| Mr.QueenFan 10.05.2015 17:00 |
Hello, fellow Queen fans, There's something that i wanted to ask this forum for quite a while. So, i have heard on the Portuguese radio (two times already!), when the DJ announces Innuendo, that John Deacon made a statement by asking not to appear in the video. I don't know if it was a political statement, but i got the idea that it was to show his dissatisfaction with something. Because i was not paying attention i never heard the beginning of the story, so i've missed what statement was John making when he decided not to have his image painted. Now, i like to think of myself as a guy who has some deep knolwedge on Queen, but i have never heard of this in the past (and i wasn't aware that he's not featured in the video!). So, i checked the video to see if the DJ was right, and he is right! link John Deacon is the only Queen member that wasn't animated with live footage or footage from other videos (the exception is the beginning of the video with "that" Breakthru footage, and his caricature picture on the Flamenco section - that also appears on the album "artistic" pictures). But the point still stands! During the performance of the song John is the only one who isn't there. And so, i'm assuming that DoRo only did that at someone's request. My first reaction was "No way! John? Ah, another rumour." But after i've watched the video to check John, i'm willing to accept that something happened for DoRo not to include him. So, my question is, why did John asked not to be in the video? Or, anyone knows why he isn't featured there? Thank you in advance. P.S- I hope i'm not the only one who wasn't aware of this :-) |
| musicland munich 10.05.2015 17:18 |
The Video was directed by Jerry Hibbert and Rudi Dolzal, so it wasn't a DORO standalone production. But it's an interesting observation / topic indeed. |
| Jedi Knight 10.05.2015 17:59 |
Well, in the video I can see John's footage from Wembley, I Want It All, Breakthru, The Invisible Man, Scandal and The Miracle videos. |
| Mr.QueenFan 10.05.2015 18:15 |
Jedi Knight wrote: Well, in the video I can see John's footage from Wembley, I Want It All, Breakthru, The Invisible Man, Scandal and The Miracle videos.Can you point out where in the video? -------------------------- Another thing i find very interesting is that they substituted John's face with the character they have created for him in the footage from the "I want it all" intro (you have to freeze the video to see it more clearly). This is very interesting! link |
| musicland munich 10.05.2015 18:19 |
^Yes he's right BUT they choosed a different Art (style) for him. Freddie,Bri and Rog were more human-like/ Cartoon and John is shown as a more surreal colored character |
| Jedi Knight 10.05.2015 18:27 |
Scandal The Invisible Man Breakthru Wembley The Miracle I Want It All |
| Mr.QueenFan 10.05.2015 18:52 |
Jedi Knight wrote: Scandal The Invisible Man Breakthru Wembley The Miracle I Want It AllThank you for the reply, Jedi Knight. But your pictures just prove the point that John isn't there. Of course that character playing bass is to represent John, but no parts of John's body were used to make that character. And that was the point i was making, because looking back i think there must be some truth to what the DJ said on the radio. |
| Mr.QueenFan 10.05.2015 19:04 |
musicland munich wrote: ^Yes he's right BUT they choosed a different Art (style) for him. Freddie,Bri and Rog were more human-like/ Cartoon and John is shown as a more surreal colored characterIt could be, and i think that is the general idea in the articles about the video. But what i think it's strange, now that i'm looking at it more closely, is that John's body wasn't used in any way. That is what i now found strange - after hearing the DJ on the radio. They used Freddie, Brian and Roger live performances, but they didn't use John's. I now believe that they went for that surreal colored character as a second option, and not what they had in mind in the beginning. Even though, it's a great video, i don't see a reason for it to be screened that way from the beginning, because it meant that one Queen member wouldn't be featured in the video, and i don't see anyone - but a Queen member - making that kind of decision to begin with. Maybe John really requested for them not to use him in the video. And i suppose the DJ must have heard the story somewhere. These guys in radios have access to information that sometimes don't make to the news. |
| Jedi Knight 10.05.2015 19:09 |
John IS in the video. The animators use John's movements in the same way they did with Freddie, Brian and Roger, but, as musicland munich says, they choosed a different art style for him. So it's not a different character, is just John in surrealistic style. |
| Doga 10.05.2015 21:20 |
John is in the Innuendo video. In Innuendo, the four members are represented in the style of great artists, Freddie was in the style of Da Vinci, and John was the Picasso's. Check this at 0:59: link Is John playing the bass! Now check El Guernica, Picasso's most famous paint. link |
| antiden 10.05.2015 21:26 |
Ha-ha, didn't you guys watch Champions Of The World documentary?? Jerry Hibbert clearly states the concept behind the images of Queen members in Innuendo video. Doga is absolutely right. |
| musicland munich 10.05.2015 22:14 |
antiden wrote: Ha-ha, didn't you guys watch Champions Of The World documentary?? Jerry Hibbert clearly states the concept behind the images of Queen members in Innuendo video. Doga is absolutely right.I've mentioned Jerry in my first post ! But I've watched COTW in its entire length... about 18 years ago...maybe I should consult a neurologist. |
| Wiley 10.05.2015 22:53 |
Well, yes, each Queen member is modeled after a painter's style: Freddie was Leonardo Da Vinci, Roger was Jackson Pollock (?), Brian was __??, and John was (very obviously) Picasso. End of the mystery. |
