| Rock It 23.05.2009 04:21 |
That's it, Ive had enough, I can't put up with this shit anymore!! I found this on a Dutch news site. Idols-deelnemer mogelijk nieuwe voorman Queen Idols contestant possibly the new frontman for Queen Brian May said (regarding this reporter) Dutch: 'Temidden van de chaos was er geen rustig moment om met Adam te praten, maar ik wil zeker met hem samenwerken'', stelde May. English: "Their wasn't any quit moment i could talk to Adam during the Idols show, but i defenitley wanna work together with him." Well , personally i don't care if it's true or not, but this is it, Paul Rodgers ......fine, but a Idols contestant...!!??. link |
| onevsion 23.05.2009 06:46 |
I sell my collection if they do this. |
| pittrek 23.05.2009 06:49 |
I don't know if I should laugh or cry |
| beautifulsoup 23.05.2009 08:52 |
That quote doesn't automatically mean that Adam Lambert would be a new singer for Queen. Brian said he'd like to work with him. That could mean on a production of WWRY, or playing a guitar solo or two on an Adam CD, or having him sing with the band on one or two songs in another context (someone in another thread mentioned a 46664 concert)... It could mean all kinds of things - or nothing at all; don't get too upset yet, folks! |
| onevsion 23.05.2009 08:57 |
Brian in rollingstone: (from brianmay.com) EXCLUSIVE: After Adam Lambert’s killer performance with Queen on Wednesday night’s season finale of American Idol, rumors flew that he had already been offered a job singing with the band. That’s slightly premature, according to the band’s guitarist, Brian May. “Amongst all that furor, there wasn’t really a quiet moment to talk,” May tells Rolling Stone in an e-mail interview. “But [drummer Roger Taylor] and I are definitely hoping to have a meaningful conversation with him at some point. It’s not like we, as Queen, would rush into coalescing with another singer just like that. It isn’t that easy. But I’d certainly like to work with Adam. That is one amazing instrument he has there.” May, whose band recently ended a four-year-long partnership with singer Paul Rodgers, is comfortable with Idol as a launching point for the careers of rock singers. “You’d have to define ‘legitimate’ first,” he writes. “The long-term answer has to be that, if you have enough talent and enough will to succeed, you will get there by whatever route presents itself. Once you have scaled the castle walls, with the sword in your hand, it matters little how you got there. I’ve not always been positive about shows like this, but there is no doubt that it offers a door to some real genuine talent along the way.” “Both those boys are well worthy of big success,” May continues, in regard to Lambert and Idol winner Kris Allen. “So it’s pointless for someone like me to stand on the sidelines jeering. I’m confident Adam will make great use of this wonderful opportunity. I hope I’m there to see it.” |
| Makka 23.05.2009 09:14 |
I'll lose totally what little respect I have left for them after the PR experiment if they go ahead with this. Or at least don't use the Queen name!! |
| PieterMC 23.05.2009 12:12 |
Ducksoup wrote: I sell my collection if they do this. If you survived Queen + 5ive I am sure you could get through this. |
| Sebastian 23.05.2009 14:22 |
I think it's a very good idea to have him as the frontman. After all, Adam Lambert was Freddie's favourite singer, as May's and Taylor's upcoming interviews will soon establish. |
| theCro 23.05.2009 16:03 |
ok... i was for Paul Rodgers, he's amazing singer and he did amazing job with Queen for four years.. tha's fine... but, GOD PLEASE NO, GOD PLEASE NOT Adam Lambert.... PLEASE.... Brian, Roger, please... do not do this... |
| marwan 23.05.2009 17:01 |
4 this essue i thought it's avery good time to give this legendary band avery modernize touch by avery strong voice of lambert & don't 4get he is doing very well.so i hope it will b happend.as soon as ...... |
| theCro 23.05.2009 17:52 |
marwan wrote: 4 this essue i thought it's avery good time to give this legendary band avery modernize touch by avery strong voice of lambert & don't 4get he is doing very well.so i hope it will b happend.as soon as ...... oh my God, lambert's fanboys registered here, please God, no.... i hope this collaboration will never happen.. it ruins QUEEN reputation alot |
| PieterMC 23.05.2009 19:28 |
Why does everybody have their panties in a wad over something that has not even happened? |
| The Real Wizard 24.05.2009 00:48 |
All tastes and opinions aside... From a marketing standpoint, it would be a brilliant move. The name Queen then may certainly be popular in the US at levels comparable to their peak there in the early 80s. |
| theCro 24.05.2009 00:51 |
The Doctor wrote: Why does everybody have their panties in a wad over something that has not even happened? we're just hoping it aint gonna happen... come one it would ruin Queen reputation ALOT... look it like this: Freddie was one and only, unique. We accpted Paul Rodgers as he's really one stunning musician that has really long career and music success behind him... but man, who the fu** is this guy???? HE's not for Queen and that's it... I easily accepted Paul Rodgers, come one, we all did, some in other, and some in another way, but we accepted it, i accepted it fully and i supported Queen and Paul Rodgers work, tour's were great, if you ask me the album [TCR] was great too! but man, this guy???? i really do not want to think of him as singer with Queen... we don't. that's it. He's nobody, he has no style and cant be Queen singer, period. ps if they really do want to collaborate with someone, please find someone else, someone who has reputation and someone who did something in music industry, someone like mr. Paul Rodgers, someone like that, not this funny little boy... final period. |
| kosimodo 24.05.2009 06:09 |
How much i enjoyed Paul live.. he sure wasnt a Freddie.. Adam would give the possibility to perform those songs live which Paul, for sure, couldnt. If so, i would go:) And i bet i enjoy it!!! |
| Jjeroen 24.05.2009 07:10 |
I'm starting to feel a little sick.... Let's just hope that 'working with him', means nothing more then 'I want him to star in WWRY'! I would be fine with that - I don't give a rats ass about that musical anyway. If they want to record one song together, I could even live with that, having survived all kinds of crap they pulled between 1995 and 2005. But anyhting beyond that... I don't want to think about it. It WOULD be the final drop for me... |
| pittrek 24.05.2009 07:58 |
Well I've seen the American Idol performance and if I would use only my ears and not my eyes I would seriously think I'm listening to some sub-average pub band who made a Queen cover just for fun. I still remember when I've first seen the Hall of fame 2004 show - I thought they sound fantastic together and I really hoped they're gonna do an album together. When I first heard the 5ive collaboration, I though "what the f......amily ? ", but later I liked the song. The same with Robbie "look at me I'm a singer" WIlliams. This "possible collaboration" reminds me more on the collaboration with Britney, Pink and Euthanasia. When I've heard it I wanted to scream "shut the f* up bitch", I don't like this feeling and I hope that "Queen" won't make me feel this way again. |
| Reid_Special_98 24.05.2009 09:42 |
M'eh -- I dunno. I really don't understand why people are getting upset about this. This is just an opportunity for musicians to work together -- and it just so happens that they 'might' use the name Queen, which they have every right to do. Consider this -- there was a BBC interview a few years ago which had Brian himself admitting that he had doubts about Freddie's capabilities - and look what happened there...Freddie Bulsara honed his craft - and got better and better along with the rest of the band. So fast forward 40 years and you sort of have the same thing. The difference this time is that the 'singer' in question is already a recognized success, and the confidence and stage presence to go along with it. Added to that, it would be a serious boost to May and Taylor if they were to go with this idea as their popularity in the States is nowhere near what it is in Europe - at least right now. What I find puzzling however -- back in 2006, Queen + Paul Rodgers also worked with the American Idol contestants and were 'supposed' to have played live on the show. This didn't happen for whatever reason. Fast forward 3 years and Brian and Roger are surprise guests...WITHOUT Paul Rodgers. Coincidence ?? I think not. Personally I think Paul Rodgers was the one who didn't want to do the show. It'll be interesting if there is ever any mention of Rodgers again -- I can't help but think that all of these statements about how Paul was 'Our Idol...' 'Freddie's Idol...' etc...were a product of the situation. They were enjoying the moment and were all about to convince everyone of this as well. Anyway....that's all from me. |
| Fat Lizzy 24.05.2009 12:56 |
Sir GH wrote: All tastes and opinions aside... From a marketing standpoint, it would be a brilliant move. The name Queen then may certainly be popular in the US at levels comparable to their peak there in the early 80s. This is exactly what I said on a Dutch forum a couple of hours ago. Nobody can disagree on that! If it happens... It would be like losing my hands or something :P |
