| Doga 22.11.2012 16:11 |
link link The first image come from the Freddie Mercury Video Collection, and is taken from DoRo team during Hammer To Fall. The second is taken by the gigant screen at the same moment, They are very similar but slighty different, and if the angles are different it must mean that QP don't have the recorded material from Knebworth, just the DoRo film. Of course they still have the audio of the gig. |
| Kacio 22.11.2012 18:30 |
This isn't a shot from the camera DoRo In my opinion they have this video of full concert ;) |
| Ozz 22.11.2012 19:52 |
opinion based in zero facts? It's pretty clear that they had enough chances in the past to make money around this concert in case they had it. and they didn't. That's enough proof to me. Knebworth don't exist. I Agree |
| The Real Wizard 22.11.2012 21:03 |
The topic starter has made the case pretty clear. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that they don't have the complete Knebworth show in the archives. Time to move on from this one. |
| john bodega 22.11.2012 22:24 |
"This isn't a shot from the camera DoRo In my opinion they have this video of full concert ;)" I would hate to be your doctor. On the day that I diagnose you with diabetes, with all of your charts laid out before me, trying to do you a Goddamn favour - and with that dumb wink you assure me that you don't have diabetes at all. There is no evidence of any Knebworth tape. Splash some cold water in your face. |
| MERQRY 22.11.2012 22:45 |
The Real Wizard wrote: The topic starter has made the case pretty clear. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that they don't have the complete Knebworth show in the archives. Time to move on from this one.Say what you (or me or whoever) say, SADLY, the Knebworth park conspiracy tehory will go on (forever and ever)... I don't know what people doesn't understand of "Knebworth parks wasn't recorded (pro), we only have the ultra know audience recording and SOME documentary footage filmed by DoRo"... By the way we don't need any gig of the Magic Tour anymore! Release 70's concerts, more 80's gigs, or NOTHING, but please don't release NOTHING more from magic tour... till Budapest i was relatively happy, more is abuse. |
| Kacio 23.11.2012 05:36 |
Zebonka12 wrote: "This isn't a shot from the camera DoRo In my opinion they have this video of full concert ;)" I would hate to be your doctor. On the day that I diagnose you with diabetes, with all of your charts laid out before me, trying to do you a Goddamn favour - and with that dumb wink you assure me that you don't have diabetes at all. There is no evidence of any Knebworth tape. Splash some cold water in your face. bullshit Can see what your level of culture ... very low I remember when they said that there is Friday Night At Wembley but only in part, came in 2011 and the Friday edition of Wembley. So stop believing in what he says Maylor... |
| Doga 23.11.2012 06:19 |
''they said that there is Friday Night At Wembley but only in part'' And is true, they only have a part of the camera angles, the second night they use more cameras. I like a lot the Magic Tour too, but the fact is they only film Budapest, the second night in Wembley, and the first as a test for the camera issues. That's a lot for the standars of the time. Look at Pink Floyd or a Led Zepellin for that matters. On the bright side, Queen record a lot of gigs in audio from the Magic Tour, all of the UK leg and some from the rest of Europe, and they released three of them, plus Mannheim on the radio, and almost the half of Knebworth in Live Magic. That is a lot of material. Now i like to hear some of the 70' stuff. They have wonderful recordings from that time (in video and audio, but audio is far more important) |
| john bodega 23.11.2012 08:55 |
"bullshit Can see what your level of culture ... very low" ??? All I said is that there is no evidence of a full Knebworth video. Put the jawbone down for a second and think about what that entails. It just means that there is nothing available to us fans, and nothing that's been said by QPL, that would indicate that such a tape exists. I worded that part very carefully, by the way, just so that you wouldn't get confused by what I meant. I deliberately left room for the possibility that a tape 'might' exist, somewhere, but that there is no evidence for it in sight. You're the uncultured one here, sunshine. I'm doing you a favour by trying to get you to snap out of your fantastic delusions about a lost Queen tape that you'll never get to see, and you didn't even say thanks. |
| john bodega 23.11.2012 09:00 |
"I remember when they said that there is Friday Night At Wembley but only in part" I think you may be confused here. The situation with the Friday show is that it exists 'as is'. Multiple angles were not recorded and preserved - it's just the edit as it was. Saturday night, on the other hand, exists as separate angles of video footage. They have the material to re-edit the show if they so wished. Brian was under the impression (some years ago) that Knebworth was in a similar state - that the show was there in the archives, but not as multiple angles. He has since recanted and said that it's not there after all. Now, you can say "he's lying!", but you need something to back that up. And you have nothing. Telling me I'm uncultured won't prove your point - stop blaming the messenger, here. |
| madmetaltom 23.11.2012 09:41 |
link Where did this come from then? it does look like the bootleg video |
| Doga 23.11.2012 10:30 |
From the Freddie Mercury Video Collection, the last clip, In My Defence (version 2000) link 2:38 And a personal opinion, having three magic shows in great quality, why don't move on? The two nights on Earl's Court seems more interesting to me, Rainbow, Houston, Hammy 79, Japan 85 or Rock In Rio are another great recorded gigs. Why this interest in Knebworth? |
| kdj2hot 23.11.2012 10:59 |
Who cares. What the hell does it accomplish if they do or dont have the confert this entire discussion is stupid. |
| pittrek 23.11.2012 11:44 |
These 2 pics are interesting. If you compare them, they are actually IDENTICAL. Just watch the bottom of the pic, especially Freddie's fist. BUT .... check very carefully this video : link end check the monitor at the right bottom corner. The video, which was "broadcast" to the Technovision screen, zooms up slowly. The DoRo footage shows the same scene from the same angle, but it DOES NOT ZOOM UP. I personally think that there were simply 2 cameras standing extremely close together (or behind each other), one of them was a 35mm DoRo camera, the other one was a video camera broadcasting the show to the screen |
| john bodega 23.11.2012 11:45 |
"Where did this come from then? it does look like the bootleg video" It was established (years ago, in fact) that this frame is from a different viewpoint than the video camera being used for the big screen. It only looks like the bootleg video in the most utterly superficial sense. Freddie is pulling the same pose, in the same performance, from a similar (read : not identical) perspective. Aside from the different perspective, the dead giveaway in the jpg you're linking to is the quality of the picture. A lot of videotape'd gigs that have made it to DVD (think Led Zeppelin at Knebworth or even the Friday Wembley show from Queen) have a rather ugly horizontal banding artifacting going for them. It's not omnipresent as such, but it's quite noticeable. I haven't seen this clip of Freddie in motion, but it looks like it could be from a film source. Doro were using film cameras that day. Possibly a Doro clip - what is certain is that it is *not* a still from the big screen feed. Can we put this to bed now? I don't like bursting anyones bubbles but this was already sorted out literally *years* ago. |
| john bodega 23.11.2012 11:46 |
"The video, which was "broadcast" to the Technovision screen, zooms up slowly. The DoRo footage shows the same scene from the same angle, but it DOES NOT ZOOM UP" Bingo. |
| damiandaj 23.11.2012 12:11 |
Hello 3:34 Is it also DoRo camera? link |
| madmetaltom 23.11.2012 12:45 |
Doga wrote: From the Freddie Mercury Video Collection, the last clip, In My Defence (version 2000) link 2:38 And a personal opinion, having three magic shows in great quality, why don't move on? The two nights on Earl's Court seems more interesting to me, Rainbow, Houston, Hammy 79, Japan 85 or Rock In Rio are another great recorded gigs. Why this interest in Knebworth?Cool man i hope we get Earl's Court nights or just sum sort of dvd boxset like kissology 1 2 3 |
