Released: Dec 22, 2009
Genre: Alternative Rock, Progressive Rock
Label: Warner Bros. Records
Number Of Tracks: 9
When it tries to be serious it sounds weak, and otherwise it doesn't sound like The Lips took the original album seriously at all.
The Dark Side Of The Moon
Reviewed by:
jkassel, on february 24, 2010 2 of 2 people found this review helpful
Sound: The first thing that a listener of this album should remember is that the Flaming Lips are not Pink Floyd. The latter has achieved such a high status in modern musical society that to even make that comparison would be a discredit to both bands. That said, the Flaming Lips are extraordinarily good in their own right. When comparisons were made calling the Lips the "Pink Floyd of our generation", most people took that to mean in terms of staying power, relation, and overall appeal. In all reality, the reason it's possible to compare the two is because there ARE no bands that sounds just like either or them. Like them or hate them, the Flaming Lips offer a sound that is both attractive and unique, similar to their idols.
That being said, Dark Side Of The Moon is an album I personally wouldn't want done by a clone, or by a band who feels the need to copy every note of the original masterpiece. The Flaming Lips have done a remarkable job of stripping the original down to its meat and bones, and injecting a miasma of their own style into it. The result is something that be looked at as neither a covers attempt, nor a purely original record, but rather something in between.
On the Lips' album, many of the songs take on an entirely different connotation. "Time", one of the most memorable songs in rock history, has been turned on its head. Whereas the original began with a sense of foreboding leading up to the climax, the Lips instead broke out with a cacophony of sound that instantly evaporates into one of the most spine-chilling moments of the album. "Us and Them" removes the grandiose nature of the original and instead serves as a haunting lullaby, which makes the transition into "Any Colour You Like" all the more shocking.
Not all of the songs manage to make a good enough name for themselves to be judged apart from the predecessors, however. "The Great Gig In The Sky", which originally featured Clare Torry's angelic cries, now features a heavily over-modulated Peaches (yes, really. that's who's credited) who would probably sound more appealing if she was in labor delivering a porcupine...spikes first. Sure, the music might be a solid jam, but I personally would've rather heard the music without the voice. "Brain Damage" also does not quite live up to its father, but instead serves as nothing more than a jumping point into "Eclipse". While this was true in the original as well, I have yet to meet someone who insists they would rather have brain damage than listen to it.
Generally though, the album produces a sound that had it not first been an album by Pink Floyd, would be received far better. The Flaming Lips did the absolute perfect thing to pay tribute to their idols: rather than try and copy a masterpiece we all know can't be duplicated, they instead paid tribute without forgetting who they are as a band. Some moments don't work, but the ones that do work very, very well. // 8
Lyrics and Singing: Luckily, most of the work has been done for me with regards to lyrical content. Dark Side of the moon turns 37 this year, and since 13 of those years were spent on the Billboard 200, most people have their own interpretations of the actual lyrics and what they are trying to say versus what they actually say.
With regards to the Flaming Lips, the Dark Side's original lyrics don't quite match up with the new sound the Lips brought to the album. I found it very hard to "breathe, breathe in the air" when i found myself breathless by the auditory overload. Some songs work far better than others, and Wayne Coyne's voice fits those moments so well that I personally find them far more enchanting and endearing than the original. The introduction of lyrics into "Time" is actually spine-chilling, and the entirety of "Us And Them" is perpetuated by Coyne's seraphim-like blessing, lulling us away from our fears and worries and into someplace more cerebral, deep within the walled-up recesses of our mind. Even the song "Money", which anyone who's been near a radio since 1973 knows by heart, has had its style changed so dramatically you'd never think it would be possible to salvage it. Yet, Wayne's voice is so haunting during the song it almost serves as a testament to how much of a genius he's been in his other works. Mr. Coyne gets a full 10 out of 10 for his performance.
Unfortunately, the supporting cast doesn't match up, and several instances of what might have been pure insanity were destroyed by their voices. Henry Rollins performs the spoken word portion of the album, and while his reading is certainly unique, it is far too cynical for either the original or the Lips version, and only discredits and grates against the otherwise tonal precision the Flaming Lips are noted for. Peaches also completely destroyed "The Great Gig In The Sky" for me, one of my favorites on the original. For my opinion of her performance, read the "sound" portion of this review again.