| Sebastian 24.05.2009 15:12 |
Sir GH wrote: All tastes and opinions aside... From a marketing standpoint, it would be a brilliant move. The name Queen then may certainly be popular in the US at levels comparable to their peak there in the early 80s. The thing is, the marketing strategy Queen (i.e. Freddie, Brian, John and Roger) used was creating marvellous songs, doing extraordinary albums and performing good concerts. The marketing strategy B&R use now is becoming a backing band for 5ive, Robbie, Britney or this bloke (if it ever happens). One year from now we'll see them in Disney channel promoting a new 'High School Musical' generation with music by 'Queen' (sic) and a Zac Efron wannabe. There's a hell of a lot of difference between both 'brilliant moves' 'from a marketing standpoint'. |
| Daniel Nester 24.05.2009 16:24 |
Sebastian-- I've read a lot of willfully naive posts on QZ, and I've written some myself, but to say Queen never marketed or publicized their music and made it just about the music is probably the most willfully naive statement I've ever heard. From their very first invite-only practice gig, where they wanted to make sure everything in their production was just so, Queen marketed. They publicized. They dressed up. They took publicity pictures. They did press. If putting a hundred-odd naked women on bicycles in honor of a single called "Bicycle Race," and then putting a gatefold posted of said naked women in the album, isn't self-promotion, marketing, and sensationalized publicity, then I don't know what is. The truth is Queen were, and to a large extent still are, a band that made its biggest mark with sensationalized marketing strategies. What were those inflatable band members on the Magic tour about? Were they simply about the music? The prospect of an effeminate, multi-octaved, sexually ambiguous and flamboyant singer (sound familiar) doing a project with the the two active member of a band that had an all-star concert, broadcast to billions around the world all to celebrate the life of its dead singer, seems like another day at the office as far as Queen is concerned. So Sebastian -- my point is, If you as a Queen fan want to make this whole being a fan of Queen thing just about the music, then I suggest you might be putting some huge blinders on, both through the band's history and now. Queen were never about navel-gazing musical integrity. They put on a show. The music is the show. One cannot seperate the two. |
| ITSM 24.05.2009 16:29 |
Please don't bring people from Idol into Queen!!!!! That would just be toooo much! Idol is just an excuse to make their own TV-channel celebrities, and bring them into every other single TV-show on the same channel. They're not famous, we just think it because they're in every show on the same channel... |
| «¤~Mrš. BÃD GÛŸ~¤» 24.05.2009 18:34 |
Oh please..you people make me laugh...QUEEN'S reputation was already ruined when they signed on Paul Rodgers!!!! |
| Amazon 24.05.2009 18:41 |
Daniel Nester wrote: Sebastian-- I've read a lot of willfully naive posts on QZ, and I've written some myself, but to say Queen never marketed or publicized their music and made it just about the music is probably the most willfully naive statement I've ever heard. From their very first invite-only practice gig, where they wanted to make sure everything in their production was just so, Queen marketed. They publicized. They dressed up. They took publicity pictures. They did press. If putting a hundred-odd naked women on bicycles in honor of a single called "Bicycle Race," and then putting a gatefold posted of said naked women in the album, isn't self-promotion, marketing, and sensationalized publicity, then I don't know what is. The truth is Queen were, and to a large extent still are, a band that made its biggest mark with sensationalized marketing strategies. What were those inflatable band members on the Magic tour about? Were they simply about the music? The prospect of an effeminate, multi-octaved, sexually ambiguous and flamboyant singer (sound familiar) doing a project with the the two active member of a band that had an all-star concert, broadcast to billions around the world all to celebrate the life of its dead singer, seems like another day at the office as far as Queen is concerned. So Sebastian -- my point is, If you as a Queen fan want to make this whole being a fan of Queen thing just about the music, then I suggest you might be putting some huge blinders on, both through the band's history and now. Queen were never about navel-gazing musical integrity. They put on a show. The music is the show. One cannot seperate the two. I know you're addressing this to Sebastian but can I throw in my own two cents about this question of publicity. I think there's a difference between what Queen did in the 70's for publicity and what they are doing now. Putting a hundred-odd naked women on bicycles was new, different and alot of fun. It featured the sense of humour that Queen brought to most of their albums, in particular Jazz. The fact that it caused so much controversy would also no doubt have tickled the group. Their preening and dressing up would have related to their belief, and Freddie's in particular, that they were special.[img=/images/smiley/msn/teeth_smile.gif][/img] Everything else they did no doubt related to their wanting to be the best and biggest, (the bigger the group, the bigger the publicity) as well as their sense of fun and their belief that they were a truly great group. I don't think they ever did anything merely for the sake of publicity. This is different. American Idol is only about publicity. Now, I like Lambert; he could become great, but the idea that this kid who did well in American Idol might team up with two of the greatest musical artists of all time strikes me as publicity for publicity's sake. I hope I'm wrong, in which case Brian and Roger will either do something else or wait a while before teaming up with Lambert, but I do think thay if they do something with him straight away, I will be more disappointed then when they teamed up with Paul Rodgers. *If they wait a while, I think it'll come across less than publicity for publicity's sake than if they teamed up with him straight away. Plus, they won't appear as desperate. |
| Sheer Brass Neck 24.05.2009 20:21 |
I agree with Amazon, Sebastian and Daniel. All good points. My take? Queen (were) like Beethoven, or The Beatles, once in a lifetime artists whose music will stand the test of time. Their legacy is secure, but it's becoming tarnished. TCR and Paul Rodgers did nothing to help, nad this little charade makes them appear as hangers on of the first class. Eminently knowledgeable posters like Sir GH and Daniel among others point that for publicity purposes, doing this type of stuff is fantastic as Idol is a ratings juggernaut. True, but what's the cost? We're fans, but for people who know Queen casually, or not at all, I'm sure it appears that here are these guys playing those songs again for the hundredth time, desperately trying to hang on by glomming on to an up and coming talent. Sure they mayget noticed, but it's below them, and pathetic. The Hills is a scripted reality show about a vapid group of pretty people in Hollywood. It's very popular, and made stars out of the cast (think Paris Hilton variety in the talent department). Should Martin Scorsese cast the women of The Hills in his next flick? After all, he's getting a little long in the tooth, and people would relate more to his movies if they had Audina Partridge in them instead of someone like Meryl Streep. Or Woody Allen could cast the Real Housewives of Atlanta in his next ensemble. What would people think in Hollywood? They'd think that they were pathetic. Which is what Brian and Roger are if they're thinking that. Having said that I understand why. They know that there is no market or future for Queen without Freddie Mercury, and that in itself must be a death sentence. Poor John Deacon is the only one left with any sense of dignity left. |
| Makka 24.05.2009 21:28 |
Next they'll be doing their own Rock Star show to find a singer....just like INXS!! *shudder* |
| Sebastian 24.05.2009 21:28 |