| matt z 23.11.2012 14:07 |
I suggest a simple solution: Rehire DoRo to work their compilation magic, and intersperse random video montages with SOME magic tour video in with the Knebworth Audio, throw a sticker on it saying "NEW!" Or "CONTAINS the last known footage from the final Queen concert" Wham bam...... All done! ;) (Alright.... -i'll leave do ro alone) |
| madmetaltom 23.11.2012 14:40 |
matt z wrote: I suggest a simple solution: Rehire DoRo to work their compilation magic, and intersperse random video montages with SOME magic tour video in with the Knebworth Audio, throw a sticker on it saying "NEW!" Or "CONTAINS the last known footage from the final Queen concert" Wham bam...... All done! ;) (Alright.... -i'll leave do ro alone)Sounds good ha ha |
| Doga 23.11.2012 17:22 |
Another fact here: link 26:00 This is an official documentary made by Queen Productions... and they are using the gigant screen footage! After said in the Soapbox they lost the transmission of Knebworth, if this is not a signal by Brian then i didn't know. At this point, 2012, we have all what we can have of the Magic Tour in video. It's time to enjoy it, and look for something new. |
| jones904 23.11.2012 17:40 |
They have it but compare it to other things |
| madmetaltom 23.11.2012 18:26 |
Doga wrote: Another fact here: link 26:00 This is an official documentary made by Queen Productions... and they are using the gigant screen footage! After said in the Soapbox they lost the transmission of Knebworth, if this is not a signal by Brian then i didn't know. At this point, 2012, we have all what we can have of the Magic Tour in video. It's time to enjoy it, and look for something new.That clip was not filmed by Queen Productions or doro Thats from the bootleg everyones got. |
| madmetaltom 23.11.2012 18:28 |
Doga wrote: Another fact here: link 26:00 This is an official documentary made by Queen Productions... and they are using the gigant screen footage! After said in the Soapbox they lost the transmission of Knebworth, if this is not a signal by Brian then i didn't know. At this point, 2012, we have all what we can have of the Magic Tour in video. It's time to enjoy it, and look for something new.Sorry matey i miss red your post. |
| fr1986 23.11.2012 19:58 |
a couple of months ago i asked of this old story. Were you the one who said that some days after brian said knebworth existed, all of a sudden that post was deleted??
Regarding first wembley, the exact words of the director who filmed this were "we recorded some of the previous night". "Some" means it is not complete, and if you are the director you should know better what is available and what is not.
The only way the sporadic knebworth posts can come to an end, will be when they release whatever they have available. Only then we will let it rest in peace.
Personally i think they had at some point the mix-tape without any possibility of choose the angles they wanted, but they either lost it, overtapped it or they lie about it. In the new documentary at 11:00 there is a pre-concert shot of the stage that i never saw before. I am quite sure is knebworth, since they have a huge slot for the big screen, but the place does not look at all like a stadium. They only used the screen at knebworth and at wembley.
I hope now they release houston or argentina.
Zebonka12 wrote: "I remember when they said that there is Friday Night At Wembley but only in part" I think you may be confused here. The situation with the Friday show is that it exists 'as is'. Multiple angles were not recorded and preserved - it's just the edit as it was. Saturday night, on the other hand, exists as separate angles of video footage. They have the material to re-edit the show if they so wished. Brian was under the impression (some years ago) that Knebworth was in a similar state - that the show was there in the archives, but not as multiple angles. He has since recanted and said that it's not there after all. Now, you can say "he's lying!", but you need something to back that up. And you have nothing. Telling me I'm uncultured won't prove your point - stop blaming the messenger, here. |
| The Real Wizard 23.11.2012 20:34 |
fr1986 wrote: a couple of months ago i asked of this old story. Were you the one who said that some days after brian said knebworth existed, all of a sudden that post was deleted??It's still there.. link |
| fr1986 23.11.2012 20:56 |
yes, i know about this one. The one i talk about is the one b4 this one where brian confirmed the existence of the knebworth recording on his soapbox. Then that post vanished. I remember reading about it here. Then this that you sent me was the "final" response to knebworth's existence.
tapeThe Real Wizard wrote:fr1986 wrote: a couple of months ago i asked of this old story. Were you the one who said that some days after brian said knebworth existed, all of a sudden that post was deleted??It's still there.. link |
| jones904 24.11.2012 00:44 |
It is a little known fact that you tube video addresses contain coded information relevent to the subject matterof the users videos, it varies as to how the code is put into the address. the one posted here showing knebworth footage has a code of the first 5 letters. QgIkSJnmYF0 deciphered it reads Q ueen g ood l iars k nebworth S show |
| Ale Solan 24.11.2012 03:54 |
jones904 wrote: It is a little known fact that you tube video addresses contain coded information relevent to the subject matterof the users videos, it varies as to how the code is put into the address. the one posted here showing knebworth footage has a code of the first 5 letters. QgIkSJnmYF0 deciphered it reads Q ueen g ood l iars k nebworth S showYou might be wrong... Q ueen g reedy l ads k now s nowboarding (?) |
| pittrek 24.11.2012 05:59 |
Zebonka12 wrote: "The video, which was "broadcast" to the Technovision screen, zooms up slowly. The DoRo footage shows the same scene from the same angle, but it DOES NOT ZOOM UP" Bingo.Of course I meant "PAN UP" |
| DLCVinnuendo 24.11.2012 07:00 |
knebworth is a good for release, but first, 70's concerts on dvd QP!!! |
| brunogorski 24.11.2012 21:23 |
They should release Wembley's second night and OH WAIT DON'T- |
| Bad Seed 25.11.2012 03:49 |
fr1986 wrote: yes, i know about this one. The one i talk about is the one b4 this one where brian confirmed the existence of the knebworth recording on his soapbox. Then that post vanished. I remember reading about it here. Then this that you sent me was the "final" response to knebworth's existence. tapeIt was me who mentioned the post which got deleted. It was around the time the Wembley DVD was released, someone asked about a knebworth release to which Brian replied that they had the footage which was fed to the screen but because of bad camera angles etc he didn't think it was suitable for release. If each camera had been recording individually like at Wembley then they could make a proper edit without the camera being focused mainly on Freddie.The Real Wizard wrote:fr1986 wrote: a couple of months ago i asked of this old story. Were you the one who said that some days after brian said knebworth existed, all of a sudden that post was deleted??It's still there.. link I wrote a rant of an email to him straight after reading saying fans are not bothered about 'beautiful camera angles' etc. He never replied and the post was taken down. I don't think they have it but I don't buy the nobody pressed record excuse, I think it's probably been lost many years ago. |
| brENsKi 25.11.2012 03:53 |
DLCVinnuendo wrote: knebworth is a good for release, but first, 70's concerts on dvd QP!!!no it isn't. it CAN'T be "good for release" if they don't have it |
| pittrek 25.11.2012 07:20 |
BTW Knebworth DOES exist, it's here :-) link |
| Doga 25.11.2012 08:06 |
Dammit, you're right! |
| mooghead 25.11.2012 10:10 |
I quite like this bit of film, where Freddie says 'Brian writes on the guitar and Roger writes on the erm.. drums'. He probably doesn't actually :-) |
| DLCVinnuendo 25.11.2012 11:00 |
brENsKi, if this exist, it's good, but not now, but there was a screen on the show, nothing of that screen was recorded? |
| fr1986 25.11.2012 16:27 |
ohh it was you!!