Overall, the lyrics haven't changed, just the style in which they're conveyed. Had the Lips used the original voices for the spoken word and for Clare Torry, Wayne Coyne might have stumbled across a totally unique and incredible way to use the lyrics to his advantage. Sadly, the supporting lyrical cast stumbles so hard it's impossible to forgive. // 7
Impression: I am already aware that many people wrote this album off as terrible before it was even released. Some of the more sensible people out there might have gotten through it once or twice before passing judgment, but inevitably they too found fault with the Lips' version of a timeless classic. However, this album seems to not extend its branches to the members of the public that don't already appreciate or love the Lips, but rather closes those branches around the people in the tree who have already fell in love with them. As a fan of both the Lips and Pink Floyd, I can understand why some people don't get it, or simply write this off as an auditory assault. But the Lips gave their treatment to one of the most influential CDs ever released.
Had Pink Floyd not shattered the musical world with Dark Side over 35 years ago, this would hold up against and even surpass every other Flaming Lips album as one of their best. There's a chance that if the Lips didn't have the monolith to stand in front of already that this album would've cast some pretty big shadows of its own.
Yes, Dark Side of the Moon is an auditory masterpiece so well performed that the original rightfully shouldn't be replicated in its pure form. Yet the Lips gave it its own meaning, its own concept, and its own unique sound. When compared with its maker, the Flaming Lips can't hold up to the brilliance of its father. But if looked at in its own right, the album missteps a few times but altogether holds up as a pure and coherent composition. Sure, it may not be a masterpiece, but it's not trying to be: it's simply out there, humble enough to take the background but powerful enough to overwhelm anyone who should venture into it. // 8
The Dark Side Of The Moon
Reviewed by:
Santeria420, on january 07, 2010 4 of 9 people found this review helpful
Sound: I must admit I have no idea what spurred them to make this album. All Dark Side of the Moon covers are doomed to fall short, most often far short, of what might be rock's most brilliant masterpiece, so why waste the time and money? Live performances always made more sense than me, I never understood the pretension behind making it into a studio album though. While it surpasses "Dub Side of the Moon", it is only slightly less silly. To start with, Henry Rollins recites the spoken words parts as if he doesn't even know the meaning of the words and is just reading from a sheet of paper. His speaking voice is quite unremarkable anyway and I have no idea why they chose him of all people for the project. The vocals are passable for the most part, but the background singer on Eclipse made me burst out laughing and the rest is for the most part unremarkable. The music in general has two modes: emotionless and funky. After spacing out through a very dry and dull version of Us and Them (and not in the way you're supposed to), I found myself feeling like I stumbled on to the set of a porno with "Any Colour You Like". It was very much a laugh out loud moment. It seems they basically fused a legendary masterpiece with 80's synthpop. Yeah. I like The Flaming Lips and usually dig their sound, but it just doesn't work here at all. // 4
Lyrics and Singing: Here The Lips have it easy: Roger Waters wrote some very brilliant lyrics and all they had to do was sing them. But they sing them badly. Now, I'll give them credit for being on pitch I guess, but it isn't hard when the pitch hardly changes. A spoken word version would have been more effective, not that I'm saying that would sound good either. But hey, there's an idea! William Shatner does Dark Side of the Moon, anyone? This category only gets an 8 because I cannot possibly rate the lyrics lower than that. They are an easy 10 on the original album. // 8
Impression: I don't think anybody, even The Flaming Lips and associates, hoped to compare to the original album. But - and forgive my French - the result here sounds like a bunch of guys jacking off on to Dark Side of the Moon. When it tries to be serious it sounds weak, and otherwise it doesn't sound like The Lips took the original album seriously at all. I'm sure they do, but you can't just throw a bunch of 80's-esque grooves over one of the greatest and most profound pieces of music ever written. It struck me as unintentionally disrespectful, like a bunch of kids were playing it, which is sad seeing how long The Flaming Lips have been around. I can only give them a five for effort. // 5
I love DSOTM, because it illustrates perfectly that the best way to sell records is to make one that convinces the somewhat ignorant and shallow that they're actually intelligent and spiritual.
^^Oddly enough, DSOTM happened after Pink cleaned up and got off the drugs.
Back on topic: There are just some things best left alone.
there was never a drugs issue with pink floyd! sid had a few too many acid trips and he was the only casuaulty!! gilmour, waters, mason and wright were never involved in serious drug misuse!
