| Roger Meadows Tailor 29.02.2008 18:38 |
How would ALL Queen fans feel if instead of Paul,Brian and Roger teamed up with Tim Staffel.For those of you who are against Paul,would that make you feel any better.Or is it just the use of the word QUEEN that irks you. |
| Sebastian 29.02.2008 20:04 |
I'm not against Paul, I think he's great. What bothers me is the use of the 'Queen' name. |
| castaway_girl 29.02.2008 22:43 |
Sebastian wrote: I'm not against Paul, I think he's great. What bothers me is the use of the 'Queen' name.I agree, i think that Paul is an excellent singer, but going under the name 'Queen' (+ Paul Rodgers or whatever) isnt right, as Brian and Roger are only part of Queen. Sorry, im feeling a bit sick a the moment, my head isnt that clear. |
| Blackvy 01.03.2008 00:37 |
Paul has nothing to do with Queen. Not even Tim. Queen is because of Freddie, Brian, Roger and John. Just a few bands could be considered almost the same, such as ACDC. |
| andres_clip 01.03.2008 01:13 |
no matter who sings we all know who Queen is.... |
| Roger Meadows Tailor 05.03.2008 06:14 |
Does anybody think that Brian and Roger may be calling themselves Queen with the blessing of the other two. Sensible answers now.What would you rather they called themselves,if not Queen? |
| Serry... 05.03.2008 06:46 |
Roger Meadows Tailor wrote: Does anybody think that Brian and Roger may be calling themselves Queen with the blessing of the other two.No. Roger Meadows Tailor wrote: What would you rather they called themselves,if not Queen?"Hotels near Glasgow" |
| Poo, again 05.03.2008 11:08 |
Staffel, May and Taylor should team up once more. |
| Pim Derks 05.03.2008 12:41 |
I'd love to see them do Earth. |
| ludwigs 05.03.2008 14:47 |
They did get on stage and played Earth in early 2000 or 2002 or sometime around then....I thought it was shite....Maybe I was expecting the vox harms to be nicer sounding but they were too 'pub-sing-a-long-ish (Yes, I did make the word up....) hey, I'm getting the hang of this now...;) |
| Penetration_Guru 05.03.2008 17:14 |
Blackvy wrote: Paul has nothing to do with Queen. Not even Tim. Queen is because of Freddie, Brian, Roger and John. Just a few bands could be considered almost the same, such as ACDC.Not sure that's the greatest example to use... 2 different bass players, 3 different drummers & 3 different different lead singers, plus I'm sure the rhythm guitarist left for a short period too. |
| Mr Mercury 05.03.2008 20:15 |
ludwigs wrote: They did get on stage and played Earth in early 2000 or 2002 or sometime around then....I thought it was shite....Maybe I was expecting the vox harms to be nicer sounding but they were too 'pub-sing-a-long-ish (Yes, I did make the word up....) hey, I'm getting the hang of this now...;)They did it in 1992 link |
| AlexRocks 06.03.2008 08:53 |
Ever heard of "The Show Must Go On"? How's that for approval to go on? |
| ludwigs 06.03.2008 09:27 |
Thanks for the correction. I knew they did but couldn't recall exactly when.... |
| theCro 06.03.2008 11:48 |
first of all. Freddie already told them to continue and john gave them blessing for all the stuff they're making atm. so what's the fuzz? |
| Penetration_Guru 06.03.2008 15:59 |
theCro wrote: first of all. Freddie already told them to continue and john gave them blessing for all the stuff they're making atm. so what's the fuzz?The stuff you lack the testosterone to grow on your face? |
| Tero 08.03.2008 05:24 |
Roger Meadows Tailor wrote: How would ALL Queen fans feel if instead of Paul,Brian and Roger teamed up with Tim Staffel.I would feel exactly the same way as I do know (disappointed), unless of course they chose to use a more accurate name with that reunion. ;) Roger Meadows Tailor wrote: For those of you who are against Paul,would that make you feel any better.Am I against Paul if I don't like Brian and Roger by themselves using the Queen name? I wouldn't think so, but somehow those two things are linked by certain people... Like you just seemed to do with the initial question! Roger Meadows Tailor wrote: Or is it just the use of the word QUEEN that irks you.In short, yes. Some musicians are happy to represent themselves accurately (and willing to accept a more limited commercial success with it), while others are more interested in the popular recognition for their fame and fortune's sake. Do they have a legal right to use the Queen name? Yes, as long as John doesn't have anything against it. Do they have a moral right? Hell no! The band was four members, out of which there are two left. |
| AlexRocks 09.03.2008 09:40 |