Daniel: I'm sorry if you understood that I meant they were all about the music and no marketing before. And I'm sure it's my mistake not yours, since I delivered my message in the wrong way. Of course there was a lot of show involved, but music still came first, at least during the golden years: writing, arranging, recording and releasing Bohemian Rhapsody was a brilliant move from a marketing standpoint: it's catchy, original, well-done and the video was successful. It's got a lot of non-musical sides about it: the whole 'what's it all about?' deal, the way they promoted it by the video, even the fact the tour started off shortly before Xmas and the single was issued on Halloween... so of course it's got many sides, off which music is just one of them - but still the main one! If Queen had done back then what Brian & Roger do now, it'd have been making duets with KC & The Sunshine Band, touring with the Sex Pistols after harshly criticising them, writing only (or mostly) Donny Osmond-type of songs and submitting them to Eurovision, etc. Note that Queen (the real Queen) made a single with David Bowie, had Michael Kamen orchestratring a single, featured Steve Howe playing a flamenco solo... Bowie, Kamen and Howe were all big commercial names, but they still were top-class musicians, and Queen never 'milked' the fact Kamen and Howe were on their records; they did 'milk' Bowie (it was mutual, actually), but it's still a great artist, way way way better than Britney, Pink, Beyonce or Robbie. Brian and Roger, regardless of the name they're using (which is another debate altogether), could have spent this decade creating a project with Dave Gilmour, touring with a symphony orchestra, or indeed joining forces with a young act. And there are loads of great emerging or relatively new young artists out there: Jeff Scott Soto, Buckethead, even that X-Japan bloke Roger recorded with in the 90's. While Sting made an album with Edin Karamazov, Brian and Roger recorded with Robbie Williams; while Queen had collaborated with Howard Blake and Michael Kamen, Brian and Roger did a Pepsi commercial with Britney Spears. |
| theCro 24.05.2009 21:37 |
now this garbage perez hilton is calling him new Freddie Mercury... i cant believe what i've got today, a link from a girlfriend... Is Glambert The New Freddie Mercury??? link Talk about a match made in heaven! Publicly closeted homosexual, Adam Lambert, and Queen??? After Lambert's performance with the rock legends on the American Idol finale last week, Queen guitarist Brian May told Rolling Stone magazine that the band is toying around with the idea of Glambert becoming Queen's permanent frontman! Wow! Says May: "…[Drummer Roger Taylor] and I are definitely hoping to have a meaningful conversation with [Lambert] at some point. It's not like we, as Queen, would rush into coalescing with another singer just like that. It isn't that easy. But I'd certainly like to work with Adam. That is one amazing instrument he has there." It just goes to show that losing American Idol can be more beneficial than winning in the long run! Glamberella's got quite the career in front of him! Would U like to see Lambert fronting Queen??? again, please God do not let this happen.. |
| Sheer Brass Neck 24.05.2009 23:25 |
The sad thing is that after a certain point (say 175 million albums sold, a tour that just did pretty well, 30 plus years of commercial success), one would become isolated from reality a build a wall. Brian May is like that. He's your genius grandfather who now goes to the store in his slippers and pyjamas because they're comfortable. You forget that at one time he was God like, now he has feet of clay. I think Brian is so set on proving that Queen wasn't Freddie (100% right, and 1000000% wrong), that he'd do anything to prove that his input was equal as great, and will go to sad lengths to prove it. The party I'd be concerned for is Adam Lambert. If he got into a Queen style project, it could ruin him, because no one in North America gave a shit about TCR for one reason: bad songs. If he did a back catalogue tour, it would stunt his development, and if he depended on Brian and Roger to write a hit he may be waiting a long time. BTW, Sebastian, you are so right, this isn't Queen in the slightest sense, but it besmirches the name so it offends us senior citizens! |
| Daniel Nester 25.05.2009 00:06 |
I agree with just about what everybody says about Queen and publicity. I guess I don't think Queen's legacy would be tarnished by pretty much anything they do. They're doing what they do: play music. Boy do we throw that word--legacy--around a lot here. It carries a lot of weight. Can anyone name an artist that diluted, ruined, or otherwise hurt their legacy, after they had done great work? I can start. Beach Boys: Crimes against legacy: Duets with Fat Boys and John Stamos. Tours now with just one guy, Mike Love, who is a total Republican a-hole. Ruling: There's still Pet Sounds for everyone to listen to. The Who: Crimes against legacy: Tours as duo now. Has greatest hits packages every fiscal quarter. Ruling: Albums still on soundtrack of every teenage boy who wants to twirl air guitar. Led Zeppelin: Crimes against legacy: Jimmy Page duets with Puff Daddy for Godzilla soundtrack; Page/Coverdale; Live Aid performance; Robert Plant's solo career Ruling: They are freaking Led Zeppelin Who else? Beatles? Michael Jackson? Prince? I think one could make an argument for all of them sullying their legacies at some point. Perhaps the question should be: Which truly great artist has ever not done anything that might ruin their legacy? |
| Yara 25.05.2009 00:12 |
Daniel Nester wrote:
Perhaps the question should be: Which truly great artist has ever not done anything that might ruin their legacy?
Neil Young. ;-) (my bias...hehehe) By the way: Hi, Daniel, great to read your posts again. I hope you're doing fine. I just wanted to point out that I fully completely agree with you about the wording - "legacy" seems to be a clumsy inadaquate term to describe the fate of a rock band, to my mind. Take care and have a great week! |
| john bodega 25.05.2009 00:32 |
I can honestly say that what The Who are doing 'now' is not ruining their legacy at all. Having finally seen them live I would happily declare that they're doing the very opposite. I think they did their legacy ruining from 81-89. Kenney Jones. "It's Hard". Brass section accompaniment. Since then it's been just swell. With regards to this Idol fella; I still say give him a go. One can claim that'll 'ruin Queen's legacy' but I mean ... the only ones who remember Queen's previous missteps (Wyclif Jean, Pepsi, etc...) are US; fans that just won't let it go. People should exercise their right to choose what is worth remembering. |
| Makka 25.05.2009 02:01 |
Daniel Nester wrote: I agree with just about what everybody says about Queen and publicity. I guess I don't think Queen's legacy would be tarnished by pretty much anything they do. They're doing what they do: play music. Boy do we throw that word--legacy--around a lot here. It carries a lot of weight. Can anyone name an artist that diluted, ruined, or otherwise hurt their legacy, after they had done great work? I can start. Beach Boys: Crimes against legacy: Duets with Fat Boys and John Stamos. Tours now with just one guy, Mike Love, who is a total Republican a-hole. Ruling: There's still Pet Sounds for everyone to listen to. The Who: Crimes against legacy: Tours as duo now. Has greatest hits packages every fiscal quarter. Ruling: Albums still on soundtrack of every teenage boy who wants to twirl air guitar. Led Zeppelin: Crimes against legacy: Jimmy Page duets with Puff Daddy for Godzilla soundtrack; Page/Coverdale; Live Aid performance; Robert Plant's solo career Ruling: They are freaking Led Zeppelin Who else? Beatles? Michael Jackson? Prince? I think one could make an argument for all of them sullying their legacies at some point. Perhaps the question should be: Which truly great artist has ever not done anything that might ruin their legacy? Michael Jackson?? bwuhahaha |
| andreas_mercury 25.05.2009 06:40 |
as long as he doesnt get AIDS he will be perefectly placed. |
| Sebastian 25.05.2009 09:09 |
So, if twenty other blokes hit their wives, it's OK to hit mine? Myself, I don't give a fuck about legacy, but I do think B+R are prostituting themselves and the Queen name. Is that good? Is that bad? Dunno, and couldn't care less. |
| YourValentine 25.05.2009 19:21 |
Sheer Brass Neck wrote:
I agree with Amazon, Sebastian and Daniel. All good points. My take? Queen (were) like Beethoven, or The Beatles, once in a lifetime artists whose music will stand the test of time. Their legacy is secure, but it's becoming tarnished. TCR and Paul Rodgers did nothing to help, nad this little charade makes them appear as hangers on of the first class. Eminently knowledgeable posters like Sir GH and Daniel among others point that for publicity purposes, doing this type of stuff is fantastic as Idol is a ratings juggernaut. True, but what's the cost? We're fans, but for people who know Queen casually, or not at all, I'm sure it appears that here are these guys playing those songs again for the hundredth time, desperately trying to hang on by glomming on to an up and coming talent. Sure they mayget noticed, but it's below them, and pathetic. The Hills is a scripted reality show about a vapid group of pretty people in Hollywood. It's very popular, and made stars out of the cast (think Paris Hilton variety in the talent department). Should Martin Scorsese cast the women of The Hills in his next flick? After all, he's getting a little long in the tooth, and people would relate more to his movies if they had Audina Partridge in them instead of someone like Meryl Streep. Or Woody Allen could cast the Real Housewives of Atlanta in his next ensemble. What would people think in Hollywood? They'd think that they were pathetic. Which is what Brian and Roger are if they're thinking that. Having said that I understand why. They know that there is no market or future for Queen without Freddie Mercury, and that in itself must be a death sentence. Poor John Deacon is the only one left with any sense of dignity left.
