| GratefulFan 20.09.2011 13:56 |
I spent the afternoon Sunday shaking my head over the 'Queen Extravaganza' which had leaked on QOL's discussion forums the day before it was posted here. I've since purged most of my disbelief by LOLing at Roger in the comments on the official press release at QOL and pointing out that he was a shameless old tart. I feel better now. At some point, you've just got to laugh. Laugh a great big deep WTF laugh. You've got to laugh when how most of us 'serious' fans see them and how they see themselves experiences such a significant parting of the ways. Does anybody think they understand any of this? Are we missing something? Is what's left of Queen missing something? Are we both missing something? Why on earth would a musician with a legacy like Roger willingly involve himself - involve himself with passion if we're to take Brian's words at face - in something like this, where the first guy whose audition he'll have to watch apologizes in his submission comments for his "phlegm problem"? Ideally without extremes of either excessive cynicism or Stepford like righteousness, and ideally avoiding the word "choice" (because we already know it's [insert band member's name here] "right" to have "choice", does anybody think they have anything like real insight into why this wonderful band seems so determined to blaze such a profoundly different and profoundly pedestrian path? |
| rhyeking 20.09.2011 14:28 |
I ask without judgement here, why do we think this is bad? So what if they get some bands together and play a big Queen festival? How does this hurt their "legacy"? Why are they excluded in fans' minds from drawing attention to themselves in any way *other* than from what they recorded between 1971 and 1991 (which a few extra-curricular exceptions)? I can't answer the questions asked in the original post because I have no great insight into the band and because I really, honestly and truly don't see why people get worked up over things like this. If I had to guess, I'd say it's because once Freddie died, certain fans felt nothing should ever change or be added to what they call "The Legacy" and they resent that this occurred. I think, if that's the case, that that possessiveness is misplaced and takes the joy out of being a fan. Queen made their mark. Short of Brian or Roger (or both) being discovered as mass serial murderers, nothing is going to change that. Time has a way of filtering out the crap, so if this Extravaganza fails, it will be lost to the ages, a footnote in Wikipedia's "2012 in Music". What will remain, as always, are the hits, the albums and the reputation that Queen rocked live. |
| GratefulFan 20.09.2011 22:48 |
It has little to do with being excluded in fans' minds minds from drawing attention to themselves, it's just that like everybody else in the world the way you draw attention to yourself matters and affects what happens next. It certainly does affect their legacy if you accept that the legacy is not yet complete and that what they are doing now and have done before potentially affects everything from who is willing to work with them, through who might seek them out for collaborative work, to how they will be supported and financed for archival/anthology releases. People who can impact things absolutely can and may draw impressions from somebody who tarts himself out to a potentially half assed and definitely cheesy internet reality venture that are different from those they might draw from somebody who seems to have a bit more respect for himself and bit more reverence for his music. And it's a cheesy reality venture for a tribute band, which is potentially like cheese with cheese on top of it. It's not possessiveness, not in most cases anyway, it's simply a predictable cringe in response to cringeworthy behaviour. Great bands have the option to be above all this if they choose. Queen don't choose, so the question remains: why? |
| Togg 21.09.2011 03:20 |
I can see a lot of people having a problem with it, yes...but I have to say I dont see the problem myself, at the end of the day they are a band, that's it just a rock band, not anything more, why is it a problem if they want to keep the 'spirit' of Queen around long after they have stopped? People all around the world love the music so why not keep it going. I have to say I dont understand all the destroying the legacy stuff people rant on about, it's just a band and nothing they do now will change what they did back then, what makes me laugh as a long term fan is how many people go on about the legacy who were not around when they are making it, at the time in the 70's-80's Queen were mostly viewed as a joke by much of the public it was only after Freddie died they suddenly had a legacy to look after frankly. It was hugly unfashionable to like Queen when I was at school in the 70's and even then when they released new albums everyone went mad because it wasn't like the last one...I remember all the fuss about Jazz....nevermind when Hot Space came out!!!! I my opinion doing things people dont expect is what they do best, it's why I like them becoase they always even now go against the grain of what people think they should do, somehow it almost always works...look at WWRY, everyone said No you can't do a musical...well it's amazingly successful, new peolple have been drawn it to see it and especially people who were too young to see them live, sounds like a pretty smart idea to me, this could be the same, might not work but hey Roger has always been one for pushing the boundaries, and as he said it's his legacy to fuck up.... |
