danwhite89 30.06.2008 14:27 |
*I Want To Break Free I mean I know it's a controversial video, but nowadays you see bands of all sorts - metal, rock, punk - dressing up as women and prancing around. So why did it ruin Queen's reputation so much in America? |
Haystacks Calhoun II 30.06.2008 14:42 |
Just the perfect storm of bad timing.... - At the onset of the Aids epedemic, which meant that people put gay and Aids in the same sentence. - A time when Reagan conservatism ran rampant, which, in part, led to above. So, take an openly gay singer of a band called Queen, dress the whole band in drag at the height of the Aids scare, and presto. Plus, add to that the bad pub from the Hot Space record, and it pretty well led to Queen not being able to get arrested in the US. |
mooghead 30.06.2008 15:03 |
danwhite89 wrote: I mean I know it's a controversial video, but nowadays you see bands of all sortsYou didn't then though, and 'they' didn't get it. |
boca 30.06.2008 15:44 |
I was reading Peter Freestone's book last night, and this was mentioned in book. I was thinking for very long time and i couldn't think of any reason for that. My opinion is that it's only excuse, but main reason is hidden deep inside. They wanted to f*ck up Queen. That's my opinion... |
Claudio_CQI 30.06.2008 16:20 |
> Why did IWTBF fail so much in the Americas? because america is this and more and more.... bye cla |
Micrówave 30.06.2008 17:05 |
Haystacks Calhounski wrote: - A time when Reagan conservatism ran rampant, which, in part, led to above.And George Bush. He's gotta be to blame for something. I think, seriously though, it's a different matter... had nothing to do with AIDS or Conservatism. Queen made a bad video. Queen didn't globally promote themselves very well in the mid 80s. Are these the 4's fault? Management? Creativity Dept? All are to blame: (1) The video, just wasn't funny outside of the UK. It was a spoof on a show that not too many people were aware of, "outside the UK". (2) The back catalog was not available in the US, so in essence Queen turned their back on a pretty big demographic. The final straw was releasing Classic Queen to Record Stores during The Miracle campaign. Great, you can hear Queen hits at the record store, you just can't buy them. But here's a $25 import CD, yes Metallica is on sale for 11.99. (3) US airplay suffered as well, as hearing something other than Bohemian Rhapsody was virtually impossible. Without a US distributorship goes the perks. (4) John Deacon's haircut. What was he thinking? He actually looked better in the video! |
Haystacks Calhoun II 30.06.2008 17:15 |
Blaming George Bush is a given....it's his fault for everything from the Hindenburg disaster to the murder of Julius Caesar. |
Mr Fred 30.06.2008 17:41 |
nowadays many bands...... but hello. Times are changing. What is allright now was not allright before. That's the way it havs been for a long time. |
coops 30.06.2008 18:31 |
Videos can make or break a song. I remember that Borap was doing well on the charts, but not tearing them up, until the video came out, and then BOOM. Number one overnight. |
teleman 01.07.2008 00:01 |
Multiple reasons as already stated. One thing about the video is that North Americans were not familiar with British soaps so there is no way they'd get the video's humour. I think Queen should have had another video for the song in America. I remember hearing disparaging comments about Queen after people saw the IWTBF video that were made by Conservative minded people who had no clue about the idea behind the video yet thought nothing of sitcoms having guys dressed in drag. |
teleman 01.07.2008 00:01 |
Multiple reasons as already stated. One thing about the video is that North Americans were not familiar with British soaps so there is no way they'd get the video's humour. I think Queen should have had another video for the song in America. I remember hearing disparaging comments about Queen after people saw the IWTBF video that were made by Conservative minded people who had no clue about the idea behind the video yet thought nothing of sitcoms having guys dressed in drag. |
Sheer Brass Neck 01.07.2008 06:33 |
After AOBTD, Body Language, the bulk of Hot Space, then Radio Ga Ga as the lead single of the Works, Queen were a keyboard driven band who sounded nothing like the band they were in the 70s. In America, Queen were arena rockers. Arena rock is loud and big, guitar driven music, not keyboards and drum machines. If you wanted that in the early 80s you had Human League, Flock of Seagulls and a million other bands. America didn't go for this non-guitar Queen, plain and simple. They strayed too far from their roots, and lost their core fans. The video didn't help, but if America were big and bad and homophobic, why were Culture Club and WHAM doing well in the charts in America at that time? |
louvox 01.07.2008 10:24 |
I absolutely agree with you. What most European fail to realize is that Queen simply started producing (in my opinion and most of America) crappy songs. “Another one bites the dust” seemed at the time like it would be a one-time hiccup and would be quickly over looked. Then we got “Hot Space” which was just a horrible record. Then along comes “The Works’. A sad compilation of retreads. In America its “Three strikes, your out!” It sad, that the period between “Hot Space” and “The Miracle” Queen became just another Euro-Trash-Synth-Pop-Band. In Europe they could do no wrong. They could fart on a record and European fans would call it pure genius. Not here. Most of us called what they were producing in the 80’s exactly what it was…Crap! So all the excuses they gave as to why their popularity declined in the USA is just hogwash! |
john bodega 01.07.2008 12:40 |
louvox wrote: I absolutely agree with you. What most European fail to realize is that Queen simply started producing (in my opinion and most of America) crappy songs. “Another one bites the dust” seemed at the time like it would be a one-time hiccup and would be quickly over looked. Then we got “Hot Space” which was just a horrible record. Then along comes “The Works’. A sad compilation of retreads. In America its “Three strikes, your out!” It sad, that the period between “Hot Space” and “The Miracle” Queen became just another Euro-Trash-Synth-Pop-Band. In Europe they could do no wrong. They could fart on a record and European fans would call it pure genius. Not here. Most of us called what they were producing in the 80’s exactly what it was…Crap! So all the excuses they gave as to why their popularity declined in the USA is just hogwash!At face value your post makes some sense. On closer examination it's total crap. If any of the above reasons for Queen failing in the US in the 80's were applicable, then virtually no bands in the 80's would have succeeded in the 80's. It was all crap. Some of it way crappier than Queen. Rick Astley, anyone? You're also making it sound like Americans were the only people left in the world with any musical taste. Ludicrous! And as to Queen's 80's output being totally without merit.... Under Pressure, Life Is Real, Who Wants to Live Forever and Was It All Worth It. Personal taste aside, each song has something going for it. |
MercuryArts 01.07.2008 12:49 |
The video is irrevelant to the song success or lack there of in the US. I was 15 when The Works came out. Radio Ga Ga came and went w/ some fanfare. But IWTBF was released as a single and flopped completely a couple of months before the video even saw the light of day in the U.S. It was hammered by the radio stations. The video which nobody got was just the final nail in the coffin. |
kingogre 01.07.2008 12:56 |