Great post, it makes complete sense to me. |
| Daniel Nester 25.05.2009 21:27 |
Sort of off-topic, but Face Dances by The Who is a favorite album. It's probably because I was a kid when it came out, but there it is. It's Hard has "Cry If You Want," which is a favorite, too. Here's a live performance of that song. For what it's worth. |
| Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira 25.05.2009 23:33 |
The Doctor wrote:Ducksoup wrote: I sell my collection if they do this.If you survived Queen + 5ive I am sure you could get through this. Well, I think the 5ive collaboration had good Queen music content in it. I am talking about the single, where Roger also collaborated. Since I do not live in the UK or in the US, the name of that 5ive thing did not mean anything to me, I had never seen their faces and so I was not sick to hear their name. Maybe that is why I could appreciate the Queen content of the single, regardless of that boy band making some noise all over it. It was like listening to Queen while my neighbor played the odd pop band of the moment. I just tried to focus on the part I like - Brian and Roger playing. And it felt good :) Cheers, Ogre- |
| Marcos Napier 26.05.2009 00:48 |
If Queen is doing this for "marketing" reasons (which they obviously didn't do with Paul... or did they?), what will be the excuses? I thought they just had a succesful (according to some opinions) tour, and didn't exactly need any "promotion" right now. If it was really a huge success (it wasn't) maybe they would have the urge to put anyone in Paul's shoes to keep it going but... oh well. This is more than disgusting - now they have gone to their lowest standards. I'm starting to regret my opinion that they shouldn't have fired Paul (or that he shouldn't have quit, whatever have happened). Paul is a nice singer after all, he just didn't fit with Queen - or all their catalogue, at least. Things are really going downhill it seems if they try it once more. This guy will be great in a duet... with Cher. |
| Fone Bone 26.05.2009 07:58 |
Oh dear They might just have hit the bottom there ... AI as a marketing opportunity to sell the back catalogue in the US ? Nothing to be proud of, but OK, it's been done before (Stone Cold Classics, anyone ?). But the crap about having "a meaningful conversation" with a young fellow who IS NOT A SINGER but can occasionaly hit a few high notes and implying he might be in the near future the frontman of QUEEN ??? I liked the post benchmarking comparable acts like The Who, The Beach Boys and Led Zep. I think none of them has sunk so low Either they lost their mind, or Brian, who is a control freak and wants to be Queen by himself since Freddie died, thinks this guy will be a more manageable resource than Paul Rodgers. Surely if Brian wants to boss his new vocalist around, this boy will be more appopriate than the former frontman of fracking Free. More generally, Brian should get his act together : his songs on TCR sucked and he didn't really shine during the tour (unlike Roger). Less musical, less badges, less American Idol : he's Brian May, he should focus on making some new good music, on this I am with Sebastian 200% I love Queen and I love Brian, but if it happens with Lambert, it will be shameful beyond redemption |
| Daniel Nester 26.05.2009 11:38 |
Oh man, c'mon. Adam Lambert is a singer. He does it professionally and he was on American Idol. Say what you will about AI, but it is a singing competition, as well as a personality contest. It's not a dating or a reality show. It's not a talent contest. It's a singing contest. There is a difference. What kind of art doesn't involve personality as well as art? And what has always been Queen's justification for what they do? The people like it! Damn the critics! We sound like a bunch of rock critics lately. And no one on this board, I suspect, can sing as well as him. Whoever said that sounded a little crazy to me. Talk about the cult of the amateur. He is Broadway. I will say that. Which gets on my wife's nerves, for one. Me, I like him. I said this before, and I will say it again: Queen has never performed as Queen after Freddie died, except for NOBY and the Tribute. Everything else has been with the + sign. Which I have always thought has been an elegant way of saying Queen is - Freddie. I can see people who don't want anything to happen with the Queen moniker after Freddie died. But I can see Brian and Roger sort of consciously adding that "+" moniker as a way of saying this is different, this is a post-Freddie kind of thing. Everyone has seen the big magazine articles about Glambert, even before the finale. Comparisons were made. Photos of Freddie in People magazine? Wow. That Bri and Rog played the finale--again, without an announcement from a contestant, judge or host, only the bass drum gave people any indication these two old dudes had anything to do with Queen. Sorry for meandering. |
| Sebastian 26.05.2009 12:07 |
This is an on-line forum, and as such, it's a free space where people can comment and have an opinion. It's not OK for us to resemble 'a bunch of rock critics' but it's OK for B+R to harshly criticise AI and then kneel down to it? Remember: this is a discussion forum, not a worship one. |
| Donna13 26.05.2009 12:15 |
When I first saw Adam on the show I immediately thought that he would be the typical person that they would want to hire for WWRY. He had that fake rock star look (the clothing and hair) - like an actor playing a rock star. I haven't seen WWRY, but I've seen the cast performing on the Tonight Show (I think it was the Tonight Show and I think I saw that unless I was dreaming or something - ha) - and so I get the general idea of what they are doing with that production. (I would like to see WWRY eventually.) But ... that fake rock star thing was my first impression only. When I watched his performances during the season, he got more and more impressive to me. That was because of his musical abilities, compared to everyone else - not his look. He had very good arrangements to the songs and his voice could be beautiful on some of the songs. I think he overdoes that yelling thing on some songs, but that could be taken care of with some good musical direction. He never made any mistakes. He seems very quick and bright and cheerful, and comfortable on stage. His performances were the only ones this season that I wanted to watch more than once. So, he became like a real rock star to me and I found myself only looking forward to his performances during the show. Now that the show is over, I'm not sure how exciting he will seem. If he is on TV, I will watch it, for sure. Everyone is speculating so I will too. I think that first of all Brian was probably impressed by this guy's talent. He rehearsed with him briefly, and so I guess he was able to assess the situation quickly. And maybe he has been interested in Adam's performances this year with regard to WWRY (a possible Broadway production maybe?). I think the close timing of the announcement of Paul's departure (by Paul) and then Brian saying this kid, Adam, is talented and he would like to work with him in the future is what is getting everyone so upset. They think that Brian and Roger are desiring to re-create the type of relationship they had with Paul, with touring, etc. I doubt if that is the case at this point. |
| vadenuez 26.05.2009 12:31 |
I'm not sure if Lambert has any musical background or if he can write music, anyway if he doesn't it'll mean that Brian and Roger will be hiring him to hit some high notes so they'll be able to recreate more Queen songs for future concerts. In a word, they'll probably turn into their own official tribute band. They're free to do so, of course but I won't be interested in whatever they do anymore. There are thousands of new bands out there who are coming out with very interesting new music, so I fail to see the point of sticking to a couple of middle age men who are trying to recreate something they'll never get to do again, with a fake version of their former singer. God, the actual Queen seems to be millions of years away from the days when they gave birth to gems like The March of the Black Queen or Spread Your Wings. |
| andreas_mercury 26.05.2009 13:19 |
Sebastian wrote: It's not OK for us to resemble 'a bunch of rock critics' but it's OK for B+R to harshly criticise AI and then kneel down to it?.... ugh! ugh! it is ok because you do this in the space of one sentence where it's just not the truth....... when was the last time brian really, really to his full ability said "IDOL IS ALL EVIL 100% BULLSHIT"? been months or years hasn't it? and he has explained on his soapbox his mixed feelings but has decided that to some instances its just a way for people to expose themselves ...... its probably not the preferrred way but fucks sake..... |
| Sebastian 26.05.2009 13:27 |
Yes, of course it's OK, he can do what he wants. But so can we: if we want to criticise him (and Roger), we can do it. |
| Holly2003 26.05.2009 15:18 |
vadenuez wrote: I'm not sure if Lambert has any musical background or if he can write music, anyway if he doesn't it'll mean that Brian and Roger will be hiring him to hit some high notes so they'll be able to recreate more Queen songs for future concerts. In a word, they'll probably turn into their own official tribute band. They're free to do so, of course but I won't be interested in whatever they do anymore. There are thousands of new bands out there who are coming out with very interesting new music, so I fail to see the point of sticking to a couple of middle age men who are trying to recreate something they'll never get to do again, with a fake version of their former singer. God, the actual Queen seems to be millions of years away from the days when they gave birth to gems like The March of the Black Queen or Spread Your Wings. Dude, those days are long gone and theyr'e not coming back whatever lead singer they use. The best we can hope for is a little surprise every now and again. When I saw them in Cardif there were some genuinely emotional moments -- the new version of 39, Brian singing LOML, Roger singing AKOM. Some Things That Glitter is brilliant on TCR. Lower your expectations a bit though: there won't be any more albums like Queen II or ADATR, and no more shows like Houston or Earl's Court. And I think that would be teh case even if Fred was still alive and still lead singer. |
| Sheer Brass Neck 26.05.2009 18:40 |
As a long time defender of Queen and their earlier works in general, I love how people find fault with people who find fault with Brian, Roger, Jim Beach, QP, etc. Roger said that Radiohead used to write great songs, then they stuck their heads up their asses or something similar. If I were Thom Yorke, I'd wonder how the guy who wrote Londow Town, C'mon Down, and A Nation of Haircuts would get the nerve to criticize anyone's songwriting after writing songs like those. But he's Roger so he can slam Radiohead and Coldplay, but it's okay 'cos it's Roger! As for Brian, he has harped about disposable TV reality shows on numerous occasions. He balked particularly at Rock Star INXS, and said Queen would never do something like that, as it was unfair to the talent and not a good way to pick a singer. So now, he thinks it's okay? That's disingenuous at best, hypocritical at worst. Brian rails against anyone who doesn't see the world in his terms (see smoking, killing hedgehogs, light pollution, critics of the musical), but loves people who do (the guy who wrote the rather excellent Flash Gordon soundtrack article, people who praise WWRY.) But in the 80s in a guitar magazine, Brian shat all over the second album from the Paul Butterfield Blues band, saying they'd lost their way completely after their first album, which he loved. So is it okay for Brian to criticize other musicians, critics, TV shows etc., but be above criticism when his fan base thinks he (and Roger) have made another poor decision? If we're all apologists, then we'll get shit like 5ive, and reissueafter reissue after reissue after... |