| Bohardy 11.05.2015 02:04 |
The DJ's got the wrong end of the stick, surely. It's well documented that the directors wanted to represent the four members of the band using a different artistic style for each. And for all four, you can clearly tell that existing footage was used as a basis for the animations. So to say that John 'isn't in the video', is absurd, as he's in the video to the same extent that the rest are. It's just that his animation is more extreme, and further removed from the original footage than is the case for the others. To complete the list of styles: Freddie - Da Vinci Brian - Victorian etchings Roger - Jackson Pollock John - Picasso |
| Rick 11.05.2015 04:42 |
If anyone had to be unrecognizable in the video, it had to be John, right? |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.05.2015 05:55 |
Bohardy wrote: The DJ's got the wrong end of the stick, surely. It's well documented that the directors wanted to represent the four members of the band using a different artistic style for each. And for all four, you can clearly tell that existing footage was used as a basis for the animations. So to say that John 'isn't in the video', is absurd, as he's in the video to the same extent that the rest are. It's just that his animation is more extreme, and further removed from the original footage than is the case for the others. To complete the list of styles: Freddie - Da Vinci Brian - Victorian etchings Roger - Jackson Pollock John - PicassoWell, i don't think it's absurd at all! You can look at it in any way you want, but the truth is John is the only one not featured in the video. The fact that footage was used for the animation process - wich i can agree with - doesn't mean he is in the video to the same extent that the rest or the members are. If you take a picture of Queen's characters and put it side by side, John's pic is the only one you don't recognize as being human. In fact, John's character is the only constant in the video. Freddie changes from Wembley to various videos, and Brian the same. With John's character you not only have a cartoon to portray him, you don't even see him in diferent environments like the other three - apart from the IWIA video intro (where he is with the other three). Brian's character appears in various environments where you can clearly spot the video where it came from. I'm not challenging the concept, but now that i look at it, it doesn't make sense that it ended up this way, because the artistic decision meant that ONLY one Queen member would not be recognizable - and i don't think the creators would take chances in creating a concept that could piss one of the Queen members off. In this case, John! Why didn't they choose Freddie? - Because Freddie is the face of Queen. Why didn't they choose Brian? - Because they wouldn't dare to pitch Brian something like this, where he would be unrecognizable. So, i don't think they would present it to Roger or John either. ALL Rock band members have egos and John isn't any different. The concept may have been there since the beginning - John being portrait in Picasso style - but even in Picasso's palete you could come up with something where John would be recognizable. There are lots of portraits that picasso painted that still had human characteristics in it. You could distort his face or body in picasso style and still recognize John. In this case, you have a mask with no one behind it. Very "inhuman" in a way. But i'm not complaining, i still think that this is one of the most brilliant, artistically videos EVER made. I want to thank everybody for the input. |
| Togg 11.05.2015 06:10 |
Nonesense John is clearly in there in the style of Picasso, and if you are aware of even a few of Picasso's paintings then you can see his influence in the animation. Either way John os most definately in the video throughout. No had they chosen Jackson Pollock then you would have struggled to see him as human... |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.05.2015 06:44 |
Togg wrote: Nonesense John is clearly in there in the style of Picasso, and if you are aware of even a few of Picasso's paintings then you can see his influence in the animation. Either way John os most definately in the video throughout. No had they chosen Jackson Pollock then you would have struggled to see him as human...Ok then, so take the bass from the picture and tell me one feature that identifies the character as being John. I know John wasn't blonde for example. I'm not challenging the Picasso style. In every animation video you see from rock bands, the members are easily identifiable from the features of the character (the Beatles for example you have hair, moustache, clothes, etc), in here i don't see one single feature that says it's John - unless you're going to point it out for me. And in that case i thank you! What i'm saying is that if you could take John's cartoon and placed it behind drums and tell it was Roger in Picasso style, then the cartoon doesn't represent John - it represents whoever they say it represents as long they say it's Picasso style (and in fact, the character is more look alike like Roger than John). You put the bass on his hands and it's John, you put him on drums and it's Roger. If this same cartoon was used to represent Brian they WOULD have to put hair on it -otherwise people wouldn't buy the concept, and if it represented Freddie they would have to make it believable too. In this video it's "just" a cartoon" playing bass, and that's why people buy the concept. It represents John, but it isn't John. |
| emrabt 11.05.2015 08:47 |
I understand what you are saying, They chose the style of piccaso because John didn't give them permission to use his likeness. |
| Viper 11.05.2015 09:09 |
