who should play him?
No one, he isn't a talented artist for his life being worth a biopic.
>>63751397
the biopic would obviously focus on his personal-life, not his music career
>>63751560
But what would be the point of making it about him and not any other junkie, then? Just to say "based on a real story"?
One would watch a Hendrix movie, not solely because of his drug use, but because he's an amazing artist with true relevance to pop music, and one would want to know more about his personal life, for instance.
Now when it comes to Syd Barret, he's only praised for pretentious hipsters and /mu/tants, having little or no importance to music. It's a fact that Pink Floyd was far better after he was gone, and even his psychedelic compositions are kind of shitty if compared to more talented and/or creative musicians of his time.
Making a flick about him wouldn't appeal to anyone at all, because so little people would be interested in watching it.
>>63751828
>It's a fact that Pink Floyd was far better after he was gone
that's the plebiest opinion I've heard today
consider suicide
>>63751337
Idris Elba obviously
>>63751828
but his second solo album is better than anything pink floyd has ever done and on par with "are you experienced"
>>63751938
I already do on a daily basis. But seriously, do you really think anything he's ever done is better than Ummagumma, Atom Heart Mother, Meddle, Dark Side Of The Moon, Wish You Were Here or Animals?
>>63751337
Jim Sturgess.
>>63751337
<---
>>63751828
He is a far more interesting person than Hendrix. Just the fact that he ate about 800 tabs of medical grade acid over a weekend and went mental makes me want to know more about him.
He was also a lot more influential than you might think. All the stuff Pink Floyd did in the 70's were heavily influenced by Barrett, just more accessible. I think Bowie credited him as one of his biggest influences as well.
>>63752149
>what is Interstellar Overdrive
>>63752149
Yes, Piper is better than all of those.
>>63752232
You just described how much of a worthless junkie schizoid he was, how on earth is that interesting at all?
>>63752317
how on earth is that not interesting?
>>63751337
Syd? Fuck... David Hayter. Jk. The classic. Dana Plato
>>63752262
>>63752312
Great song and kind of cool album, respectivelly, but comparing to Silver and Golden Age Floyd is just stupid tbqh fãm.
>>63751337
>tfw when you just want to jam sick free-improv jazz but the rest of your band is a bunch of plebs
>>63752361
She kill. I believe you mean Paul Dano
>>63752149
Ummagumma is plain shit. I appreciate syd barrett and his solo stuff for the most part, but I do agree meddle, the wall, and animals are all fantastic albums that never would have been created if syd barrett didnt go bat shit insane.
Having said that I'd like to see a biopic on syd the squid barrett.
>>63752201
Go away
>>63752407
Up boat for Dano
Pre 80s Genesis >>>>> Pink Floyd
Like hoyl shit, PF is the plebbiest entry trash "prog" pop shite out there.
>>63752381
What is Golden Age Floyd exactly? Do base that exclusively on commercial success? Because musically and lyrically Piper is a lot more Interesting than Dark Side.
Really only one choice.
>>63752444
Pink Floyd is bretty gud, m80.
>>63752444
nice
>>63752418
The live part of Ummagumma is great, though. Careful With That Axe, Eugene is one of Pink Floyd's most creative songs and an amazing attempt at incidental music.
As for the Barret biopic, it would probably be a lame movie about a guy that uses tons of drugs and is in a band, nothing too special about that, outside of the fact that it mentions real people in it.
I'd rather watch a Frank Zappa biopic, as he's not only an incredible artist, but also had an exquisite personality and was a truly unique person. Played, of course, by Le Epic Moustache Man, AKA Daniel Day Lewis. A Captain Beefheart one would be cool too, maybe one about them both in their youth.
>>63752464
Yes, I was classifying phases mostly on their respective sucsess; the silver phase being post-barret and pre-dark side, and the golden being from dark-side to the wall.
>>63752444
I agree that 70s Genesis is better than Pink Floyd, which is barely a prog band (more of a psychedelic one influenced by the prog scene). But Yes and Jethro Tull are both better than Genesis.
>>63752768
>Yes, I was classifying phases mostly on their respective sucsess
But what worth does that have musically?
>>63752444
ELP biopic when?
>Dem coke fueled late album...
>>63752821
Each phase has a sort of specific musical aspect to it.
Barret phase was based on short psych rock songs with a really clear late 60s underground sound;
Silver phase was their most experimental, as they were founding their direction musically, after Sid's departure from the group, it started with the long songs, atmospheric sounds, fusion and prog influences, solos and instrumental solos...;
Golden phase was when they found their characteristic sound, having Roger Waters as the main component of the group, dictating their conceptual themes and Gilmour siding with him in composition, achieving a more grandious and apotheotic sound, greatly influenced and encouraged by their commercial success;
Final Cut and Post-Waters phase are shitty.
