| YourValentine 11.08.2004 11:14 |
I apologise for the language but I am quoting Brian May. He is angry - why this time? Here is the offense : there is a Pringles commercial using a song called "I want It All" but it's not Queen's song "we all know and love", Brian will not get the money this time. Of course, something has to happen and so he came up with the idea to sue the people for stealing "his lyrics" "I want it all And I want it now As a matter of fact you'd better step back Cos I'm here to take everything" It's crystal clear that words like: "I want It All, I want It Now" are property of Brian May forever and ever. They are about as original as "Expert textpert choking smokers, Don’t you think the joker laughs at you?" Everybody must see this. I recommend to sue a German songwriter who wrote a song "Ich will alles und zwar jetzt" in the 80s. How about suing Jefferson Airplane for their song "Somebody To Love" ? They even had a line "you better find somebody to love" which is almost an exact copy of Queen's song line "find me somebody to love" - Sure, the Jefferson Airplane song was already in the 60s but there must be a way to claim ownership. Let's not forget Led Zeppelin. Look at their song "Thank You": "When mountains crumble to the sea, there will still be you and me." Doesn't that sound familiar? Okay, it was already in the 70s and Innuendo in the 90s but who would argue that this song line belongs to the much loved and known Queen song. Who had ever heard of Led Zeppelin before the Freddie Tribute, anyway? Go for it, Brian. We fans support you! Don't let them steal your immortal words. To use for a chip commercial!! Imagine how much money you could have made if they had chosen your song! I want It All and I want To Break Free From the sausage commercial that uses Crazy Little Thing Called Love. You are the champions, even Viagra users know that! |
| Sebastian 11.08.2004 11:23 |
You're right, it's like saying Roger waters should sue Brian for 'Show Must Go On' and 'Empty Spaces'. Also, Beatles lyrics coincidences or "paraphrases" in Queen songs are several, from the top off my head: - "somebody to love" - With A Little Help From My Friends - Play The Game: "it's so easy when you know the rules", All You Need Is Love "you can learn how to play the game, it's easy" - Sheer Heart Attack "she was just seventeen ... you know what I mean" - I Saw Her Standing There. One of Grease central pieces also has that line. - "Oh I need your loving" is done with the same words and melody in Eight Days A Week, and in Need Your Loving Tonight |
| Fenderek 11.08.2004 11:24 |
Brian should than remember one thing... ..."take another little piece of my heart".... Pathetic... |
| Roy ® 11.08.2004 11:24 |
He also has got to sue Robbie Williams for Let Me Entertain You. He had to give that song an other name. Robbie had to ask Brians permission Brian had to put his energy in Queen for bringing out some new stuff. Or old not released stuff. by the way......LOL. |
| John S Stuart 11.08.2004 11:30 |
Good post YV. You know I have a great respect for Brian and the guys - but I sometimes wonder if they live in the same planet as the rest of us - or if their own self importance has puffed up an arrogant pride. I actually heard these very same words from a spoilt three year old child, who basically took a tantrum at the sweet counter. Perhaps he should sue her juvenille ass too? At the end of the day Brian - you are a song writer. You do not save lives (like a surgeon). You do not eleviate pain (like a doctor or a nurse). You do not develop young minds (like a teacher) or keep society safe (like the police or a soldier). You do not work shifts, and can sleep very safely in your bed at night. In fact you do not empty bins, drive a bus, sweep the streets or tribute to society in any meaningful way. You are a very highly paid court jester, with no useful function whatsoever. This is not Brian knocking - but "I want it all" is not a copyrighted phrase - and I hope to god that we never reach a point where a precident is set that just because it is used by a poet, story-teller or lyricist, that the rest of society is deprived of such language. I do not know if this post is "True", it is just a "Rumour" and "I confess" "I heard it through the grapevine", but, according to "My Friend Stan" the phrase "I want it all" was in "Vogue" "Yesterday" so to YV "Congratulations". |
| Sir B.A Baracus 11.08.2004 11:32 |
I think Brian did that as JOKE!!!!!!!! A Joke, Do you know what that is? A little tongue in cheek?? You guys are pathetic, so quick to jump on Brian over something pretty funny!!! |
| YourValentine 11.08.2004 11:53 |
Is it a joke? Who knows... On August 8th there was the following article on Brianmay.com "There has recenlty been a Pringles ad, using a song called 'I Wand It All' by a band call Ateed, but it's not the Queen track we all know and love, but uses familiar words. "I want it all And I want it now As a matter of fact you'd better step back Cos I'm here to take everything" You can listen to part of the song on link .... it cuts off near the end of the 2nd chorus. It's the first track on the album that's advertised there. Opinions, please? Do you think that using the same words falls into the same category as sampling? E-MAIL" The email address was not Jen's it was Brian's. I am not allowed to quote Brian's answer to the one selected email - that would be a breach of copy right and I cannot afford to be sued by him - but you can visit the website and make up your own mind. The sheer idea makes me laugh - I can think of less self- discrediting jokes, really. |
| Sir B.A Baracus 11.08.2004 12:21 |
Lets simply say that I HOPE it was a joke. If not, then Bri has some 'splainin to do... |
| Gunpowder Gelatine 11.08.2004 12:26 |
Hopefully, it's a joke, but you wouldn't immediately think that from reading his comments. I don't think Brian's doing too well with the concept of displaying emotion over the Internet. He's said it before, around the time of the not wanting to be bothered by fans, that it wasn't meant to be offensive, but you can't really tell that just from reading what his tone was meant to be. |
| Brandon 11.08.2004 12:27 |
A joke. No doubt. |
| Hank H. 11.08.2004 12:29 |
I read May's comment earlier today and couldn't believe my eyes. I thought at least that the melody was similar, but I assume you listened to it and the "problem" are only the lyrics? If it's a joke, well, strange humour. Is WWRY, that is so funny, according to Brian, full of similar great jokes? I get more and more the impression that he really is becoming senile. How embarrassing that a person in his position can't controle his childish statements but has to publish them. |
| Adam Baboolal 11.08.2004 12:38 |