Mr.QueenFan wrote: Hello, fellow Queen fans, There's something that i wanted to ask this forum for quite a while. So, i have heard on the Portuguese radio (two times already!), when the DJ announces Innuendo,I there! I'm portuguese. Which radio station are you talking about? |
| cmsdrums 11.05.2015 09:46 |
If we could have some kind of evidence that the DJ used as his thinking for this, that would be helpful. Seeing as John appeared in person in all the other later videos from the 'Innuendo' album, I'd actually be more willing to believe it's the opposite of what you say, and that John WANTED the 'Innuendo' video to feature them 'in the flesh', but the others refused a 'live action' shoot in favour of the artistic version we got. To be honest I don't believe this either, but to me it's more likely that your/the DJs version of events. |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.05.2015 10:18 |
emrabt wrote: I understand what you are saying, They chose the style of piccaso because John didn't give them permission to use his likeness.Bingo! That's exactely what i'm saying. Man, you should have replied earlier so i didn't have to write big posts :-) That's what i'm saying! It doesn't mean that the theory is correct, but if one looks at it more closely (after the DJ pointed out) then it becomes obvious that something isn't right about it. Of course i know about the "official" story about the video. The point of my thread wasn't to challenge that story, because that story is true, i just got the idea that it's incomplete. As you pointed out so beautifully, i think that they chose this style, because there wasn't any other option. They could have used Picasso style over John's footage and make John recognizable, but the Portuguese DJ said John refused to have his footage used for the video. I was just hoping that others may have heard this story before. One thing i'm sure is that this DJ in particular didn't invented it. He probably read it in one of his sources of information (rumour or not!). I mean, i'm pretty sure the majority of Queen fans never noticed the absence of John's in the video until someone pointed out. Thanks for the reply. |
| Viper 11.05.2015 10:23 |
On which radio station was it? I'm portuguese btw. |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.05.2015 10:36 |
cmsdrums wrote: If we could have some kind of evidence that the DJ used as his thinking for this, that would be helpful. .In fact, i wasn't looking for the evidence of it. I just wanted to know the first half of the story, because that's the thing i missed both times. I'm not expecting evidence of something that contradicts the "official" story. In case it exists, that's great! But for now, the only goal here is to know what was John's motivation to ask for not being included in the video (in case it happened this way). cmsdrums wrote: Seeing as John appeared in person in all the other later videos from the 'Innuendo' album, I'd actually be more willing to believe it's the opposite of what you say, and that John WANTED the 'Innuendo' video to feature them 'in the flesh', but the others refused a 'live action' shoot in favour of the artistic version we got. To be honest I don't believe this either, but to me it's more likely that your/the DJs version of events.WTF man, if you don't believe it why write it in the first place? So, according to you the guy that wanted to be in the video is the one not featured in the video!? At leat reply with something that makes sense!! I don't know why people get so defensive over this. The fact that John entered all other videos has nothing to do with this one in particular. This was a one-off decision. John was showing is dissatisfaction with something (maybe the Golf war (?) for example). If i knew why i wouldn't have opened this thread in the first place. This was just to let Queen fans know that there is this rumour going around about this issue in particular. It's something new to discuss. So, for me personally, the fact that there is an official story doesn't mean it's case closed. Not until i hear the first part of it - why did John asked for this? (in case it happened). Then i will reach my own conclusions, but i'm not naíve to expect official confirmation of this. What i can say after looking at the video with more attention, is something doesn't seem right with John's character compared with the other three. In fact, i don't believe any creative team in the world would pitch this character to a band member, when you could put him side by side with the other three and make it appear as a clown (as artistic as that is!). And that's why i still entertain the idea that they did what they were told to do, not what they thought would work, taking the risk of offending the member of one of the biggest bands in the world - Ever! |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.05.2015 10:40 |
Viper wrote: On which radio station was it? I'm portuguese btw.I will answer tomorrow, because i'll have to ask my brother. I heard it in his car, and i personally don't listen to radio. It was on a saturday afternoon - this year - in one of the big stations where they run the top's of different years in the past. For example, top 10 in the spring of 1991 in UK, Europe, USA. In this case in particular it only got my attention when the story was already in the middle. But i will ask my brother for the radio sation's name. |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.05.2015 10:41 |
P.S- To Viper. Last year i heard the exact same story, maybe it was the same show on the same radio. But it was before the Innuendo song came in. |
| musicland munich 11.05.2015 11:01 |