louvox wrote: I absolutely agree with you. What most European fail to realize is that Queen simply started producing (in my opinion and most of America) crappy songs. “Another one bites the dust” seemed at the time like it would be a one-time hiccup and would be quickly over looked. Then we got “Hot Space” which was just a horrible record. Then along comes “The Works’. A sad compilation of retreads. In America its “Three strikes, your out!” It sad, that the period between “Hot Space” and “The Miracle” Queen became just another Euro-Trash-Synth-Pop-Band. In Europe they could do no wrong. They could fart on a record and European fans would call it pure genius. Not here. Most of us called what they were producing in the 80’s exactly what it was…Crap! So all the excuses they gave as to why their popularity declined in the USA is just hogwash!Actually AOBTD is Queens best-selling single ever, due in large to the high US sales. |
louvox 01.07.2008 14:16 |
I never said that Americans had better taste in music. Your right they made some good songs in the 80’s, but they few and far between. If you able to see what dominates the music sales charts here, you’d know that. Reality is though, Queen changed drastically. Not for the better. I am all for artist trying new things, expanding their musical horizons. Taking something new and making it their own. Queen stop doing that just after “The Game” CD. It seems that after the big success of “Another one bites the dust” they rushed to cash in on it by making an album that was almost entirely funk/disco at a time when that kind of music was on the decline. Plus instead of recording it with their usual flare, they simply copied what others had done before. Resulting in flat, uninspired and crappy record. I will say that the live versions of the songs from Hot Space sound much better, Had they recorded them that way, it probably would have done better with their fans. Still most of their songs in the 80’s were weak or down right shitty. Zebonka12 wrote:louvox wrote: I absolutely agree with you. What most European fail to realize is that Queen simply started producing (in my opinion and most of America) crappy songs. “Another one bites the dust” seemed at the time like it would be a one-time hiccup and would be quickly over looked. Then we got “Hot Space” which was just a horrible record. Then along comes “The Works’. A sad compilation of retreads. In America its “Three strikes, your out!” It sad, that the period between “Hot Space” and “The Miracle” Queen became just another Euro-Trash-Synth-Pop-Band. In Europe they could do no wrong. They could fart on a record and European fans would call it pure genius. Not here. Most of us called what they were producing in the 80’s exactly what it was…Crap! So all the excuses they gave as to why their popularity declined in the USA is just hogwash!At face value your post makes some sense. On closer examination it's total crap. If any of the above reasons for Queen failing in the US in the 80's were applicable, then virtually no bands in the 80's would have succeeded in the 80's. It was all crap. Some of it way crappier than Queen. Rick Astley, anyone? You're also making it sound like Americans were the only people left in the world with any musical taste. Ludicrous! And as to Queen's 80's output being totally without merit.... Under Pressure, Life Is Real, Who Wants to Live Forever and Was It All Worth It. Personal taste aside, each song has something going for it. |
Jazz 78 01.07.2008 14:24 |
I fortunately was NOT one of the American fans that thought the video was a disaster for them back then. I remember the first time I saw it on MTV all those years ago and thought the clip was hysterical!!! But then again I grew up in Monty Python and got the joke. The Stones did it, Pyton did it, Benny Hill did it. Why Queen got the boot over this clip is beyond me!!! |
Claudio_CQI 01.07.2008 14:51 |
claudiox wrote: > Why did IWTBF fail so much in the Americas? because america is this and more and more.... bye claehm... sorry, I didn't want to hurt anybody. I think the video was too much genial for the time. bye Cla |
Hugowan 01.07.2008 17:57 |
I'd just like to make clear that America is a continent, not a country. Then if you ask "Why did IWTBF fail so much in the United States of America?", i'd say that maybe the musical taste of the people on that country was... bad. |
Micrówave 02.07.2008 11:22 |
Hugowan wrote: I'd just like to make clear that America is a continent, not a country. Then if you ask "Why did IWTBF fail so much in the United States of America?", i'd say that maybe the musical taste of the people on that country was... bad.I was also going to blame Mexicans. Louvox, you have a point going. A lot of stoners were still listening to The Scorpions, Judas Priest, and Cinderella. I'm sure they were probably listening to them more, now that Queen decided that being another Hair Band was passe. Flock of Seaguls? Hardly. Unless you consider them Funk/R&B-ish. I don't. So while you bought your British Flag Muscle Shirt and did your Air Guitar to Def Leppard, Queen got out. About 4 years later, so had the rest of the Hair bands. They got harder, ditched their keyboards, and proceeded to squeeze in as many bar chords into a measure as they could. I think Brian could've adapted, and Roger too. But not the other two. But I think it would have sounded like The Brian May band sounded, back in the early 90s. Dated. Tired. Missing something. |
TheAmazingEvent 02.07.2008 15:14 |
Usually America means the USA South America is called South America The continent is The Americas At least that's how i understand it. |
louvox 02.07.2008 17:14 |
Micrówave wrote:Hugowan,Hugowan wrote: I'd just like to make clear that America is a continent, not a country. Then if you ask "Why did IWTBF fail so much in the United States of America?", i'd say that maybe the musical taste of the people on that country was... bad.I was also going to blame Mexicans. Louvox, you have a point going. A lot of stoners were still listening to The Scorpions, Judas Priest, and Cinderella. I'm sure they were probably listening to them more, now that Queen decided that being another Hair Band was passe. Flock of Seaguls? Hardly. Unless you consider them Funk/R&B-ish. I don't. So while you bought your British Flag Muscle Shirt and did your Air Guitar to Def Leppard, Queen got out. About 4 years later, so had the rest of the Hair bands. They got harder, ditched their keyboards, and proceeded to squeeze in as many bar chords into a measure as they could. I think Brian could've adapted, and Roger too. But not the other two. But I think it would have sounded like The Brian May band sounded, back in the early 90s. Dated. Tired. Missing something. There will always be some controversy on why Queen’s popularity declined in the USA. I don’t think it was only one thing, but a combination of issues. The four members have all given off the cuff answers as to why, but to me their answers always sounded like excuses. It seems that most in Europe and elsewhere believe that “I want to break free” video had a lot to do with it. Their decline in the USA started long before that video. I remember being appalled (as were most USA Queen fans) when I first heard “Another one bites the dust”, but that was one song on an otherwise very good record (The Game). Then we got “Flash Gordon Soundtrack” which was pretty much dismissed by most Queen fans. They follow up with “Under pressure” single (great song) most everyone in the USA is still happy with them. Then they release “Hot Space” a flat & uninspired collection of mostly disco/funk/techno songs. Most USA Queen fans wonder, “What the fuck