| Daniel Nester 26.05.2009 20:59 |
I agree. We're fans, not worshippers. I just disagree with these criticisms. Believe you me, I've got plenty of critical opinions about things Queen. Just not this one, and most other one's that center around alleged legacy-ruining. |
| Dusta 26.05.2009 22:31 |
I admit I have never watched AI until I was at the home of a friend, and, it was on the tube. I heard Mr Lambert sing, and, I admit I got goosebumps. I think he has an absolutely brilliant voice. Really caught my attention, and, I wanted to hear more. As far as performing with Queen...guess I'm neutral. I got over the Rodgers thing, and, I have to say I'd much rather hear this Lambert fellow sing Queen songs than Mr Rodgers(and, I am a BIG fan of Rodgers--go figure. It's a personal preference), so, no doubt I'd get over this as well. I might even like it. Maybe this is just the thing they need to inspire some Queenish new material? Who knows. Love, Dusta |
| Yara 26.05.2009 23:16 |
Donna13 wrote: When I first saw Adam on the show I immediately thought that he would be the typical person that they would want to hire for WWRY. He had that fake rock star look (the clothing and hair) - like an actor playing a rock star. I haven't seen WWRY, but I've seen the cast performing on the Tonight Show (I think it was the Tonight Show and I think I saw that unless I was dreaming or something - ha) - and so I get the general idea of what they are doing with that production. (I would like to see WWRY eventually.) But ... that fake rock star thing was my first impression only. When I watched his performances during the season, he got more and more impressive to me. That was because of his musical abilities, compared to everyone else - not his look. He had very good arrangements to the songs and his voice could be beautiful on some of the songs. I think he overdoes that yelling thing on some songs, but that could be taken care of with some good musical direction. He never made any mistakes. He seems very quick and bright and cheerful, and comfortable on stage. His performances were the only ones this season that I wanted to watch more than once. So, he became like a real rock star to me and I found myself only looking forward to his performances during the show. Now that the show is over, I'm not sure how exciting he will seem. If he is on TV, I will watch it, for sure. Everyone is speculating so I will too. I think that first of all Brian was probably impressed by this guy's talent. He rehearsed with him briefly, and so I guess he was able to assess the situation quickly. And maybe he has been interested in Adam's performances this year with regard to WWRY (a possible Broadway production maybe?). I think the close timing of the announcement of Paul's departure (by Paul) and then Brian saying this kid, Adam, is talented and he would like to work with him in the future is what is getting everyone so upset. They think that Brian and Roger are desiring to re-create the type of relationship they had with Paul, with touring, etc. I doubt if that is the case at this point. Ah, hi, Donna13! I missed your posts so much! I hope you're doing just fine. I love your posts. This one was no exception. You seem to be a very bright person and you write wonderfully well. I just wanna thank you for coming by and contributing to the thread. It's a delight. Take care and have a wonderful day! Yara |
| Sebastian 26.05.2009 23:36 |
Sheer Brass Neck wrote: As a long time defender of Queen and their earlier works in general, I love how people find fault with people who find fault with Brian, Roger, Jim Beach, QP, etc. Roger said that Radiohead used to write great songs, then they stuck their heads up their asses or something similar. If I were Thom Yorke, I'd wonder how the guy who wrote Londow Town, C'mon Down, and A Nation of Haircuts would get the nerve to criticize anyone's songwriting after writing songs like those. But he's Roger so he can slam Radiohead and Coldplay, but it's okay 'cos it's Roger! Great post, and I totally agree: if we're not entitled to criticise Adam (and btw I'm not slamming him at all) because we can't sing like him or because we haven't won AI, then Bri should shut up about newspapers unless he owns one for decades. |
| Daniel Nester 26.05.2009 23:47 |
Gotta admit, I am losing the logic here in this last exchange. Roger criticizing Radiohead is not the same as people on a fan board dissing Adam Lambert. Right? Or maybe I am just confused. That's Roger being Roger, I suppose. I think Radiohead kinda sucks, so I suppose I am on his side. |
| Daniel Nester 26.05.2009 23:54 |
Regarding the Adam Lambert = goosebumps post. I got them, too. I have to admit that I really yearn for a singer-singer, someone with a crazy and dramatic voice, to come along and sing rock music, hard rock music. So many vocalists just fail to light my fire these days. Has anyone heard of or heard Antony and the Johnsons? I used to think I could listen to them and get some of my theatrical voice fix from him/them. Then there was The Darkness, which I guess satisfied my yearning somewhat. Mika I guess falls into that slot, but I didn't buy his CD. And I suppose Adam Lambert, as I watched the show every week, made me feel this way. I think he can sing. I think he's a bit dramatic and showtunes-y, but what makes him interesting, to me, is that he wants to sing rock. Not show tunes, not opera or whatever, but rock. And hard rock at that. So that makes him even more interesting to me. |
| Yara 27.05.2009 00:40 |
I have really no prob with Adam Lambert. I think he's a good singer and may improve as a musician over time. The only thing which is a bit boring to me is, as always, the politics of music, which I'm really not interested in and it bores me a bit when artists engage in this kind of thing. I'd have no problem with Queen going to American Idol. I don't have any, as many Queenzoners know, with Queen having played Sun City, which by all standards, if I were more interested in the politics of music than I actually am, is far worse than showing up in American Idol. I'd have no problem if it were not for the constant pasteurized cliched criticisms of the "system", "the making of celebrities" and all the self-promotion done with "charity" and so on - marketing other people's suffering and turning it into sentimental songs which add nothing to the understanding of the problems is a bit ugly, I think, and more than that: it generates, to my personal taste, bad music. Brian May is no Bob Dylan. He can't do what Bob or Neil Young did. He was good at...playing his guitar and composing songs about inner feelings, love and so on. Writing a song about nuclear threat once, ok, that's nice - Hammer to Fall is a good song - but when he begins criticizing the "state of affairs" and the "dominant culture" and insisting on it, the same culture which allows Queen to be a famous act, by the way, I really get a bit uninterested. Not angry, not sad: just uninterested. Plus: I really think, I'm not kidding :op, I really think that they should feel honored for featuring in American Idol, which is a show watched by hundreds of thousands of people - what have they been doing to deserve such publicity? When people asked me whether I thought it was wrong of them to call themselves Queen, I always answered NO. Not at all. That's what's left of the band - but then I added, when arguing with many people here: what's left is, to my humble taste, BAD. It's bad music. All bands get their latest releases compared to the early stuff - sometimes favorably, sometimes not, and this is all entertainment and fun, it's rock music, it "tarnishes the legacy" in the sense that it's not as good musically as the previous stuff, but there are no moral implications to it. It's been more than 15 years since Freddie passed away and Brian and Roger managed to amount to absolutely nothing. They used to be shining stars from a legendary band. Now they're...zero, they have, by themselves, as post-Queen artists, no relevance - all that they have done which is worthy was done with Queen. That's why Adam sang We Are The Champions, and not C-Lebrity. There were people who were good at combining social criticism and music: Dylan, Neil Young, Lennon. There are those who, to my taste, just can't: Queen, U2...and they do sound as if they were transforming the idea of "fighting injustice" into a commodity and selling it. Ever since I began studying music, I've been dealing with composers and musical trends which are alternative even among erudite circles. I like it. I enjoy it and it satisfies me. I have a lot of joy playing or singing this kind of stuff. But I don't claim I'm doing anything superior - I'm doing something different. Music can, and I think has to be too, lighter entertainment. When I'm not handling music as a profession, I like it to be about entertainment, fun or things about the everyday life we all can relate do - I like it to be just like Queen's Jazz or A Day At The Races. It may move you not through exploring people's suffering in a sentimental way which doesn't help thinking and sounds absolutely fake - the hungry mouths we have to feed... - but rather through everyday life experience we can all relate to - for instance, Somebody To Life. Spread Your Wings. And I specially like it when the people doing it, that is, doing music like this - as entertainment -, just like Freddie did, deliver what they promise to do: giving us a good time. It's more than enough. :-))) Thank you all for the wonderful thread and the great contributions. Above all, and as always, thank you for taking your time to impart your experiences and knowledge. It's an honor to be part of the website! :-) Yara |
| Sheer Brass Neck 27.05.2009 00:44 |
Oops. |
| Sheer Brass Neck 27.05.2009 00:46 |
Sheer Brass Neck wrote: Hey Daniel, the beauty/downfall of the internet is that conversations tend to be kind of all over the map!What I meant by the Roger/Radiohead/Coldplay analogy, plus Brian criticizing newspapers, critics et al, was that Queen fans are kind of lemming like. If I may attempt to interpret your view (probably incorrectly I may add), then "we" as posters on a forum aren't "qualified" or have the bona fides to criticize a band that by dint of the first song they ever released accomplished more artistically in their lives than all of us collectively. Or, we aren't worthy as we haven't done anything on the level of Queen musically, or even Adam Lambert. That being the case, Roger's solo stuff is (apart from Fun in Space which is fantastic and underrated) is not even near the quality of Radiohead or Coldplay, so is he qualified to criticize? Or as Sebastian said, Brian has never owned a newspaper, (or been in a blues band), so is he qualified to pass judgement on them, and if so, is it because he's written songs we like? I'm confused! Bottom line, even if they do go with Adam Lambert, it's not Queen and never will be Queen for tons of people. If it is for others that's great. But I could call myself John S. Stuart on this forum or Daniel Nester, and it doesn't mean I have the knowledge you two have. And BTW Yara, I love your decency and spirit when you post, you are a good person for the board to have, you're very respectful in your posts which is a nice touch. |
| blackmarble 27.05.2009 01:02 |
Yara wrote:
There were people who were good at combining social criticism and music: Dylan, Neil Young, Lennon. There are those who, to my taste, just can't: Queen, U2...and they do sound as if they were transforming the idea of "fighting injustice" into a commodity and selling it.
