mooghead 12.04.2012 14:43 |
..if you encourage them they will just keep doing it. Who's with me? \o/ |
Rubbersuit 12.04.2012 15:17 |
Boycott's a strong word to use, when what you really mean is, if you don't like it, don't buy a ticket. |
Micrówave 12.04.2012 15:37 |
Not enough. Picket the ticket counters and hassle the fans entering the stadium. Signs like "Queen hates straight males" and "Badgers have rights too" would be helpful. All this while wearing a "KISS ARMY" T-shirt. |
david (galashiels) 12.04.2012 18:13 |
nope sorry,if a scotland gig is lined up,i will go. might even venture into england to newcastle. |
MJDSQ 12.04.2012 21:15 |
Brian and Roger are the reasons that most people keep participating in these forums. They have giving us join and affected positivaly the lives of many with music, love and caring. Now there are people that do not understand that BM and RT feel happy when they are on stage - see Q + PR in Chile, or when Brian does that amazing solo during Fire and Water in Japan. So boycott the shows, make Roger and Brian unhappy because we don't like Adam. Bulshit!!!! It was the same shit when Q+PR decided to tour! That tour gave me one the best days in my life and that's what matters. There will be people travaling from across the globe to see those guys and doesn't matter if it will be 5.000 or 40.000 in the venue. They will be happy as shit, period. Keep going RT and BM. |
Day dop 12.04.2012 21:23 |
It seemed like a good idea at the time when you posted this, right? Never mind. |
Sheer Brass Neck 12.04.2012 22:22 |
MJDSQ wrote: Brian and Roger are the reasons that most people keep participating in these forums. They have giving us join and affected positivaly the lives of many with music, love and caring. Now there are people that do not understand that BM and RT feel happy when they are on stage - see Q + PR in Chile, or when Brian does that amazing solo during Fire and Water in Japan. So boycott the shows, make Roger and Brian unhappy because we don't like Adam. Bulshit!!!! It was the same shit when Q+PR decided to tour! That tour gave me one the best days in my life and that's what matters. There will be people travaling from across the globe to see those guys and doesn't matter if it will be 5.000 or 40.000 in the venue. They will be happy as shit, period. Keep going RT and BM.Good post. Ridiculous, but good. That's the problem with this forum (and life) is that people see things in their eyes only. I'm really happy, and I'm sincere about that, that the Q+PR tour was an amazing experience for you. It would be incredibly selfish to think that the experiences of long time fans are more important than those of new fans. But unless people are incredibly stupid or gullible, Adam Lambert is no Paul Rodgers. He's barely a Paul Stanley. And Paul Rodgers is phenomenal, but no Freddie Mercury. So if we've seen the greatest ever, are we supposed to be happy with a replication of that greatness, and in the case of Adam Lambert (great voice, no emotional heft IMHO) a poor replication of that greatness, are we supposed to say that everything Brian and Roger decide is good and we should spend our money? Or conversely, shut up and let the Glamberts rule the board? Unlikely. |
Gaabiizz 12.04.2012 22:30 |
Rubbersuit wrote: Boycott's a strong word to use, when what you really mean is, if you don't like it, don't buy a ticket. Yeah! What they do is ok |
inu-liger 12.04.2012 22:49 |
When was the last time an online fan-initiated "boycott" has actually ever worked? Last I checked, never... |
jpf 12.04.2012 23:17 |
Micrówave wrote: Not enough. Picket the ticket counters and hassle the fans entering the stadium. Signs like "Queen hates straight males" and "Badgers have rights too" would be helpful. All this while wearing a "KISS ARMY" T-shirt.Gene thanks you. |
mooghead 13.04.2012 03:53 |
No - boycott - placards and petitions and maybe even a little riot, storm the venue, tear the place apart... etc... |
clifton 13.04.2012 04:36 |
You ignorant , vile, cretin! Get a life and maybe a girlfriend. People like you who create these stupid threads are living in the past. Grow up you little turd and go on the steps/bucks fizz forums where you belong. |
Senna 13.04.2012 05:19 |
Oh the rabble that frequents the steps/bucks fizz forums, you wouldn't want to go there and the language they use especially the ones with rare recording! |
uef 13.04.2012 07:10 |
One more ticket for me, one less black t-shirted whiner that will go... boycott away if it makes you happy. |
mooghead 13.04.2012 07:42 |