is this crap?” USA rock radio stations laugh at them openly on the air and don’t bother playing anything off “Hot space” with the exception of “Under pressure”. Disco had pretty much run it’s course by then in the USA and was considered passé and un-cool. They tour the USA and it’s barely promoted at all. Most fans boo the new material at their shows (I was there). Their USA record label drops them. Next we get “The Works” For the most part a bunch of retreads & lightweight pop soaked in awful sounding synthesizers. In a period of 4 years Queen had changed from an anthem rock n’ roll outfit to an Eruo-trash-pop-synth band. Barely recognizable even amongst it’s most hardened USA fans. So by the time they released that video, the damaged had been done. MTV never even played that video in the USA and if anything because it was not readily available to most Queen fans in the USA, it was very sought out. I thought the video was clever and funny, but the song it’s self was lame. It crawls along at a snails pace and it’s got the stupid synthesizer solo that sounds like someone having a bowel movement. I am all for artist trying new things. Queen used to take other styles of music and make it their own, forge new roads & create some of the most inventive music ever produced, but that all changed in the 80’s for the most part. Suddenly they just started mimicking others. Freddie was more concern about appeasing his inner circle of friends and what they were into. John thought just because “Another one bites the dust” was a huge hit all he had to do was keep writing fluff. Roger suddenly found his fingers glued to a synthesizer or forgot all about the guitar & drums. Brian at times seem disenchanted with the direction and offered up very little. Usually it was his songs that were worth listening to at all. Even the next two releas |
Lester Burnham 02.07.2008 19:33 |
louvox wrote: Their USA record label drops them.This didn't happen. Their contract with Elektra ran out in 1982, and the band were pretty disenchanted with the label, and decided not to re-sign with them. (Not that Capitol did any better...) Brian expanded upon what happened in an interview a few years ago, where he said that something similar to the 1960 payola scandal happened at Capitol, and the band lost their label support. Remember that 'Radio Ga Ga' hit #16 in the US, which is pretty close to 'Body Language' (#11) and even better than 'Under Pressure' (#29). Also, Paul Prenter was apparently acting dismissive toward the few journalists who had otherwise supported the band. I remember reading somewhere on QZ, by someone who lived in the middle of America, that the IWTBF video was shown not once, but twice on MTV, which disputes the "Americans were terrified of men in drag". Keep in mind that grown men wearing leotards and feathered hair was pretty popular among the metal bands at this time, so the myth that the IWTBF video killed Queen's popularity holds very little water. I personally put it down to Capitol Records' terrible promotional skills, but that's just me. |
kingogre 03.07.2008 04:11 |
Lester Burnham wrote:Youre probably on to something, as it really seems like too much of a coincidence that the bands decline in sales happened at the same time as they changed label.louvox wrote: Their USA record label drops them.This didn't happen. Their contract with Elektra ran out in 1982, and the band were pretty disenchanted with the label, and decided not to re-sign with them. (Not that Capitol did any better...) Brian expanded upon what happened in an interview a few years ago, where he said that something similar to the 1960 payola scandal happened at Capitol, and the band lost their label support. Remember that 'Radio Ga Ga' hit #16 in the US, which is pretty close to 'Body Language' (#11) and even better than 'Under Pressure' (#29). Also, Paul Prenter was apparently acting dismissive toward the few journalists who had otherwise supported the band. I remember reading somewhere on QZ, by someone who lived in the middle of America, that the IWTBF video was shown not once, but twice on MTV, which disputes the "Americans were terrified of men in drag". Keep in mind that grown men wearing leotards and feathered hair was pretty popular among the metal bands at this time, so the myth that the IWTBF video killed Queen's popularity holds very little water. I personally put it down to Capitol Records' terrible promotional skills, but that's just me. That said homophobia could very well have been another reason for the decline as it was during this time Freddie started living more openly as a homosexual even adapting the gay-clone-look. All in all it might have been too much for the US fans who were mainly into the rock-sound of Queen, that they suddenly turns to recording more pop and even disco, the singer suddenly changing his image to an openly homosexual-style and focusing on issuing singles that never were really that big of a thing in rock. With a bad label this probably meant that the band didnt get into the pop-market that it did in the rest of the world to compensate this. During the 80s, and really even in the late 70s, the band chose to be a great singles band instead of a great album band. And they were pretty much geniuses at making great singles and marketing them. Though the albums are sometimes painfully lacking for various reasons the solo-albums and various other tracks proved they still had the songs. Some of those tracks were apparently even tried out for Queen-albums but discarded for various reasons. |
Dane 03.07.2008 06:37 |
American humour and English humour come from 2 different planets. As Brian stated on IWTBF; They just didn't get it over in the States. The English have always been more open on television. Just look at Dame Edna! Well ok, US had Divine, but still. Most US bands take themselves very seriously. UK bands do not. Not offending anyone here I hope.. That wasnt my poitn at all. |
Major Tom 03.07.2008 08:33 |
(4) John Deacon's haircut. What was he thinking? He actually looked better in the video! Lol, could be it really. |
Lester Burnham 03.07.2008 09:46 |
kingogre wrote: That said homophobia could very well have been another reason for the decline as it was during this time Freddie started living more openly as a homosexual even adapting the gay-clone-look.If that was so, wouldn't a grown man prancing around in too-tight leotards while drinking champagne and calling everyone "a load of tarts" or "darlings" tip them off? kingogre wrote: All in all it might have been too much for the US fans who were mainly into the rock-sound of Queen, that they suddenly turns to recording more pop and even disco, the singer suddenly changing his image to an openly homosexual-style and focusing on issuing singles that never were really that big of a thing in rock. With a bad label this probably meant that the band didnt get into the pop-market that it did in the rest of the world to compensate this.Remember that the two biggest US singles weren't even really hard rock songs: 'Crazy Little Thing' and 'Another One Bites The Dust' were as far away from, say, 'It's Late' or 'Fat Bottomed Girls', both of which performed miserably in the US. Please don't think that I'm picking on you or singling you out -- not my intentions at all! You do make some good points, but I think that people are really looking too much into the whole "drag" thing of IWTBF too much. If Americans really didn't "get it", then why was Monty Python so much more popular over here than in the UK, or why did we really dig The Kids In The Hall? Besides, if it was anything in the IWTBF video, it would've been the ballet scene in the middle... hooboy! |