i see. I do think the same as yo do. Probably they lost the tape or it is damage and they think the best way to cover it up is sayin "it does not exist"
Bad Seed wrote:fr1986 wrote: yes, i know about this one. The one i talk about is the one b4 this one where brian confirmed the existence of the knebworth recording on his soapbox. Then that post vanished. I remember reading about it here. Then this that you sent me was the "final" response to knebworth's existence. tapeIt was me who mentioned the post which got deleted. It was around the time the Wembley DVD was released, someone asked about a knebworth release to which Brian replied that they had the footage which was fed to the screen but because of bad camera angles etc he didn't think it was suitable for release. If each camera had been recording individually like at Wembley then they could make a proper edit without the camera being focused mainly on Freddie. I wrote a rant of an email to him straight after reading saying fans are not bothered about 'beautiful camera angles' etc. He never replied and the post was taken down. I don't think they have it but I don't buy the nobody pressed record excuse, I think it's probably been lost many years ago.The Real Wizard wrote:fr1986 wrote: a couple of months ago i asked of this old story. Were you the one who said that some days after brian said knebworth existed, all of a sudden that post was deleted??It's still there.. link |
| brENsKi 25.11.2012 16:58 |
DLCVinnuendo wrote: brENsKi, if this exist, it's good, but not now, but there was a screen on the show, nothing of that screen was recorded?you need to follow the thread. it's already been confirmed on here - and by Brian May - that NOTHING from the screen was EVER recorded. Brian's exact words were "someone forgot to press the record button, so it's probably disappeared 20 light years into space by now" ordinarily i-d be calling you an idiot by now, but i'll let this one slide...maybe on a "lost in translation" merit actually, if you want someone to blame - blame me. i was there that day, and i clearly remember looking at the desk and seeing the lead from the tape machine hanging loose over the edge of the mixing desk...just as status quo left the stage...i coulda done something, but i thought "fuck it, if they can't be bothered to check things themselves...bollocks to em" better take that back...or else the interweb will find a weird way of blaming me, and the next thing i'll know is when a solicitor's letter from QPL arrives citing "music sabbotage". so just to clarify...I WAS NOWHERE NEAR THE CONSOLE...i was much much nearer the stage, and so couldn't have been responsible |
| DLCVinnuendo 25.11.2012 18:52 |
hummmmmmmmmm, ok brENsKi, i understand, there isn't nothing, really NOTHING of the screen, and seriously speaking, it's good, no "more" magic tour!!! :D |
| Doga 25.11.2012 21:18 |
No isn't good, Knebworth was a great concert, but i think for sure QP never record the gig in video. Anyway, we are very lucky in this aspect, Queen filmed a lot of gigs, some of them in great quality in audio and video, something very rare at the time, another great bands never did things like that. But as a fan, i still think Queen deserve a every gig filmed in 35 mm. Being realistic, we must thank God for have the video catalogue of Queen gigs and the slighty more extense catalogue of gigs recorded in audio, and hope that someday that material will see the light of day. |
| DLCVinnuendo 26.11.2012 06:58 |
There is a difference in them having recorded shows and recorded FULL shows, uncut, there are several shows in the archives of the QP, but complete, are few, saw it on a site at a time, and are 18 shows that the QP has completed shows. |
| Mr.QueenFan 26.11.2012 09:54 |
fr1986 wrote: ohh it was you!! i see. I do think the same as yo do. Probably they lost the tape or it is damage and they think the best way to cover it up is sayin "it does not exist"I remember that first post of Brian as well!Bad Seed wrote:fr1986 wrote: yes, i know about this one. The one i talk about is the one b4 this one where brian confirmed the existence of the knebworth recording on his soapbox. Then that post vanished. I remember reading about it here. Then this that you sent me was the "final" response to knebworth's existence. tapeIt was me who mentioned the post which got deleted. It was around the time the Wembley DVD was released, someone asked about a knebworth release to which Brian replied that they had the footage which was fed to the screen but because of bad camera angles etc he didn't think it was suitable for release. If each camera had been recording individually like at Wembley then they could make a proper edit without the camera being focused mainly on Freddie. I wrote a rant of an email to him straight after reading saying fans are not bothered about 'beautiful camera angles' etc. He never replied and the post was taken down. I don't think they have it but I don't buy the nobody pressed record excuse, I think it's probably been lost many years ago.The Real Wizard wrote:fr1986 wrote: a couple of months ago i asked of this old story. Were you the one who said that some days after brian said knebworth existed, all of a sudden that post was deleted??It's still there.. link I'm a huge fan of Knebworth and i remember him saying that they had the big screen feed in their archives. Later that post was deleted wich got me a little confused, but at that time Brian believed it was in the archives. Wich means that Brian thought that knebworth was taped (Big Screen feed) and in the archives until 2003. Wich he should! Because if he was working with what they called the best crew in the world for the Magic Tour, then Brian KNEW that it was recorded like it SHOULD be!! He didn't need to check. The only thing i believe in all this story is that it ISN'T in the archives NOW! But i believe it was recorded. ------------------------ P.S.- QZ forum doesn't let me re-arrange my post so i leave it like this. |
| brENsKi 26.11.2012 10:52 |
Mr. QueenFan: "I don't think they have it but I don't buy the nobody pressed record excuse, I think it's probably been lost many years ago." Mr. QueenFan :"The only thing i believe in all this story is that it ISN'T in the archives NOW! But i believe it was recorded" sorry. but NOT a fucking chance. think about it. In ALL this time.. the "no-one pressed record" story is so fucking well circulated throughout the queen community. Surely in 26 years this story has fed it's way back to someone who worked the console on the day....and surely that person would've by now come forward and said "no fucking fucking way am i taking the blame for this...i fucking-well DID press fucking record button" |
| The Real Wizard 26.11.2012 11:04 |
But since when have logic and rationality trumped out irrational beliefs? If they did, there would have been peace in the middle east centuries ago. |
| brENsKi 26.11.2012 11:57 |
aha. so basically by following your middle-east argument through the current unrest in the middle east began when Saladin defeated the Crusaders in 1179 and recaptured Palestine, the vanquished Christians had a premonition that some 807 years later a "tape op" WOULD press RECORD on the console and the final show of one Freddie Mercury would BE recorded for posterity. However, Anthony of Padua*** (on his deathbed) in 1231 predicted that the said "holy grail" of audio tapes would be lost forever when a stupid jumped up librarian would claim that "we don't have any such tape" in the queen archives. Consequently, this would prove beyond all doubt that Mr. QueenFan's claim that "they recorded it but it's now lost" to be absolute FACT. Unfortunately, the audio and video data spun its way across the cosmos and bounced back to earth in 2012 landing in the Holy Land - which someone mistook for a mortar shell...and it all kicked off all over again. *** St Anthony of Padua was canonized - one year after his death by Pope Gregory IX - who upon losing his car keys nominated him the Patron Saint of Lost Things |
