| k-m 02.12.2018 17:26 |
Just listened to Brian May interview on BBC Radio 2 and gosh, couldn't bear him at all. link He was asked about the film and said he was obviously pleased with it, "as Freddie would be". Then he went on to say the film painted an accurate picture of Freddie "who could be a bit of an arse". Later, he was confronted directly about the inaccuracies in the film with the interviewer pointing out they played live in Japan two months before Live Aid which our Bri flatly denied. The interviewer asked him: "Were you a bit of an arse?". To his credit, Bri agreed and confirmed he still probably is at times. I guess I'll just change the channel next time he's on. |
| Blackvy 02.12.2018 17:53 |
His "as Freddie would be" speech really annoys me. As some user said in a previous thread: "they just keep on milking the Queen cash cow and Freddie is the victim to make them the money", which I agree. I second your idea to change the channel next time he's on. |
| on my way up 02.12.2018 19:04 |
Not only did they play in Japan in 1985, I'd say they played at Live Aid level at the 2 first Tokyo shows (and the other shows are really great too, even if FM's voice is a bit weaker. |
| dysan 02.12.2018 20:45 |
That's nice enough. Little chat between the old chaps good on em. |
| runner_70 02.12.2018 22:11 |
Blackvy wrote: His "as Freddie would be" speech really annoys me. As some user said in a previous thread: "they just keep on milking the Queen cash cow and Freddie is the victim to make them the money", which I agree. I second your idea to change the channel next time he's on.It is what Maylor do for ages now - Freddie would have loved Lamebird , Paul Rodgers was his fave singer , would love the film , it is ANNOYING! He lost it! |
| runner_70 02.12.2018 22:36 |
Blackvy wrote: "they just keep on milking the Queen cash cow and Freddie is the victim to make them the money",That sums up 95% of their actions after Freddie's passing. They should be ahsamed of themselves |
| Mkls 03.12.2018 09:19 |
speechless - Brian flatly denies the Works tour , so Europe , Japan , Australia, RIO (!) never happened.. oh yes it did , in 1979 I forgot - what is this guy thinking really? |
| jozef 03.12.2018 13:57 |
This old guy is fool .... |
| runner_70 03.12.2018 14:37 |
He completely lost the plot. Thats why Lambert, this crap movie etc comes along. Sad to see but it is now official...... |
| Queenman!! 03.12.2018 16:09 |
What??? brian still says they had not played together before LIVE AID (13-7-1985) for a long time because of Freddie's solo LP??? Did he forget: 11.01.1985 Rio De Janeiro, Brazil 18.01.1985 Rio De Janeiro, Brazil 13.04.1985 Auckland, New Zealand 16.04.1985 Melbourne, Australia 17.04.1985 Melbourne, Australia 19.04.1985 Melbourne, Australia 20.04.1985 Melbourne, Australia 25.04.1985 Sydney, Australia 26.04.1985 Sydney, Australia 28.04.1985 Sydney, Australia 29.04.1985 Sydney, Australia 08.05.1985 Tokyo, Japan 09.05.1985 Tokyo, Japan 11.05.1985 Tokyo, Japan 13.05.1985 Nagoya, Japan 15.05.1985 Osaka, Japan |
| bucsateflon 03.12.2018 16:23 |
Calm your tits, address this problem on hes social media pages... |
| Invisible Woman 03.12.2018 17:17 |
Perhaps he have some memory problems or he convinced himself that everything in the movie is true. |
| runner_70 03.12.2018 19:46 |
Invisible Woman wrote: Perhaps he have some memory problems or he convinced himself that everything in the movie is true.Especially the part where Freddie is begging him for his job |
| Dim 03.12.2018 19:56 |
Perhaps duing 1985 prior to the Live Aid Queen were as closed as they used to be. So in his conscience Queen were about to split. In his subconscience Queen had already ended. Now days his memories are dictated by two factors. First money and probably by what his consciousness wants to remember. |
| Dim 03.12.2018 19:58 |
Perhaps duing 1985 prior to the Live Aid Queen were not as closed as they used to be. So in his conscience Queen were about to split. In his subconscience Queen had already ended. Now days his memories are dictated by two factors. First money and probably by what his consciousness wants to remember. |
| Sebastian 03.12.2018 21:13 |
Sure, but in this case, there's also evidence - loads of it. If Brian (or anybody else for that matter) cannot quite remember how long before Live Aid they'd last played together, a few minutes on the internet will give you the right answer. |
| Sweetandtenderhooligan 03.12.2018 21:34 |
Yeah, I'm sure Freddie would be pleased as punch to be portrayed as an ego maniac who partied so much he left the band and then came crawling back begging for his job. Sure, Bri. |
| emrabt 03.12.2018 21:34 |
My mum was diagnosed with the pre-stages of dementia 2 years ago, I've occasionally wondered if Brian might have the same. But he's been like this for many years so I very much doubt it, we would have seen more deterioration by now I think. |
| Joeker 03.12.2018 22:37 |
"Maylor".....I know Roger goes along with most of the day to day dealings still, but I honestly don't think he's at the same level as Brian when it comes to attitude. I don't hear the same level of subtle animosity from Roger as I do Brian, but I could be wrong. |
| Dim 04.12.2018 10:48 |
Listening the interview more carefully, I would like to be little more fair on Brian. He said that the touring of the works had been ended long time ago than the two months prior Live Aid. So either his memory doesn't serve him so much or he tries to be diplomat defending the movie. If it is the latter then he is a bit of an arse. |
| Thrill Yeti 04.12.2018 12:33 |
It's funny, he complains about critics 'wanting the film to be a documentary', and argues that what really matters is the emotional truth of the film; then, he can't bare to acknowledge that a technical detail of the film isn't factually correct. Unbelievable really. |
| dysan 04.12.2018 14:29 |
He is clear it 'felt like' they hadn't played together for a long time which I believe may have been true. Of course, they rehearsed loads for it (why would they need to if they felt tight right off a tour) and still made a few mistakes. The plot for the film exaggerates this because movie. Fair dos I like the massive hint that the WWRY sesstion is totally wrong. The host (who, of course, would know) was too much of a gentleman to force the point. |
| Another Roger (re) 04.12.2018 14:38 |
Yes, Brian with some factual errors in this interview. But my god how much hate there is for the man in here. Awful to see. I like Brian a lot. He is a really nice guy with some faults here and there. But it is shocking how much hate he gets on QZ. I just want to express clearly that I am not behind it at least. |
| RS_Protos 04.12.2018 15:46 |
It's not hate, this is constantly happening and it's pretty sad what he's doing. |
| dysan 04.12.2018 16:01 |
After seeing the film I realised I didn't want to follow him and Taylor on social media and put up with their 2018 bollocks. I'm now incubating the reasons I liked Queen in the first place and forgetting about 1991-2018. Because of this damage prevention, I believe I liked this interview more that I would if my trajectory of giving-a-flying-one-about-Queen had continued. |
| cmsdrums 04.12.2018 19:12 |
Brian stops and deliberates over Johnnie Walker’s specific comment that ‘the truth is you had been on tour before Live Aid unlike as portrayed in the film’....and then just flatly denies it. God I love the man but he really doesn’t do himself any favours with shit like this. |
| k-m 06.12.2018 01:27 |
@ Another Roger Dear Fan, no this topic wasn't bred from hatred for Brian, in fact, I used to like him a lot until recently. I wasn't even a particularly vocal anti-QAL fan since I thought it wasn't really that important after all. It's their music and why should anyone stop them from playing it live to worldwide audiences who are clearly hungry for it? But unfortunately, the movie and its tone changed a lot in my perception of Brian and I'm just trying to point out some basic facts with regards to the way its promoted and the whole portrayal which I think is fake and completely unnecessary. Let's put it this way, my sister is not a huge Queen fan, although she likes them and that's probably why she went to see the film. But even she told me it was a big let down, with Freddie portrayed as some lost, poor boy. I think we both felt there was so much more to this story, so much that was left out which makes it an unbearable viewing. Brian is a very intelligent man and frankly, I'm a little gobsmacked they did not find a better way to tell this story with all its nuance and universality which I'm sure is there. Ever thought what this film could actually be had they let the filmmakers do their work and just corrected them on the actual storyline and Freddie's real reactions, let's say? With the hunger for the film, it would have been an Academy Award contender to say the least, but instead, they settled down for a piece of bland soap-opera with one really great shot, being the Live Aid recreation. |
| The Real Wizard 06.12.2018 15:03 |
Dim wrote: Listening the interview more carefully, I would like to be little more fair on Brian. He said that the touring of the works had been ended long time ago than the two months prior Live Aid. So either his memory doesn't serve him so much or he tries to be diplomat defending the movie. If it is the latter then he is a bit of an arse.It's likely a bit of both. He's marketing a product that has brought in half a billion dollars. Of course he's going to toe the line for Hollywood, whether or not he remembers his 1984-85 tour itinerary. This is what a successful person looks like. They know exactly whose corner to be in and when. And right now isn't the time to side with a few hundred superfans. |
| The Real Wizard 06.12.2018 15:08 |
Queenman!! wrote: Did he forget: 11.01.1985 Rio De Janeiro, Brazil 18.01.1985 Rio De Janeiro, Brazil 13.04.1985 Auckland, New Zealand 16.04.1985 Melbourne, Australia 17.04.1985 Melbourne, Australia 19.04.1985 Melbourne, Australia 20.04.1985 Melbourne, Australia 25.04.1985 Sydney, Australia 26.04.1985 Sydney, Australia 28.04.1985 Sydney, Australia 29.04.1985 Sydney, Australia 08.05.1985 Tokyo, Japan 09.05.1985 Tokyo, Japan 11.05.1985 Tokyo, Japan 13.05.1985 Nagoya, Japan 15.05.1985 Osaka, JapanYes. Plenty of artists aren't their own historians. That's a few tour dates over 30 years ago. He's played about a thousand dates since. It's easy to forget. Plenty of artists don't even remember which songs are on which albums. Artists tend to disconnect after investing themselves so heavily in something. And instead of studying what they just did, they move on to the next thing. They have creative brains, after all. They're artists. And this is something most people on internet forums can't begin to understand. |
| The Real Wizard 06.12.2018 15:10 |
Sebastian wrote: Sure, but in this case, there's also evidence - loads of it. If Brian (or anybody else for that matter) cannot quite remember how long before Live Aid they'd last played together, a few minutes on the internet will give you the right answer.Maybe he simply doesn't care. Maybe his past doesn't mean as much to him as some people think it does/should. This is why he hired an archivist to take care of that stuff. Artists tend to live in the present, not in the past. |
| Vocal harmony 06.12.2018 15:59 |
In fairness to Brian, like Mr Wizard touched on, he has traveled so much and appeared on stage so many times it would be hard to recollect every date or even every leg of a tour. I've toured as part of my job since the early 80's, I've had discussions with people who've asked what I worked on over a specific period, it's amazing what you forget,nespecially when your out on the spot. Remember as fans we see things differently, your favourite band tours and does a show near you every year or two and releases an album, in your mind it's a major event. To the band the show may be viewed as a major event, by some. But how many of those can you pin point in a 40+ year career. Not every show is Live Aid, and being so long ago the prep, rehearsal time and nervous energy and then the jubilant reaction of both audience and press probably wiped out most memories of the final leg of the Works tour. Also as has been pointed out, Brian maybe towing the line as far as the film and the way that industry operates. |
| RS_Protos 06.12.2018 16:06 |
Marketing and money all they care, the more the better. |
| k-m 06.12.2018 16:42 |
