bryans permed poodle 15069 18.08.2005 14:20 |
link Enjoy!! |
Localboy80 18.08.2005 14:36 |
GROW UP!!! |
englishyob 18.08.2005 14:47 |
its not passable for BPP to grow up he's just a complete wanker who lives in the pasted and cant expect that Freddie is dead but life go’s on just like the show |
bryans permed poodle 15069 18.08.2005 14:52 |
Every word in that article is TRUE and you fuckin well know it. You grow up and smell the coffee. SAD.......people think they are seeing Queen. LOL!!! |
englishyob 18.08.2005 14:57 |
wanker LOL!!!!!! |
englishyob 18.08.2005 14:57 |
yes BPP is wanker |
englishyob 18.08.2005 14:58 |
oh forgot to say wanker |
englishyob 18.08.2005 14:58 |
QUEEN and PAUL ROGERS ROCK |
Whisperer 18.08.2005 14:59 |
Brilliant article! I agree 100%. |
deleted user 18.08.2005 15:00 |
finally some one else agrees about how bad paul rodgers sucks |
englishyob 18.08.2005 15:04 |
Jesus Christ people get a grip its only a band !!!!! Freddie is gone and missed but Brain and Roger are still Queen no matter what Queen was the first band i liked there still are my favourite band today i never got to see the REAL Queen play live and now thanks to Brain and Roger and a very brave Paul Roger people who missed out on seen Queen can now see the next best thing Queen and Paul Rogers |
PieterMC 18.08.2005 15:05 |
Bryans Permed Poodle wrote: link Enjoy!!Blah blah blah blah blah back in my day... Blah blah Freddie blah blah blah Rodgers sucks blah blah young whipper snapper blah blah blah... |
doremi 18.08.2005 15:33 |
Bryans Permed Poodle wrote: Every word in that article is TRUE and you fuckin well know it. You grow up and smell the coffee. SAD.......people think they are seeing Queen. LOL!!!BPP, I thought that the article, and the fans that the writer interviewed, regardless of whether their opinions are of the Queen+Paul Rodgers Tour...that they all DID articulate very well, what not only you...but alot of people on QZ have said. And some of the fans interviewed in this article DID say that they are HAPPY to be going to the New Jersey USA concert, but...because 1) Freddie died before they ever, and thus have never had a chance to see Queen tour 2) That they are going mostly for the experience of at least once seeing half of Queen being Brian and Roger...and out of respect for Queen. I think they said what you have been saying pretty much..just in articulated a bit better (and I do repsect your opinion as you are entitled to it). The comparsions between that of ACDC...as to Jim Morrison and The Doors was a spot on one (and I don't even like The Doors but I agree). Even I have said, if I go to the tour, ... 1) It's because I have NEVER seen Queen live on tour and they stopped touring the USA by the time I was old enough to see them, and then Freddie passed away. 2) I do adore Roger and Brian 3) Half of Queen is I guess what I have to take as opposed to nothing at all and I want to experience the only thing close to what Queen once was...BUT...it's not (to me and only my opinion), the same without John..and of COURSE, without Freddie. It's just not. I'm not downing it. I WANT to go to this tour. I just am realistic about this particular experience as opposed to the Freddie fronted Queen. 4) Geez, even Brian..in the LAW DVD interview says that yes..all of Queen's members were a great live experience, but that FREDDIE...was the ''vehicle, the great connection to the audience, especially on a stadium level.'' I think it's a great article that articulates many fans feelings in a realistic and positive way. Still wanting to see the tour, but for what it is and nothing more. As one last chance to see Brian, Roger and...yes Paul...kick ass to try to give people a part what was Queen....but...it's not as the article says what Queen was...without Freddie. |
bryans permed poodle 15069 18.08.2005 16:17 |
englishyob wrote: Jesus Christ people get a grip its only a band !!!!! Freddie is gone and missed but Brain and Roger are still Queen no matter what Queen was the first band i liked there still are my favourite band today i never got to see the REAL Queen play live and now thanks to Brain and Roger and a very brave Paul Roger people who missed out on seen Queen can now see the next best thing Queen and Paul RogersFuck off arsehole. Fuck the present it's the PAST that counts in this case. Double wanker!!! |
bryans permed poodle 15069 18.08.2005 16:18 |
englishyob wrote: QUEEN and PAUL ROGERS ROCKOn your own on that one. Fuckface. Triple wanker!! |
bryans permed poodle 15069 18.08.2005 16:28 |