| john bodega 26.11.2012 12:04 |
The 'nobody pressed record' anecdote is probably just code for 'we couldn't be arsed buying tape when we'd already recorded 2 nights of Wembley footage'. If tape machines and the necessary tape were onsite, then it would've been someone's job to record it. Someone would've been paid to run that side of things. Someone would've gotten a royal bollocking for not performing his duty! |
| pittrek 26.11.2012 12:26 |
A few logical questions : WHY would they hire a professional filming crew to film ANOTHER Magic Years concert, after they paid a huge amount of money to film 3 other Magic Tour concerts ? Don't forget that for them it was just another gig (only Freddie probably knew this is their last tour), and don't forget that the Knebworth gig was not planned, it was added quite late after so many fans were disappointed that they couldn't get tickets for any other UK show. Don't forget there were 2 other crews - one was consisting of a couple of camera operators who were just filming what was happening on stage, the other one (the DoRo team) was hired to shoot a DOCUMENTARY about the tour. The DoRo footage still exists, and we know they filmed at least the second half of the concert - clips of these songs appeared in various DoRo produced documentaries, TV shows and music videos - Is This The World We Created, Tutti Frutti, Bohemian Rhapsody, Hammer To Fall, Radio Ga Ga, We Are The Champions and God Save The Queen. The footage which was shown on the giant screen was luckily taped illegally by a fan - thank God - and that what we all have. But the sad thing is that that's all what Queen have, too :-( As you can see, they even used the bootleg footage for the new bonus on the Budapest video. Why would they use the audience recording if they had the complete pro-shot footage ? The BEST thing they could do : - go to the DoRo archives - get their boxes labelled as "Queen summer 1986" - clean the 35mm negatives, and scan them in at least 1080p - CORRECTLY catalogue everything (I STILL can't understand why they STILL mix up Wembley, Mannheim & Knebworth videos, even on the 2011 edition of Wembley, and on the 2011 & 2012 documentaries). Is it really such a problem to hire somebody who knows what (s)he's doing ? - get the soundboard multitracks out of the archive, make a new stereo & 5.1 mixes of Knebworth (no fixes or overdubs) - synchronize the Knebworth footage to the new mixes - release a 2CD + 1BD + book version of Knebworth, with the full concert on 2CDs, and all you have on Bluray But I doubt we will EVER get something like that, because it requires this company to invest some money. And that's not something they would like to do. We will probably get a newly re-edited Wembley. |
| jones904 26.11.2012 12:44 |
"Anyway, we are very lucky in this aspect, Queen filmed a lot of gigs, some of them in great quality in audio and video, something very rare at the time, another great bands never did things like that. " That isnt true at all i wish it was but queen didnt film anything hardly what about the stones they had documentary footage of them just sitting around drunk aswell as footage of them performing as teens way upto the present day marvelous early footage unlike queen who if anything probably only filmed concerts with very samish sets i hope i am wrong but i truly think i am not. plus unlike people like Bowie and Jagger, Queen never gave any social commentary conversations with incites into the times they were in,or their thoughts on things- instead they just asnswered questions about themselves. bowie and jagger obviously did that also, but it makes for a less well rounded social or pop culture commentary, and so historic impact, and leaves them seeming less relevent to pop and rock social history. This is untrue but it doesnt help that they didnt have any fly on the wall docs where they were followed like th stones were, and odd snippets of incite by them of the times they were in, were not captured for posterity. That is the sort of thing the cultural historians and those looking for voices for docs etc look for. Queen lacks that kind of thing and so they are not really given a voice outside their own importance to their rock business ventures and fans etc. That kind of thing helps you stick into the pop rock culture more. And there is no hope of Freddie being given the serious historic place he deserves for being a great composer and musician aswell as a great singer and frontman now. Especially now, by having a mere comic who appeals to 12 year old boys toilet humour, portraying him in his epitaphical biopic that will never be deleted. Anybody would think it was character assasination. Anybody SANE, and aware of cultural impact , that is. Queen are not SLADE and this is not the 1970s' and SBC cannot act Someone as culturally refined and aware as Freddie, would be appalled. Plus Jeremy Kapone's present fan base is young, european and American, while SB Cohen's is braindead and in rapid constant deteriation at both ends of the age scale. |
| brENsKi 26.11.2012 13:17 |
you're wrong about "there is no hope of Freddie being given the serious historic place he deserves for being a great composer and musician as well as a great singer and frontman now." Freddie already is acknowledged and respected the world over for ALL of the above. It's teh remaining member of Queen and what they've done since his demise that are damaging the "historic place" of the band you're correct about (but NOT in the way you think) "Queen are not SLADE and this is not the 1970s" absolutely. strangely enough, the fondness for Slade endures, due to the very British eccentricity and self-deprecating humour about them. Noddy Holder is well liked in the music and TV industry because of Slade never taking themselves too seriously. mind you, if you're so distraught about the movie....why don't YOU get some funding together and then YOU can make the biopic that you feel worthy of freddie? |
| jones904 26.11.2012 13:23 |
brENsKi wrote: why don't YOU get some funding together and then YOU can make the biopic that you feel worthy of freddie? you're wrong aboutAnybody who is seriously taking Freddie's awareness and apreciation of other peoples (artistic) talents aswell as their limitiations,into account as regards his attitude to standards in art in general , knows i am not wrong. |
| jones904 26.11.2012 13:31 |
Besides i know Jeremy Kapone can play both serious and camp comedic. He has also played a gay man (and seriously) . whereas Cohen is only able to do silly comedy based upon rhetorical absurdaties. Which are vocal based , and have nothing to do with the broad rangeof acting abiltites needed by those who can convey what it is, to be a person, by acting. Cohen works on scripts and he relies on absurd use of words he has written. But movies are not radio plays where only wordiness is important- this is cohens gift words so seeing this biopic isnt a cohen scripted comedy nor a radio play , or is it? it is lacking . |
| jones904 26.11.2012 13:41 |