@ The Real Wizard Do you seriously believe he simply forgot? What on earth are you talking about? I suspect he read this script a few times and had plenty of time to reflect on it. In fact, the producer mentioned he often went "But it wasn't like that" and that's when he explained to him it was Hollywood, not a documentary blah blah. So, I think you were right in your earlier assessment that Brian is simply selling their story now. It just puzzles me he cares so much about marketing that he can't even bring himself to admit they were in fact on tour. It's not going to change a single thing other than not being seen as an asshole by a few fans like you mentioned. People will still go and watch the film and will not give a fuck if they actually split up before Live Aid or not! And finally, it puzzles me they were happy to settle for something as superficial as BR. That script could have easily been given more substance and more depth, without the need to horrify audiences with rough gay sex for two hours and getting Queen banned from the radio for years to come ;-) Instead, it's so cliched and predictable, it hardly even feels like a serious movie. |
| The Real Wizard 06.12.2018 17:13 |
k-m wrote: @ The Real Wizard Do you seriously believe he simply forgot?When they played It's A Hard Life with Tom Chaplin in 2010, Brian introduced the song as one they'd never played live before. So I'd say yes - he has likely forgotten. People have played me recordings of things I'd played on 2 or 3 years prior, and I'd forgotten about them too. Musicians don't spend their free time studying what they did in the past. That's what superfans do - not artists. People like Jimmy Page are an anomaly. He is the keeper of the flame, but with good reason. Aside from the one Zeppelin reunion gig, he hasn't done much for about 20 years. He spends much of his free time absorbed in the past. Brian isn't like that. Most artists aren't. |
| The Real Wizard 06.12.2018 17:15 |
Vocal harmony wrote: Not every show is Live Aid, and being so long ago the prep, rehearsal time and nervous energy and then the jubilant reaction of both audience and press probably wiped out most memories of the final leg of the Works tour.Bingo. The earlier 1985 shows found the band on the verge of breaking up, especially after the Sun City debacle. Roger Taylor has recalled that their show was "stale" by then. It wasn't a great time for the band. And for all the obvious reasons, the Magic tour was far more memorable. |
| runner_70 06.12.2018 17:36 |
The Real Wizard wrote:If I had a chance to see the Magic OR the Works tour I'd choose The Works easily. Their best stage set up with the metropolis background.Vocal harmony wrote: Not every show is Live Aid, and being so long ago the prep, rehearsal time and nervous energy and then the jubilant reaction of both audience and press probably wiped out most memories of the final leg of the Works tour.Bingo. The earlier 1985 shows found the band on the verge of breaking up, especially after the Sun City debacle. Roger Taylor has recalled that their show was "stale" by then. It wasn't a great time for the band. And for all the obvious reasons, the Magic tour was far more memorable. |
| k-m 06.12.2018 18:44 |
The Real Wizard wrote:k-m wrote: @ The Real Wizard Do you seriously believe he simply forgot?When they played It's A Hard Life with Tom Chaplin in 2010, Brian introduced the song as one they'd never played live before. So I'd say yes - he has likely forgotten. People have played me recordings of things I'd played on 2 or 3 years prior, and I'd forgotten about them too. Musicians don't spend their free time studying what they did in the past. That's what superfans do - not artists. People like Jimmy Page are an anomaly. He is the keeper of the flame, but with good reason. Aside from the one Zeppelin reunion gig, he hasn't done much for about 20 years. He spends much of his free time absorbed in the past. Brian isn't like that. Most artists aren't. |
| k-m 06.12.2018 18:47 |
@The Real Wizard Sorry, this website works in mysterious ways at times. My reply is below. Ok, but there's a slight difference between a special gig full of rarities and one particular detail of their past setlists and the band being completely defunct for a few years before the most famous gig of their career, being recreated for a big screen release. Not to mention that Brian wasn't the only one involved and even if he was suffering from an episode of dementia of epic proportions at the time, someone might have mentioned to him, "Ooh, they changed it a little bit here". Anyway, you have every right to defend him, I really don't mind. However, what I am struggling to understand is what is he doing it for, that's all. |
| Holly2003 06.12.2018 19:00 |
Is there a difference between "artists" and people? Artists don't remember but people do? Odd. I get it that creative people sometimes only want to talk about the current or next thing they are creating, especially if it's currently or about to be on sale, but that doesn't mean their memory of past events is somehow impaired. I interviewed a famous SF author once. I asked him about his last book and he wasn't interested. But he was certainly enthusiastic about his next project AND stuff he had written in the more distant past. However, a lot of what he said was anecdotal -- the kind of comments almost word for word he had made numerous times before. It was an act -- a performance. Brian played IAHL numerous times: it's even on Rock in Rio. When he said that about IAHL he was probably just making the crowd feel like this was a special performance. As for his comments about the movie, let's not forget he is stupidly stubborn and has surrounded himself with yes men. I don't think in that moment he could bring himself to admit that something in the movie was wrong. |
| The Real Wizard 06.12.2018 23:57 |
k-m wrote: @The Real Wizard Sorry, this website works in mysterious ways at times. My reply is below.I think you'll find your answer here: link Ok, but there's a slight difference between a special gig full of rarities and one particular detail of their past setlists and the band being completely defunct for a few years before the most famous gig of their career, being recreated for a big screen release.It made for a more dramatic reason for doing Live Aid. They shifted around the timeline to allow for that plot advancement. It's a biopic, not a documentary. Virtually every biopic does this. Anyway, you have every right to defend him, I really don't mind. However, what I am struggling to understand is what is he doing it for, that's all.It's not so much defending him as just simply understanding the situation for what it is. I'll expand on it in my next post. |
| The Real Wizard 07.12.2018 00:00 |
Holly2003 wrote: Is there a difference between "artists" and people? Artists don't remember but people do?Yep. Because most people don't invest themselves so fully into things the way artists invest themselves in their art. And when that much focus is involved, other things go by the wayside. It's not the kind of thing that can be explained in a single paragraph. Unless someone understands it from experience, chances are they'll give you a blank look when you try explaining it to them. That aside - some people just have better memories than others. Brian played IAHL numerous times: it's even on Rock in Rio. When he said that about IAHL he was probably just making the crowd feel like this was a special performance.Perhaps. But considering how the Works tour was a low point in their career, I wouldn't be surprised if it's taken a back seat in his memory. As for his comments about the movie, let's not forget he is stupidly stubborn and has surrounded himself with yes men. I don't think in that moment he could bring himself to admit that something in the movie was wrong.This has nothing to do with stubbornness or yes men. It's the simple fact that Brian fully understands the process. Hollywood invested $50 million so that Queen could greatly expand their legacy. Anyone with half a brain knows not to bite the hand that feeds them. Compromises will be made, and the players involved will stand up for them in the interest of marketing that product. It's smart business. A few people complaining on internet forums are the only casualties at the end of the day. |
| Saint Jiub 07.12.2018 02:40 |
Marketing sucks. link link link |
| Donna13 07.12.2018 03:24 |
JW: And in the film, you’re sort of ... Queen have broken up and you know you’re going to get back together to do Live Aid but in fact, just to go to historical fact, you’d just come off a two months’ tour, hadn’t you? BM: No. It’s pretty much true, really. We hadn’t played together for quite a while, no, and Freddie’d been off making his solo album. And we actually didn’t have much confidence and we weren’t getting on very well. ————————— I’d say that this would be a point in time that he would remember quite well. Maybe not all details, and timing, but he would remember the emotions involved, their worry that the crowd wasn’t a Queen crowd, the feeling of needing to rehearse to be ready for such a huge world-wide audience, and also that he didn’t feel they were getting along very well, which would make it all kind of difficult. That’s a lot of pressure. In any case, he is in agreement that the film captured the essense of what happened. The film is its own form of art. Like story telling. For the sake of entertainment, changes are made. |
| Blackvy 07.12.2018 03:49 |
Saint Jiub wrote: Marketing sucks. link link linkSo true. |
| runner_70 07.12.2018 05:10 |
Donna13 wrote: JW: And in the film, you’re sort of ... Queen have broken up and you know you’re going to get back together to do Live Aid but in fact, just to go to historical fact, you’d just come off a two months’ tour, hadn’t you? BM: No. It’s pretty much true, really. We hadn’t played together for quite a while, no, and Freddie’d been off making his solo album. And we actually didn’t have much confidence and we weren’t getting on very well. ————————— I’d say that this would be a point in time that he would remember quite well. Maybe not all details, and timing, but he would remember the emotions involved, their worry that the crowd wasn’t a Queen crowd, the feeling of needing to rehearse to be ready for such a huge world-wide audience, and also that he didn’t feel they were getting along very well, which would make it all kind of difficult. That’s a lot of pressure. In any case, he is in agreement that the film captured the essense of what happened. The film is its own form of art. Like story telling. For the sake of entertainment, changes are made.So you basically say that May is right and the facts are wrong? The Works 1985 tour never happened??? |
| runner_70 07.12.2018 05:12 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Why is The Works tour lowpoint?????Holly2003 wrote: Is there a difference between "artists" and people? Artists don't remember but people do?Yep. Because most people don't invest themselves so fully into things the way artists invest themselves in their art. And when that much focus is involved, other things go by the wayside. It's not the kind of thing that can be explained in a single paragraph. Unless someone understands it from experience, chances are they'll give you a blank look when you try explaining it to them. That aside - some people just have better memories than others.Brian played IAHL numerous times: it's even on Rock in Rio. When he said that about IAHL he was probably just making the crowd feel like this was a special performance.Perhaps. But considering how the Works tour was a low point in their career, I wouldn't be surprised if it's taken a back seat in his memory.As for his comments about the movie, let's not forget he is stupidly stubborn and has surrounded himself with yes men. I don't think in that moment he could bring himself to admit that something in the movie was wrong.This has nothing to do with stubbornness or yes men. It's the simple fact that Brian fully understands the process. Hollywood invested $50 million so that Queen could greatly expand their legacy. Anyone with half a brain knows not to bite the hand that feeds them. Compromises will be made, and the players involved will stand up for them in the interest of marketing that product. It's smart business. A few people complaining on internet forums are the only casualties at the end of the day. |
| runner_70 07.12.2018 05:20 |
It really is beyond me why anyone defends May anymore the movie is full if lies and he seems to believe them. Especially that he was the creative Force in Queen Freddie was a drugged up lonely fool and he let him back in the band after he begged them. This crap film is an insult to any Queenfan with sense and tbh i am sick of Maylor. They have become worse than Simmons and Stanley |
| Donna13 07.12.2018 05:43 |
Isn’t it two months’ time between the tour and Live Aid? My point is that “you’d just come off” and “quite a while” are not time specific. “Quite a while” might mean two months. “Just come off” might mean two months. One implies that they were “fresh” from a tour. The other, that there was enough time that had lapsed that the band needed to regather themselves physically and emotionally and rehearse. Neither interpretation is incorrect, but Brian remembered it as needing to regather and prepare. |
| runner_70 07.12.2018 05:56 |