Solid proof that you're all Brian bashers. Makes me feel sad cause it doesn't sound like anyone bothered to read his reply... "Thanks for your messages on the version of "I Want It All" thing currently advertising Pringles on TV. Yes, I think we'll sue their ass!!! It seems pretty incredible that whoever claims to have "written" this wouldn't have heard the original Queen song. IT was a huge hit in their country. Yep. Sue their asses!! Then we'll look at the "stomps and claps" on the Tipsy single. Right ? ! Watch out people !! Love bri" Talk about a blatant joke!! Pim does the same thing everyday and we get it. How could you miss Brian's same joking around? Pathetic topic. Now I know it's really about Brian bashing. :( I expected more from you guys. I really did. Peace, Adam. |
| Kuku 11.08.2004 12:49 |
Adam Baboolal wrote: Pathetic topic. Now I know it's really about Brian bashing. :( I expected more from you guys. I really did.LOL! I agree. On the other hand... people really DO react to every single little thing that Brian says. If he is merely a "highly-paid court jester", he is a jester damn well-listened. |
| Rien 11.08.2004 14:14 |
just listened to some snippets of that album. I really like I Want It All. I think Brian gave this band/singer some free advertisement for their album and I would like to know how many hits that site has got, since Brian mentioned it. I just read Brian's comment about this and I really believe it's just a joke. Of course he isn't serious about this! |
| LittQueenie 11.08.2004 15:03 |
I just went to Brian's Soapbox and read about this - he definitely meant that as a joke!!! :-) |
| Daburcor? 11.08.2004 15:24 |
I think it was a joke. Atleast I laughed when I read it early this morning... :P |
| the oppositionist 11.08.2004 18:12 |
No im sorry, but barb is totally right on this one. Brian is quickly getting on my nerves and losing my respect fast. This is yet another topic on his 'fan site' which is just encouraging negativity on something that basically has no point. are you guys agreeing with him, because if so, id have to prepare to laugh so hard. lots of people on his site are becoming brian stepfords, agreeing with everything he says, just because hes brian may. sure, i love the guy and his work, but notes from him about 'webs sites that steal his burgundy coloured web layout' etc are going too far!!!!! i liked him being 'eco' brian- no smoking in public areas, no hurting dolphins. thats the one i like! |
| Gunpowder Gelatine 11.08.2004 18:15 |
I don't think the attack on that website was justified, but I think this recent 'Sue their asses!' thing was a joke, especially with the part about the Tipsy single at the end. |
| the oppositionist 11.08.2004 18:20 |
problem is these days brians posts can be so i dunno, odd and unfounded that some of us cant tell if hes serious or not :s |
| goinback 11.08.2004 18:21 |
Brian was just kidding...he was being sarcastic. If he didn't sue Vanilla Ice, he won't sue these guys. |
| Sebastian 11.08.2004 20:57 |
If that's a joke, thank god Brian's a guitarist and not a comedian |
| Adam Baboolal 11.08.2004 21:15 |
I think some miss the point. No-one is being a Brian stepford about this because, there isn't anything to blindly agree with. The real misgiving is that this thread is based on a huge misunderstanding. If people are still unsure if it's a joke or not, just read the very last line from his reply about the stomps and claps! It's just a joke that a few people couldn't see and decided that it was time to share their dislike of Brian. Of course, they're awfully silent now that Brian's full reply has been posted. Hmm... And hate to say it, but I'm starting to agree with whoever said that these people should not be looking at Brian's site. If it angers them so much, leave it to others who have no problem with Brian. Because if there is anything interesting like a Queen mention, some interesting story, etc. it will be posted in full on Qzone. Peace, Adam. |
| Adam Baboolal 11.08.2004 21:19 |
Sebastian wrote: If that's a joke, thank god Brian's a guitarist and not a comedianIt's in the same vain as a lot of the sarcy stuff from Qzoners like Pim, etc. If not a little more blatant. So you must dislike a lot of things on here, seb. |
| iGSM 11.08.2004 21:20 |
Brian: I just flew in from Australia, and boy.. are my arms tired. *Roger plays the 'badoom chish' which is regulatory after a joke* *silence* Brian: Is this thing on? Jim: No, it's not. Sorry. Brian: Rasser frassin'. |
| Saint Jiub 11.08.2004 21:36 |
In ping-pong a skunk occurs on a score of 7-0. Six points in a row scored for the Brian-Bashers: HairLice-Gate DarkMidi-Gate Allred4:3-Gate 46664Parasite-Gate SoapBoxSpoof-Gate and afew days ago: BenindormWhining-Gate The score is 6-0. Will Adam Stepford be skunked? Unfortunately no ... Brian rescues him at the last minute when Adam's "chips" are down. link |
| Adam Baboolal 11.08.2004 21:59 |
Eh? You know what it is Bullwinkle? I don't like it when people are this negative for no good reason. It doesn't have to be about Brian, it could be anyone. Because in the end, no-one deserves the amount of dislike/hatred that is thrown about around here. No-one. I think I might have said this before, but, it's getting more and more widespread on this forum. The newbies being a recent one. Dark's (Inu) posts mocked, etc. Was it Opp that said that there are internet bullies here? Peace, Adam. |
| Saint Jiub 11.08.2004 22:44 |
Dark's Posts Mocked = Brian Bashing??? A bit of a stretch don't you think??? ... Especially considering Brian bashed Dark. |
| Adam Baboolal 11.08.2004 22:55 |
Bullwinkle wrote: Dark's Posts Mocked = Brian Bashing??? A bit of a stretch don't you think??? ... Especially considering Brian bashed Dark.No, of course not. :) It was just an example of the weird nature of the forum. Inu is continually mocked regardless of his posts content. And yes, I know this is because of his early weird posts. Which brings us nicely to... The Brian bashing dark got. Yes, it was well deserved because, it was the most mind-bogglingly weird idea he had. He expected Brian to happily let him make and sell surround sound midi mixes of Queen tracks! But the kicker were the samples he posted on here. My god, they were baaaaaaaddd. And when Brian refused and people on here laughed at the samples, he didn't get why. Happy days! Anyway, the forum has been getting a little bit rowdy lately. Peace, Adam. |
| Saint Jiub 11.08.2004 23:45 |
Yes - Dark set himself up ... But did Brian act wisely in hammering Dark? Brian's bizzarre rantings seem to be the norm these days ... |
| iGSM 12.08.2004 01:39 |
Forum? Rowdy? I DON'T THINK SO! SOCCER RIOT! I haven't actually seen a soccer riot so I'll have to improvise. I understand though. |
| Mr. Scully 12.08.2004 02:35 |
Maybe Brian should finally learn using smileys in his posts. Otherwise it's impossible to find out what's a joke and what's an arrogant stupidity. |