I'm thinking rocket launchers, tanks, grenades and of course.. uzi 9 millimetre... |
Micrówave 13.04.2012 10:16 |
You all should encourage the one-man boycott. Their opening acts usually suck anyways. You might actually pick up a few dates. |
david (galashiels) 13.04.2012 13:13 |
mooghead,im pretty sure the metal detectors would pick that lot up lol. |
mooghead 13.04.2012 14:31 |
Nuclear warheads, mushroom cloud, end of days..... |
Russian Headlong 13.04.2012 16:21 |
i wont be going, its embarassing. |
Wiley 13.04.2012 19:44 |
Trolls will troll |
The Real Wizard 13.04.2012 21:29 |
Day dop wrote: It seemed like a good idea at the time when you posted this, right? Never mind.Classic. |
AlexRocks 13.04.2012 21:29 |
I can't wait for all the new collaborations that Queen will doing in the years to come including new studio l.p.s of new songs and new studio re-recordings of Queen songs as well as tours and solo projects!!! Whoo hoo!!! |
abc1 14.04.2012 02:42 |
Ive got a better idea, why dont you lean over and suck a fart out of my asshole? |
mooghead 14.04.2012 03:06 |
He only said 'classic' ffs |
Graeme Arnott 14.04.2012 07:58 |
Whilst I hate the idea of this line up I hope everybody who does go has a great time and do a great venue justice. |
queenUSA 14.04.2012 08:58 |
mooghead wrote: Nuclear warheads, mushroom cloud, end of days.....You left out zombie apocalypse .... But no matter ... I'll be in need of a ticket and hopefully 3 tickets if it works out for me. Let us know how the boycott goes. |
matt z 14.04.2012 09:03 |
Wiley wrote: Trolls will trollWhen you're in need of trolls, they really troll for attention Trolls will be trolls! When you've had enough and all hope is lost, Just shake your heads cause trolls will be troooooolls Right to the ee-eehnd! |
Mr Mercury 14.04.2012 09:35 |
clifton wrote: You ignorant , vile, cretin! Get a life and maybe a girlfriend. People like you who create these stupid threads are living in the past. Grow up you little turd and go on the steps/bucks fizz forums where you belong.Bucks Fizz RAWK!!!!!! Leave them alone! |
peterkoz1 14.04.2012 10:13 |
why should we boycott anything love Queen Love anything Queen related they keep the spirit alive go and change your taste to a band that disbanded and did fuck all again , enjoy life , watch the grand national and stop fucking moaning u dont deserve to call yourself a fan u cunt |
mooghead 14.04.2012 12:04 |
Pestilence.. famine... erm....nits.... |
mooghead 15.04.2012 15:51 |
If your bellend is in Brian May's stomach you will say something right now.... |
e-man 16.04.2012 02:32 |
I'm not going. and I would have easily made the effort it was paul rodgers singing. so I guess that's a boycott? |
YAFF 16.04.2012 22:54 |
mooghead wrote: ..if you encourage them they will just keep doing it. Who's with me? \o/I will and have completely ignored anything with the name "Queen" that doesn't include Freddie Mercury. Not one dime have I spent on non-Freddie Queen except for "No One But You" as a download. Freddie is why I love Queen. The others were just good supporting cast members |
notimeforlosers 17.04.2012 00:08 |
I will and have completely ignored anything with the name "Queen" that doesn't include Freddie Mercury. Not one dime have I spent on non-Freddie Queen except for "No One But You" as a download. Freddie is why I love Queen. The others were just good supporting cast membersRight. So get lost to a Freddie Mercury forum, 'cause this is a Queen forum. And Queen are Brian, John, Roger and Freddie. And don't forget to throw away your non-Freddie Queen singles, buddy! Regarding the concert, this is not about Adam Lambert, this is about two great guys, great musicians, half of the band we say we love and admire for about 40 years. Stop this childish story and let them do whathever they want and let people choose if they are gonna pay for it or not. |
Vocal harmony 17.04.2012 02:55 |
YetAnotherFreddieFan wrote:Suporting cast? Yeah they didn't write over half the songs, contribute to the Queen sound, in fact write bigger selling hits than him, AOBTD, write some of the most recognizable Queen hits. The list goes on.mooghead wrote: ..if you encourage them they will just keep doing it. Who's with me? \o/I will and have completely ignored anything with the name "Queen" that doesn't include Freddie Mercury. Not one dime have I spent on non-Freddie Queen except for "No One But You" as a download. Freddie is why I love Queen. The others were just good supporting cast members I feel sorry for Freddie having to work with second rate musicians like he did. Just think how much better Mr Bad Guy is, compared to any Queen album! |
