| joe6464 30.05.2008 16:31 |
it's is pretty obvious that Rolling Stone hate Queen, here are some quotes that they have said about Queen in their reviews: "They've also appropriated the most irritating elements of Yes's style — histrionic vocals, abrupt and pointless compositional complexity, and a dearth of melody" "But the group has some annoying weaknesses, notably a tendency toward lyrical abstraction" "The guiding principle of these arrogant brats seems to be that anything Freddie & Company want, Freddie & Company get" "Queen may be the first truly fascist rock band. The whole thing makes me wonder why anyone would indulge these creeps and their polluting ideas." "rock's reigning champs of bad taste" "Its members are never going to make it as dignified elder statesmen" This is obnoxious and offensive, i hope Brian May is aware of this |
| mickyparise 30.05.2008 17:41 |
There aware, I just emailed Brian on his website and grateful Jen responded really fast! Have to read from bottom to up........ Thanks Micky We already reported this story on BM.com. link Though they were quite complimentary about Brian's guitar playing on KYA. Kind regards Jen For SOAPBOX On 30 May 2008, at 20:51, Micky Parise wrote: > Hi Brian, > The lastest copy of Rolling Stone will be hitting the stores with > there 100 Greatest Guitar Songs, > and I was kind of SHOCKED you came in 31st, with Keep Yourself > Alive, only because of the bad rap > this magazine used to give you guys! I use to subscribe to them a > long long time ago, after there > reviews on Queen, I cancelled really fast! But not sure if you read > or seen it, just thought I > would let you know. > > link > > > Cheers and All the Best for the upcoming concerts! Can't wait till > next year when you tour the > States! > > Micky Parise > Youngstown, Ohio, USA > > P.S. Please come to Pittsburgh or Cleveland on this tour, Like the > last one! |
| steven 35638 30.05.2008 23:35 |
Rolling Stone magazine, as far as I'm concerned, is utter trash. I would much rather read Classic Rock. At least they don't bash artists with opinion. |
| P-Staker 31.05.2008 12:41 |
As the late, great Czech author Chapek said "criticism is telling the author how I'd do it better, if I could do it at all." While I enjoy a good professional review, I'm sickened by the magazines who throw shit at talented, hardworking bands. It takes guts to write a good song, but it only takes five minutes before morning coffee to bash it. I wish I could find work reviewing reviews, just to show the other side what it feels like. Unfortunately, no such jobs exist, so lemme do it for free: "Can't learn the bass but would still like the groupies? You can parasite on rock and get paid for it, Rolling Stone reviewers show - but things aren't as simple. I'm not referring here to their inability to tell a chord from lime cordial; and I'll rather not say anything about the pain in the stomach brought by the knowledge that a fellow human being would willingly spend their God-given time on Earth like a flea in Freddie's fur coat. I'll rather point to the reason these slugs of journalism are not getting any - are the only ones not getting any, when you think of it - in the back of the van at Glastonbury festival: - it's because they suck. Seriously, these hacks write with such profoundly ignorant, yet arrogant attitude that if they came down the pub on a karaoke night, they'd get their teeth done it - possibly by every patron in turn - for the greatest karaoke night in the ol' boozer yet. I feel sorry for these guys. If only Fate had dealt them a different hand, if only they learned the play the damn bass - if only they had friends to form a crap band as kids; they wouldn't have the reason to hate everyone and everything that shows a bit of balls and talent. But if I were in that pub, I'd be throwing the punch with everyone else." So, editors, got any openings? :-) |
| Treasure Moment 04.06.2008 02:49 |
Fuck that shitty magazine! they know nothing about real music. Its kinda low of brian and roger to be on that mag after all the thrash they have said about Queen. |
| pittrek 04.06.2008 03:22 |
joe6464 wrote: it's is pretty obvious that Rolling Stone hate Queen, here are some quotes that they have said about Queen in their reviews: "They've also appropriated the most irritating elements of Yes's style — histrionic vocals, abrupt and pointless compositional complexity, and a dearth of melody"Thank god for that ! "But the group has some annoying weaknesses, notably a tendency toward lyrical abstraction"What's wrong with lyrical abstraction ? "The guiding principle of these arrogant brats seems to be that anything Freddie & Company want, Freddie & Company get"Wow, how do these arrogant brats dare to refer to somebody else as "arrogant brats" ? "Queen may be the first truly fascist rock band. The whole thing makes me wonder why anyone would indulge these creeps and their polluting ideas."Fascist rock band ? Cool, just what my blood pressure needs. "rock's reigning champs of bad taste"Is it about Queen or Stones ? "Its members are never going to make it as dignified elder statesmen"Could somebody translate this for me ? |
| joe90 04.06.2008 07:01 |
Meh, it's Rolling Stone. Say no more. |
| joe6464 04.06.2008 08:50 |
If you read the quotes then you will see what is wrong with them they say Queen have "irritating elements", "annoying weaknesses", they say "The whole thing makes me wonder why anyone would indulge these creeps and their polluting ideas." |