Sheer Brass Neck 03.07.2008 11:04 |
Very valid points, Lester. People try to justify Queen's fall from grace in the US by saying America didn't get the video, and Queen got banned by MTV, and neither of those are true. As you mentioned, Queen's biggest singles were a rockabilly tune and an R n' B or funk influenced tune. People who bought those and made them huge selling songs were casual fans who wouldn't know It's Late or Dead on Time. Queen then did an album of Euro-pop and lame funk to capitalize, but lost a lot of fans along the way. Then came Radio Ga Ga with no guitar and apart from vocals, you couldn't tell it was Queen, then IWTBF, again, no guitars and no signature Queen sound, and lots of core fans, and I had lots of friends who were, gave up on Queen as a rock band and didn't care for them as a keyboard heavy band. Plus, as Louvox said, ther writing at that time was becoming shoddy. Combination of a lot of things, the video may have contributed to their decline but it was a small part, despite Brian's protestations and the red herring about Paul Prenter's rudeness. If you have hit songs, you can treat anyone like shit. |
Micrówave 03.07.2008 12:12 |
louvox wrote: I remember being appalled (as were most USA Queen fans) when I first heard “Another one bites the dust”, but that was one song on an otherwise very good record (The Game).Their best selling US single appalled MOST USA Queen fans? Um, that doesn't make any sense. louvox wrote: It wasn’t till “Innuendo” that we finally got a record worthy of their legacy.Hoop Diddy Do's? Or maybe the "VROOM" on Ride the Wild Wind? The meows? Or the worst synthesizer use of any Queen album? To which "Legacy" do you refer? louvox wrote: I am just echoing the sentiment and feelings of most Queen fans in the USA.No, Lou, that's just you I think. Something happened to you and it involved that Hot Space record. You hate it so very much, there has to be something deeper. Perhaps you weren't ready to see the Body Language video? I know I wasn't!!! |
louvox 03.07.2008 14:11 |
Micrówave wrote:It was not Queen fans that made that a hit record. It's true, most, not all (Queen fans in the USA) did not like that song. Just because something is a hit, it dosen't make it good. So there goes your logic.louvox wrote: I remember being appalled (as were most USA Queen fans) when I first heard “Another one bites the dust”, but that was one song on an otherwise very good record (The Game).Their best selling US single appalled MOST USA Queen fans? Um, that doesn't make any sense.louvox wrote: It wasn’t till “Innuendo” that we finally got a record worthy of their legacy.Hoop Diddy Do's? Or maybe the "VROOM" on Ride the Wild Wind? The meows? Or the worst synthesizer use of any Queen album? To which "Legacy" do you refer?louvox wrote: I am just echoing the sentiment and feelings of most Queen fans in the USA.No, Lou, that's just you I think. Something happened to you and it involved that Hot Space record. You hate it so very much, there has to be something deeper. Perhaps you weren't ready to see the Body Language video? I know I wasn't!!! There is only one legacy. Queen is a great band. The music they issued for the most part durring the 80's was crap. Pure and simple. "Innuendo" is a great record. Other than "Delilah". Nothing happen to me, but age. Hot space is a hoorible record, but it's not their worst. The award goes to "A kind of Magic" I actually like the live versions of Staying power, Calling all girls, action this day & back chat. Had they recorded the songs with thier usual sound, they probably would fared better. |
Winter Land Man 03.07.2008 17:42 |
I remember reading some Queen fan site and a ton of fans were excited about Another One Bites The Dust when it was released. |
Winter Land Man 03.07.2008 17:46 |
I wonder what would of happened if they released Hammer To Fall as the first single from 'The Works'... instead of Ga Ga. And then released Tear It Up as a single. |
kingogre 04.07.2008 15:05 |
Lester Burnham wrote:No, youre probably right. However Robert Halford is an example of a musician that people obviously should have realised was a homosexual but didnt. Ive even heard Brian and Roger say somewhere that they never really thought Freddie was gay until he came out, apparently they ust thought he liked to hang around with men.;) No matter what there is still a difference between being an eccentric "maybe-homosexual" man and someone who is openly living the gay life and even maing a statement out of it.kingogre wrote: That said homophobia could very well have been another reason for the decline as it was during this time Freddie started living more openly as a homosexual even adapting the gay-clone-look.If that was so, wouldn't a grown man prancing around in too-tight leotards while drinking champagne and calling everyone "a load of tarts" or "darlings" tip them off?kingogre wrote: All in all it might have been too much for the US fans who were mainly into the rock-sound of Queen, that they suddenly turns to recording more pop and even disco, the singer suddenly changing his image to an openly homosexual-style and focusing on issuing singles that never were really that big of a thing in rock. With a bad label this probably meant that the band didnt get into the pop-market that it did in the rest of the world to compensate this.Remember that the two biggest US singles weren't even really hard rock songs: 'Crazy Little Thing' and 'Another One Bites The Dust' were as far away from, say, 'It's Late' or 'Fat Bottomed Girls', both of which performed miserably in the US. Please don't think that I'm picking on you or singling you out -- not my intentions at all! You do make some good points, but I think that people are really looking too much into the whole "drag" thing of IWTBF too much. If Americans really didn't "get it", then why was Monty Python so much more popular over here than in the UK, or why did we really dig The Kids In The Hall? Besides, if it was anything in the IWTBF video, it would've been the ballet scene in the middle... hooboy! But Id imagine the main reason for Queen losing in popularity was the change of label which lead to the failure to win over the american pop-market. |
IsilwenGilraen 05.07.2008 19:44 |
Wow...with some of your comments I don't know why some of you even bother to post places like Queenzone with your obvious hatred for the majority of Queen music!. The 80's was just a decade of crap music for pretty much everyone in my opinion, especially following the heels of the 70's. Queen may have created my least favorite music in that decade, but I still like it. Nothing compares to their first five albums, of course, but I think that no matter what musical direction they decided to take it was always done artistically. And Freddie could sing out of the phonebook and I'd still listen, because no doubt it would be the most interesting phonebook read ever performed. :P What I'm trying to say is, even though they went in a completely different direction during the 80's and I'm not exactly a fan of that type of music, I would listen to Queen's rendition of pop/disco any day. No matter what type of music they experimented with, they always made it their own and it was always very musical and artistic and precise. And hey--I like Delilah!!! Some of you need to have a better sense of humor! :P For those Delilah-haters, do you also hate I'm Going Slightly Mad? Fried chicken? The rediculousness which is Lazing on a Sunday Afternoon? Bicycle Race? I mean come on! The best thing that can be said about Queen is that they have always made me laugh without sacrificing one ounce of musicality and creativity. Anyways, that's my two cents. Oh, and I'm an American who thinks that the I Want to Break Free video is hilarious. =) |