Hi, first I would suggest you to re-read the post of cmsdrums, it was a serious post, but you don't have to take it THAT seriously ;) There are tons of options why they decided to do such an video... At that point they may belived it would be Queens last Video because Fred was told by the Doctors that time was running out for him.... With the "Headlong" material they had a video in the back ( unreleased at that point) that shows the band in full flight... A simple lost in translation accident.... Actually Freddie didn't want to be filmed...but he changed his mind with "I'am going slightly mad" The statement could have been made for tactical reasons...to put Freddie out of the tabloid focus... and on and on... |
| Viper 11.05.2015 11:04 |
Mr.QueenFan wrote:Ok thx. M80 radio station uses to do those top lists.Viper wrote: On which radio station was it? I'm portuguese btw.I will answer tomorrow, because i'll have to ask my brother. I heard it in his car, and i personally don't listen to radio. It was on a saturday afternoon - this year - in one of the big stations where they run the top's of different years in the past. For example, top 10 in the spring of 1991 in UK, Europe, USA. In this case in particular it only got my attention when the story was already in the middle. But i will ask my brother for the radio sation's name. |
| master marathon runner 11.05.2015 13:14 |
.....i wouldn't regard anything a Portuguese DJ says. |
| RafaelS 11.05.2015 14:55 |
You would think that a guy who posted 1000 times would not say a rubbish as "John is not in the Innuendo video". Nonsense. I think the Portuguese DJ was only trying to play the guy well-connected or simply showing-off. |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.05.2015 15:37 |
master marathon runner wrote: .....i wouldn't regard anything a Portuguese DJ says.Why? Are you better than a Portuguese DJ? |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.05.2015 16:10 |
RafaelS wrote: You would think that a guy who posted 1000 times would not say a rubbish as "John is not in the Innuendo video". Nonsense. I think the Portuguese DJ was only trying to play the guy well-connected or simply showing-off.He wasn't trying to play the well-connected guy or showing-off at all. And i hope you're not saying that because he is Portuguese. Last time i checked you should be more concerned with reporters from the biggest economies in the world. Let's try to keep it civil. It's better for you to ask in what context the story was told, instead of making Innuendoes (npi). In this show in particular, let's say he is presenting the Top 10 in August 91 in UK. Before each song starts he gives a little story about the song in particular - things like it's place on the charts, number of weeks at the top, and numbers that are worth mentioning to put it in context. And if he has the information he gives littles things about the authors of the song, how the song came about, the inspiration behind the song, etc. So, this wasn't a show about Queen. Innuendo was just one of the songs he was playing and he happened to tell this story. The difference between me and the poster who said he doesn't trust a Portuguese DJ, is the fact that i know that he has told something that he got access to inside that radio station in his work as a reporter. It wasn't something he invented! And it probably came out of a UK source back at the time of the release of the song (rumour or not). These guys have access to information you can only dream of (official or not official). I'm pretty sure that until today the majority of Queen fans weren't aware that John wasn't featured in the video, let alone a DJ in Portugal who has better things to do than to look at things like this. And because this isn't something that one can catch at a first glance, specially when there is an official source, i'm willing to accept that there may be something to this rumour (considering everything i told throughout this thread). And that's the point of my post. John is represented, but John is not featured in the video! Before you call rubish to what i write, take a look to what YOU write, because unless you can tell me where John is in the video, you are the one writing rubbish things. We tend to believe what we're told. People are telling that John appears in the video (the perception they have according to what they were told), when in fact John is not in the video - and this is a fact! There is a cartoon painted in the style of Picasso. It's different than to say it's John painted in the style of picasso, where there isn't any feature in the cartoon (other than the bass) that identifies the cartoon as being John Deacon. You take that cartoon out of that video and present it to anyone, and i'm sure no one can identify it as being John Deacon. That cartoon is anyone you wanted it to be - in the style of Picasso! If you can't have a civil conversation don't bother posting here. You have lot's of other very interesting threads in Queenzone where you can give a positive input. |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.05.2015 16:24 |
musicland munich wrote: There are tons of options why they decided to do such an video...You are right about what you write and i appreciate your input. My intention is not to turn this into a negative thread. I rather stop posting here than to go that route again! Thanks again. |
| hobbit in Rhye 11.05.2015 16:33 |
That is an interesting story and observation Mr.QueenFan. John's cartoon images in Innuendo is kinda off when putting next to the other three. Picasso might just be an excuse (if he didn't want to show his face then Picasso is a perfect excuse). I personally think that the DJ didn't invent that story. If he invented it, he would say st like: "John was dissatisfied with st so he didn't want to show off in the video..." But in fact the DJ said clearly that "John made an statement as..." That doesn't sound like an invented story. Provided that you gave us the correct translation ^_^ I wish people with actual knowledge in this matter will break silence, and the people with no actual knowledge in the matter will debate in courtesy instead of putting you down right away. Don't let the negative comments get to you. You know people here ;) In the mean time, I give you the benefit of doubt. Will you write a letter to that DJ to ask? That would be the fastest way. |