| John S Stuart 12.08.2004 08:50 |
I paraphrase this from another thread. "...this is a Queen/Brian friendly site!" You know I love my children (nothing means more to me) but there are times when I have criticised and even on ocassion - chastised them. This does not mean I do NOT love them - quite the reverse. The same is true with our idols - we do not have to be sycophantic. If only someone loved Elvis enough to say he was too fat. If only someone loved Ali enough to protect him from one fight too many, but it seems that when you reach a certain "status", you breed a race of moronic "Yes" men, who have no spine to "tell it as it is". No one doubts Brian's musicianship or humanity, but let's get it in context here. He is not some sort of prophet or leader, and he leads a very priviledged lifestyle, yet from the safety of that ivory tower, he says some really stupid things. Too many celebrities feel that they are "Important" in some way. For example, what the heck is someone like "Posh Spice" doing on a serious polital programme like "Question Time", or someone like Tom Cruise telling me that his acting (for which he is very highly paid) in "The Last Samurai" was all about "truth" and how he sweat blood for that performance, or how Arsen Vengar felt that he was under so much pressure to win the final game of the season (even though the league was well and truely won about a month before hand!) Raising kids as a single mum - that's pressure. Living on a minimum wage - that's pressure. Getting up for work every morning for a dead end job - that's pressure. This is NOT Brian bashing, but it seems that some celebrities need to get their feet back on the ground, and tune into a dose of reality. I do not like everyone I meet, nor do I agree with everything they say (Do you?). So why should I expect everyone to like me? Likewise with all celebrities. I like most of Brian's stuff, but some I don't, and I think this sort of humour is tasteless - especially in the UK where we are turning into a far too legistic society anyway. Finally: It seems that great rock 'n roll bands sell their soul to the devil and not to "5ive", Britney or Viagra - or complain about their music being used as inspiration! But as musicians - they rock! So there you have it - my two pence's worth (and yes it is ironic that I should rant on in the very same fashion I criticised Brian for!). |
| Adam Baboolal 12.08.2004 09:28 |
"or someone like Tom Cruise telling me that his acting (for which he is very highly paid) in 'The Last Samurai' was all about "truth" and how he sweat blood for that performance," Who are you to tell him otherwise?? Were you there? Did you experience what he experienced? And, boo hoo - he gets more money than us. Awww... Does that really bother you? It's the nature of his industry, so what's the problem? Next question, do you dislike him? "it seems that some celebrities need to get their feet back on the ground, and tune into a dose of reality." Who are you to dictate how they should be? I also think you judge them too seriously. The only reason you're targeting them is because it's easy. Why don't you walk amongst the low-life folk who aren't on tv, radio, cinemas, etc. and really see the people to get angry about. "I like most of Brian's stuff, but some I don't, and I think this sort of humour is tasteless" Then I dare you to tell someone, no, everyone on this board that you hate their humour because that's exactly the same "joke" that is played out here every single day. Funny how you can accept it here, but not from Brian. And back to the start of this mess. Within a thread created out of a misunderstanding, you decided to word your negative views on Brian. I don't have to agree, sure. But then, when was the last time even I, said nothing but a good word about Brian or Queen, etc.? The point I'm making is that I find it annoying that within these threads, negative words are used in favour of ever saying anything good. But that's probably because it's unfashionable. It's too easy to say something bad than good. One may find fault with someone like Brian, but because it's so insignificant, why bother to mouth off about it at every opportunity? You won't find me singing Queen's greatness at every opportunity because why should I? Some opinions are too self-obsessed. "But as musicians - they rock!" Hmm... You can accept their music but not that they're human beings, like the rest of us who have their own ideas about the world? Yes? No? Same humour, yes? You must find yourself tasteless! :) Peace, Adam. |
| John S Stuart 12.08.2004 10:37 |
Adam, Adam, Adam, you completely miss my point. I am PRO Brian May and PRO Queen. I am not Anti-Brian! Nor am I jealous of celebrity or their status. Infact, I jealousy guard my privacy and believe that in many ways I am so much more fortunate than they are. But, (and here is the big tomallie) I do not have to be sycophantic and agree with everything he says or does. That is a little too Stepford for my liking. In this case, I think that Brian is out of line because even if meant as a joke, it is still in the wake of social and personal circumstances, in bad taste. Why do I have to appologise for that - or prove that I am actually pro Queen - because I strongly believe in what I have to say? I have a lot of positive things to say about Brian, and I have even ventured to say some in this thread (musicianship, humanity, charity etc), but come on Adam, as a public figure, he has to accept public responsiblity. (Remember John Lennon being bigger than Jesus for example?). |
| deleted user 12.08.2004 11:35 |
I think he was kidding. |
| goinback 12.08.2004 16:04 |
Yeah Scully he should. Brian has to remember that there are people from many countries reading his posts, and many don't understand English very well or the same sense of humor, so when he uses sarcasm a lot of people don't get it.... |
| Gunpowder Gelatine 12.08.2004 16:19 |
Another interesting entry today. Seems he's pissed off at noticeboards leaking information. Here's what he said: **Thu 12 Aug 04** YOU'RE MY BEST FRIEND ADDED TO VEGAS I actually wish people on these "noticeboards" would resist the temptation to show off what they know, at the expense of spoiling the element of surprise in our show ..... I like letting news of the personnel out, but I'm always really careful to hold back anything which will give away our surprises. oh well .... Dammit. Bri |
| YourValentine 12.08.2004 16:30 |