| brians wig 21.09.2011 05:14 |
Roger obviously feels the need to raise Queen's profile in the USA and maybe sell a few more copies of things, so why not? As far as I'm concerned, if Queen's fan base increases, then we are one step closer to them realising that an (dare I even say it without being swamped by negativity and ridicule??), Archive boxset would actually sell.... |
| queenUSA 21.09.2011 07:37 |
People get so excited about these things. It's only a concert. In the summertime there are lots of open air free concerts in the USA - they're quite a popular activity considering the economic circumstances of many. I attended a Beatle tribute one and there were scores of people there of all ages - singing along, dancing and really enjoying the hell out of those Beatle songs. It went on for hours - all this for the Beatles!!. I was struck by the feeling of wanting to be there at a similar event only for Queen's music and was thinking how much I'd love that - if they could only hear Queen's music I know the rest of the people around me would love it. So many Americans need to be introduced or re-introduced to the great British bands in history besides the one they know best: The Beatles. I hope it can be a success. I hope they will be brave with it and present some of the 70's material: such as The Prophet Song for instance. I hope the concert starts with Procession. Imagine how "new" that would sound to some people out there? Let's wait to see what happens with it. I'm wondering to what degree, if any, Hollywood records will be involved in this effort. |
| GratefulFan 21.09.2011 12:59 |
I certainly get that people can see the bright side of this, but I don't get that people don't see an impact on the legacy. Every decision to do one thing and not the other has some kind of opportunity cost. A legacy on the simplest level is what you leave behind. If Brian loses a spot on "It Might Get Loud" (as was hypothetically brought up in another thread) because he's elected to dive head first into theatre music, that alters the legacy. If his decision to work with 5ive or Brittany Spears means that brilliant musicians seeking classy and mature collaborations pass him over, that alters the legacy too. If Roger gets hit by a bus in a year the prospect of undocumented Queen history unique to him being lost forever because he was running an internet talent show instead of getting it onto a multimedia anthology set surely exists. So whether you're happy with what they've done or not, the legacy is surely impacted. Every new move seems to double down on the commercial and largely superficial populist wager they've made with their careers and legacy. As ever, I simply wonder why. I wonder about what factors have propelled this direction. Have they strictly chosen this or are they in some ways simply being swept along by forces largely out of their control. Things like that. |
| kohuept 21.09.2011 15:57 |
OK, fine, it impacts the legacy. To help me any maybe some others answer your question, why are you so set on it being a NEGATIVE impact? Just like the re-release of Bohemian Rhapsody in the early '90s created a resurgence of interest for that song, maybe this could create a renewed interest in the whole catalog. Maybe working on this project will energize Roger to be more creative instead of sitting in a stuffy room listening to take after take of himself screwing up in order to compile the "precious" box sets - that may drive him nuts to the point where he wants to retire completely. Point being, you never know how something will work out until it is in the past. You can't decide that this will have a negative impact on the legacy just because YOU don't like it. As to whether they've been "swept along" simply trying to be popular (if I understand your point), I think now more than ever, they're exactly where they want to be - minus Freddie, of course. |
| Michael 21.09.2011 18:08 |
I hear you, and I agree with you. At this point, Brian and Roger are just making fools of themselves. They jump on the latest bandwagon (be it Robbie Williams, or this American Idol-type nonsense), instead of creating new music, touring, releasing decent reissues, etc. Queen has always been about self-promotion, but this is ridiculous. Brian and Roger will do whatever earns them money. They care little-if-any for their long-time fans. No wonder John quit. |
| Dusta 21.09.2011 19:55 |