| master marathon runner 11.05.2015 17:45 |
....i probably am actually. |
| Mr.QueenFan 11.05.2015 19:20 |
hobbit in Rhye wrote: I wish people with actual knowledge in this matter will break silence, and the people with no actual knowledge in the matter will debate in courtesy instead of putting you down right away. Don't let the negative comments get to you. You know people here ;) In the mean time, I give you the benefit of doubt. Will you write a letter to that DJ to ask? That would be the fastest way.Thanks for your kind words :-) Don't worry, i don't let the negative comments get to me, i can handle criticism very well. What i won't do anymore (at least i hope i remember this) is to fight other members in this forum. I did this in the past and it's a waste of time, specially on a Forum with no moderation. I just folowed your advice and i asked the DJ. I was able to find the show and his e-mail and will keep you guys posted in case he replies to me. What people don't understand in Queenzone is that the attitude doesn't get them anywhere. It only leads to ignorance! For example, if this site was moderated, i could have linked the DJ to this topic, and maybe he would feel inspired to participate. But because of some remarks here, i cannot do that, because he might feel offended and not willing to help (and rightly so!). And this kind of thing happens in every topic. You just cannot link anyone from the outside here, because of the disrespectfull content of some posts. But lack of moderation was what ruined this site. |
| musicland munich 11.05.2015 19:52 |
To be fair with you Mr.QueenFan, I 've searched a little bit on the internet. Yes, there are some Sites saying John "isn't" part of the "Innuendo" video...more or less.... But they all got one thing in common....no evidence just personal opinions. The thing is on my watch-list now, if something comes along I'll reply to this topic. |
| matt z 11.05.2015 23:18 |
Interesting topic that'll probably go nowhere! I'd always recognized the slates in the video from BREAKTHRU, SCANDAL, INVISIBLE MAN, WEMBLEY , I WANT IT ALL etc in that video as being John. The motions and framing of each shot (also the fact that the animation was drawn over each shot) seem to indicate he WAS inthefilm AS A CHARACTER. Strange to hear so many years later. ..a suggestion that he'd somehow refused to be a part in it. If there's some factual basis to it then. .... go figure. One of those questions you'd have to ask John about |
| cmsdrums 12.05.2015 02:22 |
If John had made a statement to say he didn't want to have his likeness, I'm amazed that this has never been quoted, reproduced, or widely reported before in the last 24 years. |
| emrabt 12.05.2015 02:36 |
While it's not impossible for an artist not to want their likeness used in something (it's happened before many times), I can't think of a why John would refuse permission in this case? If i was clutching at straws i would ask if anyone knows if he disliked the "kind of magic" cartoon of him, maybe he had visions of it being something like that? |
| Togg 12.05.2015 03:16 |
This is one of the more far fetched posts on Queenzone... seriously, what evidence is there of what you are saying? first you say John doesnt appear in the video, now your saying take the Bass away and it could be anyone.... really?? go look at the record breaking picasso sold yesterday, the style is very similar to the JD animation in the video, it represents Picasso's style who didn't paint humans in a photographic style unlike the other artists chosen. maybe Picasso is Johns favorite artist??? hoave you thought of that? you argument is a bit like saying Brian hates the purple as you never see him wearing it on stage... unless you have evidence it's just nonesense. John may very well collect Picasso's who knows? where is the evidence that he didnt want to be in the video? he was in others before and afterwards, neither Roger or John wanted to be in It's a Hard Life, now that IS documented, they hated it, but still went ahead and were in it. John's in innuendo and that's it. |
| Togg 12.05.2015 03:25 |
I also forgot to say waht about the images of him at the begining in B/W taken from the Breakthrough shoot, you can see his face... and then later the illustraion of him with the jester hat? again his face is shown... So not only is he in there in other ways other than just the picasso he appears in three different versions. |
| matt z 12.05.2015 03:55 |
Never thought I'd say this (unless I were a Viking or in Mordor*) but. .... I'm with Togg. Might make a good t-shirt as well. "I'm with Togg." nobody would get just what it means and it'd stand out. Seems like a new rumor to me. I'm just glad it serves to make John more fascinating. |
| Mr.QueenFan 12.05.2015 06:15 |