Cohen will never achieve the conveyence of Freddie's stage agression, neither in the seventies nor in his macho moustached eighties guise. Cohen is weak, his characters so far, are weak ,his body demeaner is built for ridicule Jeremy kapone can be both male , very male , and effect a true natural character camp. He demonstrated that without any costume or makeup when he made the video for his band who also do loose comedy vids. He has also played a gay man (and seriously) in a movie. And Kapone in his movies has shown he can convey sexual machismo. H is in other words as an actor already far more suitable to attempt and achieve anything near Freddie's dualish public appearences,. in both body build, height and facial similarities he scores more points also. And he wont look like a 40 year old dried up prostitue. Freddie although outrageous was always a striking figure on stage even in the crazy 1970's. Sex appeal and gracefullness is a must. Kapone will wear Freddies costumes well and give that aura of campness and elegance visually in them. The camper as well as the harder darker rock outfits, without becoming the laughing stock that cohen will. And in light of his abilties of serious dramatic acting of at least some known standard and quantity , Kapone could hone down and convey Freddie, the private person also. and Cohen is so old and can never be macho on stage Kapone has the right skin and can ,could, will ,move and convey Freddie to a T. ....Cohen will just look rediculous. Now Freddie may have laughed and said he looked rediculous but he didnt mean the audience thought so, and as you know, we didnt think so, he was very striking! He wasn't just an old dried out forty year old prostitue with no depth, merely sending up, was he? Neither in 70's or 80's will Cohen deliver the person behind or the look upfront. he be terrible, a disaster, like a decrepid old lady dressed as Alice Cooper. That is what Cohen IS AND WILL BE , and it is just not good enough,. |
| jones904 26.11.2012 14:24 |
Do you think they care? Jobs for the boys one and all |
| jones904 26.11.2012 14:30 |
brENsKi wrote: you're wrong about "there is no hope of Freddie being given the serious historic place he deserves for being a great composer and musician as well as a great singer and frontman now." Freddie already is acknowledged and respected the world over for ALL of the above. It's teh remaining member of Queen and what they've done since his demise that are damaging the "historic place" of the band you're correct about (but NOT in the way you think) "Queen are not SLADE and this is not the 1970s" absolutely. strangely enough, the fondness for Slade endures, due to the very British eccentricity and self-deprecating humour about them. Noddy Holder is well liked in the music and TV industry because of Slade never taking themselves too seriously. mind you, if you're so distraught about the movie....why don't YOU get some funding together and then YOU can make the biopic that you feel worthy of freddie?He has not been given enough and as you say their present decisions are atrocious the biopic shall be the major lasting one. as to the biopic- I hope someone who is a producer and a director who actually does care, will go offer them some money and they take the bait and allow something to be made of the magnitude and respect Freddie's life story deserves. |
| Mr.QueenFan 26.11.2012 21:07 |
brENsKi wrote: Mr. QueenFan: "I don't think they have it but I don't buy the nobody pressed record excuse, I think it's probably been lost many years ago." Mr. QueenFan :"The only thing i believe in all this story is that it ISN'T in the archives NOW! But i believe it was recorded" sorry. but NOT a fucking chance. think about it. In ALL this time.. the "no-one pressed record" story is so fucking well circulated throughout the queen community. Surely in 26 years this story has fed it's way back to someone who worked the console on the day....and surely that person would've by now come forward and said "no fucking fucking way am i taking the blame for this...i fucking-well DID press fucking record button"Brensky, i only take credit for the second quote: ""The only thing i believe in all this story is that it ISN'T in the archives NOW! But i believe it was recorded". QZ forum didn't let me re-edit the post in the right way, so it's a little messed up, but i take full credit for the last text. Now, back to topic: I undesratnd what you're saying but this story doesn't have 26 years, and that's my point! I've read the first post from Brian, and he CLEARLY believed that it was in the archives. I'm glad others have read it, bacause it was later deleted, and even i was confused if i had mis-read it, but no! Brian believed in this and maybe only in 2006 he came with the theory nobody pressed the button. This means that until 2003 - 17 years after the event - the band members thought that it was recorded and in the archives. And by the way, the way Brian talked about it, i really got the impression he knew what he was talking about- like, that he had seen it! Now i understand that he could just be talking about screen feeds recordings in general, but that wasn't my first impression. This might be a hot topic in Queen comunity but probably the guys that were hired to do the job for the day didn't have nothing to do with Queen after that tour. And unless they spotted it in the day (wich doesn't seem to be the case), there's no way they could tell that someone forgot to press the button or to put a tape unless that person admited it- afterwards! If he did, he's either stupid ... or a man of honour! To the Real Wizard: I'm not being irrational here, in fact i'm being too racional. If you read the post by Zebonka, he's absolutely right about what he says. I am very carefull with words because i don't want to accuse someone of stealing it, but i don't buy the unprofessionalism excuse here neither. Maybe it was lost!- and let's leave it at that. The Band stated at the time that they had the best crew in the world working for them. This is what i'm thinking, and if someone knows better, please post it, because i'm not really shure how this things really work. I just know what i read here an there. Queen only used the Big screen for three shows: Wembley (2 nights) and Knebworth. I'm ASSUMING (and this is were i need help) that they had to hire a new company for that job. Mounting the screen, and puting everything in place for the band to use -video recorders, tapes, control room, and Technicians. At the time this was the biggest screen in the world and i'm shure that the technicians used were from the company who hired the screen and not someone from the Queen crew. This is different equipment and state of the art back in 86, so it needed specialists to look after it, and to work with it. I don't know how things are now, but back then i'm pretty shure that if you're gonna spend money on a screen like this and the equipment, then you're gonna recorded it. Zeppelin did it in 79. Queen did this in 86 at Wembley and if this guys were professionals like i believe they were, then they did it in Knebworth as well. And if in the control room were Video professionals, then in my opinion this guys don't forget to put tapes and press buttons. I'm only stating this because i agree that the Queen crew in 86 was possibly the best in the world - that stage wasn't an easy task, and the big screen only made things more dificult for engineers. A high level of professionalism here to make shure everything was in place. This is only my opinion and assumptions, but it's not definitelly irrational. I'm open to all possibilities, but for me to believe that someone "forgot" to put tapes and press a button, then i have to understand how they have planned that day, because as Zebonka says, someone should be in charge of that (the video equipment), and unless the person was multi-tasking i don't see how can someone forget something for an ENTIRE DAY, and never realize it. And if it wasn't recorded, then they only told the Boss (Brian) in 2003 after he went public with his thoughts on this subject. And if they were ABSOLUTELY shure that it wasn't recorded why did they tried to find it in the archives. Why look for something you KNOW doesn't exist in the first place? Answer: Because they believe that it was indeed recorded. So, i'm not saying they have the concert, because it's clear they don't. But, i'm entitled to disagree with someone who says that the concert wasn't recorded in the first place, yet tries to find it in the archives. |