^^I based my comment on an interview I saw with Nick Mason where he described PF creating much better music after getting clean and therefore more focused. Of course, they were never "the Rolling Stones" so you're right as far as "serious drug misuse" goes.
Checked it out on iTunes the other night. What a slaughter! Why would you even try to do a PF album is beyond me, I don't think DSOTM is as good as Meddle but I still wouldn't even try. They did no artistic justice to the album at all. I like the Flaming Lips....this just went to far.
I thought it was pretty good to listen to. It's fascinating to see how a different band approaching a whole album alters it. Also I thought that Henry Rollins and Karen O's contributions were pretty cool.
It wasn't that bad. I think the main let down is the way they approached the vocals, on songs like money and great gig in the sky, even eclipse, it just didn't work. The music however, especially the bass gave it an energy and sense of live spontaneity the original doesn't have, the original is very precise and clean. Im not saying this is as good as the original by any means, but after youve been listening to an album on and off for about 10 years its nice to have a fresh take on it. Especially considering its one of my favourite albums.
I love DSOTM, because it illustrates perfectly that the best way to sell records is to make one that convinces the somewhat ignorant and shallow that they're actually intelligent and spiritual.
first: this is actually pretty cool, if you give it a chance instead of writing it off before the first note is even played
second: i feel like anyone who says dark side isnt their best is just trying to sound cool. no 17-min songs or pretentious story lines? count me in!
Just write your own songs about fighting robots and leave Pink Floyd music alone.
EXACTLY
howamidriving? wrote:
first: this is actually pretty cool, if you give it a chance instead of writing it off before the first note is even played
second: i feel like anyone who says dark side isnt their best is just trying to sound cool. no 17-min songs or pretentious story lines? count me in!
First: it seems the consensus is that this album fails to meet a decent expectation of a "tribute" album or whatever they were going for.
Second: I didn't realize that claiming DSOTM isn't the best was a cool thing to do. In that case, DARK SIDE OF THE MOON SUCKS!!!
why would the flaming lips take shots at legends, they're disrespecting pink floyd by doing such a dumb, sensless, emotionless album only to try to get more famouse and get more money, but wheres the love for music?
Porcupine Tree? You know, out of any band around today, they would easily have the best shot at doing Dark Side of the Moon some justice. I feel that Steve Wilson would have a very interesting take on it, and that it would be unique from the original but still respectful to it. Too bad it's only speculation, it really would be awesome.
I'm astonished a label would actually distribute such a ****ing joke of an album. Covering a song or two on your CD, that's cool, but covering an entire album? How do you even get your door in the studio? I guess that shows just how incredibly ****ing stupid record companies are... Now that I think of it, I have no reason to be surprised..
I haven't heard the studio albumn but I did watch the Lips play the entire Dark Side of the Moon on New Years Eve after midnight in OKC. I can tell you, live, in person, it was pretty freaking AWESOME!!
Just speaking to the why waste your time comments: When you can do whatever you want, and don't care what anyone says, you get to do whatever you want That's just what the lips do, make music they like.
why would the flaming lips take shots at legends, they're disrespecting pink floyd by doing such a dumb, sensless, emotionless album only to try to get more famouse and get more money, but wheres the love for music?
Have you actually listened to it? Because from that comment, it really looks like you're just talking out of your ass.
banter wrote:
It wasn't that bad. I think the main let down is the way they approached the vocals, on songs like money and great gig in the sky, even eclipse, it just didn't work. The music however, especially the bass gave it an energy and sense of live spontaneity the original doesn't have, the original is very precise and clean. Im not saying this is as good as the original by any means, but after youve been listening to an album on and off for about 10 years its nice to have a fresh take on it. Especially considering its one of my favourite albums.
This man has some sense, so listen to him. I own the entire ****ing Pink Floyd discography and I still enjoyed this, because it's something different and was a labor of love by a band getting back to what made them what they are.
And for the record, the Flaming Lips did a good job of covering The Who, too.
I'm astonished a label would actually distribute such a ****ing joke of an album. Covering a song or two on your CD, that's cool, but covering an entire album? How do you even get your door in the studio? I guess that shows just how incredibly ****ing stupid record companies are... Now that I think of it, I have no reason to be surprised..
I think they have their own studio..... I don't think they would turn themselves away.