Just seems to me as if they are finding ways to stay in the business, is all. Nothing wrong with that. It's what they do! |
| coops 22.09.2011 09:49 |
If they (Queen) put a cover band together and played in your town, would you go see them? I would and I would take the family. If you refused to because you are holding onto some memory of how they were 30 years or so ago, then you need to get out a little more. |
| Negative Creep 22.09.2011 11:38 |
coops wrote: If they (Queen) put a cover band together and played in your town, would you go see them? I would and I would take the family. If you refused to because you are holding onto some memory of how they were 30 years or so ago, then you need to get out a little more. I certainly wouldn't go - I wouldn't go because I find tribute bands to be..... erm, sad. I go and see bands play their own songs. I don't get a kick out of seeing saddos dressed up in costume mimicking some songs I may or may not like. There's any number of tribute bands who have been going for years who are apparently very good at what they do...... there's no need for an officially sanctioned one. I can't imagine there's much of a market for it in the US anyway - if it actually gets past the auditions, it'll be one small tour to minute audiences and that'll be that. |
| john bodega 22.09.2011 12:12 |
At best, they'll find some good musicians and put on a good show. What I'm always sad about is the negative side of competitions like this. You see guys like this link ... .. who honestly think that A) this is their big shot, and B) they're talented enough that they have a right to shout anyone down who criticises them (ie. Treasure Moment). It gives them just another freaking avenue to embarrass themselves. I mean, seriously - I hate this shit. I hate it on shows like Idol when they deliberately advance shitty contestants past the screening judges and up to the TV judges, just in order to humiliate them. Y'know - this stuff doesn't need to be seen. When you put out bad music (and boy do I know what I speak of) you should have the opportunity to rethink yourself and pull it the fuck out of the public consciousness. This kind of thing takes that ability away. |
| The Real Wizard 22.09.2011 12:33 |
This one is even better... link I feel sorry for Roger or whoever has to actually watch all of these. But they'll find their talent - it's out there. |
| Micrówave 22.09.2011 15:05 |
coops wrote: If they (Queen) put a cover band together and played in your town, would you go see them? I would and I would take the family. If you refused to because you are holding onto some memory of how they were 30 years or so ago, then you need to get out a little more.No I wouldn't... And I'm out playing in cover bands every weekend. This is a TRIBUTE band, if they play just one artists' music. And yeah, I've done those too. Thing is, cover bands have been dealing with Artists wanting to get paid whenever their music is played for years now. This is just simply another vehicle for that. Do these "musicians" think that they're going to make more $$$ with a Roger Taylor backed Queen Tribute Band? Get Real!!! In fact, they'll probably make less because, in the end, Roger just wants to get paid. And from a club owner / event promotor stand point, are they really going to pay 2X maybe 3X as much for a simple TRIBUTE BAND just because Roger Taylor bought the PA and hired someone to book the band? This isn't a very well thought out plan... but then neither was Fun It. |
| Ivo-1976 23.09.2011 02:02 |
We want Queen to go on forever, want Brian and Roger to go on forever. Touring and recording new stuff, releasing the unreleased materials. Of course at some point they have to stop. I feel that that moment has come. No more tours, no more solo albums. No more projects with other musicians. The boys are ready to retire. For some reason they have not made that public, but i think we can all feel it. I think it is too hard for them to say "it has been fun, thank you and goodbye." Yes, they are still involved, but the creative power, that made them write and record all those great songs, is gone. The drive to go out there and play them for an audience, is gone. After Freddie's death, some great stuff was released, and some projects failed. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't. For me, the last highlights were the tours with Paul Rodgers. I really enjoyed those shows. I hope they continue to release older stuff (still waiting for some decent '70s live material), but I don't think we can expect exciting new stuff. Those days seem to be over. |
| john bodega 23.09.2011 12:10 |
*shrug* I just don't give a shit. Maybe they're a spent force, who knows. I was pretty sure they were done long before they did that show in Kharkov. Man, when Brian threw down Bijou, I nearly got misty. I bet neither of them ever thought they'd see a crowd that big again, but they did! They may be in a dry spell, but I won't write off their ability to come up with something (even if it's not groundbreaking) until they're both dead or something. Not defending some of the absurd crap they've come up with since the late 90's, but I'm just saying - anything's possible. In the meantime, listen to some music ... it's fun! |