| jones904 26.11.2012 22:02 |
The title is more really true than false Knebworth really doesnt exist, it has been wiped from time itself i can tell there are no waves coming from its place. It seems Queen have tried to make it dissapear from the time river.. |
| Ozz 28.11.2012 10:29 |
Mr.QueenFan: You are relying in the well known faulty memory of Brian. This is old history. Since Magic Years, Rare Live, Champions of the world to the last documentary there are NO TRACES of filmed Knebworth. pittrek is absolutely right: They had had planned filming Wembley and Budapest. Knebworth was a last minute gig. There are no recordings of any big screen in any of the other venues from the magic tour. It makes all the sense in the world. I'm sure is the reason is not necessarily that they didn't pressed the button but more something along the lines of them not wanting to film it at the time. We NOW know that knebworth was their last show. They didn't back then |
| Doga 28.11.2012 15:28 |
It could be much worse, at least they recoreded the audio of Knebworth. I can't see the tragedy in not filming a gig. For a band of musicians the audio is the important, not the visuals, and, if Queen Archivist is right they record seven or eight gigs of the Magic Tour. I think is enogh. |
| guild93 28.11.2012 16:30 |
I still think at the very least maybe a quarter of the show exists from Doro cameras (even if it is true that the screen feed was not recorded). We've seen short clips from Bo Rhap, Tutti Frutti and Hammer to Fall. I've been told those clips only go for a few seconds (so we're supposed to beleive the camera man set up his camera, filmed a few 3 second blocks here and there and kept hitting the pause button to cut out the rest of the songs). I'm not doubting the word of the person who told me that info as he may only be going by what he was told, but really ..... As it was noted earlier, we were told that only a few songs of the Fri Wembley show existed from 2003 onwards, then the whole show mysteriously appears. One of the key elements in a marketing a product can be a suprise annoucement, I'd not be at all suprised if they're keeping something under wraps for a future release (maybe box set of audio plus what is available of the video) like the recent Led Zep release. |
| pittrek 29.11.2012 00:41 |
guild93 wrote: We've seen short clips from Bo Rhap, Tutti Frutti and Hammer to Fall.Don't forget the full video of "Is This The World", parts of Ga Ga, clips of Champions and the almost full GSTQ |
| Doga 29.11.2012 08:47 |
It's funny, i found Pink Floyd fans have the same debate with a show of the Animals Tour, (A tour without recorded gigs) some of them claim that one show was filmed for a Tv Station, while other claims the opposite |
| Mr.QueenFan 29.11.2012 18:45 |
Ozz wrote: There are no recordings of any big screen in any of the other venues from the magic tour. It makes all the sense in the world.OK, now i am confused and before going further i need help in clarifying some things. This is what i think exists from the Wembley concerts. Friday concert: - The video feed recording + - The Gavin Taylor recording - incomplete- in preperation for the socond day. I thought that the DVD from the Friday show was a mixture between the two sources. Saturday Concert: -The Video screen recording + -The Gavin Taylor recording - complete show as seen on DVD. Is this right? If the Video feeds were not recorded from Wembley then there's no point for me in continue this discussion about Knebworth, but i allways got the impression that the Wembley feeds were recorded. |
| Doga 29.11.2012 20:32 |
It's a good point, but we need an expert in electronics/video to confirm that. I'm not sure if Wembley bigscreen recorded the video. For sure Gavin Taylor said he need to change the tapes in the cameras. They recorded the show in tapes and the bigscreen was for the audience. |
| pittrek 30.11.2012 00:40 |
What makes you think that the Wembley video feed was recorded ? I never heard about that |
| Bad Seed 30.11.2012 03:32 |
Ozz the screen was only used at Wembley & Knebworth, your post implies that it was used at all the shows? Whether the Wembley screen feed was recorded I don't know but screen feeds usually are. Both Houston & Earls Court are Queen examples, along with Hyde Park 2005. A lot of stuff on ac/dc's family jewels came from screen feeds, Zeppelin Earls Court was a screen feed and possibly Knebworth? Go onto YouTube and you'll find bootleg screen feeds from an a-z of rock bands. And pittrek I don't understand what you mean when you say why would they pay for a film crew? The film crew were there. |
| Mr.QueenFan 30.11.2012 10:42 |
pittrek wrote: What makes you think that the Wembley video feed was recorded ? I never heard about thatWell, years of reading Brian's soapbox and Queenzone. To be fair i can't emember the exact sources right now, because there were lots of contradicting things over the years and i'm not going to read everything again. But from memory, and my personal conclusions about what was writen, i got the impression that the Bonus DVD from the Wembley show - Friday- that what you see is what was seen on the big screen that night. I can be wrong about this, but didn't they told that the first night wasn't filmed completely by Gavin Taylor? If that's the case then they had to include footage from the feeds, and maybe that's the reason you get all those close up angles of freddie and the band, like you usually do on the big screen. Oh, and by the way i never thought that Gavin Taylor was responsable for the Big screen. I allways thought that it was a complete diferent crew for the job. Whether or not they were going to film the concert for posterior release, a crew needed to be in place to operate the Big Screen. This is why i'm insisting on Knebworth. If the Big Screen was there, then the crew that operated it in Wembley should be there too?! But even if it wasn't the same crew, everything else (technology) should be in place, and this guys do what they allways do to operate the "beast". Like i said before, certainly there must have been there specialists from the company who rented the Big screen in case something went wrong. What i'm trying to say is that not filming it isn't an option! I'm pretty shure that if you have the Big Screen and the technology behind it, then you record it. It doesn't matter if it's their last concert, a big concert or a small concert. This isn't the kind of thinking that goes on in these guys minds. You have a feed, a videorecorder, - you tape it! Even when Brian says that someone forgot to press the button, what he's really saying is that someone didn't follow the PROCEDURE for this cases. Because if it wasn't supposed to be recorded in the first place, then no one forgot anything! And this is what i