Everyone taking it like "How dare you try and recreate DSotM" should calm down. I was really looking forward to this and I was hoping for great things, however, in general the album was just poor. It has nothing to do with the original either. Even if I had never heard the original I highly doubt I would like this album. They just didn't do a good job.
Idk where all the hate comes from, but I actually really enjoyed this album. Yeah, Money was a little stupid, but Time and Great Gig In The Sky were great interpretations. Don't know why everyone is like HOW DARE YOU FLAMING LIPS, butI thought it was fun and creative.
Never heard this album though I'll give it a biased shot. I'd love to be capable of listening to it without the previous idea that it'll suck but I think that's just not possible. :\ I'm not a big fan of Flaming Lips either.
And I think that Floyd's best albums are DSOTM and WYWH. I'm not a big fan of The Wall. All Floyd albums are great, don't get me wrong, I just don't think the wall is the monster album everyone makes it to be.
Even if I had never heard the original I highly doubt I would like this album. .
Listen the original its a masterpiece really... for me its the greatest album what ever made along with metallicas master of puppets and iron maidens number of the beast
I'm always apprehensive when it comes to other artists covering floyd, I can't do cover floyd with justice. However I hear dream theater does a decent job?
Ok, so i really need to get my opinion of this album out, because for the first week that i knew of this albums existence I was one of the many people who found this album both wrong and offensive. However today I could not get the question out of my head "Why would flaming lips even try to do something like this?". They knew it wouldn't sound anything like the original, and would only accomplish pissing off lots and lots of floyd fans, then the answer hit me like a flying pig, and gave me a whole new appreciation for this album. Of course FL knew that the album would go down like it did. They had to have been completely aware that mimicking an album as important as DSotM in any seriousness would end bad. Thats when i realized, this album is not serious at all! and in that lies its brilliance. This album is right here is post-modernism at its finest (perhaps a little to early for its time in my opinion, but thats kind of the point here). seriously, if the flaming lips wanted to cover dark side, and do it seriously, it wouldn't have been as good as floyd, but it would be way better than what we have here. What the lips are doing here is far from a serious attempt at covering one of the best albums of all time, they are innovating new concepts in music by touching the untouchable in ways that the general public just isn't ready for, but at the same time creating new ideas and expanding the pop-culture world by doing things that seem wrong. Music today is a lot of crap, that sounds like a very biased and opinionated statement, but who doesn't agree with me? I will say there are some good bands out there, but for the most part the artists of past that we have all known and love are dying, and new artists are emerging that are just getting harder and harder to understand and appreciate. This is something that comes along every few decades, where the art of the old generation becomes old and dull to the new generation, and the art of new generation becomes odd and un-tasteful to the old generation, and what better way to kick off this trend by making light something as sacred as Dark Side of the Moon. It seems like a depressing thought at first, but if you found anything enlightening about my long-ass comment, give this album another listen and maybe you will find the same appreciation in it that I did. I somehow get the feeling that more and more things like this will occur as time passes.
I doubt anyone will agree with me but I've listened to about half of this album and so far I think it's pretty good. DSOTM is one of my favorite albums of all time and has been for most of my life so I can't honestly say that the Flaming Lips covers are as good or even close; but they are interesting. One of my favorite bands (The Flaming Lips) covering one of my favorite albums by my favorite band (Pink Floyd) is intriguing to me.
I don't understand why so many people are being negative about this. Of course it's not as great as the original, it's not supposed to be. It's a reinterpretation of a classic album by a very creative band. Enjoy it for what it is.
Maybe, and I'm going out on a limb, they weren't trying to one up the original. Maybe just paying tribute or thought it would be fun. It's not there fault it was thrown mainstream and people who do not like the Flaming Lips or the other band are hearing it. If you don't like the lips you won't like this. Trust me the don't need your money or approval!
Wow... getting a little heated in here. Okay Dark Side is a classic but it hardly means that it is infallible or untouchable. To turn the argument on it' head, if Pink Floyd (if they were of course still in formation) did a cover album of The Lip's Soft Bulletin (arguably as much of a classic as DSOTM in it's own right) would there be as much controversey and screams of "MURDER!" flying around?
The thing is, you have to respect this album as a standalone piece of work. In the same way a composer interprets Beethoven's 9th a band must take an album and apply their own idiosyncracies and groove to the music. That's what I hear when I listen to this record, The Lip's gave birth to their own bastard child. Although possibly not as well recognised as his legitimate brother, it still has a lot of style.
