumed it was released as a Pink Floyd album to satisfy the remaining requirements of the band's record contract.

Hadn't heard that before, but sounds plausible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...