Vela 19.04.2012 08:06 |
What a ridiculous subject for a thread. I'm so pleased that so many fans are shouting it down with sarcasm, wit and FACT. The OP needs to get with the real world and with what Roger and Brian want. Freddie was a VERY important part of the band when he wasn't THE band. Even as a Freddie fan I have to acknowledge that. I won't be going to the shows simply because I can't afford to but I would have loved to. Anything that keeps the spirit of the band going is not wrong in my book. You may as well boycott 'We Will Rock You'. |
Vela 19.04.2012 08:17 |
Sorry, YetAnotherFreddieFan, but you're just as mooghead. If we're going to take contribution to the band's material as a measure of who the band was/is, Freddie was no more than also-ran. A low percentage of the band's output was written or co-written by him. In fact, almost nothing at all at the start. He had a very good voice and was a great frontman but as for much being his creation, not so. Also, let's not forget that it was Freddie who approached Brian and Roger about joining their already existing band. For all their negatives for me (like Paul's material, don't like his voice and find him a dull performer, love Adam's voice and stage presence, can take or leave most of his material until now) neither of them asked the existing band members to be the singer, it was the other way around, so why vilify them as if they'd begged for the part? At least YetAnotherFreddieFan's name tells you what they are. Perhaps mooghead should do the same and not claim to be a Queen fan when they are in fact just a Freddie fan. |
notimeforlosers 19.04.2012 11:08 |
Hats off to Vela. |
Queen4ever13 19.04.2012 14:13 |
This is the 100% honest to God truth and John Deacon would agree. |
Queen4ever13 19.04.2012 14:17 |
YetAnotherFreddieFan wrote:Regarding your quote that is :) Queen was Queen only while they were all together. Anything else is trying to recreate what was and never will be by no means. Hey but to each his own.mooghead wrote: ..if you encourage them they will just keep doing it. Who's with me? \o/I will and have completely ignored anything with the name "Queen" that doesn't include Freddie Mercury. Not one dime have I spent on non-Freddie Queen except for "No One But You" as a download. Freddie is why I love Queen. The others were just good supporting cast members |
DAVE D 19.04.2012 17:38 |
I am not boycotting ....just not going......ticket prices have kept me from attending a Queen show in England for the first time in 30 years !!!!! If this was really a concert for the fans as Brian stated it was..then why are the tickets £75..??...not so much for the fans ...more for Brian & Rogers pension funds..... like they need it right!!!!! I hope everyone who is going will have a great time....as for me..i will have to do with some fantastic memories. |
Vocal harmony 19.04.2012 17:57 |
The ticket price of most gigs has little or nothing to do with the band. The promoter hires the venue, pays for ticketing and advertising costs and usually sets the ticket price. The promoter pays the artist what ever their agreed fee is. The ticket price is usually a reflection of the promoters belief in the band being able to sellout at the highest possible price. Queen have a huge fan base and with a 40 year history many of those fans fall into an age group who usually have a healthy disposable income. A pop act aimed at a younger audience who are touring their second album will have a much lower ticket price than say Elton John playing the same venue during the same week. |
waunakonor 19.04.2012 19:10 |
I'm boycotting it by not buying a ticket because it would be impractical for me to get all the way over there! Does that count? Actually, I'd really like to go... |
deleted user 19.04.2012 19:20 |
While I would be very happy to go see Brian and Roger perform as Queen; Adam Lambert..??? No way!!! While Freddie was just a fourth of the band, he was the main attraction! He could really really rock you, and the 4 of them together were just unbeatable. And somehow, I just cannot get that 'Queen' feeling with Adam Lambert. As absurd as Paul and Ringo playing with Katy Perry on the mic! Ewww! |
deleted user 19.04.2012 19:20 |
While I would be very happy to go see Brian and Roger perform as Queen; Adam Lambert..??? No way!!! While Freddie was just a fourth of the band, he was the main attraction! He could really really rock you, and the 4 of them together were just unbeatable. And somehow, I just cannot get that 'Queen' feeling with Adam Lambert. As absurd as Paul and Ringo playing with Katy Perry on the mic! Ewww! |