Arlene R. Weiss wrote:Nobody wants Brian and Roger to stop touring but I do agree with the article when it says using the Queen name cheapens the memory of it's two missing members. I again tried to watch the version of WATC live from Sheffield (free via Queenonline). I had to stop it half way through it's just not right. Although Brian, Roger and John are excellent musicians, Freddie WAS Queen and anything done without him should not be considered as Queen END OF STORY.Bryans Permed Poodle wrote: Every word in that article is TRUE and you fuckin well know it. You grow up and smell the coffee. SAD.......people think they are seeing Queen. LOL!!!BPP, I thought that the article, and the fans that the writer interviewed, regardless of whether their opinions are of the Queen+Paul Rodgers Tour...that they all DID articulate very well, what not only you...but alot of people on QZ have said. And some of the fans interviewed in this article DID say that they are HAPPY to be going to the New Jersey USA concert, but...because 1) Freddie died before they ever, and thus have never had a chance to see Queen tour 2) That they are going mostly for the experience of at least once seeing half of Queen being Brian and Roger...and out of respect for Queen. I think they said what you have been saying pretty much..just in articulated a bit better (and I do repsect your opinion as you are entitled to it). The comparsions between that of ACDC...as to Jim Morrison and The Doors was a spot on one (and I don't even like The Doors but I agree). Even I have said, if I go to the tour, ... 1) It's because I have NEVER seen Queen live on tour and they stopped touring the USA by the time I was old enough to see them, and then Freddie passed away. 2) I do adore Roger and Brian 3) Half of Queen is I guess what I have to take as opposed to nothing at all and I want to experience the only thing close to what Queen once was...BUT...it's not (to me and only my opinion), the same without John..and of COURSE, without Freddie. It's just not. I'm not downing it. I WANT to go to this tour. I just am realistic about this particular experience as opposed to the Freddie fronted Queen. 4) Geez, even Brian..in the LAW DVD interview says that yes..all of Queen's members were a great live experience, but that FREDDIE...was the ''vehicle, the great connection to the audience, especially on a stadium level.'' I think it's a great article that articulates many fans feelings in a realistic and positive way. Still wanting to see the tour, but for what it is and nothing more. As one last chance to see Brian, Roger and...yes Paul...kick ass to try to give people a part what was Queen....but...it's not as the article says what Queen was...without Freddie. |
englishyob 18.08.2005 16:36 |
Bryans Permed Poodle wrote:I dont think so it only you and a few other on here that keep going on and on and on and on etc more people one here support the amazing new Queen and Paul Roger tour but in you sad little friendless world you think everyone is on your sideenglishyob wrote: QUEEN and PAUL ROGERS ROCKOn your own on that one. Fuckface. Triple wanker!! and if Queen WAS JUST Freddie why didn’t Mr Bad Guy chart higher then it did was released answer that one then |
Sharon G. 18.08.2005 16:40 |
Right On BPP!!!! |
bryans permed poodle 15069 18.08.2005 16:41 |
englishyob wrote:Bryans Permed Poodle wrote:I dont think so it only you and a few other on here that keep going on and on and on and on etc more people one here support the amazing new Queen and Paul Roger tour but in you sad little friendless world you think everyone is on your side You need your fuckin ears syringed mate.englishyob wrote: QUEEN and PAUL ROGERS ROCKOn your own on that one. Fuckface. Triple wanker!! |
Sharon G. 18.08.2005 16:47 |
I think Q+PR will be a great rock concert. Is is Queen ?NO! Queen was Freddie,John,Bri and Roger. No one else. Sorry . No Freddie + no John = No Queen. |
englishyob 18.08.2005 16:48 |
nothing wrong with my hearing what i heard was a new sound, the music of Queen played from a diffirent prospective |
Forever88 18.08.2005 16:57 |
Don't try to ruin it for the people who never saw Queen live...bitch. |
englishyob 18.08.2005 17:00 |
yeah spot on but it like talking to a brick wall when trying to explain to Sharon G. and BPP if we wanna see QPR we'll go and see then and screw what there say |
Boy Thomas Raker 18.08.2005 17:03 |
As tough as it is to wade through the mess that the children have made with this post, it's still possible to look at it with a fair perspective. The writer isn't BPP or Sharon. G, he writes for an American daily. His points are fair, he's not a Queen hater and he presents a point of view that a lot of people share. No matter how Brian and Roger present it, no matter the value of the Queen brand from a business point of view, it's one half of Queen performing Queen material. The Doors drummer successfully won a restraining order against the surviving members banning them from using the name "The Doors of the 21st Century." The legal argument is too long to detail but the judge sided with the drummer who said that he had no trouble with the other surving Doors playing Doors music, just not with the Doors name, because the Doors were 4 guys, not 2, and their most famous member by a mile was their singer. Sound familiar? |