Of course they have a moral right to use the name Queen! How comical! You all are brainwashed! They have only every reason to continue and be the best that they can...that is Brian May with whomever he sees fit for it is HIS group! You all need to pay attention! Every other group has done this and have been GREAT and sometimes even better than they were before! Do you all honestly have so little faith in the original four members that they will somehow become irrelevant by something new and great comming along? Wow! Unbelievable! |
| Tero 09.03.2008 10:31 |
AlexRocks wrote: Of course they have a moral right to use the name Queen! How comical! You all are brainwashed! They have only every reason to continue and be the best that they can...that is Brian May with whomever he sees fit for it is HIS group! You all need to pay attention! Every other group has done this and have been GREAT and sometimes even better than they were before! Do you all honestly have so little faith in the original four members that they will somehow become irrelevant by something new and great comming along? Wow! Unbelievable!On the contrary, I have very much faith in the original four members. That's the four members TOGETHER, not whoever happens to be alive this week, calling themselves Queen. You are the one who's been brainwashed if you think that Queen is Brian May's personal band, and he has the moral right to include whoever he chooses in it. Not only are you dismissing the input of the two members who aren't available today, but you've also just reduced Roger Taylor into nothing more than a hired extra in the background. Now THAT is unbelievable for someone who supposedly has so much faith in all the members of the band. ;) |
| AlexRocks 09.03.2008 18:51 |
Let's think about this hard. It's called a founding member. Every group has one. It's the guy who first said, "Hey wanna form a band?" first. It's the guy who owns the name of the group. That would be Brian May. Hence why Brian May has said that if Roger Taylor were to die he would not continue on as Queen at that point. But you see that is HIS choice. He could if he wanted too. Some founding members of groups or those whom own the groups name: James Patrick Page: Led Zeppelin Peter Green: Fleetwood Mac THOUGH Mick Fleetwood now owns the rights to the name. Axl Rose: Guns N' Roses Steven Tyler: Aerosmith Jon Bon Jovi: Bon Jovi Jeff Beck: The Jeff Beck Group Tony Iommi: Black Sabbath/Heaven And Hell Ritchi Blackmore: Rainbow John Lennon: The Beatles Mick Jagger: The Rolling Stones Lars Ulrich: Metallica Gene Simmons: KISS |
| Tero 10.03.2008 01:01 |
AlexRocks wrote: Let's think about this hard. It's called a founding member. Every group has one. It's the guy who first said, "Hey wanna form a band?" first. It's the guy who owns the name of the group. That would be Brian May. Hence why Brian May has said that if Roger Taylor were to die he would not continue on as Queen at that point. But you see that is HIS choice. He could if he wanted too. Some founding members of groups or those whom own the groups name: James Patrick Page: Led Zeppelin Peter Green: Fleetwood Mac THOUGH Mick Fleetwood now owns the rights to the name. Axl Rose: Guns N' Roses Steven Tyler: Aerosmith Jon Bon Jovi: Bon Jovi Jeff Beck: The Jeff Beck Group Tony Iommi: Black Sabbath/Heaven And Hell Ritchi Blackmore: Rainbow John Lennon: The Beatles Mick Jagger: The Rolling Stones Lars Ulrich: Metallica Gene Simmons: KISSIf we ignore the cases where there have actually been more than one person originally forming the group (like Rolling Stones), I can actually see your point about there being a "founding member" in most of these groups. What I don't however see is the importance you place on that person. For starters I've been under the impression that Brian and Tim posted an ad for a drummer together, because the two of them wanted to form a band together... How come Tim isn't a founding member of Queen? More importantly this isn't a question of who happened to answer who's advertisement first. It's a question of what exactly did Freddie join in 1970? Did he join "Queen" (with a different name), or is Queen the result of "Smile" combining their powers with Freddie? If one thinks Brian is the central character in Queen, one would naturally be more inclined to opt for the former. I would say that since Freddie had such a huge impact on the evolution of the band, it would be foolish to claim there was any Queen before he was in the band... And that would make him one of the three founding members. |
| Serry... 10.03.2008 02:24 |