YAFF 20.04.2012 11:14 |
notimeforlosers wrote:Listen, moron, nobody is preventing you for choosing. This is a forum where different people express often divergent opinions.I will and have completely ignored anything with the name "Queen" that doesn't include Freddie Mercury. Not one dime have I spent on non-Freddie Queen except for "No One But You" as a download. Freddie is why I love Queen. The others were just good supporting cast membersRight. So get lost to a Freddie Mercury forum, 'cause this is a Queen forum. And Queen are Brian, John, Roger and Freddie. And don't forget to throw away your non-Freddie Queen singles, buddy! Regarding the concert, this is not about Adam Lambert, this is about two great guys, great musicians, half of the band we say we love and admire for about 40 years. Stop this childish story and let them do whathever they want and let people choose if they are gonna pay for it or not. As regarding the other 3 as supporting players it is true. Reality is that Freddie could've fired all three band members and replaced them and remained successful as Queen because he was the face of Queen. After those first four hits he could been Queen with any rhythm section and lead guitarist). BTW Freddie's the one that convinced Brian & Roger to have another go with the band thing (Brian might be a physics teacher today instead of a rock icon, roger might be homeless or a bag boy at a grocery store). Freddie's the one who came up with the name and logo. He's the one that wrote their first four international hits. The other three owe their careers to Freddie Mercury. Yes the other band members wrote some hits and are very important but Freddie sang them hits. Not a single Queen song sung by Brian or Roger hit the charts until "No One But You" (post Freddie). The idea that Queen was 25% freddie 25% Brian 25% Roger 25% John is just "political correctness" when it comes to the band. For them to limp along as Queen + is plain ludicrous. There's is no Queen without Freddie. There still could have been Queen if any of the other 3 were dropped. No other great band has done this shameful practice of Band + after their lead singer died.. Other band members either form a new band (Foo Fighters for example) or just "man up" and keep using the name despite new singers (Journey...though they suck now and sucked then). |
notimeforlosers 20.04.2012 14:19 |
YetAnotherFreddieFan wrote: Reality is that Freddie could've fired all three band members and replaced them and remained successful as Queen because he was the face of Queen. After those first four hits he could been Queen with any rhythm section and lead guitarist).I could just laugh about this. But I'm so annoyed at radical people that I didn't think it was even funny. Maybe you're right. And your proven point could be Mr. Bad Guy album (Freddie with any rhythm section and a lead guitarist) as a huge and worldwide sucess. Haha By the way, I Was Born to Love You and Made in Heaven are waaay better in Freddie's solo album than reworked by B+R+J, aren't they? Peace! |
Queen4ever13 20.04.2012 14:31 |
YetAnotherFreddieFan wrote:Don't even pay any mind, some people feel everyone should just LOVE any Queen spinoff. If everyone would truly admit to themselves including the remaining members, they could see clearly your summation is 100% true. Freddie didn't want it to be viewed as such but it is what it is. Any other individuals might not have blended as well. There will never be another Queen as it was.notimeforlosers wrote:Listen, moron, nobody is preventing you for choosing. This is a forum where different people express often divergent opinions. As regarding the other 3 as supporting players it is true. Reality is that Freddie could've fired all three band members and replaced them and remained successful as Queen because he was the face of Queen. After those first four hits he could been Queen with any rhythm section and lead guitarist). BTW Freddie's the one that convinced Brian & Roger to have another go with the band thing (Brian might be a physics teacher today instead of a rock icon, roger might be homeless or a bag boy at a grocery store). Freddie's the one who came up with the name and logo. He's the one that wrote their first four international hits. The other three owe their careers to Freddie Mercury. Yes the other band members wrote some hits and are very important but Freddie sang them hits. Not a single Queen song sung by Brian or Roger hit the charts until "No One But You" (post Freddie). The