May says what is in the movie is correct or didnt you see the film or heard the interview.In the film they havent played for YEARS. And two months is quite shorter dont you think. YOu can defend the guy as much as you like but dont embarrass yourself |
| Donna13 07.12.2018 06:47 |
I listened to the entire interview and Brian clearly said that some details had to be changed in order to tell the story. He never said it was two years between the tour and Live Aid. |
| Holly2003 07.12.2018 10:03 |
The Real Wizard wrote:I don't really buy the huge distinction you're creating between artistes and the bourgeoisie. And in any event it conflicts with your later comment that Brian deliberately lied to support the movie. So he either forgot (and why would he forget about his art? Surely, following your argument, it's non-artistic things he might forget about?) or he lied. Given that range of possible motivation, it's not so hard then to consider also that he stubbornly refused to admit that the film has factual errors (done for dramatic effect). Why would he not simply say so? He even comes close to that when he says the "essence of the film is true".Holly2003 wrote: Is there a difference between "artists" and people? Artists don't remember but people do?Yep. Because most people don't invest themselves so fully into things the way artists invest themselves in their art. And when that much focus is involved, other things go by the wayside. It's not the kind of thing that can be explained in a single paragraph. Unless someone understands it from experience, chances are they'll give you a blank look when you try explaining it to them. That aside - some people just have better memories than others.Brian played IAHL numerous times: it's even on Rock in Rio. When he said that about IAHL he was probably just making the crowd feel like this was a special performance.Perhaps. But considering how the Works tour was a low point in their career, I wouldn't be surprised if it's taken a back seat in his memory.As for his comments about the movie, let's not forget he is stupidly stubborn and has surrounded himself with yes men. I don't think in that moment he could bring himself to admit that something in the movie was wrong.This has nothing to do with stubbornness or yes men. It's the simple fact that Brian fully understands the process. Hollywood invested $50 million so that Queen could greatly expand their legacy. Anyone with half a brain knows not to bite the hand that feeds them. Compromises will be made, and the players involved will stand up for them in the interest of marketing that product. It's smart business. A few people complaining on internet forums are the only casualties at the end of the day. Overall in the interview he mainly sounds alert, jovial, happy. I was pleased to hear this. Despite his faults, he's given us a lot of great music over the years. |
| k-m 07.12.2018 12:21 |
Holly2003, your comments are spot on. The simple truth is there are factual errors in the movie, they might serve this or another purpose, but his denials are pointless and a little embarrassing. It's not like the Prime Minister is going to go on the radio the next day and say, "OMG, Brian May just confirmed things were changed in this film, boycott it and return your tickets!". People are still going to see it and Hollywood will not cut him off in some act of medieval retaliation. Without his consent, they might have not been able to make this film at all, so it's not like poor Bri needs to watch his every word now. Rami Malek already expressed quite a few concerns about the film and he's still alive, I'm sure Brian could get away with it too. |
| Donna13 07.12.2018 16:32 |
(1:09:07) (when asked about reactions to the movie) BM: I think some of it is a misconception. I think some people thought it was supposed to be a documentary, and it’s not. So they start picking holes and saying, you know, “This is compressed and this is in the wrong order.” That’s not what a film is about. You know, the film is about trying to find an inner truth in a sequence of events, whereas a documentary is just stringing the events together and bits of film from the time. So I think there’s a bit of a misconception. |
| The Real Wizard 07.12.2018 18:01 |
runner_70 wrote: Why is The Works tour lowpoint?????-Sun City -their show became stale in their eyes -they were on the verge of breaking up, not least because of the tensions from Mercury having gotten a 3x bigger advance for his solo album than the band got for The Works It's not far fetched to suggest that had Live Aid not happened they may well have called it quits in 85. |
| The Real Wizard 07.12.2018 18:05 |
runner_70 wrote: It really is beyond me why anyone defends May anymore the movie is full if lies and he seems to believe them. Especially that he was the creative Force in Queen Freddie was a drugged up lonely fool and he let him back in the band after he begged them.Literally every biopic stretches the truth in order to advance the story. It's how Hollywood works, and no outside force will ever change that. Take a deep breath and accept this basic fact. Unlike 1974-79 where Mercury wrote the majority of the band's hits, 1980-86 saw the other three members carrying the weight. Mercury's art took a back seat to his personal life. He wasn't creatively hungry anymore. He found himself and a community where he felt he belonged. If anything, the film was very generous to Mercury. There was only one indirect reference to cocaine in the entire film. Imagine the outrage if the film depicted him smashing a mirror over Pete Brown's head. Which actually happened. In 1976. Never mind when he went off the rails in the 80s. |
| The Real Wizard 07.12.2018 18:23 |
k-m wrote: Without his consent, they might have not been able to make this film at all, so it's not like poor Bri needs to watch his every word now. Rami Malek already expressed quite a few concerns about the film and he's still alive, I'm sure Brian could get away with it too.Now we're getting into legalities. Don't underestimate the inner workings of Hollywood or the entertainment business as a whole. All the players involved know exactly what they can and cannot say at any given moment, given their particular roles and the legal documents they've signed. Successful people calculate every word they say, now more than ever in this digital age. There are massive repercussions if they don't. Hollywood is far bigger than Rami Malek or Queen Productions. "the film is about trying to find an inner truth in a sequence of events" The fact that Brian May is smart enough to rhyme off things like this off the top of his head is precisely why he is rich and famous - not just because he wrote great songs. It's because he is constantly cognizant of his role in business. If forces bigger than you are helping you, then you protect that force at all costs, end of. If you can't, then you're gone and they've got ten people waiting in line to replace you because you're just a moving part. That's been the way of the world for thousands of years. Loyalty is everything. |
| Donna13 07.12.2018 18:47 |
Even if the movie got all the dates correct, and other known facts correct, there would be complaints that the dialogue was made up. Also people would be upset that an actor is pretending to be Freddie or someone else. But remember, Peter Freestone was on set and Rami consulted with him on everything. So they really made a good attempt to get the details correct. If anything was out of character, Peter and Rami would have put a stop to that. Interesting that Brian brought up the bad situation with the first director. And he didn’t try to sound polite about the situation. I think there was a lot going on and Rami had to take control. |
| The Real Wizard 07.12.2018 18:50 |
Donna13 wrote: Interesting that Brian brought up the bad situation with the first director. And he didn’t try to sound polite about the situation.Of course - because Bryan Singer's name is mud now. Anyone can slam him. |
| Donna13 07.12.2018 18:51 |
By details, I mean details of Freddie’s character/personality/habits. |
| Donna13 07.12.2018 18:53 |
He didn’t slam him, but he just didn’t try to sound polite about it. |
| runner_70 07.12.2018 20:08 |
Donna13 wrote: (1:09:07) (when asked about reactions to the movie) BM: I think some of it is a misconception. I think some people thought it was supposed to be a documentary, and it’s not. So they start picking holes and saying, you know, “This is compressed and this is in the wrong order.” That’s not what a film is about. You know, the film is about trying to find an inner truth in a sequence of events, whereas a documentary is just stringing the events together and bits of film from the time. So I think there’s a bit of a misconception.Inner truth my ass. The film lies no matter how you twist and turn it . And May is shown as the saint while Freddie is shown as a jerk. Full stop. Thats what this awful movie is showing. And May is getting on my nerves. He clearly lost it. |
| runner_70 07.12.2018 20:09 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Holy shit - as I expected - the movie and the lies has its effects. The solo album advance was NEVER EVER any issue. And The WOrks tour was awesome.runner_70 wrote: Why is The Works tour lowpoint?????-Sun City -their show became stale in their eyes -they were on the verge of breaking up, not least because of the tensions from Mercury having gotten a 3x bigger advance for his solo album than the band got for The Works It's not far fetched to suggest that had Live Aid not happened they may well have called it quits in 85. |
| The Real Wizard 07.12.2018 20:11 |
runner_70 wrote:This stuff was known and spoken about years before the film came out.The Real Wizard wrote:Holy shit - as I expected - the movie and the lies has its effects. The solo album advance was NEVER EVER any issue. And The WOrks tour was awesome.runner_70 wrote: Why is The Works tour lowpoint?????-Sun City -their show became stale in their eyes -they were on the verge of breaking up, not least because of the tensions from Mercury having gotten a 3x bigger advance for his solo album than the band got for The Works It's not far fetched to suggest that had Live Aid not happened they may well have called it quits in 85. Money was a source of competition and conflict between the band members from the day they started making money until circa 1988. By 1984-85 Queen was falling apart (and not just because of Sun City), travelling in separate limos to gigs. It was all business. And then Mercury hired a guitarist to sound like Brian for his solo album. You think that didn't create further friction? Then his album bombed, which cost Columbia a pile of money, and they dropped him (it was supposed to be a two album deal). You'd better bet your life he went crying back to the band with his tail between his legs. If anything, the film didn't go far enough in depicting this. The fact that the band played well on stage says nothing about the internal state of affairs at the time. Live Aid was a second lease on life for them. The entire experience humbled Mercury, and the happy scenes you see in the videos for One Vision hadn't existed for years. Sorry / not sorry if all this ruins your rose tinted view. Being a fan of a band means accepting their story warts and all - not just your own personal version of it that filters out the inconvenient truths. |
| Rami 07.12.2018 22:53 |
@runner_70: You are spot on. I agree with every aspect of your statements. @The Real Wizard: I have been on this forum for many years now (mostly quiet) and always read your posts with great interest and a large amount of respect. In fact, to me you are one of the most prominent and important experts on this forum. So I cannot believe that you have fallen for this giant hoax that is the "Bohemian Rhapsody" movie. It is so obvious full of Brian May and his, let's say very special view of truth that he should be ashamed. Perhaps you shouldn't take the Freddie Mercury documentary "The Great Pretender" too seriously. It was the obvious blueprint of the storyline of the movie. Out of the blue, everybody slams Paul Prenter, as he is needed as the big villain in the movie. And Freddie crawling back to Queen "with his tail between his legs" (what a ridiculous phrase by Jim Beach!) after Mr. Bad Guy. Yeah, that was very clever plot hatching. Historical revisionism on two levels (documentary and movie). And to be honest with you, I think you know that very well, because it doesn't take that much intelligence to get it. However, for some reason you feel the need to defend Brian May on this forum, probably because you think (or know) that some "official people" are visiting this forum and reading the posts. OK, that is your choice. But I think it is every Freddie Mercury fan's duty to openly speak out, as the movie is damaging his legacy, imprinting a totally false (and negative!) image of him into people's minds. |
| Rami 07.12.2018 23:03 |