Since I started the thread - and I did not expect it gets so bitter: Where is the joke when Brian May tells his fans about this other song by a new unknown band and asks for opinions about a possible copyright infringement? Copyright infringmenet is a serious affair and when a rich and famous star with a powerful production company behind him starts such a discussion it's no fun for this other band. Someone said they did not sue Vanilla Ice but the truth is: they did sue and they even won an award for that song in the end (to be precise: Hollywood Records sued but Queen endorsed it). I am not a "Brian basher", whatever that is supposed to mean, I make up my mind about issues and I defended him on many occasions. But please don't tell me he has a highly developed sense of humour when he or his music is involved. I can remember numerous outbreaks when Queen did not win the acclaim he thought they deserve or when people made (admittedly bad) jokes about his hair, his clogs, his outfits or whatever else a celebrity encounters when he lives a public life. My initial post aimed at the annoying number of Queen songs in commercials recently and that a commercial is even an issue when a non- Queen song is used. I think the sheer idea of suing for such commonplace lyrics is laughable and I thought I made it clear in my examples of songs that were "sampled" by Queen. |
| the oppositionist 12.08.2004 18:27 |
Mr. Scully wrote: Maybe Brian should finally learn using smileys in his posts. Otherwise it's impossible to find out what's a joke and what's an arrogant stupidity.I couldnt agree more. I love Brian, but he is in a position of power and when he says things, he needs to make his intentions more clear, because he could easily scare his own fans away otherwise. Its just some of the things he has said recently have been frankly daft. He needs to put :D at the end of jokes! |
| FriedChicken 12.08.2004 19:08 |
Yeah, i'm sure Brian was being sarcastic |
| FriedChicken 12.08.2004 19:09 |
And if the only thing you can do is be angry at whatever Brian says all the time, why in gods name do you check his website |
| Hank H. 12.08.2004 19:10 |
Instead of smileys, Brian usually adds a funny little "haha" or "ha ha ha" after a joke. This time he didn't, therefore I have no reason to assume he tried to make a joke. If it was, as I said, strange humour. Your Valentine and John S. Stuart already pointed out why this remark is not nice, let alone funny either way. |
| Hank H. 12.08.2004 19:31 |
Fried Chicken: "And if the only thing you can do is be angry at whatever Brian says all the time, why in gods name do you check his website" 1. We are not angry on principle, but about what he says in certain situations 2. The content of Brian's comments and messages changed over the last years, and so did his image. Whoever doesn't realize this is not neutral but preoccupied (hello Adam). He disappoints me more often than I could agree with him. 3. When you realize that the "old" image that Queen and also Brian May used to have (high standards, quality, music, honesty...) was for most fans the reason to call themselves fans you will also realize that there is a big discrepancy between this "old" image and the new one that we get to know now (musical, musical, musical, rants, cancellations, advertisements, teenager collaborations, recycling of already recycled stuff...). 4. I still hope to find interesting messages there, which still happens. I could also ask: If the only thing you can do is be happy about everything Brian May says all the time, why in god's name do you check threads like this one? Arguments like the one you used are absolutely senseless and lead to nothing. Critique is always more productive than praising. |
| Óli Gneisti Sóleyjarson 12.08.2004 19:45 |
You seem to prefer your image of Brian May to the real Brian May. |
| FriedChicken 12.08.2004 21:50 |
Yeah, it's quite hard to see if it's a joke when you don't use emoticons We'll sue their asses! or We'll sue their asses! ;-) Mean the same thing, but in the 2nd one you can see it's a joke |
| Adam Baboolal 12.08.2004 22:22 |
"2. The content of Brian's comments and messages changed over the last years, and so did his image. Whoever doesn't realize this is not neutral but preoccupied (hello Adam). He disappoints me more often than I could agree with him." You really don't know, do you..? The only thing that has changed is a more accesible link to this person. And you're beginning to realise that you don't agree with things he says or does. Pretty normal affair with celebs. You don't know them till you hear their personal thoughts. And I ain't talking interviews. The thing my brother always tells me about Queen from past years is that they were very private and let very little through of themselves. You didn't really get to know them past their music. So, in fact, that's the idea behind his site. He's putting himself out there. Like him or don't. So, just like the music and be done with it. Don't waste your time on the site. I said it on the last page, if there's something worth reporting, you know a QZ member will post the information. Remember the No-One But You information? Óli Gneisti Sóleyjarson has posted a very intelligent view - "You seem to prefer your image of Brian May to the real Brian May." Peace, Adam. |
| Adam Baboolal 12.08.2004 22:29 |
Hank H. wrote: Instead of smileys, Brian usually adds a funny little "haha" or "ha ha ha" after a joke. This time he didn't, therefore I have no reason to assume he tried to make a joke.Did you read the last line about stomps and claps from the other track? It's hard to miss! I really don't get how people don't see the joke. Personally, I find it really obvious. And like I've been saying, it reminded me a lot of the stuff someone like Pim posts on here. Peace, Adam. |
| high-flying-adored 12.08.2004 22:50 |
Damn, this is quite heated. So I'm staying out of it. |
| Saint Jiub 12.08.2004 23:20 |
If Ice Ice Baby draws a lawsuit for a bass riff, certainly it does not take much imagination for stomp stomp clap to be lawsuit worthy. I mean if Dark's midis, a soapbox spoof, or Brian May's flea circus can put Brian's nose out of joint, it is not hard to imagine Brian getting a chip on his shoulder about an I Want It All commercial. ... but evidently Brian was joking ... |
| Holly2003 12.08.2004 23:30 |
Let's not forget Brian moaning that he had no creative control over the WWRY DVD, neglecting to mention of course that he (Queen) had gladly sold the rights to that show years earlier. |
| Virtuoso 13.08.2004 00:29 |
The deal's that Pim is recognized for being sarcastic and Brian is not.I've read and seen interviews which Brian rarely uses that sort of humour.It was obvious,well for me anyways,that he was...'joking'. |
| scallyuk 13.08.2004 07:42 |
John Stuart wrote :"and I hope to god that we never reach a point where a precident is set that just because it is used by a poet, story-teller or lyricist, that the rest of society is deprived of such language. If a phone company can copywrite the colour orangepantone 151) then anything's possible!!" I still think brian was joking though Neil |