Winter Land Man 05.07.2008 21:40 |
I love everything in the 80s and 90s by Queen, better than anything Brian sang lead on in the 70s... ick... 'She Makes Me' I enjoy the 80s and 90s Queen more than the 70s Queen. The only thing I didn't like, is Freddie stopped writing many hard rock songs which he used to do. Another thing about 86 thru 91, is, Freddie didn't write a pure love song / power ballad. I don't consider 'Don't Try So Hard' a love song, no matter what anyone else says. Not a power ballad either. I know he wrote a lot of love songs on his solo albums, but I'm talking about Queen releases. Brian sort of took over the love songs. And The Miracle didn't have any love ballads, which sucked, but, I love the album. I love every song on Hot Space. I enjoy Hot Space more than Queen II. I like catchy songs. There's some good stuff on Queen I and Queen II, but, the songs, though produced quite well, had catchy bits in the songs, and then forgettable bits. The March Of The Black Queen would of been PERFECT, if it had some things taken out of it. I love the A Kind Of Magic album, I consider the songs great, even if the majority is pop rock. I love The Works. Keep Passing The Open windows is forgettable though. The Game is probably the album of the 80s I like least by Queen. I like maybe five songs off that album, but the rest are filler. It made #1 because of Crazy Little Thing Called Love and Another One Bites The Dust, it's obvious. I think Play The Game should of been a bigger hit. It was played and requested on radio stations quite a bit. Even now, when they have requests on radio stations, Play The Game is a popular request. I remember hearing it a lot in the early 90s. I love all the songs on Innuendo. I love 'Delilah'.. great song. Jessica doesn't like it, but I love that song. Especially the demo of it. A mistake they made in the 80s is that they didn't release an LP per year. But still, they had MORE hits in the 80s than they did in the 70s!!! Fuck anyone who says I have a bad taste in music, just because I prefer 80s and 90s Queen over the 70s Queen. I prefer Queen's 80s rock songs (Hammer To Fall, Tear It Up, Put Out The Fire, etc) over their 70s rock songs. Let Me Entertain You was rediculous, especially the lyrics. |
Dusta 05.07.2008 22:58 |
Lovely post!
IsilwenGilraen wrote: Wow...with some of your comments I don't know why some of you even bother to post places like Queenzone with your obvious hatred for the majority of Queen music!. The 80's was just a decade of crap music for pretty much everyone in my opinion, especially following the heels of the 70's. Queen may have created my least favorite music in that decade, but I still like it. Nothing compares to their first five albums, of course, but I think that no matter what musical direction they decided to take it was always done artistically. And Freddie could sing out of the phonebook and I'd still listen, because no doubt it would be the most interesting phonebook read ever performed. :P What I'm trying to say is, even though they went in a completely different direction during the 80's and I'm not exactly a fan of that type of music, I would listen to Queen's rendition of pop/disco any day. No matter what type of music they experimented with, they always made it their own and it was always very musical and artistic and precise. And hey--I like Delilah!!! Some of you need to have a better sense of humor! :P For those Delilah-haters, do you also hate I'm Going Slightly Mad? Fried chicken? The rediculousness which is Lazing on a Sunday Afternoon? Bicycle Race? I mean come on! The best thing that can be said about Queen is that they have always made me laugh without sacrificing one ounce of musicality and creativity. Anyways, that's my two cents. Oh, and I'm an American who thinks that the I Want to Break Free video is hilarious. =) |
kingogre 06.07.2008 05:12 |
To sum it up for me.. Queen were a genius singles band in the 80s but at best a decent album band. They never took themselves to seriously, something that is all too rare in rock, and that is one of the reasons why at least I love them. Also Freddie started writing a lot of in my opinion lesser tracks like Dont try suicide, keep passing the open windows, Rain must fall and My baby does me and less of the epic masterpieces he wrote in the 70s. They all still wrote songs that at least would have been great filler on the albums but instead released these on solo-discs. |
steven 35638 06.07.2008 12:05 |
Perhaps the people of North America simply had bad taste in both humor and music. However, this has been mentioned all too often. So, I will build on top of what IsilwenGilraen mentioned earlier. Even Queen fans struggle to comprehend Queen's over the top humor -- which is an essential element of their persona. So, let's not focus directly on North Americans such as myself and many others. Most fans seem to find the fun in songs like Seaside Rendezvous, The Fairy Feller's Masterstroke, and The Millionaire Waltz; but, make them listen to Delilah or I Want to Break Free they seem to hesitate. What is it that makes them so unsure? I think I may have a reasonable explanation. The sudden transition in both musical taste and production is what must have startled many Queen fans. At one point we have Jazz, a delicious dose of good rock and roll, and then out of the blue we have the funk/rock of The Game (an album the United States, in particular, found pleasure in). The sound was different , it was loose. But, unfortunately, some fans just didn't find much satisfaction in it. Flash Gordon, although a breakthrough, bored many fans. Hot Space, although interesting, was the final nail in the coffin for many fans. This different taste in direction and feel clouds the minds of so many fans. They can't get over the fact that it's different and not the seventies -- they look over the humor. Once one looks past the change and begins to appreciate it they will most likely begin to understand the humor and learn that it is not too different from their humor in the seventies. |
Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira 06.07.2008 12:41 |
TheAmazingEvent wrote: Usually America means the USA South America is called South America The continent is The Americas At least that's how i understand it.If South America and Central America are named as such, I cannot understand why North America would follow another rule. I fail to understand why a single country is sometimes referred to as North America and, even stranger, America. Cheers, Ogre- |
kingogre 06.07.2008 14:11 |
Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira wrote:Good point.TheAmazingEvent wrote: Usually America means the USA South America is called South America The continent is The Americas At least that's how i understand it.If South America and Central America are named as such, I cannot understand why North America would follow another rule. I fail to understand why a single country is sometimes referred to as North America and, even stranger, America. Cheers, Ogre- Somebody mentioned Flash Gordon. Many of the older Queenfans I know seem to dislike that album a lot, strangely to me because I find it very entertaining and a powerful and fun listen. Maybe that album was more important to the commercial decline in the US thanmost people think. Just a thought. |
steven 35638 06.07.2008 16:47 |
I don't see how Flash Gordon could have harmed Queen. I wasn't around in the early eighties, but wasn't it clear that the album was a soundtrack, not a full-fledged Queen album? |