Concerning the Works Tour: Roger himself has stated it as one of his favourite tours. |
| Rami 07.12.2018 23:16 |
As far as I know, Freddie wanted to release the Barcelona album on Parlophone and therefore Parlohphone bought Freddie out of the contract with Columbia (who happily agreed). So when do you think Columbia "dropped" him to make Freddie "crying back to the band"? A couple of weeks after the release of "Mr. Bad Guy"? It doesn't fit into the given time-frame. Actually, Mr. Bad Guy was a small success in Europe, if you check the charts. In 1985, the first three singles off the album were played indeed on German radio with I Was Born To Love You being a well-known hit. In fact, I became a fan through these singles as a twelve-year-old (turning thirteen). Also, the album itself was not unheard of at all. |
| runner_70 07.12.2018 23:16 |
Rami wrote: @runner_70: You are spot on. I agree in every aspect of your statements. @The Real Wizard: I have been on this forum for many years now (mostly quiet) and always read your posts with great interest and a large amount of respect. In fact, to me you are one of the most prominent and important experts on this forum. So I cannot believe that you have fallen for this giant hoax that is the "Bohemian Rhapsody" movie. It is so obvious full of Brian May and his, let's say very special view of truth that he should be ashamed. Perhaps you shouldn't take the Freddie Mercury documentary "The Great Pretender" too seriously. It was the obvious blueprint of the storyline of the movie. Out of the blue, everybody slams Paul Prenter, as he is needed as the big villain in the movie. And Freddie crawling back to Queen "with his tail between his legs" (what a ridiculous phrase by Jim Beach!) after Mr. Bad Guy. Yeah, that was very clever plot hatching. Historical revisionism on two levels (documentary and movie). And to be honest with you, I think you know that very well, because it doesn't take that much intelligence to get it. However, for some reason you feel the need to defend Brian May on this forum, probably because you think (or know) that some "official people" are visiting this forum and reading the posts. OK, that is your choice. But I think it is every Freddie Mercury fan's duty to openly speak out, as the movie is damaging his legacy, imprinting a totally false (and negative!) image of him into people's minds.SPot on - I fear it is too late. Lots are buying the lies in this movie and the real Queen story will fade away. Sad but true |
| runner_70 07.12.2018 23:18 |
The Real Wizard wrote:You either have no clue about Queen at all or you really believe the crap you have just written. Or you have Brian May dementia. I guess The Works tour did not happen before Live Aid right?They had a 2 year break right?runner_70 wrote:This stuff was known and spoken about years before the film came out. Money was a source of competition and conflict between the band members from the day they started making money until circa 1988. By 1984-85 Queen was falling apart (and not just because of Sun City), travelling in separate limos to gigs. It was all business. And then Mercury hired a guitarist to sound like Brian for his solo album. You think that didn't create further friction? Then his album bombed, which cost Columbia a pile of money, and they dropped him (it was supposed to be a two album deal). You'd better bet your life he went crying back to the band with his tail between his legs. If anything, the film didn't go far enough in depicting this. The fact that the band played well on stage says nothing about the internal state of affairs at the time. Live Aid was a second lease on life for them. The entire experience humbled Mercury, and the happy scenes you see in the videos for One Vision hadn't existed for years. Sorry / not sorry if all this ruins your rose tinted view. Being a fan of a band means accepting their story warts and all - not just your own personal version of it that filters out the inconvenient truths.The Real Wizard wrote:Holy shit - as I expected - the movie and the lies has its effects. The solo album advance was NEVER EVER any issue. And The WOrks tour was awesome.runner_70 wrote: Why is The Works tour lowpoint?????-Sun City -their show became stale in their eyes -they were on the verge of breaking up, not least because of the tensions from Mercury having gotten a 3x bigger advance for his solo album than the band got for The Works It's not far fetched to suggest that had Live Aid not happened they may well have called it quits in 85. |
| RobbyBloodshed 08.12.2018 02:31 |
Mr Bad Guy gets so much hate and is called a flop, time after time. These numbers are great for ANY artist. Forget comparing it Queen. You surely can say “I personally don’t like it, it didn’t have Queen production, it is synth oriented”. That’s purely opinion....On the other hand, numbers don’t lie. It did well. It has catchy tunes that obviously the rest of Queen liked enough to have on MiH. (Brian must have really hated Mr Bad Guy, at that time....as he willingly went to the final mix listening, as seen in the picture.) link Charts: UK - Peak 6 / 23 Weeks Australia - Peak 38 / 10 Weeks Switzerland - Peak 14 / 6 Weeks Japan - Peak 20 / 21Weeks Netherlands - Peak 20 / 11 Weeks Austria Peak 23 / 4 Weeks |
| RobbyBloodshed 08.12.2018 02:31 |
..double post, apologies.. |
| runner_70 08.12.2018 07:27 |
RobbyBloodshed wrote: Mr Bad Guy gets so much hate and is called a flop, time after time. These numbers are great for ANY artist. Forget comparing it Queen. You surely can say “I personally don’t like it, it didn’t have Queen production, it is synth oriented”. That’s purely opinion....On the other hand, numbers don’t lie. It did well. It has catchy tunes that obviously the rest of Queen liked enough to have on MiH. (Brian must have really hated Mr Bad Guy, at that time....as he willingly went to the final mix listening, as seen in the picture.) link Charts: UK - Peak 6 / 23 Weeks Australia - Peak 38 / 10 Weeks Switzerland - Peak 14 / 6 Weeks Japan - Peak 20 / 21Weeks Netherlands - Peak 20 / 11 Weeks Austria Peak 23 / 4 WeeksGreat posting. Guess he forgot the listening Session as well |
| bucsateflon 08.12.2018 07:54 |
It was supposed to do better than Queen, or else there was no point to go solo... |
| AlbaNo1 08.12.2018 08:42 |
Brian as an artist has hardly created anything at all in the last 20 years in music. A lot of his output in any medium , such as Queen in 3D, takes from what has already been created. Brian must be fully aware of the timelines leading up to Live Aid. It’s not like it’s an off the top of the head recollection he made at short notice. Given the years that have gone in to deciding how to make the movie it would be uppermost in his mind. |
| Rami 08.12.2018 08:56 |
German Album Charts: 1985 Mr. Bad Guy - Peak 11 / 21 Weeks German Single Charts: 1985 I Was Born To Love You - Peak 17 / 13 Weeks |
| runner_70 08.12.2018 09:04 |
bucsateflon wrote: It was supposed to do better than Queen, or else there was no point to go solo...What? Which sane person /record executive expects a solo album doing better than the main band. Almost never the case. Mr Bad Guy only flopped in America. Queen flopped in America since Hot SPace. So what? |
| runner_70 08.12.2018 09:08 |
AlbaNo1 wrote: Brian as an artist has hardly created anything at all in the last 20 years in music. A lot of his output in any medium , such as Queen in 3D, takes from what has already been created. Brian must be fully aware of the timelines leading up to Live Aid. It’s not like it’s an off the top of the head recollection he made at short notice. Given the years that have gone in to deciding how to make the movie it would be uppermost in his mind.That is the saddest part. He is living in the past and completely dried out as a songwriter. What the heck happened? All he came up with in the last 20 years was stuff like "The Kissing Me Song"? I stand by it: The guy has completely lost the plot. Just read his ramblings in his soap box. I remeber the last postin I read there: He was complaining that leaves from trees where cleaned in front of his house. And that a neighbor is doing refurbishment..... |
| Rami 08.12.2018 09:08 |
@bucsateflon: The point of going solo? That was obvious. Recording an album which was 100% Freddie Mercury. The album title, artwork and, of course, the music reflect that. What you see is what you get: pure Freddie Mercury. He has put his heart and soul into this album. It is full of emotion. And his voice is the main focus. So, in a way, it is a concept album, the concept being "Freddie Mercury". |
| runner_70 08.12.2018 09:22 |
it is sad to see that the lies is the movie are now spread around the world and believed by lots even some diehards. That is my main concern about this movie and it shows early |
| Sebastian 08.12.2018 12:14 |
The Real Wizard wrote: Maybe he simply doesn't care.And that's fine. Still, my point is that 'a lot of time has passed' is not a valid excuse in my opinion, especially when you can, again, spend a minute or so online and find out when they'd last played before Live Aid. Now, that doesn't invalidate him as a musician, as a person or as a PhD astrophysicist, stereo photographer, animal activist, etc., but it's there. The Real Wizard wrote: Maybe his past doesn't mean as much to him as some people think it does/should.So why talk about a BIOPIC? One that covers events leading up to 1985? Last I checked, Live Aid was 33 years AGO - and 33 years ago is part of, wait for it ... wait for it ... the P-A-S-T uwu The Real Wizard wrote: Artists tend to live in the present, not in the past.Sure. That's why everything on their current setlist was penned in 2018. That's why he's promoting a film which only deals with the present. That's why he recently released a book which only covers his activities from the last sixty days or so. Sure! PS: Not that there's anything wrong with any of that, anyway, but claiming they're not living in the past is preposterous. They're selectively living in the bits from the past they want to enhance (again, nothing wrong with that, just silly to deny that's what they're doing). In fact, ever since the late nineties (or 'Furia' at the latest), most of what Brian's done is living in the past. And why wouldn't he? His past has plenty of magnificent material, achievements, etc. His present has some as well, but mostly it's about reminiscing about the great songs he and the others wrote decades ago. Which again, is alright. But yeah, he's definitely living in the past. As are most artists around his age. As are most people, myself included (so no, this is not a criticism and this isn't coming from a place of alleged superiority). My point is: Brian, a PhD with a long story of being thorough, could've spent a couple of minutes online to get his facts straight, or he could've said 'yeah, but...' He chose not to. That's not a crime and not something that automatically makes him a bad person. But yeah, he does live in the past. |
| Vocal harmony 08.12.2018 13:12 |
I think the point about artists living in he present is valid. Brian's focus is on the current line up and how they choose to present the music live. Very much living in the present. Yes the music maybe part of the band's history, but when they were still recording and releasing new music the setlist usually reflected the past more so than the current. They certainly didn't take the Pink Floyd route and play the current album live or even a version of the next album. As for Brian's recollection of past tours, yes he could google what the band did, but I don't think he's that vein,min that way! And I still don't believe pin point accuracy of the past is as important as the bigger picture to him. I also think that too many people are wrapped up in the film being about the band. It isn't directly and certainly not an historical ducument of that. What it is, is a film about Freddie and his involvement in the band and other key people in his life, pesented in an entertaining way. |
| Chopin1995 08.12.2018 13:25 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Add to that:runner_70 wrote: Why is The Works tour lowpoint?????-Sun City -their show became stale in their eyes -they were on the verge of breaking up, not least because of the tensions from Mercury having gotten a 3x bigger advance for his solo album than the band got for The Works - for the 1st time no touring in North America - Freddie drunk on stage - Freddie injuring himself during a show to the point an immediate help is needed - ending a concert after 4 songs because one member of the band is unable to continue. - using electronic drums on stage - doing 5 shows in Japan and not performing Teo Torriatte |
| Vocal harmony 08.12.2018 13:54 |