| Krizzy 13.08.2004 09:59 |
God Bless Brian! Gotta love him! Kisses to Dr. May! Kriz ;o* |
| QueenSite 13.08.2004 11:23 |
a joke?not a joke? who cares? Brian try and concentrate on more important matters (for examples what about writing some new stuff, maybe an anti-Pringles song?) |
| Pandy Legend 13.08.2004 11:29 |
I notice Ateed's forthcoming album is called "Coming Soon". I wonder if they could be sued for yet another Queen "copyright breach". |
| Oberon 13.08.2004 11:57 |
Holly2003 wrote: Let's not forget Brian moaning that he had no creative control over the WWRY DVD, neglecting to mention of course that he (Queen) had gladly sold the rights to that show years earlier.Unless you know the details of the deal (?) I suspect that they didn't "sell" it, but could only get it filmed if MobilVision or whoever "owned" the film. I don't think he neglected to mention anything about selling it - I think in fact he's stated that he regretted the fact that they lost ownership (hoever that happened). he's a perfectionist, and I think nearly everything he does and says is driven from this fact. That's why the musical is at the forefront of his activities, 'cause he wants it to be the best for every production, which means he wants to be involved. I think he just doesn't think about how his notes on his site can be construed by the reader. Let's face it, he probably has to wade through lots of stuff even if Jen or whoever is filtering some out, so he probably doesn't have enough time, and writes some little comment, it gets sent to Jen to post, and he forgets about it until the backlash comes back to him!!! we're entitled to disagree with him, but I think he could be given a bit more slack and benefit of the doubt! It's the same kind of deal that happens with "newbies" on this forum. People are all to eager to jump to a conclusion which may be wrong. |
| Adam Baboolal 13.08.2004 12:31 |
"Let's not forget Brian moaning that he had no creative control over the WWRY DVD, neglecting to mention of course that he (Queen) had gladly sold the rights to that show years earlier." On the WWRY dvd... He wanted to update the audio mix properly, but the people that hold the rights merely wanted to spray some MrSheen on it! Of course, they got to update the picture and it looks great for it, so why not the audio?? What would you prefer, an up-to-date overhaul of the sound or someone pushing the high EQ up a little? As evidenced by the recent dvd-a work he was involved in, it's so worth revamping this stuff. Peace, Adam. |
| The Man On The Prowl 13.08.2004 12:38 |
I think a few words can't be considered property, and I think also Brian knows that! Anyway YV, I don't think Brian was moved by money when he wrote that. It's not a joke because it wasn't written to make us laugh, but I think he just wanted to tease himself, as he is used to do. |
| Holly2003 13.08.2004 12:52 |
If he was so concerned about WWRY he could've tried to buy the rights back. If he wasn't prepared to do that then he has no cause to moan. You can't sell something then complain you don't have it anymore. |
| Adam Baboolal 13.08.2004 22:39 |
"If he was so concerned about WWRY he could've tried to buy the rights back. If he wasn't prepared to do that then he has no cause to moan." Who said the company who has it were willing to sell back? Surely it's more cost effective to keep it and reap the benefits? Peace, Adam. |
| Holly2003 13.08.2004 23:48 |
Brian didn't mention anything about trying to buy the concert rights back so I'm assuming he didn't try. Given the moaning that he did, it's probably safe to assume that if the company had refused him, he would've complained about that too. However, even if that isn't the case, if the company that owns the rights didn't want to sell them, then that is entirely their business. They paid for the product and it's only fair (and entirely legal) that they should profit from them as they see fit. It's not as if they edited or in any way ruined the concert. If that was the case, I would probably side with Brian. In fact, however, ALL the reviews I've read say they did a good job. Bottom line - once Queen sold the rights, they have no cause to complain about what is done with them in the future. This is basic stuff Adam. |
| The Real Wizard 14.08.2004 02:42 |
Bullwinkle wrote: Yes - Dark set himself up ... But did Brian act wisely in hammering Dark?Are we forgetting that Brian then apologized to him a couple days later? Or is Brian supposed to be infallible, and cannot make mistakes in his celebrity status? |
| John S Stuart 14.08.2004 09:02 |
Holly2003: "Brian didn't mention anything about trying to buy the concert rights back so I'm assuming he didn't try... if the company that owns the rights didn't want to sell them, then that is entirely their business. They paid for the product and it's only fair (and entirely legal) that they should profit from them as they see fit. It's not as if they edited or in any way ruined the concert" Forgive me if I am wrong Holly, but I believe the reason Brian is unhappy with the "We Will Rock You" DVD is not so much the sound mix as such, but the fact that he had no post-production control. (In otherwords, he could not go back into the studio and overdub his mistakes). Let me explain; the process of writing an album from scratch to production is a long one. But, to overdub a live session could take a single afternoon. (It's a bit like a "Harry Potter" novel. It may take a year to write - but the proof-reader may correct the mistakes in a day or two). Therefore recent live Queen DVD releases - Wembley, 46664, Queen at the Palace, Freddie Tribute - and bet your ass Milton Keynes also - have all been subject to the "remastering/editing/overdub treatment. Now I know the arguments for and against - so I am not going to re-open that can of worms - but needless to say (and this is a personal slice of philosophy) I prefer the raw unedited versions. That is why I enjoy the "We Will Rock You" DVD. It is also the reason I prefer my videoed from broadcast 46664 and Freddie Tribute tapes. In otherwords - thank god for Brian NOT having artistic control! (But I bet that's seen as Brian bashing also ;-) |
| Pim Derks 14.08.2004 12:13 |
"Therefore recent live Queen DVD releases - Wembley, 46664, Queen at the Palace, Freddie Tribute - and bet your ass Milton Keynes also - have all been subject to the "remastering/editing/overdub treatment." Are you saying that Brian and Roger have re-recorded parts of Milton Keynes recently for the DVD? Or did they do overdubs in 1982 for the Channel 4 broadcast ? |
| Sir B.A Baracus 14.08.2004 12:24 |
The WWRY DVD makes a GREAT cd to listen to in the car! The raw power is amazing..... |
| Daz85 14.08.2004 12:28 |