Yara, You cannot seriously speak about good combination of social criticism and music after "Let's Roll". It was horrible in 2001 and pain stupid now. |
| Ray D O'Gaga 27.05.2009 01:18 |
Adam Lambert & Queen: The Rumors Are True link I hope they sign the kid up if for no other reason than because it would royally piss off so many of you. He's probably got more talent in his eyeliner than most of you have in your whole bodies. So, yeah, let's get a queen back in Queen. Long overdue. |
| Yara 27.05.2009 01:46 |
blackmarble wrote: Yara, You cannot seriously speak about good combination of social criticism and music after "Let's Roll". It was horrible in 2001 and pain stupid now. Hello, Blackmarble! How are you doing? First of all, welcome to Queenzone! You must have already noticed that there are some very good discussions going on. I hope you have a wonderful time here. As for your post: I think, no offense, please, I just think you misread me. You yourself quoted me: I wrote that there were people who WERE GOOD... Even though I'm a huge fan of Neil Young, I don't think he's as good now as he used to be. Same goes for Dylan. Lennon is, unfortunately, not among us anymore. You may have missed some of my posts - I don't like the idea of combining both. People here have already gotten quite mad at me because of that (:op) - so, if it's that bad, it's a sign that my poor soul is on the right track as far as my most humble taste goes: better keep social criticism to people who have a good grasp at what's happening in the world and have the moral authority to change things. ;-))) I'm not addressing "Let's Roll" now in order to avoid going off-topic, but I'd love to do it elsewhere and discuss it in another thread, maybe in the personal board where we can expand on the song. Anyway, "Let's Roll", even if I had writen the sentence in the present, wouldn't be enough to debunk my point, I guess. Don't you think? But that's another issue altogether. So, no offense, again, but I think there was a misreading there. Amidst of all these things, I don't want to lose sight of what's, for now, more important: your coming to the website and the fact we have one more inquiring and interested Queenzoner. It makes me happy and I welcome you. I hope you have a great time here. Take care and be well. Yara |
| YourValentine 27.05.2009 03:56 |
Daniel Nester wrote: Oh man, c'mon. Adam Lambert is a singer. He does it professionally and he was on American Idol. Say what you will about AI, but it is a singing competition, as well as a personality contest. It's not a dating or a reality show. It's not a talent contest. It's a singing contest. There is a difference. What kind of art doesn't involve personality as well as art? And what has always been Queen's justification for what they do? The people like it! Damn the critics! We sound like a bunch of rock critics lately. And no one on this board, I suspect, can sing as well as him. Whoever said that sounded a little crazy to me. Talk about the cult of the amateur. He is Broadway. I will say that. Which gets on my wife's nerves, for one. Me, I like him. I said this before, and I will say it again: Queen has never performed as Queen after Freddie died, except for NOBY and the Tribute. Everything else has been with the + sign. Which I have always thought has been an elegant way of saying Queen is - Freddie. I can see people who don't want anything to happen with the Queen moniker after Freddie died. But I can see Brian and Roger sort of consciously adding that "+" moniker as a way of saying this is different, this is a post-Freddie kind of thing. Everyone has seen the big magazine articles about Glambert, even before the finale. Comparisons were made. Photos of Freddie in People magazine? Wow. That Bri and Rog played the finale--again, without an announcement from a contestant, judge or host, only the bass drum gave people any indication these two old dudes had anything to do with Queen. Sorry for meandering. I am sure Adam Lambert is a good singer but in my opinion that's not the point. As you said - he is Broadway, so every good WWRY cast member like for example Tony Vincent could front Queen? I still think Queen are a rock band and a rock singer needs different stage qualities than a theater singer. Saying that AI is a singing contest is a euphemism imo but even if it' s a "singing contest" - Adam Lambert did not win, right? I do not think Queen need to justify what they do and I am not worried about their legacy, it's their reputation and legacy and not mine. However, I do have an opinion and Queenzone is the place to voice that opinion because it's a Queen forum. I was in favour of the QPR project from day one, I thought it's a great combination and after two tours I still believe that. I do not believe that Queen + Adam Lambert are a good combination and it has nothing to do with the use of the Queen name. I think Brian and Roger can use any name they want. And - no, I cannot sing as well as Adam Lambert :-) But I still have an opinion. |
| Holly2003 27.05.2009 04:19 |
YourValentine wrote:. And - no, I cannot sing as well as Adam Lambert :-) Prove it ;) |
| theCro 27.05.2009 06:51 |
ok so ... now, the end is near, so we face, the final curtain... my friend we've said it clear... enough... they will hire this guy and it's up to us to accept it or not, it seems they already decided and he wants to work with them.. so now we need to see will they tour and record or vice versa... well...what to say... i want Queen to rock on, but i'm not sure this is the right choise.. |
| john bodega 27.05.2009 08:31 |
YourValentine wrote: I am sure Adam Lambert is a good singer but in my opinion that's not the point. As you said - he is Broadway, so every good WWRY cast member like for example Tony Vincent could front Queen?I think the crucial difference between Tony Vincent and Adam Lambert is that Adam Lambert can, when he gives it a bit of grunt, sing rock and roll music. Tony Vincent is to rock and roll what a wet mop is to a face. They're both very Broadway, no doubts there, but Lambert has a possible application outside of that. Vincent doesn't. |
| Sheer Brass Neck 27.05.2009 17:03 |
Adam Lambert is a talented karaoke show contestant. Big fucking deal. Whether it pisses us off or not, it makes Queen look desperate and pathetic, which as Barb said, it's their legacy, their choice. But in the world that they should live in, they've become a joke. John Lennon dies, the Beatles are dead. John Bonham dies, Led Zeppelin are dead. Freddie Mercury dies, Queen is 2/4 of a band and whoever will sing with them. It's Queen in name, but nothing near Queen in spirit, and Ray, if you were to look at the situation honestly, you would realize that forgetting his singing ability and showmanship, Freddie Mercury was a world class writer and a fabulous piano player. Adam Lambert is a talented karaoke show contestant. So he can be Queen like vocally (barely) but there's more to it than that. |
| Daniel Nester 27.05.2009 22:27 |
I do acknowledge Queenzone is a place for opinions. What's the problem with disagreeing? |
| Yara 28.05.2009 00:19 |
Daniel Nester wrote: I do acknowledge Queenzone is a place for opinions. What's the problem with disagreeing? Hi, Daniel Nester. I hope you're doing fine. Well, your presence here, and your posts are very important to me. I profit a lot from them. You can be sure of that. :-)) If everybody had the same opinion on this and you hadn't furthered the discussion introducing a more dissident view the thread would have become just boring. People like yourself and Donna13, however, managed to point out some cracks, let's say, in the consensus in a very clever and respectful way. Donna13 is terrific, I like her posts a lot, I'd love if she wrote here more often! This kind of discussion is always rewarding. I've been enjoying it a lot. I like being here, there are many nice threads and a lot of bright people discussing the issues. Hail the disagreement! :-))) Take care you all! You all! All. Just fancy that my arms are getting longer and I'm hugging you all. Like a tree. :op Even if - time for the emotional blackmail...hehehe - my pledges for virtual kisses and hugs are systematically and almost ruthlessly denied (lol), I still let my arms grow longer and longer to be able to embrace you all. Love, Yara |
| andreas_mercury 28.05.2009 05:36 |
uggggh cant you say something of fucking INTEGRITY for once???? i have seen you get more posts on the forum and gradually seen this 'love you all HOW ARE YOU DOING' stuff to the front, why??? cant you say what you are thinking for one time?? just say something honest ....... ive seen you, you werent always wishing world peace on your every sentence, so say something from the fucking heart......... either that or move to diseney land where they LIKE this kind of crap..... |
| andreas_mercury 28.05.2009 05:38 |
Ray D O'Gaga wrote: Adam Lambert & Queen: The Rumors Are True link I hope they sign the kid up if for no other reason than because it would royally piss off so many of you. He's probably got more talent in his eyeliner than most of you have in your whole bodies. So, yeah, let's get a queen back in Queen. Long overdue.LOL i wish the same thing |
| Daniel Nester 28.05.2009 10:37 |