Togg wrote: So not only is he in there in other ways other than just the picasso he appears in three different versions.You are free to believe what you want, because nobody is forcing you to believe anything. And the things you are pointing out i already pointed it in my first post. So, maybe you should relax and read what i wrote more carefully before you think you are debunking my posts. I'm not challenging the artistic style, and i'm not saying that the rumour is true. When one joins in a middle of a conversation, it's a good thing to read what came before to not make the OP repeat himself. Online ethiquete? I will say it one last time - and people don't have to agree with me. Freddie, Brian and Roger appear in the video because their paintings were made over the frames of their respective clips, and they kept their identity coupled with the artistic side. They may have used John's frames to paint the Picasso, but they didn't kept anything John in the picture. No face, body, arms, legs, nothing! Therefore, John is the only one not appearing in the videos in the style of the other three. And this is what the supposed rumour is about. That, for some reason that i'm stll not aware of, he didn't gave the permission for the team to use his image in the same way of the other three. If you see John in the Picasso character, then good for you. That isn't going to change my view/perception that the character represents John, but it's not John! Two different things! I don't care if it's in the style of Picasso or Van Gogh. The other three i can see they're there. This has nothing to do if i believe if the rumour is true or not - i'm inclined to keep an open mind about it, but you and others don't have to. And Togg, since you already seem to know everything about Queen, from now on i'm going to pay close attention to your posts, wich i'm sure are full of interesting content about my favourite band. Thank you for your input. P.S.- Togg, you do know that Picasso had many styles, don't you? They could have used Picasso in a different style and still make it believable. Here's a picture of a young John Deacon portraited by Picasso (I kid you not!): link You're welcomed! P.P.S - I will stop post in this thread until something interesting comes up. I'll keep you guys posted in case the DJ answers my email. Cheers! |
| Togg 12.05.2015 07:16 |
Genius... This topic gets more random with every one of your posts, it has certainly made me laugh out loud which I guess is a good thing. Actually i'm very well aquainted with Picasso's work i studied the history of art while doing my degree. The fact that if you tried to paint a representation of Picasso's work you would have to chose one of his more well known pieces, in which he didn't chose to paint people in a life like way, had they chosen to use say the work you showed in the link nobody would have recognized it as Picasso... try looking up (in your own link, 'The musicians' i think you will find it clearly shows three people palying instruments none of which are painted in a life like manner. hence a well known artisting style. I did read your post fully, and frankly it's nonesense from start to finish, why start a rumour without ANY evidence, where are you getting the comment "he didn't gave the permission for the team to use his image" ? have you seen that somewhere? no, it's just making stuff up in your head. unless you can point to that as fact you might as well say Freddie told the band they had to stand on one leg while recording, it has as much a basis of truth... You can't claim he didnt give permission unless you know that? I the fan club magazine of the time, he wrote his letter, it says a "thank you all for buying Innuendo and making it a number 1 album as i speak and thank you too for making the innuendo single a hit" "As i write this we are on teh third day of our next video shoot for Day's of Our Lives, complete with banannas and gorillas" He didnt go on to mention anything about being in this one, or not being in the last one, in fact he seems very happy to be part of both... I'm all for people uncovering new FACTS about the band and i'm often delighted when they do, however start false rumours or making wild accusations such as you have done by saying he didnt give his permission is totally pointless and attention seeking. it's not true, it can't be backed up and not to mention one viewing of the video it is clearly incorrect... |
| master marathon runner 12.05.2015 07:25 |
Come on now Mr Queen fan, calm down and listen to Mr Togg's very valid comments. Stop being silly. |
| Martin Packer 12.05.2015 09:39 |
Bananas and gorillas in "Days Of Our Lives"? :-) |
| Ozz 12.05.2015 10:38 |
This HAS to be a troll post. Its a perfect example of how dissinformation can start a whole conspiracy theory. "John is the only one not appearing in the videos in the style of the other three." link That could be said for any of them. There's 4 distinct styles. Roger, and the jackson Pollock style, is not realistic either : link Except in the IWIA shot: link with the same mindset... does the NOTW cover imply that roger was splitting from Queen at the time? link and so on |
| noorie 12.05.2015 11:12 |
Mr.QueenFan wrote:That portrait could really could pass off as John, couldn't it? In that case, John is a 110 years old!Togg wrote: So not only is he in there in other ways other than just the picasso he appears in three different versions.P.S.- Togg, you do know that Picasso had many styles, don't you? They could have used Picasso in a different style and still make it believable. Here's a picture of a young John Deacon portraited by Picasso (I kid you not!): link You're welcomed! P.P.S - I will stop post in this thread until something interesting comes up. I'll keep you guys posted in case the DJ answers my email. Cheers! I kind of find the movements of the 'John' character in Innuendo to be very much like those of JD on stage. So perhaps he does not have JD's facial features, but to anybody familiar with Queen, the movement is unmistakable. Just my 2 bits. By the way, I was about 7 when I first saw the Innuendo video, and it scared me to death! Very sinister! |
| kosimodo 12.05.2015 14:53 |
Where is john when you need him? |
| winterspelt 12.05.2015 15:16 |
