Dog 3000
|
Re: Prog Britannia
Jan 06, 2009, 17:24
|
|
I think Eno is also "progressive" in all senses of the term. Prog can also be minimalist. ;-)
|
Moon Cat
|
Re: Prog Britannia
Jan 07, 2009, 16:09
|
I saw it last night on BBC4 repeat. It was resoundingly ok. It really should have been a much more in depth 2 or 3 programme documentary like they did with Jazz Brittania. There were glaring exceptions but I suppose it depends on how they were defining prog. I enjoyed the footage but it wasn't really saying anything new, although I was pleased that Steve Howe seemed less of a grumpy bugger than I'd thought. I was also a bit peeved they stopped at the predictable 'punk vs prog' period. Yeah, yeah.... zzzzz
I would really have liked them to have gone beyond that generic cut off point to the present day cos there's much more recent stuff they could have covered. Oh well.
I did enjoy the companion Prog at The BBC show. It's not often you get to see girls in hot pants dancing badly to Atomic Rooster and Jethro Tull in a Top of the Pops studio!
|
singingringingtree
|
Re: Prog Britannia
Jan 07, 2009, 16:17
|
|
Moon Cat wrote: I was pleased that Steve Howe seemed less of a grumpy bugger than I'd thought.
he seemd ok ... i really warmed to bruford + wyatt (natch) too ... i found myself thinking about sleep whenever a member of genesis who wasn't phil bloody collins was on screen ... jeez, those guys are so DULL!!! there was an alarming absense of "personality" all round tho, for a pop/rock documentary
|
Squid Tempest
|
Re: Prog Britannia
Jan 07, 2009, 16:37
|
Vincent Crane! What a star!
I agree with your views on the prog btw.
|
Squid Tempest
|
Re: Prog Britannia
Jan 07, 2009, 16:38
|
|
Yeah, Bruford seems to have retained a sense of humour.
|
mojojojo
|
Re: Prog Britannia
Jan 07, 2009, 16:39
|
I recorded it last week and have only watched a bit. I thought it was a three parter or was that just a cheeky reference to prog excesses?
x
|
Moon Cat
|
Re: Prog Britannia
Jan 07, 2009, 16:43
|
Bruford was great. I loved his hints at what it's like being in King Crimson.
Overall I enjoyed the contributions. I just thought there was a bigger and more detailed story to tell, and a story that didn't end in 1977. I know they had a brief "what happened next" bit, but it was so cursory.
|
dave clarkson
|
Re: Prog Britannia
Jan 07, 2009, 17:02
|
Yeah they always go for that year zero thing with the punk. Very tiresome. Prog artists started off playing the 3 chord rocknroll in the sixties rebelling against their dad's jazz records. They got educated more musically until they did their stuff in the seventies. Just the same as the punk bands who got educated musically and did the same by their second/ third albums. Both PIL and Magazine achieved this by the second albums - Metal Box and Secondhand Daylight are progressive albums played with punk attitude. John Lydon has become an irritating tosser as much as some of the prog rockers, more so in the fact he lives off the past.
8)
|
Moon Cat
|
Re: Prog Britannia
Jan 07, 2009, 17:11
|
|
It was quite interesting with the flipside thing too - the Rick Wakeman's and Tony Bankesesess of the scene wanting to play something more immediate and, for want of a better word, rocking, than the classical orthodoxy they'd been tutored in. In a way, you could argue that prog was liberating for some musicians from the extreme ends of the rock n roll - classical spectrum. The rockers wanted something more and the classicists wanted something less!
|
Moth
|
Re: Prog Britannia
Jan 07, 2009, 18:41
|
The (one) programme is in 3 parts. Fooled me at first too!
As Moonie said, it could have been better than ok if it HAD been in 3 parts (or even 2)....
love
Moth
|
