QueenZone discussion #1127053

Penetration_Guru wrote: The biggest surprise is that Brian CAN be outvoted on such matters - I'd have thought he had a veto.

Mack2008 wrote: We all called it months ago when Brian was ranting about those big electronic billboards he hates so much. We all knew the new Queen album would be advertised on those very same devices. He's owned up on his soapbox admitting that he was outvoted on this one. At least he put his hand up to this one - maybe now he realizes that money is money and they must do all they can to make this album a success. Which by the sounds of things so far - it will be!! Roll on Sept 15th.

regmarha wrote: I think he is very decent to post this. The toughest thing is always to admit one's failure publicly. And this time it's clearly a failure for his idealism.

Tero wrote:

regmarha wrote: I think he is very decent to post this. The toughest thing is always to admit one's failure publicly. And this time it's clearly a failure for his idealism.

One could also approach this from an objective point of view, and wonder just how strong his conviction were to begin with. If it is indeed a strong personal idealism, you would expect his friend and bandmate from the past 40 years to feel a bit sympathetic about it when Brian tells his opinion... Right?

Benn wrote: He doesn't deserve it. (...) he opens himself up for all of us to see that he's the incredibly sheltered person he has been throughout his career. By NOT allowing nay-sayers to get to onear him, Brian has no method of determining what may or may not be right on a great number of topics.

regmarha wrote: You're right, Roger is surely there for support. But, you know, you can't always get what you want - no one can always be right and win every argument and situation. No one, not even a band leader, not even a president of a statet. Brian feels strongly about many things in his life and music, and probably at most points he gets things done his way. In this case it's different, he lost for whatever reasons. I mean that's life, admitting that is a strenght, not a weakness.

Benn wrote: He's never displayed a clarity of thought on the Soapbox. If the site were given a more appropriate name, perhaps we would then expect less........

Benn wrote: I read is as being a place you go to in order to "say what you know to be true" - after all, why get on your Soapbox unless you have the courage of your convictions? .......but yeah - I getcha!

Evil Brian May wrote: Me? A hypocrite? Never! Cheers from Hell! Evil Bri

Jake? wrote: Brian May ROCKS! He's also a genious.

Benn wrote: Tero. Absolutely right. If it REALLY bothered Brian, it wouldn't happen, but the machine determines the promotional tools used because they employ marketing professionals who will understand the impact of using a billboard much more so than pandering to one of Brian's whims. If Roger and Paul were bothered about Brian's conviction, then they would have oulled their permission to use their images. Adolfo. You're just typical of the type of Queen fan I so despise. Loving the band for everything and anything they do, regardless of how crass it may be or how destructive to the legacy it is. Or, in fact, how ridiculous the members of the band make themselves to be. Be more objective. Brian's soapbox is laughable for such a seemingly intelligent guy. Roger has the sense to stay away from these types of public pronouncements which could, potentially, damage him.

regmarha wrote: Maybe Brian finally said OK to the lighting billboards with one condition: Roger will have to agree to the use of Rupert Murdoch's Myspace. Oh how I wish to order 'The Memoirs Of Jim Beach' from Amazon :)

Adam Baboolal wrote: It's sad to once again see both Benn and Tero trailblazing a thread that focuses on the negatives of Queen/Brian related matters.

Adam Baboolal wrote: It's also quite funny how they still call him a hypocrite, even though his explanation basically leaves no doubt that he's not!

Adam Baboolal wrote: If his problem with advertising on these kind of signs in town has been outnumbered by others, that means he was still sticking up for his ideals, but failed to get the result. Now, if he was voting FOR advertising on those bright signs, THAT would make him a hypocrite. But he wasn't. You do realise that that is what being a hypocrite means, yeah?.

Adam Baboolal wrote: Once again, it saddens me to return to Queenzone after a while away and find such resentment for Brian and co.. Too quick to take the cynical viewpoint and also point towards the more negative take on a situation. Why not display both sides of a story?

Adam Baboolal wrote: P.s. did you honestly think Roger would give a shit about how Brian feels about a sign??? If Roger locks himself away until he got the b-side to BoRhap, I'm sure this is merely a small matter to him. lol

Gym Bitch wrote:

I start writing my memoirs next week. I would release the book before x-mas, but I don't want to flood the market.

Oh my God, so the Jim Beach memoirs I'm reading right now is not the official one? :)

kingogre wrote: Think there are a lot more people involved besides Roger, Brian and Jim Beach. Record company execs, marketing people, retailers, QP etc. This is a big venture.