I think we're talking about Queen in Spirit, but not in name. [This is my opinion.] Brian and Roger use "Queen +" so they can play the songs of their old band, Queen. [IMHO] No one would think seeing the QPR shows that Freddie wasn't there. They mentioned him, like, every other song. [IMHO] For me, a fan since 1979 who couldn't go to the Hot Space tour gig in 1982 because my mother thought I was too young to go, it was a great chance to see and hear Roger and Brian play. Loudly. [IMHO] [For the record, I have never forgiven my mother for this decision. But that's for me and my therapist to sort out.] Anyhoo, I love Queen. I love the sound of Brian's guitar, Freddie's voice, the albums. Everything that has happened since Freddie died has been sad and not-as-good on many levels, and seeing him die over those last years sucked. But for me, seeing Brian and Roger play live has helped. And I'd pick Adam Lambert of Anastacia any day. (I was trying to be funny on that last one.) [IMHO] |
| The Real Wizard 28.05.2009 13:31 |
andreas_mercury wrote: uggggh cant you say something of fucking INTEGRITY for once???? i have seen you get more posts on the forum and gradually seen this 'love you all HOW ARE YOU DOING' stuff to the front, why??? cant you say what you are thinking for one time?? just say something honest ....... ive seen you, you werent always wishing world peace on your every sentence, so say something from the fucking heart......... either that or move to diseney land where they LIKE this kind of crap..... Judging by your history of posts here, you're simply jealous of her inherent positivity, something which you seemingly can't even fathom. Yara brightens up this place with her greetings even in the most negative of threads (and toward the most negative of people), while you darken it no matter where you go. I pick Yara. |
| inu-liger 28.05.2009 15:22 |
andreas_mercury wrote: uggggh cant you say something of fucking INTEGRITY for once???? i have seen you get more posts on the forum and gradually seen this 'love you all HOW ARE YOU DOING' stuff to the front, why??? cant you say what you are thinking for one time?? just say something honest ....... ive seen you, you werent always wishing world peace on your every sentence, so say something from the fucking heart......... either that or move to diseney land where they LIKE this kind of crap.....Jesus Christ, must you play the role of misery guts all the time?? No wonder both your bands dropped you, I'm starting to see why now... Yara to me is an awesome, cheerful optomist who, despite writing long posts (something I tend to be guilty for as well from time to time), always has some nice insight to just about anything and everything, whether or not she's 100% confident what she's saying is correct all the time, especially in terms of speculation. I like her a lot for that :-) |
| Donna13 28.05.2009 18:46 |
Yara, thanks for your nice comments. I will post more often, even if I just hate what I have to say. :) |
| Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira 28.05.2009 18:54 |
Sir GH wrote:andreas_mercury wrote: uggggh cant you say something of fucking INTEGRITY for once???? i have seen you get more posts on the forum and gradually seen this 'love you all HOW ARE YOU DOING' stuff to the front, why??? cant you say what you are thinking for one time?? just say something honest ....... ive seen you, you werent always wishing world peace on your every sentence, so say something from the fucking heart......... either that or move to diseney land where they LIKE this kind of crap.....Judging by your history of posts here, you're simply jealous of her inherent positivity, something which you seemingly can't even fathom. Yara brightens up this place with her greetings even in the most negative of threads (and toward the most negative of people), while you darken it no matter where you go. I pick Yara. Yeah, kudos for Yara for always been so positive. Keep Passing the Open Windows, Yara. Cheers, Ogre- |
| andreas_mercury 28.05.2009 22:11 |
Sir GH wrote: Judging by your history of posts here, you're simply jealous of her inherent positivity, something which you seemingly can't even fathom. Yara brightens up this place with her greetings even in the most negative of threads (and toward the most negative of people), while you darken it no matter where you go. I pick Yara.LOL well im glad it doesnt matter what you pick, then. 'brightens this place up'? i havent even read something so silly. positive posts mean absolute nothing when you don't actually mean them... she is a phoney who says the *same* stuff to everyone and never deviates and the posts are always so LONG! like those monty python guys when they say "GET ON WITH IT". |
| Yara 28.05.2009 22:42 |
Hi, folks... I'm really...happy. :)) You guys made me cry! I'm moved, for real. I always enter the website at the same time, which is late at night here. We all have very demanding days, I think, and despite all the pressures and the rush of everyday life, you guys, who come from different regions of the world, devote part of your precious time to write such lovely, kind and endearing messages to someone who's so far away and doesn't even know how to write English properly - the thought that ultimately it's music, as an art form, with its universal appeal, which allows us to have such nice experiences and brings us together is very moving. Either by benefiting from the kindness and patience involved in sharing the music or talking about the pleasure of listening to it or even the knowledge we may have about something, I always have a great time here. It's so beautiful. Ever since I came here I learned a lot with you guys and I keep learning. I'm specially happy because the messages come from very, very dear users: Sir GH, Inu-linger, Donna13 and, finally, Arnaldo, the one who saved me from displaying a shameful record of no successful jokes - I remember he liked that one about which "We Will Rock You" came first - the fast or the slow... :op I can't be funny and make jokes, at least deliberately. lol Is it possible that I have a Canadian soul? I love Neil Young and Joni Mitchell, listening to Glenn Gould playing Bach changed my life, I like Rush, and dear queenzoners Sir GH and Inu-Linger have always been so kind and respectful and patient towards myself. You're lovely. I know soon I'll go to bed with a big smile on my face and a lot of energy to live each and every hour of my day with joy and intensity! Sorry, my dears, for the lenghty message and for being a bit emotive. In no way I want to hijack the thread. But I just COULDN'T help expressing my gratitude and joy. Have a wonderful day you all, and especially Sir GH, Inu-Linger, Donna13 and Arnaldo. *hug* Yara |
| andreas_mercury 28.05.2009 23:23 |
i rest my case.......... what i want to know is where did all of the other care bears go. |
| The Real Wizard 29.05.2009 01:57 |
andreas_mercury wrote: i rest my case.......... Nobody told you to read it, or even to come back to this thread. We live in a society of free choice, where Yara is free to say what she wants in a forum thread, but unfortunately this two-way street also permits you to inject your pessimism into it like an incurable disease. If you feel the need to criticize things that are wrong in this world, then maybe you should focus on some real problems instead of going after someone else's genuine positivity that only you can't seem to handle. |
| on my way up 29.05.2009 02:32 |
Of course I'd pick Yara too. Her posts about Queen's live performances(especially Freddie)are always a joy to read(very very interesting!). Several people, who are mainly active in the announce section, try to make this a better place. Yara is part of that and I love it. |
| Saif 29.05.2009 02:57 |
If you don't like her posts, skip them, asshole. No one's forcing you to read them. Her posts are probably too much for your miniscule brain. |
| andreas_mercury 29.05.2009 03:20 |
oh god YAWN..... i didnt ask to make a discussion about Yara i made one post, i've never seen such hypocrites.... 'if you don't like it then dont read and quit bitching' where is that philosophy NOW, saif?? LOL sir made a good point to about 'genuine positivity' which is always the best but yara is overkill and theres a bit too much of it to be genuine ..... to say nothing of the fact its always copy pasted, much like Amir's posts. anyway enough of that, you guys are remarkabely one-eyed when it comes to repetetiveness on the forum and i'm bored. |
| YourValentine 29.05.2009 03:44 |
If you are so bored why don't you stop hijacking posts on this board with your tedious alleged band story? Yara has always something to say about the topic and it's always interesting to read her contribution. lol @ Daniel (IMHO). Of course we share opinions. I think we reacted so sensitive because you said we sound like "rock critics". If QZ is not the place to nitpick about Queen - where else do we have to go? |
| andreas_mercury 29.05.2009 04:36 |
YourValentine wrote: If you are so bored why don't you stop hijacking posts on this board with your tedious alleged band story?my hands are tied and i cant even answer that question can I?? because I just said i'm bored of the topic???? come on guys! but as for the 'tedious band story' can I explain something; i want peoples input. thats why i brought it up, but now that i no longer live in same city as those people, it is over..... YourValentine wrote: Yara has always something to say about the topic and it's always interesting to read her contribution you're right she always says something .... whether its interesting or not, LOL.... but look thats her thing. it doesnt bother me too much but i had to bring it up at least once. |
| Togg 29.05.2009 06:21 |