mercuryrocks 18.08.2005 17:16 |
It is a great article! Especially the last two lines are SO TRUE! I think that Brian and Roger are great musicians and they should have every right to still make music and tour. The point is that they are using the name QUEEN! They are NOT Queen! And everybody knows that! Queen are (as already mentioned like a 1000 times) John, Roger, Brian and Freddie! Brian and Roger are great musicians so I think that they could have used another name. I think they would still get success. But obviously, they wanted success so bad that they used the name Queen. Then they were SURE that they would get success. For example, my parents like Queen. They listened to Queen when they were young. But they were never fans like the members here on Queenzone are. The only member of the band that my parents remember and know the name of is Freddie Mercury. THAT IS THE POINT! Queen were John, Roger, Brian and Freddie. Freddie could not do it without the others, but he is still the one that most people remember and the one that has made history because he is the greatest front man ever. That means: The new tour will really cheapen the memory of what Queen was all about! Queen were SO F***ING great, that if my parents went to a Queen concert now, they would get SO disappointed, and that would be such a shame! It is really a shame to cheapen the memory of a band that was SO great! I know that many people really appreciate this new tour. And I am happy for them! But there are some Queen fans out there (including myself) that would expect to hear QUEEN if we would be going to one of the concerts on this tour. Obviously, that is not what we would be going to hear! We would be going to hear two members of the late band Queen and Paul Rodgers. Even if you love this new tour, you will know it! This is NOT Queen! That is not a question of opinion. It is a statement! |
bryans permed poodle 15069 18.08.2005 17:49 |
*3* Forever88 wrote: Don't try to ruin it for the people who never saw Queen live...bitch.Your still not seeing Queen live THAT IS THE POINT. Brian and Roger are only using the name Queen to make more cash. |
bryans permed poodle 15069 18.08.2005 17:51 |
englishyob wrote: nothing wrong with my hearing what i heard was a new sound, the music of Queen played from a diffirent prospectiveSo if thats the case they offer nothing more than what a tribute band would. + a tribute band would not charge you £50.00 a ticket |
doremi 18.08.2005 18:07 |
BHM 0271 wrote: As tough as it is to wade through the mess that the children have made with this post, it's still possible to look at it with a fair perspective. The writer isn't BPP or Sharon. G, he writes for an American daily. His points are fair, he's not a Queen hater and he presents a point of view that a lot of people share. No matter how Brian and Roger present it, no matter the value of the Queen brand from a business point of view, it's one half of Queen performing Queen material. The Doors drummer successfully won a restraining order against the surviving members banning them from using the name "The Doors of the 21st Century." The legal argument is too long to detail but the judge sided with the drummer who said that he had no trouble with the other surving Doors playing Doors music, just not with the Doors name, because the Doors were 4 guys, not 2, and their most famous member by a mile was their singer. Sound familiar? mercuryrocks wrote: It is a great article! Especially the last two lines are SO TRUE! I think that Brian and Roger are great musicians and they should have every right to still make music and tour. The point is that they are using the name QUEEN! They are NOT Queen! And everybody knows that! Queen are (as already mentioned like a 1000 times) John, Roger, Brian and Freddie! Brian and Roger are great musicians so I think that they could have used another name. I think they would still get success. But obviously, they wanted success so bad that they used the name Queen. Then they were SURE that they would get success. For example, my parents like Queen. They listened to Queen when they were young. But they were never fans like the members here on Queenzone are. The only member of the band that my parents remember and know the name of is Freddie Mercury. THAT IS THE POINT! Queen