IsilwenGilraen 06.07.2008 22:41 |
Good points GALORE Steven! It's hard for even the most die-hard fans to accept change, but in my opinion that's what makes Queen such a stand out group from all the rest--they constantly changed their image and musical taste, always experimenting and stretching the limits. One good example is half the time I hate Queen songs that go in a different direction that what I am used to, but after many listenings I start appreciating each song for what it is. For example, I used to absolutely HATE Crazy Little Thing Called Love because I HATE Elvis, but eventually I recognized the humor in it and let's face it it's just got some great chords and beat and movement....I love it now! Same thing goes for I'm Going Slightly Mad, and (can you believe it) Don't Stop Me Now. (I don't know what I was thinking). The amazing thing about Queen is that when I go through different moods and my own personal music taste changes, Queen always comes through!! They've created songs in so many genres and styles that no other artists are needed! :P Oh, and about why only the US gets to be called "America" versus the other North American/Central American/South American countries....could it be that it's the only one with the word America in it's proper name anyways?? lol |
Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira 07.07.2008 08:16 |
IsilwenGilraen wrote: Oh, and about why only the US gets to be called "America" versus the other North American/Central American/South American countries....could it be that it's the only one with the word America in it's proper name anyways?? lolWow, few knew that. I bet you say Africa instead of South Africa. ROTFL Cheers, Ogre- |
Daniel Nester 07.07.2008 11:57 |
I Want to Break Free flopped in America in large part because there was no radio format for it -- the rock stations had gone hard rock, the pop stations largely post-New Wave and then Michael Jackson-type R and B. IWTBF fell nowhere in these lines -- a guitar- and piano-less single from a band that had made its name as a guitar- and piano-based band. The video's content, sure, had something to do with it. But remember that there was largely no videos back then with a sense of humor. I could name a few that had any jokey content at all from circa 1984 (Men at Work). Videos were a serious business back then, truly a make-or-break prospect for a single. Great point by I think MercuryArts about the video only screening a couple times on MTV in the first place. I wish some MTV executive would go on record about the video, but the bottom line is that, by this time, save for the hiccup of Radio Ga Ga cracking the top 40 with only intermittent airplay, Queen could not get arrested in the US. It was not in any kind of rotation at all, let alone the other video shows popular around that time (Friday Night Videos, Radio 1990). Hammer to Fall should have probably been the second, even the first, single from this album. The only reason I can think of this not happening was to give some songwriting credit and monies love to Roger and John. |
kingogre 07.07.2008 16:11 |
As far as older fans has told me at least they saw the marketing of Flash Gordon as something like a regular Queen-album. Good point about the radio stations, Daniel! |
iron eagle 07.07.2008 16:18 |
was it not banned from mtv.... if not mistaken it aired once and then was banned |
Daniel Nester 07.07.2008 18:37 |
Banned in the sense that they didn't like it? Sure. Banned in the sense that Body Language was? Naw. They just played it, like, once, with Martha Quinn leading it in and then with a "huh?" reaction afterwards. Re: Flash It's hard to see how this album would have contributed to any of the downfall in North Ameria or elsewhere. It spawned a hit single, was released in the same year as Greatest Hits. Nobody bought that album thinking it was a fully fledged Queen album a la The Game or ANATO. Or maybe people did: in the States, you can always see cut-out copies everywhere. It's a stretch to think that disgruntled buyers of the Flash soundtrack would in turn lead to, say, IWTTBF not being played on MTV and getting radio airplay. Four years had passed. |
Charlie Brown 08.07.2008 01:03 |
Lets all recall ladies and germs that The Game album was number 1 in the US for multiple weeks and 'Crazy Little Thing Called Love' and 'Another One Bites The Dust' each reached number 1 on the singles chart for multiple weeks in the US. So Queen in 1980, 1981 was huge in the US. Well what happened to their popularity here? Some people say that the Flash Gordon album did them quite a bit of damage but considering it was almost entirely an instrumental album, it not selling as well as their previous albums was probably expected by the band and music industry people. Then we have the 'Americans realized Freddie was bisexual/gay' and turned against the band theory. This might hold some water if not for the fact that i'm sure it occured to Americans that Freddie might have been bisexual/gay before the early 80s! What we are left with is that Hot Space and The Works where misunderstood and or disliked by the hard rock/heavy metal audience and radio stations, MTV. Also that Elecktra and then Capitol records didn't do a good job promoting Queen. And not touring after 1982 was probably the cherry on top of the ice cream sundae of their years long popularity crash. |
Rik&Roll 08.07.2008 08:18 |
Of course there is always the possibility that the americans hated to see a great rockband performing some poppy shit. I know I did. |
Daniel Nester 08.07.2008 08:40 |
Just as point of reference, and because I can't find where I posted it on QZ before, here is Brian's explanation for what we are discussing, as well as other issues. This is a letter from Queen guitarist Brian May, which originally appeared in News of the World: The Newsletter for Queen Fans. He is attempting to answer the question of whether Queen “gave up” on American fans after the 1982 tour behind the Hot Space album, which failed to go gold. He is addressing the newsletter’s editor, Cola Todd. 26th March 1997 Dear Cola: Now I would like to answer the Big Question that you ask. America was our great pride and joy as we grew of age as a band. Throughout the late 70s we worked very hard, touring many months of every year, and a large proportion of that time was spent in the States. I guess we took pride in the fact that every time we came back, usually with another album on the shelves, the response got bigger and bigger. We felt that we were earning our wings, as it were, and that the following we had was a genuine word-of-mouth thing, based on the uniqueness of the Queen shows, etc. We also put in time at Radio when we were passing through, particularly Roger and I, so that there was a continuing direct connection between us and the public. As far as I can tell, a number of things happened with the last Queen U.S. tour: 1) The Hot Space album was perceived by Radio as Queen forsaking Rock and Roll for Disco – out timing was perhaps a little premature, which was evident when you compare with material with what Michael Jackson was to be doing with Ed Van Halen and Slash in years to come. 2) Relations with Radio was not taken care of – we had a new man in charge of Promotion on the road, who, unknown to us at the time, was very high handed and rude with the media people and gave them the impression that we no longer cared. We only later discovered the huge extent of the damage much later, when trying to get Freddie’s solo record played. There was great resentment (radio people, like the rest of us, need to feel loved, and important!), and word of mouth on our tour was distorted by people who now wanted to see us fail. 3) We got caught in the crossfire of an attempt by Capital Records to withdraw from the Independent Promotion Circus (a.k.a. Payola) which dominated radio plays at that time. Capital dropped the man who was the lynch pin of their connection with the network of the radio station bribery, and the next week, 95 per cent of radio stations dropped our record, Radio Ga Ga. You can check this out in the record books. There was also the convenient rumours that the lyrics of the song were demeaning to Radio programmers, so there was a handy excuse available. Capital had been made an example of, by those in control, and we were the instrument. 