idea that Queen was 25% freddie 25% Brian 25% Roger 25% John is just "political correctness" when it comes to the band. For them to limp along as Queen + is plain ludicrous. There's is no Queen without Freddie. There still could have been Queen if any of the other 3 were dropped. No other great band has done this shameful practice of Band + after their lead singer died.. Other band members either form a new band (Foo Fighters for example) or just "man up" and keep using the name despite new singers (Journey...though they suck now and sucked then).I will and have completely ignored anything with the name "Queen" that doesn't include Freddie Mercury. Not one dime have I spent on non-Freddie Queen except for "No One But You" as a download. Freddie is why I love Queen. The others were just good supporting cast membersRight. So get lost to a Freddie Mercury forum, 'cause this is a Queen forum. And Queen are Brian, John, Roger and Freddie. And don't forget to throw away your non-Freddie Queen singles, buddy! Regarding the concert, this is not about Adam Lambert, this is about two great guys, great musicians, half of the band we say we love and admire for about 40 years. Stop this childish story and let them do whathever they want and let people choose if they are gonna pay for it or not. |
Vocal harmony 20.04.2012 17:30 |
Yes there will never be a Queen, as they were. But if BM and RT formed a new band and went on to perform some of the old Queen hits they would be hounded by the press for being Queen wanna be's. They perform as Queen+ because their is no singer who can replace Freddie. And that seems to be the biggest contention amongst those who don't agree with what they're doing. "no one can replace Freddie" the point is no singer has actually joined the band as a permanent replacement. Their are many bands who have replaced different members and carried on. At the end of the day if you don't like what's happening don't buy a ticket. And as for boycotting the show,yeah boycott all you want, it makes no difference to anyone because the two Hammersmith dates have sold out. |
YAFF 20.04.2012 17:56 |
Queen4ever13 wrote:Any band with a Freddie Mercury was bound to succeed eventually. Sure, the chemistry was definitely right with the four. They were a great team...perhaps the best of all possible combos....but Freddie really was THE Queen. They know this deep inside. You notice the DVD/CD covers of Wembley & Montreal? What do you see? An iconic pose by Freddie. It's simply impossible to picture Queen without Freddie. I'm not saying they should have retired as musicians but they should have either continued as Queen with 2 new members if they dared or just started a new band. But their solo careers fizzled out so they turned to desperation by going out as Queen + so they deserve the scornYetAnotherFreddieFan wrote:Don't even pay any mind, some people feel everyone should just LOVE any Queen spinoff. If everyone would truly admit to themselves including the remaining members, they could see clearly your summation is 100% true. Freddie didn't want it to be viewed as such but it is what it is. Any other individuals might not have blended as well. There will never be another Queen as it was.notimeforlosers wrote:Listen, moron, nobody is preventing you for choosing. This is a forum where different people express often divergent opinions. As regarding the other 3 as supporting players it is true. Reality is that Freddie could've fired all three band members and replaced them and remained successful as Queen because he was the face of Queen. After those first four hits he could been Queen with any rhythm section and lead guitarist). BTW Freddie's the one that convinced Brian & Roger to have another go with the band thing (Brian might be a physics teacher today instead of a rock icon, roger might be homeless or a bag boy at a grocery store). Freddie's the one who came up with the name and logo. He's the one that wrote their first four international hits. The other three owe their careers to Freddie Mercury. Yes the other band members wrote some hits and are very important but Freddie sang them hits. Not a single Queen song sung by Brian or Roger hit the charts until "No One But You" (post Freddie). The idea that Queen was 25% freddie 25% Brian 25% Roger 25% John is just "political correctness" when it comes to the band. For them to limp along as Queen + is plain ludicrous. There's is no Queen without Freddie. There still could have been Queen if any of the other 3 were dropped. No other great band has done this shameful practice