were John, Roger, Brian and Freddie. Freddie could not do it without the others, but he is still the one that most people remember and the one that has made history because he is the greatest front man ever. That means: The new tour will really cheapen the memory of what Queen was all about! Queen were SO F***ING great, that if my parents went to a Queen concert now, they would get SO disappointed, and that would be such a shame! It is really a shame to cheapen the memory of a band that was SO great! I know that many people really appreciate this new tour. And I am happy for them! But there are some Queen fans out there (including myself) that would expect to hear QUEEN if we would be going to one of the concerts on this tour. Obviously, that is not what we would be going to hear! We would be going to hear two members of the late band Queen and Paul Rodgers. Even if you love this new tour, you will know it! This is NOT Queen! That is not a question of opinion. It is a statement!BPP...maybe my post was too vague and diplomatic...but..I was trying to say that I agree with the writer...and with these 2 posters. I want to see Brian and Roger, but I persoanlly still do NOT think they should call it Queen. Obviously they are doing it for the brand name to make money as so did the 2 members of the Doors because it does not sound quite as good to say... ''Brian May and Roger Taylor, perform the music of Queen with guest Paul Rodgers.'' It's the Queen brand name that sells those $200 tickets and they know it. I have never been comfortable with them using the name though and I still agree to way back when this difference of opinion on this board started, when quite a few people used as the BEST argument I thought, that each member of The Beatles when they broke up, NEVER toured under the tag of The Beatles. They always used their own name, be it Paul or John, what have you. But, that's because each member was a star in their own right. Brian and Roger, much as I love them and much as Queen fans lov |
bryans permed poodle 15069 18.08.2005 18:23 |
Arlene R. Weiss wrote:BHM 0271 wrote: As tough as it is to wade through the mess that the children have made with this post, it's still possible to look at it with a fair perspective. The writer isn't BPP or Sharon. G, he writes for an American daily. His points are fair, he's not a Queen hater and he presents a point of view that a lot of people share. No matter how Brian and Roger present it, no matter the value of the Queen brand from a business point of view, it's one half of Queen performing Queen material. The Doors drummer successfully won a restraining order against the surviving members banning them from using the name "The Doors of the 21st Century." The legal argument is too long to detail but the judge sided with the drummer who said that he had no trouble with the other surving Doors playing Doors music, just not with the Doors name, because the Doors were 4 guys, not 2, and their most famous member by a mile was their singer. Sound familiar?mercuryrocks wrote: It is a great article! Especially the last two lines are SO TRUE! I think that Brian and Roger are great musicians and they should have every right to still make music and tour. The point is that they are using the name QUEEN! They are NOT Queen! And everybody knows that! Queen are (as already mentioned like a 1000 times) John, Roger, Brian and Freddie! Brian and Roger are great musicians so I think that they could have used another name. I think they would still get success. But obviously, they wanted success so bad that they used the name Queen. Then they were SURE that they would get success. For example, my parents like Queen. They listened to Queen when they were young. But they were never fans like the members here on Queenzone are. The only member of the band that my parents remember and know the name of is Freddie Mercury. THAT IS THE POINT! Queen were John, Roger, Brian and Freddie. Freddie could not do it without the others, but he is still the one that most people remember and the one that has made history because he is the greatest front man ever. That means: The new tour will really cheapen the memory of what Queen was all about! Queen were SO F***ING great, that if my parents went to a Queen concert now, they would get SO disappointed, and that would be such a shame! It is really a shame to cheapen the memory of a band that was SO great! I know that many people really appreciate this new tour. And I am happy for them! But there are some Queen fans out there (including myself) that would expect to hear QUEEN if we would be going to one of the concerts on this tour. Obviously, that is not what we would be going to hear! We would be going to hear two members of the late band Queen and Paul Rodgers. Even if you love this new tour, you will know it! This is NOT Queen! That is not a question of opinion. It is a statement!BPP...maybe my post was too vague and diplomatic...but..I was trying to say that I agree with the writer...and with these 2 posters. |