All of the above and more, as Mr Wizzard has pointed out. Actually in fairness to someone in block C of the enorm dome in which ever city they were in, the European/UK Works shows were stunning, the production was great and the setlist drew every album. The shows on the second leg weren't so good, and the fractured strained associations in the band were stretched to the limit. I really don't think they were going to work together again, but Live Aid really did change everything The point about not touring America. It was a major problem, Freddie didn't want to, the other three did. I was told that dates were lined up (not announced) but then pulled, Brian during a phone in on Amrican radio told a fan that they would be heading their way very soon! Freddie's solo deal was worth a lot more than Queen were getting. I believe that the record company had the next Micheal Jackson signed up and ready to go. The album sold relatively well in some counties, but didn't met its forecast targets and Frddie was dropped Parlaphone/EMI didn't buy Frddie out of the deal. What they did was buy back the rights to the songs, but the songs were worth a lot less than Freddie was paid in the initial deal. |
| RobbyBloodshed 08.12.2018 15:43 |
bucsateflon wrote: It was supposed to do better than Queen, or else there was no point to go solo...I don’t think that’s totally fair to say. I’m sure a big part of trying a solo endeavor was to have total creative control and to work with other musicians. |
| Rami 08.12.2018 17:50 |
Vocal harmony wrote: I believe that the record company had the next Micheal Jackson signed up and ready to go. The album sold relatively well in some counties, but didn't met its forecast targets and Freddie was dropped. Parlophone/EMI didn't buy Freddie out of the deal. What they did was buy back the rights to the songs, but the songs were worth a lot less than Freddie was paid in the initial deal.Have you got any source for this? It contradicts everything I have read (and heard) about it. When was Freddie dropped according to your information? |
| Holly2003 08.12.2018 17:50 |
RobbyBloodshed wrote:Yep. People are talking about Fred as if Roger and Brian's solo releases never happened.bucsateflon wrote: It was supposed to do better than Queen, or else there was no point to go solo...I don’t think that’s totally fair to say. I’m sure a big part of trying a solo endeavor was to have total creative control and to work with other musicians. |
| runner_70 08.12.2018 18:51 |
Rami wrote:Just ignore her and her clueless drivel as she has no clue about Queen.Vocal harmony wrote: I believe that the record company had the next Micheal Jackson signed up and ready to go. The album sold relatively well in some counties, but didn't met its forecast targets and Freddie was dropped. Parlophone/EMI didn't buy Freddie out of the deal. What they did was buy back the rights to the songs, but the songs were worth a lot less than Freddie was paid in the initial deal.Have you got any source for this? It contradicts everything I have read (and heard) about it. When was Freddie dropped according to your information? |
| The Real Wizard 08.12.2018 19:14 |
Rami wrote: German Album Charts: 1985 Mr. Bad Guy - Peak 11 / 21 Weeks German Single Charts: 1985 I Was Born To Love You - Peak 17 / 13 WeeksIt bombed in the UK, and it bombed in the US. German charts are irrelevant. The majority of the album sales were advance sales on his name alone, not the quality of the product. The label dropped him. That should say it all. |
| The Real Wizard 08.12.2018 19:17 |
Rami wrote: Concerning the Works Tour: Roger himself has stated it as one of his favourite tours.You're right, he did say that. But perhaps he was just referring to the European dates in 1984. Things went south after that. He's also said this was the tour where their show became stale. Sun City happened, and they were blacklisted by the UN. And they realized they'd lost America. There's not a chance that anyone in the band looks back on this period fondly. I have no idea why you guys are so aghast by history. Bands fall apart, and history can be messy. It's normal. |
| The Real Wizard 08.12.2018 19:20 |
Rami wrote: Out of the blue, everybody slams Paul Prenter, as he is needed as the big villain in the movie. And Freddie crawling back to Queen "with his tail between his legs" (what a ridiculous phrase by Jim Beach!) after Mr. Bad Guy. Yeah, that was very clever plot hatching. Historical revisionism on two levels (documentary and movie).It's not out of the blue. Anyone who worked for the band in the 80s will tell you that Prenter was the worst thing that ever happened to them. As I've stated in another thread - the fact that a story hasn't been previously told doesn't mean it's not true. Were the new stories told in the Days Of Our Lives documentary in 2011 not true because they hadn't been told in 2010 or earlier? McCartney tells new stories about his past to this day. Are those all untrue too because Beatles fans didn't already know about them? You don't have to take my word for it, but in the interest of intellectual honesty, just know that there is far more to any band's story than superfans know about. Books and documentaries never tell the whole story. I think it is every Freddie Mercury fan's duty to openly speak out, as the movie is damaging his legacy, imprinting a totally false (and negative!) image of him into people's minds.No - his legacy is well intact. It's just a few hundred people on internet forums who are complaining. The only thing this film is ultimately doing is exposing more people to Queen's music. People walk out of the theatre thinking Live Aid was amazing, not about his difficult period. I guess you guys missed my post about Mercury smashing a mirror over his assistant's head, and the fact that there is only one brief reference to cocaine in the film. The film was far too lenient compared to what it could have been. I can only imagine what you guys would be saying about the portrayal of those things - and they actually happened. |
| Saint Jiub 08.12.2018 19:31 |
Is there any evidence that Queen broke up the band for three years? Is there any evidence that Freddie had to beg to get back in the band, and was dismissed from the room while the rest of the band decided his fate? |
| The Real Wizard 08.12.2018 19:38 |
Saint Jiub wrote: Is there any evidence that Queen broke up the band for three years?That's obviously a Hollywood fabrication. Is there any evidence that Freddie had to beg to get back in the band, and was dismissed from the room while the rest of the band decided his fate?You'd have to ask the band or people in their close circles at the time. But I doubt you'll get a straight answer. The event in question actually happened after Live Aid. This has been spoken about before, but naturally people weren't too keen on even entertaining the possibility because it doesn't cast Mercury in the greatest of light. |
| runner_70 08.12.2018 19:40 |
The Real Wizard wrote:The German market is the third biggest after UK and USA and was always very important for Queen. Stop embarrassing yourself with your clueless drivel. YOu are a May sheep and bought the movie's lies. We are still waiting for your evidence that Freddie got "dropped". And Obviously Mr Bad Guy is sooooo damn bad that Maylor took two songs off of to work on them for MIH. I am sure you believe the Works tour was 3 years before Live Aid right?Rami wrote: German Album Charts: 1985 Mr. Bad Guy - Peak 11 / 21 Weeks German Single Charts: 1985 I Was Born To Love You - Peak 17 / 13 WeeksIt bombed in the UK, and it bombed in the US. German charts are irrelevant. The majority of the album sales were advance sales on his name alone, not the quality of the product. The label dropped him. That should say it all. |
| runner_70 08.12.2018 19:43 |
The Real Wizard wrote:The Works European tour was HUGE. So saying the dates were great only in EUrope is a bit of a joke as The tour in Europe makes about 70% of the whole tour. Then there was Rock in Rio their biggest gig ever. I have no idea why you desperately want to believe the lies the film is delivering. YOu just embarrass yourself with your drivel. May won't read your crap here so you can stop posting it. Might save us some time hereRami wrote: Concerning the Works Tour: Roger himself has stated it as one of his favourite tours.You're right, he did say that. But perhaps he was just referring to the European dates in 1984. Things went south after that. He's also said this was the tour where their show became stale. Sun City happened, and they were blacklisted by the UN. And they realized they'd lost America. There's not a chance that anyone in the band looks back on this period fondly. I have no idea why you guys are so aghast by history. Bands fall apart, and history can be messy. It's normal. |
| runner_70 08.12.2018 19:47 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Can you PLEASE stop your crap now? You are the first one telling the story that Freddie almost killed an assistant. The film shows Freddie as a drugged up loner without any friends feeling miserable all the time except he was working with Queen. Load oif bollocks. A friend of mine was in the movie with me and his first thing he said to me afterwards was "Freddie had a really sad life and was a jerk" Thats what the movie is picturing. Just live with it and don't believe all the crap the Guitarplayer with dementia is catering. Stop being a Maylor sheep. Thank youRami wrote: Out of the blue, everybody slams Paul Prenter, as he is needed as the big villain in the movie. And Freddie crawling back to Queen "with his tail between his legs" (what a ridiculous phrase by Jim Beach!) after Mr. Bad Guy. Yeah, that was very clever plot hatching. Historical revisionism on two levels (documentary and movie).It's not out of the blue. Anyone who worked for the band in the 80s will tell you that Prenter was the worst thing that ever happened to them. As I've stated in another thread - the fact that a story hasn't been previously told doesn't mean it's not true. Were the new stories told in the Days Of Our Lives documentary in 2011 not true because they hadn't been told in 2010 or earlier? McCartney tells new stories about his past to this day. Are those all untrue too because Beatles fans didn't already know about them? You don't have to take my word for it, but in the interest of intellectual honesty, just know that there is far more to any band's story than superfans know about. Books and documentaries never tell the whole story.I think it is every Freddie Mercury fan's duty to openly speak out, as the movie is damaging his legacy, imprinting a totally false (and negative!) image of him into people's minds.No - his legacy is well intact. It's just a few hundred people on internet forums who are complaining. The only thing this film is ultimately doing is exposing more people to Queen's music. People walk out of the theatre thinking Live Aid was amazing, not about his difficult period. I guess you guys missed my post about Mercury smashing a mirror over his assistant's head, and the fact that there is only one brief reference to cocaine in the film. The film was far too lenient compared to what it could have been. I can only imagine what you guys would be saying about the portrayal of those things - and they actually happened. |
| The Real Wizard 08.12.2018 19:55 |
runner_70 wrote: Can you PLEASE stop your crap now? You are the first one telling the story that Freddie almost killed an assistant.This has been written about in numerous biographies, and Pete Brown has even described the incident himself: "He could be very tough. He often made me cry during the years I worked for him." Driving the band to the venue, Brown found the route led through a crowded fairground and suggested they'd have to get out of their respective limousines and walk. "We had to drive through at snail's pace so as not to injure anyone and Freddie acted up with the champagne all the way!" Irate pedestrians banged on the windows, flipped V-signs, and yelled "Pommy pussies!" "When we got inside, Freddie was in such a cold rage that he picked up a big mirror and literally smashed it over my head. Then he ordered me to find a brush and shovel to sweep up the glass at once." Oddly enough, Brown forgave him: "You see it was the humiliation he had suffered. He just had to take it out on someone. I understood." Take off those rose coloured glasses. Your favourite singer wasn't a perfect person. |
| The Real Wizard 08.12.2018 19:56 |
runner_70 wrote: We are still waiting for your evidence that Freddie got "dropped".What label was Barcelona on? I'll give you a clue - it wasn't Columbia. He had signed a two album deal with them. It is well documented. |
| Sealion 08.12.2018 20:30 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Runner won’t believe you, because he can’t bare it.runner_70 wrote: We are still waiting for your evidence that Freddie got "dropped".What label was Barcelona on? I'll give you a clue - it wasn't Columbia. He had signed a two album deal with them. It is well documented. He has been mocking Lambert for months, because he thinks Lambert got dropped by his label. How would it look, if the same had happened to Freddie? ;) |