| GratefulFan 23.09.2011 12:19 |
kohuept wrote: OK, fine, it impacts the legacy. To help me any maybe some others answer your question, why are you so set on it being a NEGATIVE impact? Just like the re-release of Bohemian Rhapsody in the early '90s created a resurgence of interest for that song, maybe this could create a renewed interest in the whole catalog. Maybe working on this project will energize Roger to be more creative instead of sitting in a stuffy room listening to take after take of himself screwing up in order to compile the "precious" box sets - that may drive him nuts to the point where he wants to retire completely. Point being, you never know how something will work out until it is in the past. You can't decide that this will have a negative impact on the legacy just because YOU don't like it. As to whether they've been "swept along" simply trying to be popular (if I understand your point), I think now more than ever, they're exactly where they want to be - minus Freddie, of course. ==================================== It's not really that I'm set on seeing a negative impact, it's that it's a bit of an uphill climb trying to get people to even acknowledge that there is a wider impact when all creative and business choices seem to slant towards the commercial and the comparatively superficial. People tend to deny any effect on the legacy at all and take gratuitous shots about the "precious" boxset. A well done anthology and some deep history and well chosen archival releases would be absolutely precious, don't you think? It's true that I would personally find much more value in a great rock documentary or rich archival releases than I would in one night out watching a tribute band, no matter how proficient. And I love live music just about as much as I love anything. The greats can make you forget entirely that you're little more than one half of a commercial entertainment transaction and leave you feeling moved and wrung out and carried away. Queen who were once so good at that now seem to go out of their way to flip up their skirts and show us their tacky little commerce panties. It's all so dull and transparent to me, from that "grassroots" Muppets video timed to promote Absolute Greatest to this current reality venture which to me is clearly some cynical marketing exec's idea of selling a tribute tour to a couple of countries with the attention span of gnats. I find it sad that a band so full of intelligent men allow their business partners to take the low road that relies an awful lot on gullibility and the exaggerated base instincts of reality shows. Does that mean those inclined can't get fun and enjoyment and good memories out of a Muppets video or a fun night out to see the tribute band? Of course not. But just don't pretend it doesn't cost a thing. It's QPL that makes it feel like a choice between one or the other when they make or intimate promises that are never kept, and then throw all the effort behind things that cater almost entirely to the new or casual fan. As for a resurgence of interest in the catalogue I think (yet) another bump in the hits compilations is most likely. You're right that we don't know the future, but we do have as a culture 10 years of music reality shows behind us with remarkably little substantial to show for it, except that people appear to be even dumber, meaner and less able to discriminate quality from crap than a decade ago. |
| GratefulFan 23.09.2011 16:52 |
Zebonka12 wrote: At best, they'll find some good musicians and put on a good show. What I'm always sad about is the negative side of competitions like this. You see guys like this link ... .. who honestly think that A) this is their big shot, and B) they're talented enough that they have a right to shout anyone down who criticises them (ie. Treasure Moment). It gives them just another freaking avenue to embarrass themselves. I mean, seriously - I hate this shit. I hate it on shows like Idol when they deliberately advance shitty contestants past the screening judges and up to the TV judges, just in order to humiliate them. Y'know - this stuff doesn't need to be seen. When you put out bad music (and boy do I know what I speak of) you should have the opportunity to rethink yourself and pull it the fuck out of the public consciousness. This kind of thing takes that ability away. =============================== I so hear you. I despise 98% of reality shows for precisely this reason, or reasons a lot like it. They're total distortions of just about everything, even for those who do have some talent or success. There are literally thousands of comments on that Marc Martel's STL version that are wildly over the top. He's the reincarnation of Freddie, if people close their eyes they hear Freddie himself, the contest is over, it's a miracle, he's alive, they found the cure for AIDS, yadda yadda yadda. Half the people who have arrived there from some linking site don't even know what they've arrived at and are just completely babbling. He's a talented singer, and not a perfect one I might add, but nobody who knows Fred's work in any depth is going to hear some spooky embodiment in Marc Martel, except when he's pulling some corny deliberate mimicry. Reality plots need a constant infusion of drama because people burn themselves out in lemming like extremes of derision and adulation. Watch if this Marc guy hasn't peaked too soon. |