Oberon 18.08.2005 18:51 |
It only cheapens the name if YOU let it. So they've used the name? So what? If you, Poodle whatever can't make the distinction regardless of a name, then that's your problem. If people don't realise that this isn't Queen proper, then that's their problem. All I know it that there's a band that went out under a certain billing and it entertained. It wasn't the same, but it was good and they played great shows. I never saw the "true" Queen, so again, I'm thankful for this. It's even better than Brian or Roger solo (which was also good) and I enjoyed all three shows - even Wembley. You can have your opinion and so can the writer of the article, but in making your arguement you don't acknowledge that BR, RT and PR have stated openly in the press that this is SOMETHING NEW and DIFFERENT. They haven't in fact pretended it's something other than what we know it is, which is one half of Queen with PR and three backing musicians. The fact that they are using the name Queen is irrelevant to me. An album of new material under the Queen label would probably be a different thing. But a tour and live CD/DVD of existing Queen songs is fine in my opinion. In short, OPEN YOUR MIND. If you keep it closed, it'll just get dusty.... |
teleman 18.08.2005 19:18 |
The writer does make some valid points and you are entitled to your opinion..
I didn't see where he said Paul Rodgers sucks. Personally I think Paul Rodgers is a decent singer.
Legally Brian and Roger have the right to use the name Queen.
Endless bitching and moaning about it is pointless
Bryans Permed Poodle wrote:There is a Queen tribute act playing 3 nights at Massey Hall in Toronto in October. Best seats cost CDN$65 + $11.68 in service charges. After taxes $88.18englishyob wrote: nothing wrong with my hearing what i heard was a new sound, the music of Queen played from a diffirent prospectiveSo if thats the case they offer nothing more than what a tribute band would. + a tribute band would not charge you £50.00 a ticket I think I'd rather pay more and see one of my guitar heroes play the songs he recorded Freddie was great but he is dead. It must be nice to have so few concerns in your life that you can expend so much energy endlessly bitching, whining and moaning about Q+PR. |
deleted user 18.08.2005 19:40 |
englishyob wrote: Freddie is gone and missed but Brain and Roger are still Queen no matter whathate to break it to ya, but brian and roger are not queen, theyre qu 1/2, only half of queen |
*3*Playful as a pussycat 18.08.2005 20:19 |
BPP...yes, u r entitled to your own opinion, but GET A GRIP!!!! u cant change what they r doing so why even rant about it? yes, it isnt Queen, but the only reason (i presume) that they are going under the name of Queen is so everybody who doesn't know about Brian and Roger (shocking, i know) knows that they are from Queen. and it's QUEEN + PAUL RODGERS!!!!!!!! GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD! not Queen, QUEEN +++++++++++++ PAUL RODGERS!!!!!! BIG DIFFERENCE!!!!! btw, if Queen is your favorite band (i dont know if they are or not, so ill just guess that they are) why dont you support the 50% of it that are touring again? or at least appreciate the fact that Brian and Roger are having a good time? *sigh* |
Boy Thomas Raker 18.08.2005 21:07 |
First off, I think BPP has contributed zero to this board. However, he feels that the writer wrote a fair article about who constiutes Queen, so why does he have to "get a grip?" Second, Oberon, you say "the fact that they are using the name Queen is irrelevant to me", and that "a tour and live CD/DVD of existing Queen songs is fine in my opinion", then finish with "in short, OPEN YOUR MIND." The fact that they are using the name Queen (and I'm not taking sides here) is obviously relevant and annoying to a lot of people, including a daily columnist in one of the two US cities Queen + PR are playing this tour who thinks it cheapens the group to do so. And they can perform a tour and record a CD which is fine in YOUR opinion. But people who disagree with your positions have to open THEIR minds? Why? Why don't you open yours and realize that a lot of people are offended by Brian and Roger going out as Queen? People who were there when Queen were listed by name on every album and the names Paul Rodgers, Jamie Moses & Spike Edney weren't listed as members. You need to get off your soapbox and look at both sides of the argument before deciding your opinion is the only one which matters. |