| A05 08.12.2018 21:50 |
>I guess you guys missed my post about Mercury smashing a mirror >over his assistant's head, and the fact that there is only one brief >reference to cocaine in the film. The film was far too lenient >compared to what it could have been. I can only imagine what you >guys would be saying about the portrayal of those things - and they >actually happened. You are totally missing the point here. We are all adults here AND we've read the books by David Minns where he desribed Freddie's rages and antics and by Phoebe who took it for granted. It is not about facts, it is about ATTITUDE. Whereas even David Minns said - ok, there were fights, but I was written the most beuautiful song for me... and Phoebe and Jim Hutton said - OK. Freddie could be furious and vicious, but he always made up for his tantrums or wrongs with generosity and grace. This movie does not show it. It shows a completely lost wronged man with no dignity and grace at all who has to beg for all the wrongs he has done to his bandmates. And it is not about who was dropped by what lablel. Maybe Brian May and Roger Taylor have not been on any label of this scale at all! (I do not know for sure please correct me if I am wrong) It is ok that 4 strong creative forces have fierce competition and discussions "who's worth more". This is just not right to retailate in form of a "Biopic movie about our dear Freddie"....and stretch facts to fit the attitude. |
| Rami 08.12.2018 21:56 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Sorry, but it did not bomb in the UK. You can check the UK chart history.Rami wrote: German Album Charts: 1985 Mr. Bad Guy - Peak 11 / 21 Weeks German Single Charts: 1985 I Was Born To Love You - Peak 17 / 13 WeeksIt bombed in the UK, and it bombed in the US. German charts are irrelevant. The majority of the album sales were advance sales on his name alone, not the quality of the product. The label dropped him. That should say it all. When did the label supposedly drop him? |
| Rami 08.12.2018 22:07 |
The Real Wizard wrote:They must have realized that they had lost America before the European tour even started. That shouldn't have affected any aspect of the Works tour. Everywhere else their success reached new heights.Rami wrote: Concerning the Works Tour: Roger himself has stated it as one of his favourite tours.You're right, he did say that. But perhaps he was just referring to the European dates in 1984. Things went south after that. He's also said this was the tour where their show became stale. Sun City happened, and they were blacklisted by the UN. And they realized they'd lost America. There's not a chance that anyone in the band looks back on this period fondly. I have no idea why you guys are so aghast by history. Bands fall apart, and history can be messy. It's normal. Nobody denies that Queen felt jaded after the Works tour and that Live Aid came exactly at the right moment. But Freddie's solo album (which had been encouraged by the band, btw.) really wasn't the problem. I am not aghast by history at all, but I am aghast by the lies told in the movie. |
| AlbaNo1 08.12.2018 22:16 |
It’s ridiculous to brand Germany as irrelevant. How many German dates were on the European tours |
| Sealion 08.12.2018 22:21 |
AlbaNo1 wrote: It’s ridiculous to brand Germany as irrelevant. How many German dates were on the European toursIt’s not irrelevant. But if an album or a song by an artist from the UK isn’t successful in the UK, that artist is doomed and going nowhere. Success in Germany would have been considered as nice, but it wasn’t the relevant market. With Freddie the only goal must have been worldwide success. That didn’t work. Ergo the artist got dropped. That’s how the business works. For every artist. |
| Rami 08.12.2018 22:38 |
The Real Wizard wrote:I was referring to a documentary released more than 20 years after Freddie's death in which everybody slams Paul Prenter. That was "out of the blue". I was not referring to anything happening behind the scenes. In this documentary Brian stated that Paul Prenter single-handedly destroyed Queen's relationship with the USA. Yeah, Brian, alright...Rami wrote: Out of the blue, everybody slams Paul Prenter, as he is needed as the big villain in the movie. And Freddie crawling back to Queen "with his tail between his legs" (what a ridiculous phrase by Jim Beach!) after Mr. Bad Guy. Yeah, that was very clever plot hatching. Historical revisionism on two levels (documentary and movie).It's not out of the blue. Anyone who worked for the band in the 80s will tell you that Prenter was the worst thing that ever happened to them. As I've stated in another thread - the fact that a story hasn't been previously told doesn't mean it's not true. Were the new stories told in the Days Of Our Lives documentary in 2011 not true because they hadn't been told in 2010 or earlier? McCartney tells new stories about his past to this day. Are those all untrue too because Beatles fans didn't already know about them? You don't have to take my word for it, but in the interest of intellectual honesty, just know that there is far more to any band's story than superfans know about. Books and documentaries never tell the whole story.I think it is every Freddie Mercury fan's duty to openly speak out, as the movie is damaging his legacy, imprinting a totally false (and negative!) image of him into people's minds.No - his legacy is well intact. It's just a few hundred people on internet forums who are complaining. The only thing this film is ultimately doing is exposing more people to Queen's music. People walk out of the theatre thinking Live Aid was amazing, not about his difficult period. I guess you guys missed my post about Mercury smashing a mirror over his assistant's head, and the fact that there is only one brief reference to cocaine in the film. The film was far too lenient compared to what it could have been. I can only imagine what you guys would be saying about the portrayal of those things - and they actually happened. Paul Prenter being rude to roadies is one thing (that had been documented before), but this hate against one person, making him the villain in the history of Queen, is ridiculous. Of course, books and documentaries never tell the whole story. You tell me! OK, if you say that Freddie Mercury's legacy is still intact, I am relieved. And it is really good that you know what people think after leaving the cinema, because I do not. I can only speculate. What exactly happened in the smashing the mirror incident, we will never know. But what we do know is that all the following people have described Freddie and his relationship to the band members and his friends in a totally different way from the way it is depicted in the movie: Brian May, Roger Taylor, John Deacon, Mary Austin, Jim Hutton, Peter Freestone, Dave Clark, Peter Hince, Mack, Rudi Dolezal,... To me it looks as if Hollywood tried to give Freddie's on-stage persona an existence of its own, because it makes a much more interesting story than that of a caring diplomat. And what do you mean by emphasizing that there was only one brief reference to cocaine in the movie? This has got nothing to do with the way Freddie treated his band members and friends in real life vs the movie. |
| Rami 08.12.2018 22:42 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Yeah, but a very bad and damaging Hollywood fabrication.Saint Jiub wrote: Is there any evidence that Queen broke up the band for three years?That's obviously a Hollywood fabrication.Is there any evidence that Freddie had to beg to get back in the band, and was dismissed from the room while the rest of the band decided his fate?You'd have to ask the band or people in their close circles at the time. But I doubt you'll get a straight answer. The event in question actually happened after Live Aid. This has been spoken about before, but naturally people weren't too keen on even entertaining the possibility because it doesn't cast Mercury in the greatest of light. As far as we know, Freddie was the driving force to go back into the studio after Live Aid. So perhaps he felt the need to show a sort of responsibility towards Queen after his solo album. But that is miles away from the begging scene in the movie. |
| Saint Jiub 08.12.2018 22:46 |
The Real Wizard wrote:I really should proof read what I write more thoroughly. I meant to portray my displeasure at the implication that Freddie broke up the band (not Queen)Saint Jiub wrote: Is there any evidence that Queen broke up the band for three years?That's obviously a Hollywood fabrication.Is there any evidence that Freddie had to beg to get back in the band, and was dismissed from the room while the rest of the band decided his fate?You'd have to ask the band or people in their close circles at the time. But I doubt you'll get a straight answer. The event in question actually happened after Live Aid. This has been spoken about before, but naturally people weren't too keen on even entertaining the possibility because it doesn't cast Mercury in the greatest of light. Can you please provide some links regarding "the event"?> |
| Rami 08.12.2018 22:47 |
The Real Wizard wrote:It was always said that Jim Beach bought him out of the contract. That may be untrue, but that is the information we have got. So please give us a source for your statement.runner_70 wrote: We are still waiting for your evidence that Freddie got "dropped".What label was Barcelona on? I'll give you a clue - it wasn't Columbia. He had signed a two album deal with them. It is well documented. And again: Mr. Bad Guy did not bomb. It was a small success. |
| Rami 08.12.2018 22:49 |
A05 wrote: >I guess you guys missed my post about Mercury smashing a mirror >over his assistant's head, and the fact that there is only one brief >reference to cocaine in the film. The film was far too lenient >compared to what it could have been. I can only imagine what you >guys would be saying about the portrayal of those things - and they >actually happened. You are totally missing the point here. We are all adults here AND we've read the books by David Minns where he desribed Freddie's rages and antics and by Phoebe who took it for granted. It is not about facts, it is about ATTITUDE. Whereas even David Minns said - ok, there were fights, but I was written the most beuautiful song for me... and Phoebe and Jim Hutton said - OK. Freddie could be furious and vicious, but he always made up for his tantrums or wrongs with generosity and grace. This movie does not show it. It shows a completely lost wronged man with no dignity and grace at all who has to beg for all the wrongs he has done to his bandmates. And it is not about who was dropped by what lablel. Maybe Brian May and Roger Taylor have not been on any label of this scale at all! (I do not know for sure please correct me if I am wrong) It is ok that 4 strong creative forces have fierce competition and discussions "who's worth more". This is just not right to retailate in form of a "Biopic movie about our dear Freddie"....and stretch facts to fit the attitude.Great post!! |
| Rami 08.12.2018 22:55 |
Sealion wrote:But Mr. Bad Guy was a success in the UK.AlbaNo1 wrote: It’s ridiculous to brand Germany as irrelevant. How many German dates were on the European toursIt’s not irrelevant. But if an album or a song by an artist from the UK isn’t successful in the UK, that artist is doomed and going nowhere. Success in Germany would have been considered as nice, but it wasn’t the relevant market. With Freddie the only goal must have been worldwide success. That didn’t work. Ergo the artist got dropped. That’s how the business works. For every artist. And again: Where is the source that Columbia has dropped him? |
| Rami 08.12.2018 23:03 |
Sealion wrote:Don't be rude!The Real Wizard wrote:Runner won’t believe you, because he can’t bare it. He has been mocking Lambert for months, because he thinks Lambert got dropped by his label. How would it look, if the same had happened to Freddie? ;)runner_70 wrote: We are still waiting for your evidence that Freddie got "dropped".What label was Barcelona on? I'll give you a clue - it wasn't Columbia. He had signed a two album deal with them. It is well documented. |
| Sealion 08.12.2018 23:07 |
Rami wrote:There is no source. These things are usually not publicized. That’s why I could be wrong, but by evidence, it’s very likely, that they dropped him.Sealion wrote:But Mr. Bad Guy was a success in the UK. And again: Where is the source that Columbia has dropped him?AlbaNo1 wrote: It’s ridiculous to brand Germany as irrelevant. How many German dates were on the European toursIt’s not irrelevant. But if an album or a song by an artist from the UK isn’t successful in the UK, that artist is doomed and going nowhere. Success in Germany would have been considered as nice, but it wasn’t the relevant market. With Freddie the only goal must have been worldwide success. That didn’t work. Ergo the artist got dropped. That’s how the business works. For every artist. |