He's guessing Pim. Somebody will have to compare an audience bootleg with the DVD when it comes out to know. The trouble with the WWRY DVD is that a lot of the crowd audience noise is fake, and the audio can sometimes be from a different night to the visuals. I find that highly annoying because it's quite obvious. They should have just stuck to one concert! |
| John S Stuart 14.08.2004 12:43 |
I agree Darren - you are quite correct - but could you imagine "We Will Rock You" with FURTHER overdubs? |
| Adam Baboolal 14.08.2004 17:48 |
Could you post the page where these new overdub sessions for WWRY are mentioned, John? Never heard of it before. Peace, Adam. |
| John S Stuart 14.08.2004 19:22 |
See Darren's reply above Adam: "The trouble with the WWRY DVD is that a lot of the crowd audience noise is fake, and the audio can sometimes be from a different night to the visuals. I find that highly annoying because it's quite obvious. They should have just stuck to one concert!" I did not say they were "new" - but that is one of the reasons why Brian cites "artistic control", as his dislikes, because it basically means that he can't return to re-work on it - because it is no longer his property to do so. As I have said, if he wants to do that, then it is his perogative to do so - but I think it's "not natural". (Mind you, I think George Lucas should have also left "Star Wars alone" too!). What is your view on "live" concerts Adam? Overdub - or au natural? I can see the reasoning for overdubs - but each to his own. |
| Adam Baboolal 14.08.2004 20:01 |
"but the fact that he had no post-production control. (In otherwords, he could not go back into the studio and overdub his mistakes" That's why I thought you meant new overdubs. I have no preference when it comes to concerts cause I like hearing both kinds. One is raw and that's always cool. And then there's the overdubbed and carefully remixed version - I like that also. I can't choose between them because they can be so different. Always interesting. Peace, Adam. P.S. I whole-heartedly agree on Star Wars:SE. The real problem is that George won't let us buy the originals anymore! If he put both versions on sale, he'd get more cash!! I believe that someone brought up the idea of making a branching dvd that would allow you to mix and match the SE and original stuff together! Which would be most welcome!! Oh and I hear that he's messed with THX1138 and the reviews I've been reading have not been good. Hmm... |
| Oberon 15.08.2004 13:11 |
Holly2003 wrote: Brian didn't mention anything about trying to buy the concert rights back so I'm assuming he didn't try. Given the moaning that he did, it's probably safe to assume that if the company had refused him, he would've complained about that too. However, even if that isn't the case, if the company that owns the rights didn't want to sell them, then that is entirely their business. They paid for the product and it's only fair (and entirely legal) that they should profit from them as they see fit. It's not as if they edited or in any way ruined the concert. If that was the case, I would probably side with Brian. In fact, however, ALL the reviews I've read say they did a good job. Bottom line - once Queen sold the rights, they have no cause to complain about what is done with them in the future. This is basic stuff Adam.As I said before, are we sure they did "sell the rights" Maybe they just agreed that the local film company could film and Queen Productions wouldn't own the film. As you didn't reply before with proof either way on how the deal was done, I guess you don't know, so are making assumptions based on your perception that Brian is "complaining". |
| Oberon 15.08.2004 13:13 |
John S Stuart wrote: In otherwords - thank god for Brian NOT having artistic control! (But I bet that's seen as Brian bashing also ;-)John, I agree on the overdubs - we don't they leave it alone? Part of the magic of a performance is everything - the warts and all. I don't mind them picking the best bits from a number of concerts, but to overdub, I'd rather they didn't! |
| Holly2003 15.08.2004 13:39 |
"As I said before, are we sure they did "sell the rights" Maybe they just agreed that the local film company could film and Queen Productions wouldn't own the film." So if they don't own it, how is that different to what I said? If they made a "deal" like this, they still obviously signed away their rights to the show. Otherwise Brian would not have any cause for complaint would he? "As you didn't reply before with proof either way on how the deal was done" I didn't reply because I didn't feel you had said anything I needed to reply to. But you're right, I'm not part of Queen management so I don't have the contract in front of me. I'm making an informed guess based on Brian's complaints in his article. I haven't done anything other than repeat his complaints and disagree with them. "I guess you don't know, so are making assumptions based on your perception that Brian is complaining." No assumptions at all. I'm commenting on what he said in the article. My "perception" has nothing to do with it. If you want to look up the article, feel free. I'll be happy to respond to your "perception" of it. |
| Adam Baboolal 15.08.2004 14:17 |
What article? Link? Or do you mean his Soapbox? Peace, Adam. |
| Holly2003 16.08.2004 00:25 |
I'm referring to Brian's comments in The Stepford Daily Chronicle, aka "Brian's Soapbbox." |
| GonnaUseMyPrisoners 16.08.2004 00:36 |
Jesus H Christ, girls! John S Stuart, you need a vacation. No one's perfect. My position here is about this ONE post ONLY. The post by May was CLEARLY nonsense and QUITE humorous, and meant to INDIRECTLY MOCK the sort of person that would take such a thing so very seriously. In fact, I'd say he was taking a stab at the very person(s) who brought the item to his attention, perhaps one of you worrywarts. Brian got along with the playful Mr. Mercury and the intrepid Mr. Taylor because he shared their HIGHLY INTELLIGENT senses of humor. Sense of humor. I Sense of humor. N Sense of humor. N Sense of humor. U Sense of humor. E Sense of humor. N Sense of humor. D Sense of humor. O ;-) |
| Adam Baboolal 16.08.2004 09:44 |
So Holly, are you actually going to give us a link or not? We'd like to see these comments you read. Peace, Adam. |
| Holly2003 16.08.2004 13:13 |
Adam, are your hands painted on? As you once said to me chum, go find it yourself. |
| Adam Baboolal 16.08.2004 13:36 |
What are you on about? When did I say that to you? Plus, it's for the benefit of everyone reading this thread, so... |
| Holly2003 16.08.2004 14:26 |
Adam: "This was posted maybe a week or two ago. Have a look..." link If you want to again read what Brian said then go find it yourself because I can't be arsed. This may be important for you but it's not to me. Can I make that any clearer Adam? |
| Adam Baboolal 16.08.2004 15:41 |