The Real Wizard 19.08.2005 00:11 |
After sifting my way through all of the children and their immaturity, I finally have a reply. I agree with the article. If we weren't big fans of Queen, we'd be saying the exact same thing. It's two of the original members, and commercially speaking, not the most important two members. To 99% of the general music audience, Freddie Mercury was Queen. To 90% of them, it's Brian and Roger who? I'm seeing Queen + Rodgers because it's the closest thing to Queen I'll ever see in my lifetime. Is it Queen? No. But is it close to Queen? Yes. The spirit of Queen will be there, and that's why it will be one of the greatest days of my life. 57 more days. |
greaserkat 19.08.2005 00:22 |
IF Freddie was alive today, and be truthful to what you really think he would say, and he was retired from music completely like John is, and Brian and Roger were going to tour with Paul as the frontman, do you think Freddie would be ok with them using the name "Queen." |
Richard Orchard 19.08.2005 00:55 |
i agree with the general thrust of the article as well... |
YourValentine 19.08.2005 03:47 |
Nobody says that Queen+Paul Rodgers are the same as Queen used to be with Freddie and John Deacon. The question is: should they use the name Queen. The answer for me is: of course they should. It's the name that gets all the promotion and it's the name that makes people buy the tickets. I saw four concerts and they were amazing. They lived up to the name and the heritage. People tend to say that Freddie would not have liked this or that. If Freddie were alive and retired, would they still use the name? Who knows? He is not alive. But one thing is for sure: he did everything possible in his will to enable the surviving members to do what they want with the Queen name and heritage. No family member has a say in band decisions, it's all up to the band and the executor of the will: band manager Jim Beach. (much different from the Beatles who have to ask Yoko Ono about everything) Brian, John, Roger and Freddie's estate agree on using the Queen name for this tour, so just accept it, it's their band, their lives, their careers. |
AmeriQueen 19.08.2005 04:19 |
My observation is that every bad review is from someone who has heard about the tour, but hasn't gone. Every good review is a surprised person who saw the show and loved it. The bottom line is that most of the skeptics won't go to the show because it's not Freddie. The true fans who should be the most skeptical will go and, I have noticed, for such an artificial tour, they sure do seem to cheer and scream their asses off. I know I did! The best thing about the show to a true fan, in my opinion, is that without Freddie, Brian and Roger finally sing a huge part of the show. That was a surprise that I wasn't expecting. Paul Rodgers is great but I still prefer Brian and Roger over him with most any song. I think they are only half as good as the old Queen. A band half as good as Queen is a band that is considerably better than most rock bands ever and way better than any of the shit that comes out today. Furthermore, why is it that people are so ignorant to say that Freddie was Queen. Queen would have been great without Brian May, but would it have been nearly as good or distinct?? That guitar sound is a signature for them as much as Freddie's voice. Furthermore, I loved it the other day when my friend was arguing that Freddie was the best thing about the band. The part I loved was when I asked what her favorite songs were and she named 5(I Want to Break Free, You're My Best Friend, These Are the Days of our Lives, The Prophet Song and Spread Your Wings). My response was, "Then it's not the Queen you like because John Deacon isn't there, the guy who wrote 3 of those songs. Notice not one was a Freddie written track. And just to note, I notice that all of my friends prefer The Game to all other Queen albums. I guess it's an American thing but I sure as hell don't get it. How can The Game be their best album in the USA. As great as it is, I would have thought it to be their worst album to date(with the possible exception of Jazz). At least you British figured it out.) I am going to the L.A. show which is great but I cannot tell you Brits how perfect and pleased I was to see my first Queen show in England among people with far superior music taste than us Americans. Now if you fuckers could just learn how to cook! |
mercuryrocks 19.08.2005 06:46 |