Interesting topic (to a certain degree) In terms of design, the "Picasso look" totally out of place, as the other band members are shown in a more "realistic" style. John could be drawn in a Van Gogh style and it would be a better choice. It may be that John really didnt wanted to appear on the video... Or may be just an artistic choice which can be taken in 2 ways: 1- They used a "non human" way because some animator loved Picasso, by a poor choice of style or because of John's "wishes to not be in the video" or 2- As an artistic and deliberated choice they used Picasso because John was always some kind of "outsider" within the band/music business. (I dont think this one is a valid reason but at the same time its as valid as any other reason posted in this topic!) In any way, unless John talks about it or someone can prove that John refusing to appear in the video, every single answer in this (and many other posts) will be just speculation (which is fun but most of the times leads to nowhere) |
| matt z 12.05.2015 15:45 |
Or perhaps because John always felt sub- human all his life? *(joking) |
| Togg 13.05.2015 02:48 |
Hey Matt what size are you? the T shirt is nearly ready... Sorry yes I meant to write 'Going slightly mad' not Days of Our Lives, moment of madness, must be this thread... Regarding the comment that they could have chosen another artist with a more realistic style, yes true, but I think the chosen artists were selected by the band, i'm fairly sure I read that in a fan club magazine at the time but I cant find it, I'm pretty sure Freddie wanted to be Da Vinci, because he had studied him at art school, Brian for obvious reasons was victorian etchings, after his passion for collecting victorian 3d photographs, i can only assume Roger and John selected a favorite artist, Pollock certainly represents Taylors 'style' and I guess John likes Picasso... |
| Costa86 13.05.2015 05:59 |
When the video was made, Brian, Roger and John were making an extra effort to stick together and make music, for Freddie's sake. It has been said several times that those last years were the closest Queen ever were. It makes no sense that John would get all weird and not want to be shown in the video. What exactly would he have said, "Listen, don't put me in the video - you can put some representation of me, which everyone will know is me, but don't use my actual real face"? It's absolutely ridiculous, I'm sorry. John is in the video, represented in a Picasso-style drawing. There's nothing more to it, and no evidence against this. |
| Togg 13.05.2015 08:05 |
Indeed, not to mention if it's a 'Statement' of what exactly? if you make a 'statement' don't you want it to be understaood by someone? if it's politcial then you stand up and are counted, if it's a protest then it's pretty obvious what the protest is about... but as you say this was probably one of the most cohesive times for the band, they supported each other and Freddie 100% to think he would have decided to refuse to be in a video is probably one of the most outlandish things I've heard for a long time. And as for the DJ in Portugal well i suspect he's just filling air or trying to make out he has some inside knowledge. Utter rubbish. |
| Ale Solan 13.05.2015 14:40 |
I consider this stupid thread closed for good. |
| Mr.QueenFan 13.05.2015 15:05 |
The ONLY reason you people are aware of the concept of the Innuendo video is because it was explained to you! The consumer at home (at whom the video is aimed) doesn't care if it's Picasso or not. The consumer and casual fan, and even die-hard fans (to an extent), only care about identifying the band members, or even their favorite band member. To put simply, you couldn't use this concept on the four of them and use that on the cover of a release because the band would not be recognizable. As good and artistic as that would be, the guys running the company only care about the end consumer perception. (and please don't bother linking the exceptions, because the rule still stands). And from that point of view, John is represented by a cartoon playing bass. People only identify that character as being John because he is in a Queen video next to the other three. If you don't explain the concept to the consumer, they will not get it! There is not one soul watching the Innuendo video that goes : "Hey man! That is a damn good representation of a Picasso". And that's why i kept an open mind about this rumour and wanted to find out the reasons that were given about John not wanting his image to be used. Because, in the end i don't understand why go to such lenghts with John's character (in the name of Art!) when in the end the people at whom this was directed (rock fans!) would miss the concept. And this is not a critique to rock fans. It's just a fact, even with the exceptions! But this thread was about if someone had heard this rumour before, and if so, what was the reason - according to that rumour - that John gave for not wanting his image to be used in the animation process. The replies here prove to me that no one is aware of such rumour, and i respect that. I don't understand how my first post has evolved into personal attacks, and condescending language. I believe i've explained in a well manner what happened and why i was asking the question. I've missed the first half of the supposed rumour my-self! Because of some disrespecful posts here towards me, and even the DJ for the fact that he is Portugusese, and because this forum isn't moderated this WILL BE my last post on this thread. I've emailed the DJ and in case he answers me I WILL NOT post it here. As far as i'm concerned this thread is closed for me. I appreciate everybody's input on this thread. P.S. - And Togg, i have nothing personal against you. When i posted the picture of a Picasso and called it John Deacon i was being sarcastic! I know that that isnt the most recognizable style of Picsso, but i can assure you that no one watching Innuendo will look at it and say : "Look! what a great cartoon in the style of Picasso. And Freddie is great in the style of Da Vinci" and so on. People don't care about that! And to make it clear, Innuendo is in my opinion one of the most artistic and beautifull videos EVER made! Thanks again for everyone who replied to this thread. |