That has nothing to do with moral right, you're talking like a lawyer. Moral right is not about "I'm the founding member, fuck you all, na-na-na, na-na-na", moral right is "I'm the founding member of "1984" and who the hell on the Earth knows about my band "1984"? Wasn't it my dead bandmate Frederick who came with new ideas, with new name for the band, with the songs and force me to play music instead of watching at stars, etc.?". "I went to see Brian May, Roger Taylor and Danny Miranda yesterday!" - "WTF?!" - "Queen..." - "Wow! You've seen Queen?! Wow again! I thought that guy with moustache is dead...". You wanna satisfy your ego that you've seen Queen, they wanna satisfy their egos that they're still Queen. |
| Roger Meadows Tailor 10.03.2008 03:48 |
You know,Brian and Roger are called Queen.They've obviously been given the blessings of Freddie and certainly John to call themselves Queen.So whether WE like it or not Queen they are and Queen they always will be until they decide differently.I admit it isnt the same,but in the light of not being able to have all 4 on stage, i'll settle for the two of them plus Paul.Although if John was to change his mind and come back i'd be there in a flash.I miss John and his particular style of bass playing.Does anybody else miss John? |
| Serry... 10.03.2008 03:54 |
Roger Meadows Tailor wrote: They've obviously been given the blessings of FreddiePeople from Freddie's inner circle in interviews says that "I think Freddie wouldn't like it" or refuse to answer questions about possible Freddie's attitude towards the Q+PR project. "Fred blessed them" is the same story as "PR was Fred's all-time fave singer", IMHO. |
| AlexRocks 10.03.2008 14:08 |
Huh? I am trying to follow some of you all. This isn't about "powers". That's for grown men who wear leotards in comic books. A particular person owns the rights and makes a final decision. For example Mick Fleetwood has NEVER written a song or sung on one as far as I know so he makes the final call on things even though Lindsey Buckingham and Stevie Nicks are the ones who make all the decisions since they have most of the success doing the songwritting. It's a legal issue not an input thing. Again Queen were not Freddie's solo band. The other three members had significant influence and impact as well. |
| Tero 10.03.2008 14:21 |
AlexRocks wrote: Again Queen were not Freddie's solo band. The other three members had significant influence and impact as well.This is the problem with your comments. As long as we're talking about Queen with Freddie, it's always four members with significant influence and impact... And once Freddie's dead, it's Brian May's personal band where he calls all the shots. That just doesn't add up in any logical way. |
| Hitman 10.03.2008 14:44 |
oh dear how many speculations! this subject will never end.... i am personally pro "Queen+Paul ROdgers". There's nothing bad in this choice according to me |
| AlexRocks 10.03.2008 21:02 |
What do you mean once Freddie's dead it is then Brian's band? It was Brian's band from the beginning. |
| Sebastian 10.03.2008 21:51 |
It was NEVER Brian's band: Freddie put the name, Freddie wrote most of the hits, Freddie was the chief songwriter, Freddie played the main instrument of most of the turning-point pieces, Freddie did most of the vocals. Queen weren't Smile II, as much as they weren't Wreckage II, Reaction II or Opposition II. Queen were formed when three friends decided to join forces: all three of them were founding members. |
| AlexRocks 10.03.2008 22:18 |
Obviously someone owns the rights to the name of the group and makes a final decision on things. So how did Brian May come to owning the name of the group? |
| Sebastian 10.03.2008 22:24 |
He co-owns it. |
| john bodega 11.03.2008 01:49 |
I hope they change the name from Q+PR to just Queen. It'd suck, but it'd be worth it just to see the reaction of some of you people... ha-ha. |
| Dan C. 11.03.2008 03:24 |
Zebonka12 wrote: I hope they change the name from Q+PR to just Queen. It'd suck, but it'd be worth it just to see the reaction of some of you people... ha-ha.HA! |
| Tero 11.03.2008 11:35 |
Zebonka12 wrote: I hope they change the name from Q+PR to just Queen. It'd suck, but it'd be worth it just to see the reaction of some of you people... ha-ha.On a similar note, wouldn't it be nice to see the Tim Staffel band performing live as Queen? He is a founding member after all. ;) |
| AlexRocks 11.03.2008 15:23 |
It should stay Queen + Paul Rodgers so as to allow them to perform with someone different in the future if they so choose as well as by themselves is they want to do that as well. |