Plus, it's not like Flyod's album's disappeared off the face of the Earth, so just stick on the original!
charliezard! wrote: Pink Floyd sucks. This is probably better than the original, but I dislike the original too much to give this one a chance.
Consider this: Most of the pseudo-indie, pseudo-good "bands to say you like to make people think you're interesting" bands that you're into wouldn't exist if it weren't for bands like Pink Floyd paving the way over 40 years ago. Fortunately though, Pink Floyd has also inspired some amazing bands and artists over the years, The Flaming Lips included.
I probably shouldn't have replied to that... but someone saying "Pink Floyd sucks" is just too stupid for me to leave alone.
Why do people like the wall? It makes me sick and sounds nothing like anything else they've done. Animals was their last great album, and greatest album.
FUCK YEAH AND ANIMALS
On a side note, this album wasnt all that terrible, people are just like HOLY SHIT I LOVE PINK FLOYD EVEN THOUGH I WASNT EVEN BORN WHEN THEIR LAST ALBUM CAME OUT HOW DARE YOU
Wow... getting a little heated in here. Okay Dark Side is a classic but it hardly means that it is infallible or untouchable. To turn the argument on it' head, if Pink Floyd (if they were of course still in formation) did a cover album of The Lip's Soft Bulletin (arguably as much of a classic as DSOTM in it's own right) would there be as much controversey and screams of "MURDER!" flying around?
The thing is, you have to respect this album as a standalone piece of work. In the same way a composer interprets Beethoven's 9th a band must take an album and apply their own idiosyncracies and groove to the music. That's what I hear when I listen to this record, The Lip's gave birth to their own bastard child. Although possibly not as well recognised as his legitimate brother, it still has a lot of style.
Plus, it's not like Flyod's album's disappeared off the face of the Earth, so just stick on the original!
Wow... getting a little heated in here. Okay Dark Side is a classic but it hardly means that it is infallible or untouchable. To turn the argument on it' head, if Pink Floyd (if they were of course still in formation) did a cover album of The Lip's Soft Bulletin (arguably as much of a classic as DSOTM in it's own right) would there be as much controversey and screams of "MURDER!" flying around?
The thing is, you have to respect this album as a standalone piece of work. In the same way a composer interprets Beethoven's 9th a band must take an album and apply their own idiosyncracies and groove to the music. That's what I hear when I listen to this record, The Lip's gave birth to their own bastard child. Although possibly not as well recognised as his legitimate brother, it still has a lot of style.
Plus, it's not like Flyod's album's disappeared off the face of the Earth, so just stick on the original!
I'm seriously not understanding all the offense taken here. Each song in Dark Side of the Moon is great, but it is WAY better to listen to the entire album straight through. I guess I consider it one huge song. Yeah, they could have just covered Time if they wanted to. They could have just left it at that. In my opinion, they were paying a great deal of respect to Pink Floyd by redoing the entire thing.
Plus, I think the Flaming Lips did a kickass job. They totally funked it out, made it their own, and for that I respect them. Say whatever you want about the album, I guess, but I'm a huge Pink Floyd fan and I commend the Flaming Lips for this project.
Even if I had never heard the original I highly doubt I would like this album. .
Listen the original its a masterpiece really... for me its the greatest album what ever made along with metallicas master of puppets and iron maidens number of the beast
When did I say I've never listened to DSotM? It's a good album. I think it's a tad overrated but an excellent album nonetheless.
to me it sounds just like it is: Flaming Lips doing Dark Side. Whats wrong with that? I think its kinda cool that the Lips did it their way. Isn't that what covers are all about after all. You kind of just have to understand the Flaming Lips.
This is actually a great album. I don't understand the hate. They totally rearranged and changed it, but retained the psychedelic feel of the original. I have really enjoyed it.
I don't understand why everyone is hating on this album so much. I think this album is absolutely brilliant. I'll admit that DSotM isn't one of my favorite albums to begin with, and so I looked at this album not at some strike at Pink Floyd, but rather another great, inspired, and all around cheeky album from the Flaming Lips. Obviously anyone hoping that this album would "do justice" to DSotM would find themselves disappointed, as this is (at least in style) no where near what Pink Floyd was going for, and yet I find the emotion the same. Both groups made an album that was a bit before it's time, and was extremely polarizing. I wasn't much of a fan of the Flaming Lips last album (Embryonic), but I was thrilled after listening to this one. It is an excellent tribute, and equally forward moving and enjoyable.
why would anyone ever try to remake someone else's music? i mean a covers one thing but a whole album? for real now? it's ****ing retarded, make your own damn album ****ers.