| matt z 13.05.2015 18:13 |
Eh. Don't get worked up on people's perceptions of you online. It'd be good to debunk this new rumor or perhaps confirm it. I'm a Medium. Used to be small. Don't know how that translates into international sizes (if there are any differences) Maybe it's something confused by translation. * if I wanted to be an ass I would've asked if someone could confirm the names of the acrobats in the promo video. I think they did a fantastic act. |
| cloudberry 13.05.2015 20:16 |
You fucking bastards!!!! NOW WE'LL NEVER KNOW IF JOHN REFUSED TO BE PART OF THE INNUENDO VIDEO!!!!! I won't be able to sleep tonite. Geez. |
| cloudberry 13.05.2015 20:24 |
YOU MADE MRQUEENGAY TO PISS OFF I'M REALLY SORRY YOU FAT FUCK, I PROMISE IT WON'T EVER HAPPEN AGAIN, PLEASE COME BACK I ALREADY MISS YOU |
| Ale Solan 14.05.2015 00:14 |
LOL |
| Togg 14.05.2015 02:57 |
Just to be clear MrQueenfan I have nothing against you either or personally, however the thread itself is in my opinion a crazy one, namely because one viewing of the video debunks it. Actually I believe many educated Queen fans would (and did) recognise it as Picasso, probably more so than the other artistic styles used. he after all has has a lot more public awareness than either Pollock or Victoria etchings... I woundn't bother writing to the DJ, trust me he has nothing to contribute other than self promotion, certainly nothing factual, so whatever he comes back with please don't bother posting it here! JD doesn't even respond to the band so I highly doubt he will ever answer your query, QP will just tell you it's rubbish as will Jacky. I can understand wanting to test the rumour, and I think that's cool, but to keep insisting it must have some basis of truth is the part I lose respect for, when it's obvious it doesn't and there is literally NO evidence otherwise. I love the fact that on occassion Queenzone brings new facts to life or uncovers interesting titbits, but I hate the constant drivel that gets posted here, ranging from whats Bo Rap about to Freddie's health to passport shit. Once apon a time this site used to be populated with people that had useful and sensible things to offer, sadly that time is long since past. All I ask is that people research before posting or think about what they are writing, In this case I can understand why you asked the question, but not why you defended the theory as if fact? |
| Saint Jiub 14.05.2015 08:21 |
Mr.QueenFan - Don't listen to those c*nts Togg or his sidekick "cloudberry" Post your results here. |
| Togg 14.05.2015 09:14 |
And there we have it... proof if proof were needed that the level of intellect on this board has suck below that of your average toadstool |
| Ale Solan 14.05.2015 09:45 |
Togg wrote: And there we have it... proof if proof were needed that the level of intellect on this board has suck below that of your average toadstoolDon't even bother reading Panchgani, Togg... he's such a waste of human sperm. |
| BETA215 14.05.2015 10:32 |
Ale Solan wrote:I thought he was a monkey... forget it.Togg wrote: And there we have it... proof if proof were needed that the level of intellect on this board has suck below that of your average toadstoolDon't even bother reading Panchgani, Togg... he's such a waste of human sperm. |
| Ale Solan 14.05.2015 11:20 |
BETA215 wrote:Ojo! I could be wrong and you could be right, vieja.Ale Solan wrote:I thought he was a monkey... forget it.Togg wrote: And there we have it... proof if proof were needed that the level of intellect on this board has suck below that of your average toadstoolDon't even bother reading Panchgani, Togg... he's such a waste of human sperm. |
| Togg 15.05.2015 02:42 |
It's always amusing how 'Airheads' shoot themselves in the foot every time they open their mouths... |
| Ale Solan 15.05.2015 10:54 |
Togg wrote: It's always amusing how 'Airheads' shoot themselves in the foot every time they open their mouths...That's a great portuguese saying (?) |
| tomchristie22 16.05.2015 07:36 |
Don't be dismayed by all the flack you're getting here, Mr. QF. If you think it's worth looking further into, it surely can't hurt to do so. You have a good point in that John's the only band member whose actual likeness isn't used in the video (something you've said the whole time which Togg keeps ignoring), though it may simply be a result of them choosing the Picasso style for him. No need for everyone to amass and act like vipers because of a more or less well articulated, if slightly flawed and out there theory. |
| tomchristie22 16.05.2015 07:39 |
cmsdrums wrote: If John had made a statement to say he didn't want to have his likeness, I'm amazed that this has never been quoted, reproduced, or widely reported before in the last 24 years.Nobody's suggesting it was a public statement - hypothetically speaking, if it was a thing kept within the band, I'd be very surprised if it had been quoted, reproduced, or widely reported. It's not as if the Innuendo vid is something that's ever talked about to begin with (I mean how much did the band even have to do with it?) |
| Togg 18.05.2015 03:38 |
tomchristie22 wrote: Don't be dismayed by all the flack you're getting here, Mr. QF. If you think it's worth looking further into, it surely can't hurt to do so. You have a good point in that John's the only band member whose actual likeness isn't used in the video (something you've said the whole time which Togg keeps ignoring), though it may simply be a result of them choosing the Picasso style for him. No need for everyone to amass and act like vipers because of a more or less well articulated, if slightly flawed and out there theory.Except his likeness IS used in the video... there's the illustration of him wearing the jester hat (as I pointed out)... so if he didn't want his likeness used he failed... |