4) We made a video in drag, as a spoof on a soap series, which was viewed as very funny, and something of an innovation, in Europe, but to the media in the U.S., it was seen as a threat to Morality. Yes, seriously – I was around to see the reaction of the TV people first-hand – they were horrified! Again, some of the media were looking for fuel for the fires of hatred (or at least distrust!), and a Homophobic undertone that further undermined Queen’s image in the U.S. The rest of the world did not seem to find this a problem. Which brings us to: 5) When the question of touring came up, we always looked at reactions to our latest album around the world. There was a massive explosion of interest in most of the countries of South America, in Africa, in the East, in Eastern Europe, and part of Western Europe which had been slow in the early days while were enjoying great recognition in North America. It made sense (and fun!) to go touring in the countries where there was growth and even hysteria, rather than flogging a Dead Horse in the US, where we felt there was a tide of something which for our interests and purposes was not dissimilar to M |
john bodega 08.07.2008 09:42 |
Rik&Roll wrote: Of course there is always the possibility that the americans hated to see a great rockband performing some poppy shit. I know I did.It's because of America that poppy shit exists. I'm sure most Americans probably didn't notice. |
Daniel Nester 08.07.2008 10:03 |
Hard rock Americans didn't want to see poppy shit, perhaps that's the better way to put it. Your average stadium-arena-rock goer in the 70-80s, even today, wouldn't be into IWTBF. |
kingogre 08.07.2008 10:19 |
I think Brian pretty much emptied the subject there. Its clear he has a lot on his feet for what he said. |
Daniel Nester 08.07.2008 10:33 |
These sentences from Brian makes me choke up sometimes: Music becomes a huge part of people’s emotional life, but always at the moment when it is ringing in the ears everywhere. There is a huge chunk of Queen music which rang from Budapest to Buenos Aires to Beijing, but was silent in America. That can never be changed now. Especially when we were all doing Radio Ga Ga handclaps at the Continental Arena gig, the first time that song was ever played on North American soil. |
Donna13 08.07.2008 12:03 |
Zebonka12 wrote:America .... A-meeeer-i-caaaaaaaa ..... A-meeer-i-caaaaaaaaaaaa!!! Ba boom ba boom ba booooooooooom. Crash. Sizzle. Pop.Rik&Roll wrote: Of course there is always the possibility that the americans hated to see a great rockband performing some poppy shit. I know I did.It's because of America that poppy shit exists. I'm sure most Americans probably didn't notice. |
Rik&Roll 08.07.2008 13:39 |
Donna13 wrote:Ehrm... yes, sure (?)Zebonka12 wrote:America .... A-meeeer-i-caaaaaaaa ..... A-meeer-i-caaaaaaaaaaaa!!! Ba boom ba boom ba booooooooooom. Crash. Sizzle. Pop.Rik&Roll wrote: Of course there is always the possibility that the americans hated to see a great rockband performing some poppy shit. I know I did.It's because of America that poppy shit exists. I'm sure most Americans probably didn't notice. But what I'm trying to say is that most people here blame the video for the song not being a hit in the states, while I think that the song became a hitsingle in Europe because of the videoclip. Halfway during the eighties every stupid song became a huge succes when the video was well-liked. And let's face it: IWTBF was a terrible song, especially for such a talented band. |
Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira 08.07.2008 14:27 |
Rik&Roll wrote: Of course there is always the possibility that the americans hated to see a great rockband performing some poppy shit. I know I did.That is not true! All over South America lots of Americans loved it! I live here and I can assure you! :) Cheers, Ogre- |
Charlie Brown 08.07.2008 23:58 |
I would like to thank Mr. Nester for posting the letter by Brian. A few points. Hot Space was certified gold in 1982 according to the RIAA (Recording Industry Association Of America) web site. So it did flop by the standards that Queen had set for itself in the US but it was not a increadible flop. If Brian was being accurate when he stated in the letter that media people had been terribly upset to see Queen in drag in the video for IWTBF then how does one explain the video by the band Ratt for their song "Round And Round' in which legendary comedian Milton Berle dressed in drag, Mr. Berle was the uncle of Ratts manager. The video for "Round And Round" was shown often on MTV more or less in the same time period as The Works album was released. And how about all the other 'hair metal' bands who wore long hair and makeup and spandex clothes and yet sold millions of records and had their videos played on MTV. So i think some sort of homophobic hysteria causing Queen to loose popularity doesn't make much sense. |
Rik&Roll 09.07.2008 15:17 |
Ergo, it must have been the quality of the song :P |
onevsion 09.07.2008 19:19 |
Micrówave wrote:Interesting. I think you are right. (especially on the deacy afro! :-) )Haystacks Calhounski wrote: - A time when Reagan conservatism ran rampant, which, in part, led to above.And George Bush. He's gotta be to blame for something. I think, seriously though, it's a different matter... had nothing to do with AIDS or Conservatism. Queen made a bad video. Queen didn't globally promote themselves very well in the mid 80s. Are these the 4's fault? Management? Creativity Dept? All are to blame: (1) The video, just wasn't funny outside of the UK. It was a spoof on a show that not too many people were aware of, "outside the UK". (2) The back catalog was not available in the US, so in essence Queen turned their back on a pretty big demographic. The final straw was releasing Classic Queen to Record Stores during The Miracle campaign. Great, you can hear Queen hits at the record store, you just can't buy them. But here's a $25 import CD, yes Metallica is on sale for 11.99. (3) US airplay suffered as well, as hearing something other than Bohemian Rhapsody was virtually impossible. Without a US distributorship goes the perks. (4) John Deacon's haircut. What was he thinking? He actually looked better in the video! |
kingogre 10.07.2008 11:03 |
Glam- and hairmetal is despite the clothes and makeup in essence ultra-macho music so I dont really think its a good example. Queen didnt have any open macho-behaviour in the band and Freddie was on the contrary openly living a homosexuel lifestyle. He was no longer an eccentric like Liberace but clearly belonging to a community and adopting the image and lifestyle of it. (This can be compared to Jimi Hendrix if you instead apply a race aspect. When he played with two white guys he was beloved by the white rock audience and record execs, when he formed the Band of Gypsys and began to openly make statements about racial issues the record execs even went so far as to force him to disband the band. Being black was not a problem when he was an eccentric black man entertaining white audiences but when he suddenly was a very "black" artist he was seen as a threat.) Brians got a good point when he says that it also served as some sort of excuse for banning Queen when record-companies and pr wanted to see Queen fail for other reasons. He also says he was there to see it all when it happened. |