greaserkat wrote: IF Freddie was alive today, and be truthful to what you really think he would say, and he was retired from music completely like John is, and Brian and Roger were going to tour with Paul as the frontman, do you think Freddie would be ok with them using the name "Queen."No! He invented the name and he knew just how big and important a part of the band he was. I think he would feel offended and left out (even if he had chosen to retire himself)! |
tomyorenes 19.08.2005 07:20 |
I went to their Show in Madrid last april, and I must say that I enjoyed the show, but I must say a couple of things about Q+PR: 1. They are great as a band but obviously Freddie was only there when they used the Bohemian Rhapsody video. When Brian dedicated Love Of My Live to Freddie it was very stunnig how people reacted by shouting Freddie's name for at least a couple of minutes. I was shocked. I must say that even Brian was shocked, I think. But if you ask me that I like them going out on tour with PR, my answer is NO, because they can sing their songs much better than Paul does, just my opinion. 2. Unfortunately for Brian and Roger, the only member that here in Spain most people remember from Queen is Freddie, that's the truth, and I'm afraid that sometimes what they remember from him is not precisely how well he did sing. So using the name "Queen" is not only a chance for them, it's also a duty because if they were credited as Brian May, Roger Taylor and PR, only Queen fans here in Spain like me would go to see them play. Sad but true. 3. The only good things, in my opinion, they have done correctly by using "Queen" since Freddie's Tribute Concert were when they played TSMGO with Elton John and the Bejart Ballet, the WWRY musical and No-One But You. Everything else they've done except 46664 was spoiling the band's name, because WATC with Robbie Williams was awful, WWRY with Five was nothing but S**T, and this tour would have been great if they have played their stuff without PR, even if they used the name Queen, I don't care. I hope noone gets angry, but that´s what I really think guys. Thank U |
QUEENROCKS_1991 19.08.2005 08:29 |
Queen is Queen They played Queen songs freddie say THE SHOW MUST GO ON and it will |
its_a_hard_life 19.08.2005 09:10 |
I like what you say QUEENROCKS_1991 I agree. |
Bobby_brown 19.08.2005 09:47 |
Bryans Permed Poodle wrote: Nobody wants Brian and Roger to stop touring but I do agree with the article when it says using the Queen name cheapens the memory of it's two missing members. I again tried to watch the version of WATC live from Sheffield (free via Queenonline). I had to stop it half way through it's just not right. Although Brian, Roger and John are excellent musicians, Freddie WAS Queen and anything done without him should not be considered as Queen END OF STORY.Let me ask you something, if instead of Queen they would choose another name would it make the music more enjoyable to you? Would you have watched WATC to the end? Take care |
@ndy38 19.08.2005 11:07 |
If they want to go on tour let them. Although i don't see them as Queen at all, it's something very different. It was always going to be without John and Freddie. |
Boy Thomas Raker 19.08.2005 11:08 |
Since all of your responses have been knowledgeable and well thought out Bobby Brown, I won't attmpt to answer your question to the One Trick Pony known as BPP, as we know what his answer would be. But for me, the issue is the way that's it's been handled in the Queen camp. I believe that Queen died on Nov. 24/1991. I think it's great that Brian and Roger are playing again. They have earned the right to call themselves Queen. However, Brian and Roger aren't Queen. The band went to great lengths to state who Queen were on every album. They didn't credit Fred Mandel, Steve Howe, David Bowie or Mike Moran as members of Queen, because it was the four. That doesn't make me a hater like BPP, but I feel that I followed a group of four individuals, and two aren't there. I'm totally ambivalent about their tour with Paul Rodgers. I'm thrilled that some of the younnger posters here are getting to see the band live. It's only a name but a name that holds great meaning to people apparently. |
bgordon88 19.08.2005 11:55 |
AmeriQueen wrote: Now if you fuckers could just learn how to cook!You are right - we can't cook can we. I've been to the U.S several times and the food is far superior to the rubbish we eat here. Moving on ...in their defence for using the name Queen. Other than for the money I think they wanted to prove that they could still put on something worthy of the name Queen. A Queen show was a bit camp, big and brassy and rocked your socks off. So I guess it's a 2 out 3 then ! |
bryans permed poodle 15069 19.08.2005 12:27 |
QUEENROCKS_1991 wrote: Queen is Queen They played Queen songs freddie say THE SHOW MUST GO ON and it will"The Show Must Go On" is all about how FREDDIE battled AIDS and how he kept himself motivated knowing he was dying. It's not about what Queen as a band should do after his death. Read the lyrics. |