I think the only way to cover a whole Pink Floyd album is the way they tried with Dub, where the style is changed. Or for a better example, Luther Wright's "Rebuild the Wall" album, where the album is played bluegrass style.
floyd and reggae fans should check out the Easy Side All Stars' version "Dub Side of The Moon"
its pretty good. not meant to be listened to sober tho haha
I don't understand why everyone is hating on this album so much. I think this album is absolutely brilliant.I'll admit that DSotM isn't one of my favorite albums to begin with, and so I looked at this album not at some strike at Pink Floyd, but rather another great, inspired, and all around cheeky album from the Flaming Lips. Obviously anyone hoping that this album would "do justice" to DSotM would find themselves disappointed, as this is (at least in style) no where near what Pink Floyd was going for, and yet I find the emotion the same. Both groups made an album that was a bit before it's time, and was extremely polarizing. I wasn't much of a fan of the Flaming Lips last album (Embryonic), but I was thrilled after listening to this one. It is an excellent tribute, and equally forward moving and enjoyable.
Cheeky! Thats exactly the word I was looking for. One should not do a "cheeky" Dark Side of the Moon. Thats like making a "cheeky" remake of American Beauty...
I gave 3 and a half songs a try and couldn't listen anymore. Definitely a waste of everyone's time and money. If you could sue a band for being disgraceful, Pink Floyd would have a good case in court.
this is complete BS... the only one's allowed to do a Pink Floyd cover is Primus or Les Claypool... The Flaming Lips did to this album what Hollywood did to Dragonball... from now on Primus and Les Claypool are THE ONLY ones allowed to cover Pink Floyd's material cuz apparently THIS is what happens when someone else does it.
Cheeky! Thats exactly the word I was looking for. One should not do a "cheeky" Dark Side of the Moon. Thats like making a "cheeky" remake of American Beauty...
Perhaps, although I'll continue to be enamored with the cheekiness of the flaming lips. I feel like rather than a cheeky remake of american beauty it is to the original DSotM what Austin Powers is to Bond films. A silly, funny, bastardization that if you can stop taking everything about it so seriously you can seriously enjoy. Unless of course you hated austin powers, in which case I now sound like a fool.
I disagree with the shot taken at Easy Star All Stars. Dub side of the moon is incredible. A completely original bend of classic rock and reggae, the most thought provoking and perfectly tempo'd album to cover
Cheeky! Thats exactly the word I was looking for. One should not do a "cheeky" Dark Side of the Moon. Thats like making a "cheeky" remake of American Beauty...
Perhaps, although I'll continue to be enamored with the cheekiness of the flaming lips. I feel like rather than a cheeky remake of american beauty it is to the original DSotM what Austin Powers is to Bond films. A silly, funny, bastardization that if you can stop taking everything about it so seriously you can seriously enjoy. Unless of course you hated austin powers, in which case I now sound like a fool.
This is where comparisons get tricky, because you seem to be comparing James Bond to American Beauty, and the two films are in COMPLETELY different classes. American Beauty is famous for its profundity, while Bond is famous for making shit blow up. One deserves a parody, but with the other... well, lets just say you better be reeeeeaaaaalllly funny if you wanna rip on that.
Ok, first off, the Flaming Lips are just a really fun band. I saw them live awhile back in San Fransisco and their show was amazing. Great display of effects, lights and colors, along with really wierd music. But that's what the Flaming Lips are: wierd. A first normal reaction to the Lips are "what the **** is this?" But for me, anything they've recorded grows on me in an unusual way. I liked this cover album, although it took a couple of listens to kick in. I realise that no, the Lips can't match Pink Floyd, but it's a still an effort nonetheless
I'm always apprehensive when it comes to other artists covering floyd, I can't do cover floyd with justice. However I hear dream theater does a decent job?