Daniel Nester 10.07.2008 21:14 |
Liberace is an extremely astute example of being the gayest person in the world but never admitting it. In fact, he forged the way for people like Freddie to inhabit being gay without admitting or being out with it. Perhaps, by the time of IWTBF, this little game caught up with those straight male rock audiences. If this all happened now, hell, a drag video from a not-out gay lead singer would be a selling point. How times have changed. |
Sheer Brass Neck 11.07.2008 07:02 |
kingogre wrote: Brian's got a good point when he says that it also served as some sort of excuse for banning Queen when record-companies and pr wanted to see Queen fail for other reasons. He also says he was there to see it all when it happened.I call bullshit on Brian. First, and finally, IWTBF was never banned by MTV. Never. May not have played it a lot, but it wasn't banned. Record companies and PR wanted to see Queen fail? Ludicrous. Capitol spent a shitload of money to get Queen. THEY were the only record company that mattered, and they got a band that didn't tour N.A. for Capitol, they got a former hard rock guitar dominated band that opened their Capitol career with two keyboard heavy, drum machine aided songs that sounded nothing like the band they thought they were getting. Did Capitol screw up promoting Queen? Absolutely. Does anybody believe that if Queen released Bohemian Rhapsody or Somebody to Love in 1984 that they wouldn't have succeeded? Quality always wins, and their 80s songwriting wasn't near their 70s efforts, and only apologists would say it was. |
john bodega 11.07.2008 08:30 |
Sheer Brass Neck wrote: Does anybody believe that if Queen released Bohemian Rhapsody or Somebody to Love in 1984 that they wouldn't have succeeded?I wouldn't guarantee their success at all. Whoever said quality was winning out in the 80's anyhow? |
kingogre 12.07.2008 06:12 |
Sheer Brass Neck wrote: [/QUOTENAME I call bullshit on Brian. First, and finally, IWTBF was never banned by MTV. Never. May not have played it a lot, but it wasn't banned. Record companies and PR wanted to see Queen fail? Ludicrous. Capitol spent a shitload of money to get Queen. THEY were the only record company that mattered, and they got a band that didn't tour N.A. for Capitol, they got a former hard rock guitar dominated band that opened their Capitol career with two keyboard heavy, drum machine aided songs that sounded nothing like the band they thought they were getting. Did Capitol screw up promoting Queen? Absolutely. Does anybody believe that if Queen released Bohemian Rhapsody or Somebody to Love in 1984 that they wouldn't have succeeded? Quality always wins, and their 80s songwriting wasn't near their 70s efforts, and only apologists would say it was.My bet is acually that these sings would have had a hard time in the 80s. They are too typical for the 70s and would not have been considered serious in pop-climate of that day. In fact Radio GaGa was first supposed to have a more 70s epic sound, however due to commercial reasons thsi was changed in favour of the synth-pop sound. To say that quality always wins on the charts is naive. Hot Space was far from a Queen-sounding album, but the band redeemed that by doing an album that was deliberately going to sound like a mix between ANATO and The Game, which were considered the most typical Queen albums at the time. IAHL and HTF are as typical for the Queen sound as arguably anything else theyve recorded, yet they didnt become hits in the US but everywhere else in the world. True half of most their 80s albums consisted of lesser material ranging from uninteresting to crap, but these songs were not released as singlesn and they didnt prevent these albums from selling shitloads. Talking about quality these songs were HUGE hits all over the world, except in the US. Assuming quality of the singles was what mattered we are ultimately left with the assumption that the musical taste of the US record buying public is superior to that of the rest of the world, something that is quite frankly rubbish. I think Brian explains very well what it was in the politics of the record industry that prevented the Queen-singles from being sufficiently marketed. He has obviously given it a lot of thought and he was there something that neither of us was. |
Rik&Roll 13.07.2008 07:16 |
Sheer Brass Neck wrote:You're absolutely right!kingogre wrote: Brian's got a good point when he says that it also served as some sort of excuse for banning Queen when record-companies and pr wanted to see Queen fail for other reasons. He also says he was there to see it all when it happened.I call bullshit on Brian. First, and finally, IWTBF was never banned by MTV. Never. May not have played it a lot, but it wasn't banned. Record companies and PR wanted to see Queen fail? Ludicrous. Capitol spent a shitload of money to get Queen. THEY were the only record company that mattered, and they got a band that didn't tour N.A. for Capitol, they got a former hard rock guitar dominated band that opened their Capitol career with two keyboard heavy, drum machine aided songs that sounded nothing like the band they thought they were getting. Did Capitol screw up promoting Queen? Absolutely. Does anybody believe that if Queen released Bohemian Rhapsody or Somebody to Love in 1984 that they wouldn't have succeeded? Quality always wins, and their 80s songwriting wasn't near their 70s efforts, and only apologists would say it was. |
steven 35638 13.07.2008 08:13 |
I am no apologist, but I do enjoy Queen's music in the eighties. Yes, it was different than the seventies. Yes, their music from the seventies is more memorable amongst the general public. However, their musical inspiration and creativity was not lacking. Hot Space was just another experiment, much like their experiments with vaudeville and gospel. The only difference was they wanted to embrace this newer musical genre. That very same album still had more to offer though. Las Palabras De Amor is an absolute gem. As is Life is Real (Song for Lennon). The Works contained one of, in my opinion, Freddie's most memorable ballads, It's A Hard Life. The album also helps encompass that Queen sound. Although many of you find that to be a stupid move for the band, I can't help but find the joy in it. Later in the eighties we have such songs as Who Wants To Live Forever, Princes of the Universe, Breakthru, A Kind of Magic, Invisible Man, and One Vision -- all of these songs are pure Queen. It was just a different time. I suppose I find their eighties' music just as interesting as their seventies' music. |
kingogre 13.07.2008 09:13 |
Lets not forget the songs that ended up on soloalbums. While there are no Bohemian Rhapsody on these no one can say that their 80s albums would not have benefited from having Love Kills, Made in heaven, Heaven for everyone, I was born to love you, Man on fire and a few other tracks on them instead of the filler material. |
Daniel Nester 14.07.2008 10:30 |
I think that point about solo album material is a really important one. In Who circles, there's always been talk of Pete Townsend "saving" songs for his solo albums, and how they diluted later Who albums. I think you could certainly say the same for Queen. Love to hear a Queen version of Man on Fire!!! |