Pink Floyd: Behind the Wall

As a huge floyd fan, I wanted to learn more. After about 15 minutes, I checked to see if somehow I started this in the middle of the movie. Horrible production value for a 2011 film. Random fan interview snips that dont have anything to do with the topic that was being discussed. the interview with waters seemed always to have music played over his discussion, loud enough that i couldnt understand him. Just a bad movie and nothing surprising or fascinating about it.

This quality documentary from 2011 is only 80 minutes long with 50 minutes spent on the band's beginnings in the 60s and the Syd Barrett years, plus the immediate aftermath, which covers their first two albums when they sounded like a cross between The Doors and latter-day Beatles. Speaking of whom, the film shows how The Beatles were recording SGT. PEPPER'S at the same studio when the Floyd boys were recording THE PIPER AT THE GATES OF DAWN (1967) and how the Fab Four were influenced by Floyd's creative and boundless psychedelia.

This leaves 30 minutes for the rest of their career, including the most important period revolving around DARK SIDE OF THE MOON (1973), WISH YOU WERE HERE (1975), ANIMALS (1977) and THE WALL (1979), with ANIMALS being inexplicably omitted altogether!

Still, what's here is very good with lots of footage from the era in question and interviews with the surviving band members & Co.

Worst narrator voice in documentary history. Like a robot received-pronunciation female on mandrax so that aint cool .... not a bit

Strobes on images to make sure you understand it is sy-key-delic

Good footage from the times tho; bits one has not seen elsewhere ... lots of Joe Boyd (Music producer and creator of the Underground UFO club) lots of one of Syd's girlfriend very eloquent she is too

So who is this made for then? Not quite sure maybe folks who are brand-new to The Floyd ... Youngsters more than likely .... but and since there is a fair amount of unseen before footage all will find something here

Ha also if you interview someone do not crank up the music when they reply because then you cannot hear what they say .... a difficult concept? ....

For me too Syd-heavy. Syd was there for 2 years tops in the entire story so the deification never sat right with this fan of the Floyd here ... Later phases with no Syd are more significant to many and not really shown here ... but hey .... good on the early days ....

I'm afraid whatever info this documentary contains is obscured by the rather awful production values of this documentary. Odd cuts, strange 1-second flashes on other images (that is not intended as some "psychedelic" style choice), and even one fully minute or two long section where the person speaking is not visible due to something obscuring half the frame (again, not a style choice, but simply horrible production). As for the content, the film spends the first 2/3 of the film focused on the first 2 years of their career...which would be great if the documentary was couched as specifically being about the Syd Barrett years, but then speeds through the rest of their career. And while it does so, it very agonizingly mixes concert footage from their later years ("Momentary Lapse" onward) over narration discussing their still early years. If the viewer isn't already familiar with and a fan of Pink Floyd, you would be left with a very odd and uneven (mis)understanding of the development of the band. Also, and I can't say this is necessarily an objectively negative quality like the above complaints are, but the film is almost entirely interviews from people who hung out with Syd and Roger in the early days. This is somewhat interesting and a new take, but gets rather played out pretty fast with a lot of redundant and repetitive (heh) information and sound bites. All told, it's a rather embarrassing endeavor. It reminds me of writing an undergrad paper at 8pm the day before it's due and spending the night focused in great detail on 5% of the topic before realizing at 7am I need to cover the other 95% of it...and then not giving it a single proof-read before handing it in.

Mostly about Syd Barrett and somewhat of the dynamics of Waters and Gilmour. Taking the "The Wall" into it's title is effectively clickbait and nothing to do with the main content of the film (apart from about 5 minutes talking about how Waters wanted to perform behind a wall literal/metaphorical. Don't hold out like I did waiting for it to get to the meat - the sharks have already taken it before swimming off with the gravy train.