Dream Theater do Comfortably Numb really well. Petrucci's solo at the end is just divine
FUCK YEAH AND ANIMALS
On a side note, this album wasnt all that terrible, people are just like HOLY SHIT I LOVE PINK FLOYD EVEN THOUGH I WASNT EVEN BORN WHEN THEIR LAST ALBUM CAME OUT HOW DARE YOU
I was 18 when Division Bell came out 11 for Momentary Lapse, does it make me an expert? NO! but this album was complete crap from a very arogant band. Read some interviews, I have heard them on several local radio stations doing interviews and they act like they are the gods of Oklahoma. I have never thought they were any good and this sure as shit didn't change my mind. It was a horrible album and if I could get my money back from itunes I would in a hurry.
this is complete BS... the only one's allowed to do a Pink Floyd cover is Primus or Les Claypool... The Flaming Lips did to this album what Hollywood did to Dragonball... from now on Primus and Les Claypool are THE ONLY ones allowed to cover Pink Floyd's material cuz apparently THIS is what happens when someone else does it.
I love Dragonball, The Movie was Eh... I do agree with the Les Claypool statement because The Flying Frog Brigade do a fantastic version of "Animals" in a live setting.
I look at this like it is two separate albums. Both are great in their own ways. Flaming Lips did not cover this so much as reimagine it. And The lips imagination has never disapointed. I love the original DSOTM. I love when Phish covered it in '98. I love this version. And all for different reasons.
I look at this like it is two separate albums. Both are great in their own ways. Flaming Lips did not cover this so much as reimagine it. And The lips imagination has never disapointed. I love the original DSOTM. I love when Phish covered it in '98. I love this version. And all for different reasons.
But thats the thing, I saw the album as completely unimaginative. I didn't mean to do a whole "You can't possibly dream to cover Floyd!" thing, its just that I think the Lips failed miserably here. Thats all.
Well, today my friend came to me and said "heard this cool band, Flaming Lips? Did nice cover of Floyd songs, listen to them". And well, I launched our beloved Youtube and typed in Flaming Lips at first - listened to them, ok, could be, not my style. Then, I typed in Flaming Lips Pink Floyd cover, and... RAGE! How could they FAIL so much? HELLO, GREAT GIG IN THE SKY? ARE YOU STILL ALIVE? Poor Wright surely now turns in his grave, if I were Robert Gilmour I would sue FL for moral losses. D@@@@mn.
I really like jkassels review. Though I obviously disagree with it at points, its much more thorough and well thought out than my own. I too felt that it was hard to "Breathe, breathe in the air" with all the intensity going on. But maybe I'll give it another listen one of these days.
I don't think the Lips were trying to out-do Pink Floyd. They just covered the album from THEIR perspective. I think the Floyd fanboys are a bit close-minded and that is damn ironic.
why is everyone so angry at them for this
if you were the flaming lips and you were hanging out with henry rollins and peaches and the idea came up to cover dark side of the moon, why wouldnt you do it? The lips are at the point where they have a solid enough fanbase where they dont have to worry about what they do. This is just a fun thing they did with their friends, and they decided to share it with the world.
and come on, its not bad. if you are a fan of both bands i cant see why you wouldnt enjoy this (if your not a fan of the flaming lips, then, yeah, you probably wont like it because you dont like their style)
I absolutely love when people take great offense to an artists interpretation of a classic (or anything for that matter), I really do. All of you who are pissing and moaning about how "this is a disgrace to Pink Floyd", or how "this isn't good at all" are forgetting one thing...it wasn't made for you. They made this for themselves, out of desire and love for their past. What is especially awesome is that the Flaming Lips have been and will be around for a long, long time, doing exactly as they did before; EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT WITH NO REGARDS TO WHAT ANYBODY ELSE WANTS! Why? Because they know 'music fans' are going to appreciate it. The angry ones are probably Republicans. Conservatives for sure. Go the way of the dinosaur.
We've detected that you are using Ad Blocking software.
If you hate ads, but love Ultimate Guitar, how about subscribing to Ultimate Guitar's Ad Free Service? If you subscribe to this service, you won't see annoying banner ads, pop-up ads, text-link ads or video ads and will be helping to support your favorite site at the same time.
As you know, we provide you with a lot of great, free content like news, reviews, interviews, tabs and chords, but you see, ads are the way we generate revenue to run UG and pay royalties to the songwriters and music publishers of the songs that are posted here.
Was this review helpful to you? 
That's just what the lips do, make music they like. 
No matter how you change it, it will always be less awesome than the original