Did you post the wrong link? That's going on about a movie featuring Somebody To Love. Nothing to do with WWRY dvd. Peace, Adam. |
| Saint Jiub 16.08.2004 17:52 |
WHOOSH ... Over his head. I guess I need to explain it ... Haole's link referred to your similar inability to provide a link for the Ella Enchanted movie. Understand now??? Why could you not take a minute and look up a link? Nevermind ... I'll do it for you ... link |
| Saint Jiub 16.08.2004 17:54 |
"let us remix it properly in DTS 5.1 surround" |
| John S Stuart 16.08.2004 18:00 |
Here's what Brian May said Adam; "...really glad that the "We Will Rock You" performance DVD didn't win... instead of risking the EXTRA money to let US remix it properly in DTS 5.1 surround. They frigged around with the old Stereo mix to make a kind of surrogate surround. Unfortunately the old mix was crap. I only wish we could have stopped them putting it out in this shoddy fashion - it's the only Concert footage which we don't own - we let this company called "Mobilvision" film us to put us on an experimantal large-screen show for "concert"- type audiences many years ago. So we lost control of this footage". So Adam, in all honesty do you think this "frigged around ORIGINAL stereo mix" is all that bad, and, do you think they would have "really" given up control without some sort of pay-out? I have to agree with Holly2003 here. "if the company that owns the rights didn't want to sell them, then that is entirely their business. They paid for the product and it's only fair (and entirely legal) that they should profit from them as they see fit". She also goes on to say, "In fact, however, ALL the reviews I've read say they did a good job. Bottom line - once Queen sold the rights, they have no cause to complain about what is done with them in the future." So final question, do you think Brian has real grounds for complaint - or is it just sour grapes on his part? (And yes I am PRO Brian May!) I also agree with - GonnaUseMyPrisoners - Yes I do need a vacation - to somewhere tropical, hot, lots of cold beer and bikinis... long legs... and definately NO PC!!! |
| Adam Baboolal 16.08.2004 18:41 |
John S Stuart wrote: Here's what he said Adam; So Adam, in all honesty do you think this "frigged around ORIGINAL stereo mix" is all that bad, and, do you think they would have "really" given up control without some sort of pay-out?I don't mind the current dvd cause it is great. Picture was dealt with nicely. But for some reason, not the audio. While I'm happy with the current dvd, I'd love it if they gave Brian's team control for a remix. You have to understand that because I'm very familiar with audio every single day, I know exactly what could be done by talented folks like JustinSS. I can't believe they're (mobil) are happy to use the basic track from 1982(?) as the basis for their "5.1" mix. And I think I already mentioned that the company probably doesn't give a toss about it. I have to agree with Holly2003 here. "if the company that owns the rights didn't want to sell them, then that is entirely their business. They paid for the product and it's only fair (and entirely legal) that they should profit from them as they see fit".That's not in question by me. I'm only saying that it's a missed opp to make it sound really good. Very surprised because you have to remember that the boys did work on this back in 1982 with the company in question. So, why a sudden shut-out? Sure, they don't have to include BM, but why not get the audio remixed? She also goes on to say, "In fact, however, ALL the reviews I've read say they did a good job. Bottom line - once Queen sold the rights, they have no cause to complain about what is done with them in the future." So final question, do you think Brian has real grounds for complaint - or is it just sour grapes on his part? (And yes I am PRO Brian May!)Yes, but you're saying that somehow he's not allowed to complain about the sound. That's basically what he's annoyed about. It's not as good as it could be. Doesn't that bother you guys? That this company has basically done nothing new to the audio and focussed only on the picture. And here's Brian saying, hey guys, we could've given you something much better... I call it neglect. That's like Brian and co. NOT doing a complete new transfer of the NATO album into pro-tools for the dvd-a. And instead just using the stereo master-copy stuff they had lying about for mixing into surround for a dvd-a. Literally! It's the same process that is mentioned with the the WWRY sound came to be. So, are you two telling me that what Brian is saying, doesn't matter? Peace, Adam. EDIT: There's no excuse to not get it properly remixed into 5.1. I'm having to work on a stereo track for remixing into 4.1. The only reason I'm doing this is because it's the only audio that exists for this video. If there was more, I wouldn't "fake-it" unless absolutely necesary. And with the WWRY dvd we hear the director mention the multitracks in 82 mixed for the concert. So, they exist. And in that case I'm very annoyed that they didn't bother to seek them out for a remix. Or does that mean involving you know who..? |
| Saint Jiub 16.08.2004 20:26 |
Rank these missed opportunities from most to least serious: WWRY Concert DVD where "the old mix was crap" (in Brian's objective words) GVH DVD where 1/3 of the picture is missing and the 5.1 surround sound is really 4.1 because the center channel is missing. Live Magic CD which is heavily edited. Rare Live Video which is also heavily edited. My rankings: Rare Live: Editing is bad enough, but switching between 70's and 80's concerts within the same song makes listening and watching tedious. Live Magic: Editing GVH DVD: WS picture detrimental to some videos. WWRY DVD: 5.1 surround sound would only be an incremental improvement to sound that is already excellent. IMHO "crap" is an undeserved rating. Why would Brian give a "crap" rating to the WWRY DVD? - Mostly sour grapes. Why would Brian May publicly flog Michael Allred for a legitimate criticism of the aspect ratio of GVH? - Bruised Ego? |
| Adam Baboolal 16.08.2004 21:42 |
