nightflameauto wrote: ↑Thu Mar 13, 2025 2:35 pmI'm all for Zakk, Phil and Rex writing new tunes. But don't call it Pantera. I get that there's nostalgia for the name, and I'm sure it would sell, but it'd sell just as well with a new name and a sticker that said, "In Tribute to Pantera." Phil's already got like twenty other bands he's in that sell just fine. I'm sure the name recognition of Zakk plopping together with him would sell fine no matter what they call it.Guitarbilly wrote: ↑Thu Mar 13, 2025 1:37 pmI honestly prefer that than trying to play the old stuff. I think Zakk, Phil and Rex writing together could be cool.
The old stuff doesn't sound right. I went to the show because I got free tickets. And LOG was opening.
It was not a bad show in its own merit, Phil, in particular, sounds great these days. But I've seen the real Pantera many times in the 90s and that wasn't it.
So is it bad? No. Is it Pantera? Also no.
But new material could actually work.
Also, broslinger gave me a case of the giggles. Those guitars would have fit right in during that era. I can see Limp Bizkit playing them to introduce the Undertaker.
I think that's utopic/idealistic and I agree with the principle, but in reality, anyone that owns a band name that's globally recognized at that level, is going to use it, if they're allowed to.
I'm sure they would sell fine without the name but the name immediately gets them bigger shows. They played at CFG Arena here, which neither Down or BLS would be able to fill 1/3 of it, even combined... every time I've seen these bands were at House of Blues type of venues with a 2-3k capacity. CFG is 20k. Pantera is just a huge name and it's a business at the end of the day. There are bands doing that with even less original members, sometimes none at all.
