Was it 'Queen for an Hour' from 1989 to promote 'The Miracle'?
This has been bugging me for a while. It also annoys me how on 'Champions of the World' DoRo makes it seems as if the clip at the end is Freddie's last interview, when in fact that was a snippet from a 1985 interview where Freddie talks about the future of the band. Not sure if by then he knew he was HIV/AIDS + or had suspicions he might be.
DoRo productions should have taken a lot of bad critisim for what they did, now that you mention. It was genuanly unethical and they totally got away with it like "no big deal" .
Perhaps the fans (i know that i did) wanted so much to listen Freddie for the last time and most importantly commenting on his difficult situation, that by the time we realised it was actually a montage of other interviews irrelevant to his beeing towards the end, the "buzz" had already worn off .
Mr.Jingles wrote:
Not sure if by then he knew he was HIV/AIDS + or had suspicions he might be.
Just to answer this: it's very likely that he knew by 1985. That was the year when the first HIV test became available. At the time there was a big problem with false negatives and positives, so he likely took the test a number of times between 1985 and 1987 (the latter being when a biopsy ruled out any speck of a doubt - probably a biopsy for Kaposi's sarcoma, which is AIDS defining). He probably suspected he had it even before he took the test, because of (a) people, who he had been with, getting AIDS/dying, and (b) initial symtoms showing up around late 1984 and 1985.
But, still, in 1985 his viewpoint on life was different from what it was in say 1989. In 1985 he was still mostly healthy, he probably had some minor doubts on the reliability of the HIV test, and he likely hoped they'd find a cure in time for him to be saved. In 1984, when HIV was discovered as the cause of AIDS, many scientists thought they'd have an HIV vaccine available within two years. So Freddie's perspective on his mortality, while different from how it was in previous years, wasn't as pessimistic (in terms of his prospects of not dying of AIDS) in 1985 as it would become in the subsequent years.
Long story short: making a 1985 interview seem like his last is doubly dishonest of DoRo, because whatever he said in 1985 would have been said in a different context from what he would have said later on in life, when death was much closer.
I must say, I'm not a big DoRo fan. Well-respected back in the day, worked for a number of successful acts, yada yada yada... but I don't have the best opinion of some of their work.
"it's very likely that"
"so he likely"
"probably a biopsy for"
"He probably"
"in 1985 his viewpoint on life was" (how the fuck do you know)
"he probably had"
"and he likely"
This is how the Freddie/AIDS thing would read without stupid assumptions and speculation....
{blank}
mooghead wrote:
"it's very likely that"
"so he likely"
"probably a biopsy for"
"He probably"
"in 1985 his viewpoint on life was" (how the fuck do you know)
"he probably had"
"and he likely"
This is how the Freddie/AIDS thing would read without stupid assumptions and speculation....
{blank}
Not sure I see what the fuck (to use your language) the point you are making is? So now it's not ok to give a reasonable opinion based on what we know about the course of HIV? Where do you come off declaring a carefully thought-out opinion, based on years of research, albeit not as a scientist, about HIV/AIDS and the progression of the disease, as "stupid assumptions and speculation"?
Let's all not discuss anything unless we know it's a 100% fact, even if the opinions we reached are reasonable. Let's not form an opinion about subjects we don't have the complete facts on because it's impossible to know them, unless moog thinks it's ok.
mooghead wrote:
"it's very likely that"
"so he likely"
"probably a biopsy for"
"He probably"
"in 1985 his viewpoint on life was" (how the fuck do you know)
"he probably had"
"and he likely"
This is how the Freddie/AIDS thing would read without stupid assumptions and speculation....
{blank}
Not sure I see what the fuck (to use your language) the point you are making is? So now it's not ok to give a reasonable opinion based on what we know about the course of HIV? Where do you come off declaring a carefully thought-out opinion, based on years of research, albeit not as a scientist, about HIV/AIDS and the progression of the disease, as "stupid assumptions and speculation"?
Let's all not discuss anything unless we know it's a 100% fact, even if the opinions we reached are reasonable. Let's not form an opinion about subjects we don't have the complete facts on because it's impossible to know them, unless moog thinks it's ok.
I'm not too much into this kind of discussions in this moment of my life, but don't be such a mooghead. Let people talk about something with or without any kind of reason, they aren't hurting a fly.
And spend that time helping other people or sucking your own moog - which translates into "play that moog you have stored somewhere in your house" and stop whining.