The thing I don't understand (trying hard to keep on track here...) Queen have always been an experimental band, just look at the history...surely if you like Queen you are not into one sound, one style, one creative path? Unless you just like one or two albums of course. So, why are so many people (actually when yo look back it's usually the same ones) upset when they do something new? So what if they try a new singer...would it matter if they tried Hip Hop? or went country? These guys are in a band that always changes, that's WHY I love them, I don''t want the same thing for 40 years So if they try a new style or singer or go down a different creative path like launch a musical...do a film or start a newspaper, I would be interested to see what it was like, I don't have to like everything, but as I normally like how they approach creative work I guess there is a good chance I will like some part of it So I am always amazed that people get hot under the collar about change. |
| YourValentine 29.05.2009 09:35 |
Togg, I am absolutely with you - I am all for Brian and Roger trying new things and expand their creativity. I do have doubts if Adam Lambert is the right person to achieve that. I have seen the musical 4 times and I did not see or hear anything new or creative. There is a stupid story which is full of stolen ideas from King Arthur to Brave New World and there are 16 old Queen songs which are performed very well but still old, unless you think that lyrics like "Radio Gaga, internet googoo" is a creative achievement. The musical is no new creative path, it's just exploiting the Queen Greatest Hits very successfully. The Queen film is not a Queen film but a Freddie film and as far as I heard it was shelved because Freddie's mother was deeply offended by the script and what we hear about the script it's a Freddie biopicture focussing on private issues, so where is the creative part contributed by Brian and Roger to this project? The Cosmos Rocks was the only new and musically creative Queen project since Made In Heaven and although it does not have this extra special Queen touch of original Queen albums (IMHO) I do not complain - it's a solid Rock album and I would not mind if they released more really new stuff. I thought it was good that they had a singer who was a star of his own and not a Freddie clone. About a possible collaboration with Adam Lambert Queenzoner Sheer Brass Neck wrote the following on page 2 of this thread and I quote it because he says it so well: "I'm sure it appears that here are these guys playing those songs again for the hundredth time, desperately trying to hang on by glomming on to an up and coming talent. Sure they mayget noticed, but it's below them, and pathetic. The Hills is a scripted reality show about a vapid group of pretty people in Hollywood. It's very popular, and made stars out of the cast (think Paris Hilton variety in the talent department). Should Martin Scorsese cast the women of The Hills in his next flick? After all, he's getting a little long in the tooth, and people would relate more to his movies if they had Audina Partridge in them instead of someone like Meryl Streep. Or Woody Allen could cast the Real Housewives of Atlanta in his next ensemble. What would people think in Hollywood? They'd think that they were pathetic. Which is what Brian and Roger are if they're thinking that." That's exactly what this discussion is all about. There is no creative innovation in Queen, there is only exploration of previous success, no risk, no new ideas. It's Crazy Frog and Viagra ad, Pepsi commercial and American Idol. |
| Sebastian 29.05.2009 10:09 |
There are different levels of change. Changing from Killer Queen to Bohemian Rhapsody is a good change: they're both great songs and very different as well. Changing from Trident Studios to Rockfield was a great choice, and both eras are ace. Changing from no-synths to synths brought them gains and losses, as well as changing from no-guests to guests, or from pre- and post-smoking Fred's voice. I've always adored how Queen (1970-1991) tried out new things, even if some of them were shite like Body Language... for every Body Language or Get Down Make Love you also get a Las Palabras de Amor or an All Dead, All Dead... it's all worth it to me. But to 'explore' what's like to collaborate with Britney Spears or being a backing band for an AI contestant... well, would've fans liked it in the 70's if they did a record with KC & The Sunshine Band or if they became a backing band for a John Travolta tour? There are loads of people who admire Mr Lambert: good for them; but then again there are also some people who simply can't conceive the thought of B+R doing anything wrong, so they tend to either: - Slam those who're not OK with 'every move they make' ('get a life', 'you can't sing like Adam/Paul/Robbie/you-name-them'). - Criticise the Freddie era (they also had shite songs, they also fell for disco), almost to the point of resenting him. And even if that group is 1% of Queen fans, casual listeners or critics, they're 'loud' enough to ruin QZ (for instance), even if for limited extent. Many people here probably know my perspective on the use of the Queen name: I don't agree with it, and I think B+R are bigger than that (by 'that' I mean, living off the past and becoming their own cover band). But this isn't about the name: it's about two people who could be doing great on their own (plus a bassist) or collaborating with some of the marvellous musicians out there (both old and young), but instead content themselves with Adam Lambert... I think, personally, the rea$on i$ pretty obviou$. I'm personally not very fond of their 80's output, but now I yearn for a time like that: at least their guests were Howard Blake, David Bowie, Arif Mardin, Michael Kamen, Fred Mandel, Mike Moran (AGP was most likely put together in '89 so it's still the 80's), Steve Howe (ditto), Steve Gregory, Lynton Naiff, Joan Armatrading, the bloke who sang True (forgot his name). Now they've traded them for Britney Spears, Pink, Robbie and Adam. Are Britney, Pink, Robbie and Adam bad singers? Not at all, but it's like having a '53 VW Beetle after years and years of owning Ferrari's. |
| Togg 29.05.2009 11:59 |
I understand where you are coming from YV not sure I agree completely, I think the musical is creative, maybe not a new story as such but then I'm not sure there are many truely new stories out there, most films are based on retelling the smae 8-10 story lines when you think about it. I would have prefered them to base the show around one of the Queen songs, say 39, but hey they did something that has worked well, it is what it is, good pure entertainment which is what 90% of Queen's music is, as Freddie said disposable. The film being shelved is a shame but lets face it, from a writters point of view the only really interesting story was Fred's private life, it's the bit that sold the newspapers so I would guess it's where a writer would focuse 2 hours of whating the band work in the studio or on stage is not going to attract an audience outside the normal Queen fan. Shame but true. I do think Cosmos was a creative move...sure its' not a new sound, but it's a new venture for Queen, Anyway whatever comes next I will look forward to hearing/watching |
| The Real Wizard 29.05.2009 13:14 |
andreas_mercury wrote: but as for the 'tedious band story' can I explain something; i want peoples input. But you don't seem to understand that nobody cares! Treasure Moment is a band that nobody likes (except for a few people on YouTube), who have only recorded (poorly) a few home demos. Nobody here would care if they were never mentioned here again. This is a Queen forum, not a "hijack every second thread with irrelevant crap" forum. At the absolute least, this stuff should be left in the personal section, but at best, it should be discussed on your own time because it is a waste of time and space here. |
| andreas_mercury 29.05.2009 13:33 |
ugh ... when i say 'input' i mean advice. my problem has very little to do to band stuff, its just that i wanted advice, and when someone addresses to me in a thread I respond to them as was the case with Microwave bringing up that shit fucking band Treasure Moment .... I answered his post, END OF DISCUSSION, let it go...... fucking incredible you still write paragraphs of WAH WAH WE DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR BAND when I was done writing about the whole thing ages past!!!! can't we talk about adam lambert now??? |
| andreas_mercury 29.05.2009 13:36 |
Sebastian wrote: it's about two people who could be doing great on their own (plus a bassist) or collaborating with some of the marvellous musicians out there (both old and young)absolutely to this I agree 100%. brian and roger between themselves have so many awesome friends .... pull some strings and put the all star tour together ....... maybe that's another kind of $$$ gimmick!!!!! mmm. i think the reason depends on who'd they pick ... queen is very dead and the name should rest but that is only secondary of importence!! what most matters is that they get out and make new music just like when with paul rogers. okay the music wasn't fans for everyone but that will happen. try again, no reason to stop, not until they (physically) can't play anymore, like Freddie. |
| Queen4ever13 09.12.2011 12:13 |
Oh come on, is this a bad joke, are they kidding?? I know they've been stretching themselves a little thin trying to stay in the spotlight, which they don't need to. But this is a direct insult to Freddie Mercury. If they didn't consider George Michael as lead singer and he might have been able to pull it off, how could they consider this amateur wanna be?! Please guys, take a cue from John Deacon as he knew when to bow out gracefully. He's the only one with any sense to realize it was over when Freddie left this world. |