| GratefulFan 23.09.2011 16:59 |
Sir GH wrote: This one is even better... link I feel sorry for Roger or whoever has to actually watch all of these. But they'll find their talent - it's out there. ============================= If you read the fine print they're only committing to one winner if necessary, and in theory I guess that could be some guy on cow bell or something. If they don't find their talent, they'll hire their own. Which is a wise safety net in terms of being able to guarantee a quality product, but on the other hand it underscores that this is a marketing/attention seeking venture as much as or more than a commitment to do what it takes to find and foster undiscovered musicians to play Queen music. |
| GratefulFan 23.09.2011 17:33 |
kohuept wrote: As to whether they've been "swept along" simply trying to be popular (if I understand your point), I think now more than ever, they're exactly where they want to be - minus Freddie, of course. ======================= Missed this last bit in my last reply. What I meant to bring up for discussion was whether there are factors unique to Queen that have propelled this path which as a whole is quite different from the path of most other greats. Maybe they are in an orbit from which the universe will not allow them to be peeled because of fixed factors like the mass appeal of the timeless and varied music they made, or the ever present pull of an iconic dead frontman who died just as the internet and a revolution in communication and mass media were set to create glittering giants out of mortals. Maybe that long ago uncool factor and critical rejection meant they never did have the same opportunities for arty and weighty and respectable collaborations with people the world rightly or wrongly revered more. Maybe they just don't have great taste, and Fred really was the guy responsible for a lot of the refinement and regal grace where it was present. Maybe some fork in the road 5 or 10 or 15 years ago swallowed some things up for good. Those are examples of the things I mean, and whether they're where they want to be or not is not that relevant to the question because even if they weren't, cognitive dissonance would have likely taken care of that some time ago. Really what I'm trying to consider is whether some of us are being too hard on them because we're assigning them options they no longer really have, if they ever did. |
| tcc 24.09.2011 09:08 |
I think Roger and Brian are now influenced by a new group of people who are possibly under their employ or on retainer basis, principally Rhys Thomas (whose name appears in a lot of the new releases). These people could have given them a lot of ideas on how to make their business bigger. They are enjoying themselves in the role of business entrepreneurs and are willing to try them out. Many musicians are not just creative, they also turn out to be very good business people. Personally I know of a pianist who plays in the music lounges for fun but he makes a lot of money as a property agent. Another musician in our country founded a lyric theatre for music operas as a hobby but he runs a lucrative insurance business. Back to Queen, Roger still has a lot of energy and drive and he also has a son in the music business. In the process of doing all this, he can also help his son to develop a career in the music industry. From what I see of the David Richards fb thread, I think those who want to work with the band must not reveal the inner workings of the band. If they show that they cannot be trusted with the band's "secrets", they would be dropped out of the loop. |
| Donna13 24.09.2011 17:46 |
I've never seen a Queen tribute band, but they are already in existence, so they already have a built in audience of admirers, I guess. Anyway, I went to see a Beatles tribute band this past summer, and thousands of people were there. It was fun to hear the music being played live and being in the crowd of Beatles fans (I like having the experience of being in an audience of people, whether for a movie or another type of show, just to have that "togetherness" feeling). If Paul and Ringo had worked with this particular tribute band and given them direction, and worked on the show, then it would have added some extra magic to the experience, I'm sure. I don't understand why they are limiting it to American musicians. |