don't agree with. Unless they knew from that day that it wasn't recorded as it should have been, then they can't say for shure that it wasn't! They don't find it in the archives, but that doesn't mean it wasn't recorded. And if the responsible for the feed that day were Doro, then there's a good chance of it being not laballed at their archives- "lost" with the other tapes form the 86 documentary. If this is a confusing topic thank Queen guys. Here's another one who spotted Brian words on this topic, Read the reply by NTL, 12 Aug 2006: link It reads: "Brian is now saying that no video exists because someone forgot to hook up a machine to record it, however a while back Brian mentioned on his site that they DO have the video but it was recorded direct from the screens which meant they could not do an edit, so was not good enough for release. Maybe they do have the video but dont want it released, so Brian is now putting a lid on it by saying it does not exist at all. " And from this: link diesel_79c asks, 03 Aug 07: "Hi Mr. Broks, Thanks for sharing your list! I have a question: "Is the Knebworth 86 only audio recording or also video recording?" Queen Archivist answer: diesel_79c ONLY the sound. No footage exists. Only footage of the big screens exists which is utterly boring, and some shots of the audience as I recall." I haven't seen the new Queen Documentary in Budapest where they used the audience shot, but it's clear that they don't have it, but the contradictions throughout the years were obvious. |
| Doga 30.11.2012 11:01 |
Maybe they recorded the videoscreen feed, maybe is the only they have... but maybe someone lost, destroy, forget... the materials through the years and now they don't have it. It could be a lots of maybes |
| cmsdrums 30.11.2012 11:05 |
Well Greg contradicts himself straight away - "no footage exists. Only footage of the big screens exists". And presumably he means 'footage FROM the big screens" - I don't want any footage "OF" a big screen with fuck all on it. I'm constantly amazed these days at the lack of grammatical skills of those who are published authors. Besides, how can footage from the big screens be "utterly boring" if it's of Queen in action at their very final gig?!? |
| Ozz 30.11.2012 11:45 |
I dont know how many big screens were used on the tour. But what i meant is that there's no clue about any recording from those screens anyway. Sorry i didn't explained myself well. >"What i'm trying to say is that not filming it isn't an option! I'm pretty shure that if you have the Big Screen and the technology behind it, then you record it" your reasoning is based on that assumption, and that assumption may be wrong. There's plenty of reasons why the real world sometimes dont work as intended. The contradictions you see, are based in hearsay , not primary sources, at least in Brian case, besides we KNOW that Brian has an awful memory and he has given in a number of occasions just wrong info. |
| pittrek 30.11.2012 12:48 |
cmsdrums wrote: Well Greg contradicts himself straight away - "no footage exists. Only footage of the big screens exists". And presumably he means 'footage FROM the big screens" - I don't want any footage "OF" a big screen with fuck all on it. I'm constantly amazed these days at the lack of grammatical skills of those who are published authors. Besides, how can footage from the big screens be "utterly boring" if it's of Queen in action at their very final gig?!?I'm pretty sure he was talking about the audience recording which we all have. They even used it in the latest release |
| Doga 30.11.2012 12:56 |
^ Yes, i think is a signal by Brian/Roger or QueenProductions saying: ''Sorry guys, this is all we have'' The same when they put Bohemian Rhapsody at Hyde Park in perfect condition. ''We have all this footage and this soundboard, and maybe one day...'' |
| jones904 30.11.2012 13:09 |
if it doesnt esist it is because they destroyed it |
| The Real Wizard 30.11.2012 15:24 |
jones904 wrote: if it doesnt esist it is because they destroyed itJust stop talking, please. You're wasting precious bandwidth. |
| guild93 10.12.2012 19:28 |
OK, now i am confused and before going further i need help in clarifying some things. This is what i think exists from the Wembley concerts. Friday concert: - The video feed recording + - The Gavin Taylor recording - incomplete- in preperation for the socond day. I thought that the DVD from the Friday show was a mixture between the two sources.This is a very good point, the Friday Wembley footage is all close-up shots which would indeed suggest it was the feed for the screen above the stage and not a camera rehersal for the 2nd night. So now were' suppose to beleive they (Star VIsion) recorded the Wembley screen feed but forgot to for Knebworth? hmmm |
| pittrek 11.12.2012 02:40 |
guild93 wrote:Well, that's wrong. The Friday DVD includes many helicopter shots, shots from behind the stage, shots from the audience perspective ... Pretty far from "all close-up shots". I have no reason to doubt that it was shot by Taylor's teamOK, now i am confused and before going further i need help in clarifying some things. This is what i think exists from the Wembley concerts. Friday concert: - The video feed recording + - The Gavin Taylor recording - incomplete- in preparation for the second day. I thought that the DVD from the Friday show was a mixture between the two sources.This is a very good point, the Friday Wembley footage is all close-up shots which would indeed suggest it was the feed for the screen above the stage and not a camera rehearsal for the 2nd night. So now were' suppose to believe they (Star Vision) recorded the Wembley screen feed but forgot to for Knebworth? hmm |
| emrabt 11.12.2012 05:36 |
There is no reason to doubt that Queen only had incomplete test footage in their archive from Friday either, the whole thing was probably kept in Gavin Taylor’s archive. You have to remember in the 10 or so years between the releases they could have bought it from him. Just because they find something "new" doesn't mean it was always in their archive and they were lying. |
| The Real Wizard 11.12.2012 10:56 |
emrabt wrote: Just because they find something "new" doesn't mean it was always in their archive and they were lying.Of course it does. How else would people defend their otherwise undefendable views? |
| brENsKi 11.12.2012 11:34 |
emrabt wrote: There is no reason to doubt that Queen only had incomplete test footage in their archive from Friday either, the whole thing was probably kept in Gavin Taylor’s archive. You have to remember in the 10 or so years between the releases they could have bought it from him. Just because they find something "new" doesn't mean it was always in their archive and they were lying.or, possibly (and it's just a suggestion), they hired an incompetent buffoon as an archivist? - who hadn't got a fucking iota of a microbe of a clue what was in the vaults. some might say "an absent-minded professor type...without the likeability" just a suggestion, mind :-) |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.12.2012 12:45 |