Tero wrote:

kingogre wrote: Think there are a lot more people involved besides Roger, Brian and Jim Beach. Record company execs, marketing people, retailers, QP etc. This is a big venture.

Either you are incredibly naïve for believing that Brian and Roger aren't calling the shots for their multi-million business venture of over 35 years with AT LEAST 50% decision making power, or Brian and Roger are incredibly stupid for actually doing what you suggest. These people are in the small minority of recording artists who actually own the rights and recordings of their own releases, and that gives them a helluva lot more power than you give credit for. Sure, they CAN give that power away if they want to, but that would mean giving away the control of their work and livelihood for practically all their adult lives... Sounds reasonable, doesn't it? Then again, everything sounds reasonable if you don't want to think bad things about your idols. ;)

kingogre wrote: But you know, they cant sell the album on their own. They are dependent on a long line of companies, retailers and marketers. All of which have their own routines of working.And Queen is one of the biggest bands in the world, Id be surprised if Brian and Roger even knows about a lot of things that happen in QP.

Tero wrote: That IS what other artists do, you know. ;)

Tero wrote:

kingogre wrote: But you know, they cant sell the album on their own. They are dependent on a long line of companies, retailers and marketers. All of which have their own routines of working.And Queen is one of the biggest bands in the world, Id be surprised if Brian and Roger even knows about a lot of things that happen in QP.

Who says they even have to sell loads of albums? :P People call ME cynical, but I at least entertain the possibility that artists could be making art just for their own pleasure, and sell it to whoever happens to like what they make, however they make it. That IS what other artists do, you know. ;)

kingogre wrote:

Tero wrote: That IS what other artists do, you know. ;)

No it isnt.;)

Tero wrote:

kingogre wrote:

Tero wrote: That IS what other artists do, you know. ;)

No it isnt.;)

Yes it is. Prince is a good example of this. -He releases material from instrumental jazz to the most commercial pop music. -He gives away his latest album with a newspaper and pisses off his UK record label. -He demands websites like YouTube to remove his material even though others think it's a great place to advertise. -In concerts he has a rolling setlist of more than 50 songs, and doesn't play just his own hits. -He only performs in one European city because he wants it that way. And this is just from the fast five years. Need I go on? This is what a true artist does when he has nothing to prove anymore: He releases what he wants when he wants, and performs where he wants and whatever he wants. THAT'S artistic integrity, and something "Queen" should take a lesson from.

kingogre wrote:

Come on, money rules the music biz. I dont see what this has got to do with the argument about the advertisements though. Thats a completely different thing than what music you want to record.My point is that, it is not Roger and Brian alone in a room that decides what happens. There are lots of people involved and Im sure that most things are decided without them being involved at all.

The FINAL decision lies on the members of Queen.
If they want to they can let others make decisions for them, but they can also set the ground rules for the people who work for them.
If Brian May feels passionately about the advertisements, he will make it a point in all their PR contracts to say "no advertisements". If he doesn't feel passionately about it, he'll let somebody else make all the decisions for him.

Zebonka12 wrote: Fuck you people! I say ; the best promotion tool would be BRIAN MAY'S FACE, projected onto the moon. That's it, right now. Screw electronic billboards; BRIAN MAY'S FACE. THE MOON. Man I'm excited already.

Tero wrote:

kingogre wrote: Come on, money rules the music biz. I dont see what this has got to do with the argument about the advertisements though. Thats a completely different thing than what music you want to record.My point is that, it is not Roger and Brian alone in a room that decides what happens. There are lots of people involved and Im sure that most things are decided without them being involved at all.

The FINAL decision lies on the members of Queen. If they want to they can let others make decisions for them, but they can also set the ground rules for the people who work for them. If Brian May feels passionately about the advertisements, he will make it a point in all their PR contracts to say "no advertisements". If he doesn't feel passionately about it, he'll let somebody else make all the decisions for him.

Adam Baboolal wrote: QUOTE] That's incredibly nieve. They're not the all powerful artists you think. Their record company needs to make money. You know, the people they're signed with? And they make certain things possible for the band. In other words, there's no way a record company would sign an artist (even Queen) with a "no advertisements" in their contract. That's just ridiculous!

Benn wrote: Adam, Atlantic signed Led Zep with a no singles clause - so why not? The artist can do exactly what he or she wants with their material providing they are not ALREADY contracted and obligated.

kingogre wrote: Ive written this before as well, if youre looking for some kind of punk-ethic then this is the wrong band for you. Queen were ALWAYS a very business-conscious band. I actually think Brian seems to be the most "artist" of them. But well well when you are looking for things to complain about some one you obviously dislikes strongly then anything will do I guess..