| kingogre 04.06.2008 11:41 |
Just to clear things up, its the magazine Rolling Stone, not the band Rolling Stones. |
| MercuryArts 04.06.2008 16:49 |
Its obvious that if anyone bought albums base on the reviews of Rolling Stone Mag that person would have the worst music collection EVER! |
| Daniel Nester 05.06.2008 10:13 |
I have been trying to find my clip of Dave Marsh's review of Jazz, where he calls Queen the first 'fascist band.' It truly is an assassination attempt. Even the pans from Lester Bangs, one of my hero writers, expressed the view that, while he could understand Queen's appeal, it wasn't his cup of tea. Which is really what a critic is supposed to do, right? Explain an artist's appeal and not just say they suck? Roger's letter to RS is up in the photo album somehere on the QZ. It's awesome. |
| PieterMC 05.06.2008 10:21 |
Daniel Nester wrote: I have been trying to find my clip of Dave Marsh's review of Jazz, where he calls Queen the first 'fascist band.' It truly is an assassination attempt. Even the pans from Lester Bangs, one of my hero writers, expressed the view that, while he could understand Queen's appeal, it wasn't his cup of tea. Which is really what a critic is supposed to do, right? Explain an artist's appeal and not just say they suck? Roger's letter to RS is up in the photo album somehere on the QZ. It's awesome.Here is the Dave Marsh review of Jazz: link Here some of the other Rolling Stone reviews: Queen: link Queen II: link SHA: link ADATR: link NOTW: link Live Killers: link The Game: link Hot Space: link The Works: link AKOM: link The Miracle: link Innuendo: link One of the most absurd quotes comes from the review of The Game. "Certainly, The Game is less obnoxious than Queen's last few outings, simply because it's harder to get annoyed with a group that's plugging away at bad rockabilly than with one blasting out crypto-Nazi marching tunes." |
| Micrówave 05.06.2008 12:46 |
Treasure Moment wrote: Fuck that shitty magazine! they know nothing about real music. Its kinda low of brian and roger to be on that mag after all the thrash they have said about Queen.I thought you got Syphillus and had left us. Well, welcome back... glad the penicillin worked. |
| Fireplace 06.06.2008 06:24 |
joe6464 wrote: "Its members are never going to make it as dignified elder statesmen"Interesting. Does Liverpool University know that? |
| rg9l 09.06.2008 10:23 |
RS is SHIT, I really hate who writes on. Well, I don't care about what they say. I don't mind. Reading this about Live Killers makes me ROTFL. ''Live," they said. pity the poor consumer who has to spend eight or nine dollars before he or she can read the self-congratulatory liner notes inside Queen's Live Killers and discover that the better part of "Bohemian Rhapsody" isn't live at all.'' |
| sheerheartattack1980 09.06.2008 14:12 |
I really don't see why they take we will rock you so offensively...fascist??? that is so laughable. Queen did experiment, hence HOT SPACE!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rolling stones blows and I would rather put a fucking ice pick in my eyes then read their pretentious, BORING, for-shit magazine. |
| joe90 10.06.2008 07:30 |
Critics always hated Queen because they never represented whatever social movement was happening at the time. They only represented themselves, played what they wanted to play, we're better than anyone else and didn't mind the rest of the world knowing about it... and dont we love them for it. Honestly, these critics are just a sad pack of wankers who must absolutely detest the fact that despite their vile, Queen went on to dominate the World! Remember, those who cant, critque. |
| Holly2003 10.06.2008 07:58 |
Let's be honest though: the liner notes for Livekillers are exactly as stated in RS -- self-congratulatory, indulgent, gushing and sycophantic. |
| Wiley 10.06.2008 14:35 |
I was pleasantly surprised to read a positive review of Queen's first album but all the others are terrible. It's almost as if RS fell in love with Queen's very early style and they felt betrayed by their later works, holding a grudge for ever. Or maybe they fired the person that reviewed their first album...? I find their reviews from the 80's somewhat accurate (surprisingly favorable for The Works) but they really lost the mark on the Innuendo one. I think they still pose a good point (in a very bad manner). I believe that Queen tried so hard in making their songs as 'generic' as possible -to please everybody- that you almost don't believe Freddie when he sings them. Still, I wouldn't call them "soul-less". Interesting reading, though. |
| Treasure Moment 10.06.2008 17:42 |
sheerheartattack1980 wrote: I really don't see why they take we will rock you so offensively...fascist??? that is so laughable. Queen did experiment, hence HOT SPACE!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rolling stones blows and I would rather put a fucking ice pick in my eyes then read their pretentious, BORING, for-shit magazine.I agree, fuck that shitty garbage magazine, its written by a bunch of stupid garbage humans. |
| john bodega 11.06.2008 02:13 |
If I'd been shot four times and was bleeding to death and the only thing I could use to plug up some of the bullet holes was a Rolling Stones magazine, I'd rather bleed to death. Fuck this stupid publication. |