Bullwinkle wrote: Rank these missed opportunities from most to least serious: WWRY Concert DVD where "the old mix was crap" (in Brian's objective words) GVH DVD where 1/3 of the picture is missing and the 5.1 surround sound is really 4.1 because the center channel is missing.On the sound... Justin already posted why he mixed it as 4.1. He explained his reasons in an article on Bri's site. Tried to find a link, but I couldn't find it. I thought it was a mistake, but after reading Justin's article, it made sense. I was further convinced after mixing 5.1 myself and realising the same thing. It doesn't always work. The AR? Well, I dunno. All I can say is that's the way they wanted it. But I got hold of the promo dvd with flix 1+2 and that's FullSreen. I've never been bothered by the Aspect Ratio thing. Probably cause if I grow to dislike it, I can mix the new sound with the old videos. I've offered on here to do this for whoever wants it, but people are too busy complaining...go figure. *Shrugs* Live Magic CD which is heavily edited.Live Magic? Dunno - don't care. Never bothered with it cause most of it is now released. Or I could just get the bootlegs of the rarer bits. Rare Live Video which is also heavily edited. My rankings: Rare Live: Editing is bad enough, but switching between 70's and 80's concerts within the same song makes listening and watching tedious.And I think the rare live vid is notorious because of the Twins. You know who..! Live Magic: Editing GVH DVD: WS picture detrimental to some videos. WWRY DVD: 5.1 surround sound would only be an incremental improvement to sound that is already excellent. IMHO "crap" is an undeserved rating. Why would Brian give a "crap" rating to the WWRY DVD? - Mostly sour grapes.Just read about what I posted above. The mix that was made in 82 is dated. It may still be good. But it really isn't what it could be. Why would Brian May publicly flog Michael Allred for a legitimate criticism of the aspect ratio of GVH? - Bruised Ego?Err...didn't he send an email to the letters section of Brian's site? And as warned on the site, letters can be posted. But why don't you ask Bri why the aspect ratio is the way it is? Peace, Adam. |
| Saint Jiub 16.08.2004 22:49 |
"The mix that was made in 82 is dated. It may still be good. But it really isn't what it could be." If "It may still be good", why did Brian vindictively over-react by calling it crap? By his standards, the GVH DVD's, Live Magic, and Rare Live are crap. Pure and simple, his opinion is because it was an independent (not QP) release. I seem to remember Ghost of a Smile being ignored by the Queen Machine. When asked about it, the fan club erroneously said it was a bootleg. Just another case of sour grapes toward independent (not QP) releases. |
| Adam Baboolal 17.08.2004 09:04 |
I don't know about you guys, but I don't care about Brian's sour grapes or whatever record is disowned by QP. I just want us, the fans, to get the absolute best in the case of the WWRY sound. I think Brian must have called it crap because it is dated. I've said all this above. It ain't what it could be. And after listening to the new Milton Keynes snippits, it's very evident about what could be done. Peace, Adam. |
| Saint Jiub 17.08.2004 10:50 |
Why is it that Brian does not complain about the sound for Final Live in Japan 1985 DVD, but gives the WWRY DVD both barrels despite the fact that the WWRY concert has much better sound? Maybe it's because Final Live DVD is an officially sanctioned release, but the WWRY DVD is not? Adam - Why don't you e-mail Brian and ask him about the Final Live quality, and ask him when he will fix the mix and upgrade it to 5.1 surround? Surely Brian has more control over the Final Live DVD than the WWRY DVD. |
| John S Stuart 17.08.2004 12:00 |
Adam: "...here's Brian saying, hey guys, we could've given you something much better..." Good point Adam - and very well made. We all would like to see something made better - and if possible - maximise it's true potential. I agree with you there, but I personally still have a little problem with this. Namely that "live" recordings do NOT need to be "bettered", and I argue this from the point that during a live concert, the sound is all from the front anyway! While it is true that the studio version of "Bo Rhap" 5:1 surround sound may sound stunning, under concert conditions, the only sounds I heard behind me was ambient crowd noises - and seriously, there is no need to remix that! Furthermore, the "Bo Rhap" opera section I heard under live conditions - was bog-standard stereo tape anway! Finally, as a purist, I want to hear a live concert "warts and all" without any electrical tinkering about, remastering or overdubbing whatsoever. (But again I stress this is only my point of view). As the old adage goes - "if it aint broke - don't fix it". However AR is a completely different ballgame. To me, a widescreen "Bo Rhap" is at best a travesty and at worst a joke. I am lucky I have the true ratio version on DVD, but others in here are not so - surely that needs to be redressed before anymore tinkering with a live DVD? As for your offer to marry the visuals of the original Queen Greatest Hits DVD promo (in true AR) and the GVH DVD surround sound - can I point out that this is not a job that you should undertake, and whilst I think you may be "bettering" a defective product, what do you think Brian would say to you, if you wrote him an e-mail suggesting such? Remember the title of this thread? "Sue their asses!! "! |
| Adam Baboolal 17.08.2004 15:49 |
I don't understand your gripe about fixing up the sound of Live recordings. They DO need it. I'm not talking about overdubs being added. I'm just talking about making it sonically better, edits between songs, mixing of instrums and audience, etc. As for 5.1, well I dunno, no-one complained about the Live At Wembley dvd. And I believe that these simply encorporate the audience and some slapback in surround. Nothing radical or fake. Natural elements if you will.
Furthermore, the "Bo Rhap" opera section I heard under live conditions - was bog-standard stereo tape anway!Why mention this? I am lucky I have the true ratio version on DVD, but others in here are not so - surely that needs to be redressed before anymore tinkering with a live DVD?Tinkering? Do you mean that you'd rather have the GVHits in fullscreen before anymore live dvd releases? Er... I'd rather have the live discs before some fixup of the GVHits. I don't expect any GVHits re-releases for a long while. and whilst I think you may be "bettering" a defective product, what do you think Brian would say to you, if you wrote him an e-mail suggesting such? Remember the title of this thread? "Sue their asses!! "!Uhm... the title of the thread is irrelevant because it was a joke that people took to the hills with. Let's not dwell on this anymore, please. I wouldn't be selling the discs. I'd only be offering it to owners of the original discs (which I can check). And why would I email Brian about it? I think a little hush-hush movement would be called for. It's technically not illegal because of the backup idea with the original owners. As long as they own the originals and the flix tapes, it's fine. Have you seen the Phantom Edit/Remix that was posted on the internet of Star Wars Episode One? Maybe you've heard of a person who edited a lot of Jar-Jar out and unnecesary bits, etc. It became pretty famous and was hailed as a respectful edit by a fan. George Lucas, as far as I know, did not take action. Even though he knows of its existence. Peace, Adam. |