emrabt wrote: There is no reason to doubt that Queen only had incomplete test footage in their archive from Friday either, the whole thing was probably kept in Gavin Taylor’s archive. You have to remember in the 10 or so years between the releases they could have bought it from him. Just because they find something "new" doesn't mean it was always in their archive and they were lying.Here it is: link Gavin Taylor 1,25 sec: "When we shot wembley, we actually recorded SOME of the evening before..." Man, i know that English isn't my first language but if he says "some" then he isn't saying Whole, am i right? And they didn't have to buy nothing from him because those tapes belong to Queen not Gavin Taylor. I find it amusing the naívety of some of the answers here in Queenzone, feeling that they have to protect QP when QP are not being attacked. We're just discussing all possibilities, and i know i have lots of "maybes", but at least they are well documented. Every time i can, i will post a source, but i'm not to blame because of their inconsistencies over the years, or bullshiting as i like to call it. They were the ones who bullshited you in the first place and now you want to defend their bullshit? Or do you really believe that the 25 years edition of Wembley couldn't have been in 2003? They justified their incomplete first night show in wembley 2003 bonus with bullshit, and now that the complete set is out - the version that should have been in 2003- you try to find excuses to make it look that they did an honest mistake. They can release what they want, either in complete form or edited, i couldn't care less. I love this band! It's the bullshiting that i can't stand! They could have released the complete concert back in 2003, but they choose to release a minor product - in comparision (not that it is a bad product, because it isn't - at all!)- based on more bullshit. At least we now know that it's bullshit! They only had to say: Look, we have the full concert, but we choose to release an edited version so we can pack the DVD with more bonus, etc. Instead they choose to say that they have the incomplete concert, etc bla bla bla... Were they already waiting to cash in on the 25 years edition? Maybe, and i don't care. It's their business, i just don't like the lies and misdirections they throw at the fans- people who support them. I have found this from Brian soapbox- read entry 09 Aug 11 "LIVE AT WEMBLEY QUESTION": link Can anyone tell me what Brian means with ISO footage, because i don't understand what he means when he says : "...if you compare this issue with the handful of songs from the Friday night that were offered as a bonus on the 2003 DVD, that there is a small amount of ISO footage from Wembley 1..." Thanks in advance. |
| emrabt 11.12.2012 14:26 |
============== And they didn't have to buy nothing from him because those tapes belong to Queen not Gavin Taylor. ========= Tapes belong to whoever filmed the footage, the performance and sound belongs to queen. Who owns it would depend on the contract wording. Note i said "probably" and "doesn't mean they are lying". Remember what happened with montreal, perfect example. ISO is the individual camera feeds, so what he is saying is on the original Wembley DVD you have a newly edited set of angles from the footage available. In other words, these are the songs that had footage recorded from all the test cameras (which was 6 or 8 cameras). The new release is ALL the footage, recorded as a “live mix” on the day. Which I still say queen have only just acquired. It's the kind of thing Gavin Taylor would keep as an example of his work on that event, rather than a full set of all angles it's a live mixed of the finished product. (or as Mr.QueenFan has already said, probably screenfeed and multicameras.) ======== I find it amusing the naívety of some of the answers here in Queenzone, feeling that they have to protect QP when QP are not being attacked. We're just discussing all possibilities, and i know i have lots of "maybes". ==== No you are not "just discussing all possibilities" what i posted is a possibility, you somehow took it as an argument. What i say still stands, what they had in the archive in 2002, and what they had in 2011 could have changed, it doesn't mean they are lying. |
| Bad Seed 11.12.2012 14:37 |
Of course they had more (all in my opinion) of the footage in 2003 because snippets of the first night are all over in the bonus interviews/doc. |
| guild93 11.12.2012 16:51 |
Well, that's wrong. The Friday DVD includes many helicopter shots, shots from behind the stage, shots from the audience perspective ... Pretty far from "all close-up shots". I have no reason to doubt that it was shot by Taylor's teamI fully expect the helecopter shots were from the 2nd night and were just edited in to the first night to make it more viewer friendly. (plus a few other odds rushes). I still think it's at least 95% screen feed. |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.12.2012 19:00 |
emrabt wrote: ============== And they didn't have to buy nothing from him because those tapes belong to Queen not Gavin Taylor. ========= Tapes belong to whoever filmed the footage, the performance and sound belongs to queen. Who owns it would depend on the contract wording. Note i said "probably" and "doesn't mean they are lying". Remember what happened with montreal, perfect example. ISO is the individual camera feeds, so what he is saying is on the original Wembley DVD you have a newly edited set of angles from the footage available. In other words, these are the songs that had footage recorded from all the test cameras (which was 6 or 8 cameras). The new release is ALL the footage, recorded as a “live mix” on the day. Which I still say queen have only just acquired. It's the kind of thing Gavin Taylor would keep as an example of his work on that event, rather than a full set of all angles it's a live mixed of the finished product. (or as Mr.QueenFan has already said, probably screenfeed and multicameras.)Thanks for the clarification. That's why i said that the first night was a mix between screenfeed and multicameras. emrabt wrote: ======== I find it amusing the naívety of some of the answers here in Queenzone, feeling that they have to protect QP when QP are not being attacked. We're just discussing all possibilities, and i know i have lots of "maybes". ==== No you are not "just discussing all possibilities" what i posted is a possibility, you somehow took it as an argument. What i say still stands, what they had in the archive in 2002, and what they had in 2011 could have changed, it doesn't mean they are lying.First I feel i have to apologise to you about my condescending tone when i used the word naívety. I wasn't replying just to you, but i can understand that it wasn't the right tone. My sincere apologies! Now, back on topic: I agree with you that what they had in the archive in 2011 could have changed, i just don't agree with the fact that the full Friday concert wasn't avaiable in 2003. |
| The Real Wizard 11.12.2012 21:29 |
It remains possible that the audio or video of the first night was not intact in 2003. The things we'll never know.. But in the event that there were no quality issues, then indeed it was simply a way to make money on two DVD releases. So in this day and age of bit torrent, they shouldn't surprised when people will download disc 2 of the 2011 release because they don't feel like buying an identical disc 1 again. Excellent discussion. |
| emrabt 13.12.2012 01:15 |
First I feel i have to apologise to you about my condescending tone when i used the word naívety. I wasn't replying just to you, but i can understand that it wasn't the right tone. My sincere apologies! ============= no problem, don’t worry about it. =================== Now, back on topic: I agree with you that what they had in the archive in 2011 could have changed, i just don't agree with the fact that the full Friday concert wasn't avaiable in 2003. ==================== Yes it was probably a marketing ploy, but there is always a chance they didn't know about it. |