of Band + after their lead singer died.. Other band members either form a new band (Foo Fighters for example) or just "man up" and keep using the name despite new singers (Journey...though they suck now and sucked then).I will and have completely ignored anything with the name "Queen" that doesn't include Freddie Mercury. Not one dime have I spent on non-Freddie Queen except for "No One But You" as a download. Freddie is why I love Queen. The others were just good supporting cast membersRight. So get lost to a Freddie Mercury forum, 'cause this is a Queen forum. And Queen are Brian, John, Roger and Freddie. And don't forget to throw away your non-Freddie Queen singles, buddy! Regarding the concert, this is not about Adam Lambert, this is about two great guys, great musicians, half of the band we say we love and admire for about 40 years. Stop this childish story and let them do whathever they want and let people choose if they are gonna pay for it or not. |
mooghead 21.04.2012 15:11 |
Wow. First time I have visited the thread I actually started for a while. I stick with what I say. If you turn up to this monstrosity it will only encourage them and think that people actually want to see this crap. For as long as people do that they will not dig into the archives and give Queen fans what they need. Am I being stupid? Why would you release an 'Anthology' if people are still interested in your current 'work'. Even if it is with some stupid TV drag artist. THINK!!! durr.... |
mooghead 21.04.2012 15:16 |
Brian May and Roger Taylor only think about MONEY. Everyone else in the world does not exist. Let them think a 3x double cd of outtakes/demo's.. whatever, will make them a million and they will do it. Turning up to the X Factor with a twat singing will boost their (already stupidly massive) ego's. JUST SAY NO!!!!!! |
deleted user 21.04.2012 19:12 |
A 'live' Queen show without Freddie? 'Don't be ridiculous''! For me, No Freddie + No John = No Queen. Perhaps Brian and Roger should perform as 'Smile'. |
brENsKi 22.04.2012 04:41 |
i don't think a boycott will be necessary let's wait n see how this shit circus pans out |
tomchristie22 23.04.2012 09:00 |
Hopefully the Sonisphere failure has at least given them some idea that people aren't at all interested in their recent collaborations |
Queen4ever13 23.04.2012 09:15 |
Noone will ever recognize Brian and Roger as anything else but Queen. It is engrained in their very being and even if they tried calling themselves something else, no matter they are and forever will be Queen. Their choice of who joins them leaves a lot to be desired. Sure they are influenced by their management for whatever reason the "Queen machine" has in driving them in that direction. The money gets distributed a lot of ways that we're not even aware of, Queen is a big business. |
brENsKi 23.04.2012 10:23 |
hope you don't mind me cut n pasting from two separate replies but here goes
Vocal harmony wrote:The ticket price of most gigs has little or nothing to do with the band. The promoter hires the venue, pays for ticketing and advertising costs and usually sets the ticket price. The promoter pays the artist what ever their agreed fee is. The ticket price is usually a reflection of the promoters belief in the band being able to sellout at the highest possible price.i agree with you 100% on this. people need to get an understanding of how these things work. only a couple of years ago the best tickets for Killers and AC/DC were on sale at £200 !!!!, it's the promotoers knowing what they can get away with. entertainment has always been about those who can afford it, those who can't afford to go are of no interest to anyone. Vocal harmony wrote: Yes there will never be a Queen, as they were. But if BM and RT formed a new band and went on to perform some of the old Queen hits they would be hounded by the press for being Queen wanna be's..sorry but no way. other artists/bands have "moved on" and continue to perform their old songs. this has been particularly evident with the offshoot bands of Deep Purple - who all moved on by doing various songs like smoke, mistreated, burn etc, also applies to pink floyd's gilmour and waters - who both perform floyd songs solo. loads and loads of artists rely on their "previous career" for a live set - there's no shame in it and it is quite refreshing to see old songs getting a new arrnagement - even Dr May did it on his solo tour in the 90s. Vocal harmony wrote: They perform as Queen+ because their is no singer who can replace Freddie. And that seems to be the biggest contention amongst those who don't agree with what they're doing. "no one can replace Freddie" the point is no singer has actually joined the band as a permanent replacement. Their are many bands who have replaced different members and carried on.again, i disagree on this one too. i think they perform as Queen+ because the queen name is their only real earner. you and i know that if they use any other name they have no market. |