| Rami 08.12.2018 23:36 |
I think it is very likely that Jim Beach bought him out of the contract. |
| The Real Wizard 09.12.2018 00:40 |
Rami wrote: Out of the blue, everybody slams Paul Prenter, as he is needed as the big villain in the movie.It's not out of the blue. Brian has been talking about Paul Prenter since the 90s. Paul Prenter being rude to roadies is one thing (that had been documented before), but this hate against one person, making him the villain in the history of Queen, is ridiculous.You weren't there. Ask people who were. Why are you trying to protect him? What exactly happened in the smashing the mirror incident, we will never know.I posted a quote from the very person it happened to. We know exactly what happened. And what do you mean by emphasizing that there was only one brief reference to cocaine in the movie? This has got nothing to do with the way Freddie treated his band members and friends in real life vs the movie.Some people are upset about Mercury being portrayed in a somewhat negative light. By the mid 80s he was a heavy coke user, which contributed greatly to how difficult it was becoming to work with him (it's why Michael Jackson took off). It hit a point where he wasn't even showing up to mixing sessions for his own songs. I mentioned the coke scene to emphasize how easy the film was on him, when it could've been a lot worse (aka more truthful). I brought up the mirror story from 1976 for the same reason. As far as we know, Freddie was the driving force to go back into the studio after Live Aid. So perhaps he felt the need to show a sort of responsibility towards Queen after his solo album. But that is miles away from the begging scene in the movie.Again, because you were there, right? There was an intervention after Live Aid. The other three members said to Mercury, point blank - "it's Prenter or us." They shifted around the timeline for the film, but this happened. If you need proof, then spend a decade or two in the music business and you'll eventually run into the right characters who will confirm it happened. Not everything was written in books or mentioned in interviews. I think it is very likely that Jim Beach bought him out of the contract....which is as good as being dropped. That's just a matter of saving face and beating the label to the punch. And again: Mr. Bad Guy did not bomb. It was a small success.Mercury said his goal for Mr Bad Guy was to create his Thriller. He wrote about 15 songs, 11 of which ended up on the album. 500 songs were written for Thriller, and Quincy picked the best 9. Mr Bad Guy only went gold in the UK after The Works had gone 2x platinum, and it didn't hit the US top 100. Considering the money that was invested into it, it was a colossal failure. There's no way to spin this as a positive. |
| The Real Wizard 09.12.2018 00:49 |
Sealion wrote:Precisely.Rami wrote: But Mr. Bad Guy was a success in the UK. And again: Where is the source that Columbia has dropped him?There is no source. These things are usually not publicized. That’s why I could be wrong, but by evidence, it’s very likely, that they dropped him. Good PR is everything in the entertainment business. Statements are carefully crafted as necessary. It's what literally every player in the game needs to do. It is as important a skill as their artistic skills. Many Queen fans have somehow become convinced that May and Taylor suddenly became PR savvy after Mercury died, turning the band into a brand, harming their legacy, etc. The reality is - they were a hits band already by 1980, and literally from day one they were wise enough to keep their internal and business affairs as private as possible. But then when they tell one new story in the biopic, fans get their knickers in a twist because they can't deal with the reality that their favourite singer wasn't a model human being or constantly successful. While it sometimes makes for entertaining forum discussions, it's kind of disappointing to see how myopic and completely unaware of the workings of the music business so many Queen fans are. Looking forward to being branded as a Mercury hater or something of that ilk, as is the norm around here. |
| The Real Wizard 09.12.2018 01:25 |
AlbaNo1 wrote: It’s ridiculous to brand Germany as irrelevant. How many German dates were on the European toursChart success in Germany for a solo artist whose band toured Germany is completely irrelevant to the American record label who invested six figures of money into an album that peaked at #159 in the charts. |
| Saint Jiub 09.12.2018 02:33 |
The Real Wizard wrote: There was an intervention after Live Aid. The other three members said to Mercury, point blank - "it's Prenter or us." They shifted around the timeline for the film, but this happened. If you need proof, then spend a decade or two in the music business and you'll eventually run into the right characters who will confirm it happened. Not everything was written in books or mentioned in interviews.According to "Is This the Real Life" by Mark Blake ... As recalled by Queen’s former roadie Peter Hince, Prenter threw a party at Freddie's residence, and the place got trashed. “So Freddie sacked him,” Hince recalled. “Paul started ranting, ‘I'm gonna do this!’ and ‘I'm gonna do that!’ And that's exactly what he did.” link Did Freddie fire John Reid? |
| Invisible Woman 09.12.2018 09:00 |
It's just a movie. Some like it, some don't like it. This movie is just one version of the many that could have been made. They wanted to do it like this and so did it. My opinion is that they should have kept the facts, especially the facts that can be easily checked, for example - timelines. I also think they don't shown Freddie as a real person as he was, that they exaggerated with Mary and that they didn't give Jim the space he deserved. It doesn't matter is Brian a good man or not, he has the right to say what he wants but as I said, I have the right to doubt in every word which he will say or what said in past about Freddie. About Mr. Bad Guy album, I like songs from that album and I don't really care what success Freddie had with it. |
| Vocal harmony 09.12.2018 09:11 |
Vocal harmony wrote: . . ..I believe that the record company had the next Micheal Jackson signed up and ready to go. . . . .In my rush to type that post that line should have read.,. I believe that the record company thought they had the next Micheal Jackson when they signed Freddie to that solo deal. |
| Rami 09.12.2018 09:20 |
sorry |
| Rami 09.12.2018 09:24 |
|
| Vocal harmony 09.12.2018 09:29 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Can you imagine if they'd gone down a darker and more honest path in the film and had him shagging anything with a moustache preceded with lines of Bolivian marching powder.Sealion wrote:Precisely. Good PR is everything in the entertainment business. Statements are carefully crafted as necessary. It's what literally every player in the game needs to do. It is as important a skill as their artistic skills. . . . . . . But then when they tell one new story in the biopic, fans get their knickers in a twist because they can't deal with the reality that their favourite singer wasn't a model human being or constantly successful. . . .Rami wrote: But Mr. Bad Guy was a success in the UK. And again: Where is the source that Columbia has dropped him?There is no source. These things are usually not publicized. That’s why I could be wrong, but by evidence, it’s very likely, that they dropped him. The people complaining about the way he's portrayed in the film would still be up in arms. There are those who live life in a child like fantasy world in which their heroes have to be painted whiter than white no matter what. To be honest it wasn't only Freddie, listen to the pacing of some of the Jazz shows, it's evident from that Mr Taylor may have shared a mirror or two! That doesn't deminish the fact that Freddie by the early to mid 80's was embroiled in a scene that effected him and therefore the band badly |
| Holly2003 09.12.2018 09:46 |
The problem is that in the film Fred is blamed for everything. Because there's no mention of Sun City, Brian and Rog (and Jim Beach -- he offered the gig to them, and advised them it would be fine) get a free pass and therefore Fred's solo album, ego, drug taking etc gets the blame. This despite other members of the band doing solo albums and singles, taking drugs, cheating on their wives etc. Only Fred comes out of the film looking bad. There were clearly problems in 1985. However, there were clearly problems too before The Works. Roger basically admitted if The Works failed they would pack it in. But it was a massive success all over the world except the USA where it was a moderate success. They've always said, despite bickering fights etc, that Queen was the best vehicle for their talents. It was the "family" they came back to when their personal lives were difficult. There isn't any evidence that if MBG was successful then the band would've broken up. It's possible, of course, but only one of a number of outcomes. Why could it not be successful and Queen also remain together? That to me seems the most likely scenario. |
| Rami 09.12.2018 10:05 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Brian has talked about Prenter (without using his name!) as one of the many reasons why Queen lost America. This is miles away from the way he is portrayed in the movie. Never did anyone imply that Paul Prenter was the big villain who nearly destroyed Freddie's life and Queen's career. That is Hollywood fabrication at best and Brian's twisted fantasy at worst. Why an intelligent man like you believes this is beyond me. It is not about protecting Paul Prenter, it is about basic rules of logic.Rami wrote: Out of the blue, everybody slams Paul Prenter, as he is needed as the big villain in the movie.It's not out of the blue. Brian has been talking about Paul Prenter since the 90s.Paul Prenter being rude to roadies is one thing (that had been documented before), but this hate against one person, making him the villain in the history of Queen, is ridiculous.You weren't there. Ask people who were. Why are you trying to protect him?What exactly happened in the smashing the mirror incident, we will never know.I posted a quote from the very person it happened to. We know exactly what happened.And what do you mean by emphasizing that there was only one brief reference to cocaine in the movie? This has got nothing to do with the way Freddie treated his band members and friends in real life vs the movie.Some people are upset about Mercury being portrayed in a somewhat negative light. By the mid 80s he was a heavy coke user, which contributed greatly to how difficult it was becoming to work with him (it's why Michael Jackson took off). It hit a point where he wasn't even showing up to mixing sessions for his own songs. I mentioned the coke scene to emphasize how easy the film was on him, when it could've been a lot worse (aka more truthful). I brought up the mirror story from 1976 for the same reason.As far as we know, Freddie was the driving force to go back into the studio after Live Aid. So perhaps he felt the need to show a sort of responsibility towards Queen after his solo album. But that is miles away from the begging scene in the movie.Again, because you were there, right? There was an intervention after Live Aid. The other three members said to Mercury, point blank - "it's Prenter or us." They shifted around the timeline for the film, but this happened. If you need proof, then spend a decade or two in the music business and you'll eventually run into the right characters who will confirm it happened. Not everything was written in books or mentioned in interviews.I think it is very likely that Jim Beach bought him out of the contract....which is as good as being dropped. That's just a matter of saving face and beating the label to the punch.And again: Mr. Bad Guy did not bomb. It was a small success.Mercury said his goal for Mr Bad Guy was to create his Thriller. He wrote about 15 songs, 11 of which ended up on the album. 500 songs were written for Thriller, and Quincy picked the best 9. Mr Bad Guy only went gold in the UK after The Works had gone 2x platinum, and it didn't hit the US top 100. Considering the money that was invested into it, it was a colossal failure. There's no way to spin this as a positive. Just because Pete Brown said that Freddie had nearly killed him with a mirror we know exactly what happened? Huh?? Well, I always thought Michael Jackson took off just because Freddie used cocaine. Not because it was difficult to work with him. The film was easy on Freddie? You are joking, right? By all accounts there were problems in the studio with all four of them. Showing just one person who is the problem is not being easy at all. Yeah, I know that there was a meeting where Freddie had to decide between Queen and Prenter. That is quite understandable. Four people meeting and talking about the future. That is called professionalism. But it is still not what is shown in the movie. The scene in the movie is kindergarten. The success of Mr. Bad Guy is a question of perspective. I still maintain it was a success. And all this Thriller talking: Somewhere along the line Freddie must have changed his attitude towards the album, from being a Thriller like big production with famous people (Michael Jackson, Rod Stewart, Jeff Beck,...) towards a pure 100% Freddie Mercury album in a much more light-hearted way. This attitude is reflected in every interview I have heard of him speaking about the album. |