Vocal harmony 24.04.2012 11:07 |
I think a lot of the augment of whether or not BM and RT should continue using the Queen name has come about because Queen were one of the very few bands whose line up remained intact from the first album to the last. If they had gone through the number of members that say, Whitesnake or Rainbow had, or any number of bands that could be listed then the issue of them touring now with only half the original line up wouldn't be viewed as a problem. |
mooghead 24.04.2012 16:03 |
Yay! Could this be my first 100+ thread? Erm... changed my mind, love Adam Lambert, gonna buy 50 tickets and give them to all my friends. |
Lamebert whoehahaha 29.12.2018 01:49 |
Mooghead = dickhead Absolutely the biggest dumb cunt on this forum |
roddanrocks 02.01.2019 22:14 |
Keep rockin' the world BM and RT. They still rule the world without Freddie and Adam is doing an excellent job!! :-) Why stop now, when a new generation after the BR movie has connected to their fantastic music an legacy... |
RS_Protos 03.01.2019 15:13 |
Keep rockin' the cosmos! ummm, whatever.................. |
spiralstatic 04.01.2019 08:36 |
I've never had the slightest interest in seeing Queen with any other singer. However, Roger and Brian can do as they wish. As musicians, I would have thought that they'd have wanted to continue to create new music though. After losing someone close to you, I can't imagine it could feel anything other than sad to still now, over 30 years since their last live show with all of Queen, still be playing the same old hits, and with not-Freddie singing. They must think of him very time they do it, no? He must be there, like a ghost. I would have thought when Freddie died, they'd also have feared the musically creative part of their lives may be over? But then they seem to have chosen to not be creative together anymore? I feel like John Deacon retiring was at least partly (a large part) related to the rest of Queen's decision to continue with new singers? Surely there would have been an option to continue as a three-piece and actually make new music? Might John have been interested in continuing in that way? I've no idea. They then could have kept Queen, or chosen a new name, and say, used Roger's voice - he's a great singer and his voice suggests a different kind of music. That they didn't seems to suggest to me that there is ego in this. Instead they tried solo careers. And Queen are not just Freddie, but Queen without Freddie - as both a frontman and as a songwriter would, I presume have been unlikely to be anywhere near as successful, which would have been maybe more of an ego hit than the guys were prepared to take? If their solo careers aren't hugely successful, well at least they have full individual control and they never were massively successful, but if their music as a group without Freddie was not successful, that's more of a hit to them maybe? And maybe some would have hated this even more than Queen playing with new singers?! For me, the mere idea of watching Queen with another singer - it gives me a skin-crawling, uncomfortable yawning in my insides. There is just something about it which to me feels wrong and sad and, I guess disrespectful. There's something about it which is definitely not about the music or about creativity. So even though I guess it's the closest chance I'd ever have to see actual Queen live, I just can't care to see it and the mere idea of it makes me feel sad and deeply uncomfortable. But if others enjoy it, fine - go for it. I also think if another band member had died, not Freddie, that Freddie would have liked nothing worse than to still be playing the same old hits 30 years later. Whatever he had done: with the end or otherwise, I'm pretty sure he'd have continued to be creative. But yes, to imagine that scenario, it does feel hard to not imagine Queen continuing with a replacement, but writing new music... but maybe Freddie would have stepped away and worked in another area musically entirely. Maybe continuing from what he'd done with Barcelona, say. After all - had he survived to experience that at the '92 Olympics, who knows what may have followed. |