| Rami 09.12.2018 10:14 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Wow, simply wow! That is not the point at all. And what an outrageous reply.Sealion wrote:Precisely. Good PR is everything in the entertainment business. Statements are carefully crafted as necessary. It's what literally every player in the game needs to do. It is as important a skill as their artistic skills. Many Queen fans have somehow become convinced that May and Taylor suddenly became PR savvy after Mercury died, turning the band into a brand, harming their legacy, etc. The reality is - they were a hits band already by 1980, and literally from day one they were wise enough to keep their internal and business affairs as private as possible. But then when they tell one new story in the biopic, fans get their knickers in a twist because they can't deal with the reality that their favourite singer wasn't a model human being or constantly successful. While it sometimes makes for entertaining forum discussions, it's kind of disappointing to see how myopic and completely unaware of the workings of the music business so many Queen fans are. Looking forward to being branded as a Mercury hater or something of that ilk, as is the norm around here.Rami wrote: But Mr. Bad Guy was a success in the UK. And again: Where is the source that Columbia has dropped him?There is no source. These things are usually not publicized. That’s why I could be wrong, but by evidence, it’s very likely, that they dropped him. |
| Invisible Woman 09.12.2018 10:43 |
Freddie wasn't a saint, of course. But Brian and Roger also not saints. Of course that only one person not guilty for all but it's easiest to blame someone who is dead and can't say anything. As I said in the previous post, what kind of movie they wanted they did it and show in the movie what they wanted to show. |
| anadamfan 09.12.2018 12:32 |
I‘m not a longtime Queen fan and would like to share my impression of the movie. I have only been listening to them since the nineties, but wasn’t interested in their background, until Adam started to tour with them. I watched the movie twice. I don’t know, why everyone here says, that Freddie is pictured in a bad way. I went with 3 friends to see the film and we talked about it afterwards. My friends knew close to nothing at all about Queen, apart from their music. They didn’t even know Brian and Roger. What we learnt from the film about Freddie isn’t at all negative. We saw, how Queen was formed, their way to success, how creative Freddie was and that he was a driving force behind the creation of the music. We learnt about the love of his life and that he „turned“gay. His private life was complicated and not easy. He was lured away from the band to go solo and he followed the prospect of more money and fame. After a time, he came to be aware, that he lost it with all his partying. He went back to his „family“ and together they had a huge success at Live Aid. My conclusion of the film: Freddie was a genius, creative musician, but also a human being. I haven’t thought about anything of it as being negative. My conclusion: I find him much more likable now. As for the rest of the band: My friends knew nothing about them before the film. Afterwards they knew, that Roger was the drummer and was a womanizer, Brian created We will rock you and John played bass. The film told Freddie’s story, not theirs. I would think, most viewers saw the movie similar to me and my friends. I know some of it isn’t the truth. But in my opinion the essence of the story is. And we really enjoyed the film! |
| Dr Magus 09.12.2018 13:55 |
The success of Queen at live aid killed Freddie's solo career stone dead. Until then he'd been moderately successful. |
| Holly2003 09.12.2018 14:02 |
"I don't think Freddie really wanted to go solo," Taylor said in A Kind of Magic. "It's just that he got an awful lot of money from CBS. When it came down to actually doing a solo album, he did sort of miss us. He used to ring me up, and I'd have to fly to Munich to do his background vocals." -- Roger Taylor link |
| user1 09.12.2018 17:26 |
Blackvy wrote: His "as Freddie would be" speech really annoys me. As some user said in a previous thread: "they just keep on milking the Queen cash cow and Freddie is the victim to make them the money", which I agree. I second your idea to change the channel next time he's on.Spot on. The Real Wizard wrote: This stuff was known and spoken about years before the film came out. Money was a source of competition and conflict between the band members from the day they started making money until circa 1988. By 1984-85 Queen was falling apart (and not just because of Sun City), travelling in separate limos to gigs. It was all business. And then Mercury hired a guitarist to sound like Brian for his solo album. You think that didn't create further friction? Then his album bombed, which cost Columbia a pile of money, and they dropped him (it was supposed to be a two album deal). You'd better bet your life he went crying back to the band with his tail between his legs. If anything, the film didn't go far enough in depicting this. The fact that the band played well on stage says nothing about the internal state of affairs at the time. Live Aid was a second lease on life for them. The entire experience humbled Mercury, and the happy scenes you see in the videos for One Vision hadn't existed for years. Sorry / not sorry if all this ruins your rose tinted view. Being a fan of a band means accepting their story warts and all - not just your own personal version of it that filters out the inconvenient truths.Please stop spreading Brian May's lies as facts.Freddie would have like it! ;) |
| The Real Wizard 09.12.2018 17:58 |
Holly2003 wrote: The problem is that in the film Fred is blamed for everything. Because there's no mention of Sun City, Brian and Rog (and Jim Beach -- he offered the gig to them, and advised them it would be fine) get a free pass and therefore Fred's solo album, ego, drug taking etc gets the blame. This despite other members of the band doing solo albums and singles, taking drugs, cheating on their wives etc. Only Fred comes out of the film looking bad.Can't argue with that. But still, don't underestimate people's intelligence - pretty much everyone knows that people (including rock stars) are flawed, and that a two hour movie is going to make omissions in order to advance a plot. The plot focused on one particular person's journey, not all of theirs. Holly2003 wrote: "I don't think Freddie really wanted to go solo," Taylor said in A Kind of Magic. "It's just that he got an awful lot of money from CBS. When it came down to actually doing a solo album, he did sort of miss us. He used to ring me up, and I'd have to fly to Munich to do his background vocals." -- Roger Taylor linkWhat a wonderful anecdote. No doubt Mercury was having one hell of a battle within himself during those sessions. |
| The Real Wizard 09.12.2018 18:04 |
Rami wrote: Brian has talked about Prenter (without using his name!) as one of the many reasons why Queen lost America. This is miles away from the way he is portrayed in the movie. Never did anyone imply that Paul Prenter was the big villain who nearly destroyed Freddie's life and Queen's career.A ton has been written and said about Paul Prenter's influence on Mercury and the band, including the Days Of Our Lives documentary in 2011. Mack was recently quoted saying how Prenter attempted to influence Mercury to leave Queen if Mr Bad Guy was a success. This 1987 interview with Prenter sums up his personality and toxicity in a nutshell: link Well, I always thought Michael Jackson took off just because Freddie used cocaine. Not because it was difficult to work with him.Google "cocaine change brain chemistry," if you're interested. Snorting coke isn't like eating a chocolate bar - there are repercussions. It changes your personality. |
| Vocal harmony 09.12.2018 19:05 |
Holly2003 wrote: The problem is that in the film Fred is blamed for everything. Because there's no mention of Sun City, Brian and Rog (and Jim Beach -- he offered the gig to them, and advised them it would be fine) get a free pass and therefore Fred's solo album, ego, drug taking etc gets the blame. This despite other members of the band doing solo albums and singles, taking drugs, cheating on their wives etc. Only Fred comes out of the film looking bad. There were clearly problems in 1985. However, there were clearly problems too before The Works. Roger basically admitted if The Works failed they would pack it in. But it was a massive success all over the world except the USA where it was a moderate success. They've always said, despite bickering fights etc, that Queen was the best vehicle for their talents. It was the "family" they came back to when their personal lives were difficult. There isn't any evidence that if MBG was successful then the band would've broken up. It's possible, of course, but only one of a number of outcomes. Why could it not be successful and Queen also remain together? That to me seems the most likely scenario.Absolutely, except for Freddie's possible mind set at the time. If Prenter and maybe others in Freddie's circle convinced him he was capable of more than Queen, and he believed it for a while, then the Queen family cart would be well and truly about to run off the road, especially if the balance of the band being bigger than each member was upset in anyway. I still think had Mr Bad Guy sold in the numbers CBS were expecting and had the second album option been taken up and maybe a solo tour that would have resulted in Freddie leaving. |
| AlbaNo1 10.12.2018 11:19 |
It seems very poor judgement on the record company’s part to have expected huge sales from Freddie as a solo artist. It was after Hot Space and The Works but before Live Aid. Given the US Queen audience was a 70s rock one, was the perception, rightly or wrongly, not that the short haired, moustachioed Freddie had led the band into lame disco music. Why did they think there was a market for that when Queen had already bombed. |
| The Real Wizard 10.12.2018 19:26 |
AlbaNo1 wrote: It seems very poor judgement on the record company’s part to have expected huge sales from Freddie as a solo artist. It was after Hot Space and The Works but before Live Aid. Given the US Queen audience was a 70s rock one, was the perception, rightly or wrongly, not that the short haired, moustachioed Freddie had led the band into lame disco music. Why did they think there was a market for that when Queen had already bombed.All kinds of garbage was already being marketed as product and selling millions by then. So a solo album by one of the most famous singers in the world didn't seem like too much of a risk. He wrote Bohemian Rhapsody, after all - how bad could it be? |
| Sebastian 10.12.2018 22:27 |
Also, Michael had vastly outsold his former group. So, in context, it may have seemed like a good idea at the time. |
| AlbaNo1 11.12.2018 10:51 |
Do you mean George Michael or Michael Jackson. I don’t see any comparison with either .George Michael was only leaving behind Andrew Ridgely, and moved into a more mature sound and image,growing with his original fans who were mainly young. Freddie was going the other way if anything. What I thought at the time was it was just Freddie doing the type of music he wanted as an aside to Queen. It seems the unnecessarily large amount of money offered by CBS just caused a lot of ripples. |
| Sebastian 13.12.2018 06:03 |
Yes, in retrospect, it was obvious that Frederick's case was completely different to Michael's (I meant MJ, but you're right - GM could also work as an example), but back then, someone (not you and not me) could've (mistakenly) thought it could potentially be similar and made the (blatantly erroneous) choice to offer Frederick loads of money, (mistakenly) thinking his solo album would outsell 'The Works'. |
| bucsateflon 13.12.2018 08:29 |
Paul Prenter, Sun City and Live Aid are part of a spin-off melodrama created for the documentary Queen: Days of Our Lives (2011)Director: Matt O'Casey the basis of this script was used for the movie. |
| Viper 15.12.2018 10:24 |
interesting radio interview! despite brian's mistakes! |