bryans permed poodle 15069 19.08.2005 12:31 |
Bobby_brown wrote:Bryans Permed Poodle wrote: Nobody wants Brian and Roger to stop touring but I do agree with the article when it says using the Queen name cheapens the memory of it's two missing members. I again tried to watch the version of WATC live from Sheffield (free via Queenonline). I had to stop it half way through it's just not right. Although Brian, Roger and John are excellent musicians, Freddie WAS Queen and anything done without him should not be considered as Queen END OF STORY.Let me ask you something, if instead of Queen they would choose another name would it make the music more enjoyable to you? Would you have watched WATC to the end? Not really no. Take care |
drwinston 19.08.2005 14:30 |
Problems with this article: 1 - Freddie was a part of Queen, but not all of it. Brian's guitar is as distinctive as Freddie's voice. While the casual observer may see Freddie as Queen, the fans know that the band as a whole was what was truly special. (For reference, please listen to the Mr. Bad Guy album and try and label anything on there as special.) 2 - The statement about Brian "rivaling" Keith Richards' licks is laughable. Keith Richards is a rock legend, but a great guitar player he is not. The two don't go hand in hand. Brian can play rings around ol' Keith, and it's a terrible comparison with no point made. 3- He refers to Jim Morrison as a "poet genius". That statement kills any credibility the "writer" may have had. 4- The writer looks like a cross bewteen Doogie Howser and Richie Cunningham from "Happy Days". That said, I do wish they weren't using Queen's name and that they would have been a new band with something original to offer. But it sure is nice to see that familiar Brian May silhouette in front of a huge light show with that bank of AC30's blasting. It's not Queen and it won't be remembered as Queen. But as a celebration by the active members for the fans, it's harmless fun. |
englishyob 19.08.2005 14:40 |
<font color=space>sweden_man wrote:exactly there are half of Queen so there have every right to use the Queen name, if people are so bothered the BM and RT are using the name Queen (there band along with Freddie and John) why don’t you seek legal advise and take it to court and get them to stop using the name Queenenglishyob wrote: Freddie is gone and missed but Brain and Roger are still Queen no matter whathate to break it to ya, but brian and roger are not queen, theyre qu 1/2, only half of queen It’s just so sad that some people on here are crying over what BM and RT are doing its none of our business what they do, if there wanna tour using the Queen good on them Queen would pull more of a crowd then just a Brain May and Roger Taylor + Paul Rogers tour |
Boy Thomas Raker 19.08.2005 14:47 |
Excellent post Dr. Winston. Brian must be thrilled to learn that he's in Keith Richards' league as a guitarist! And I totally agree that Jim Morrison was brutal, however, many Americans in particular believe he's up there with Dylan, Lennon, Hendrix and Elvis as an rock icon. No accounting for taste. I still think he wrote a baalnced article, and it was hardly a slam job that guys like JD Considine and Dave Marsh, who worship at the altar of blue collar american rock (zzzzz) would write. This guy's a fan, made fair points, you have to give him his due. |
Boy Thomas Raker 19.08.2005 14:56 |
The End - lyrics by Jim Morrison This is the end Beautiful friend This is the end My only friend, the end The west is the best The west is the best Get here, and we'll do the rest The blue bus is callin' us The blue bus is callin' us Driver, where you taken' us Kill, kill, kill, kill, kill, kill "Sheer bloody poetry." Camden Daily Record |
David Lee Rocks 19.08.2005 16:00 |
This line cracked me up "continue to bill themselves as Queen" QUEEN + PAUL RODGERS That itself aknowledges that it wont be the same. You need the name "Queen" somewhere, otherwise people wont know its Queen material that will be played, will they? Its the same with The Doors. Sure, Jim Morrison is the person people see as the man who WAS The Doors, but all he wrote was lyrics, Manzerek, Krieger and Densmore needed Morrison as much as he needed them. If Morrison had felt otherwise, he would have accepted the numerous offers he received to dump the rest of them and go solo. It was actually Ray's idea to put a band together. They are both touring for the same reason, and neither of them are calling themselves "The Doors" or "Queen". If they want to tour LET THEM FUCKING TOUR. If you are against it GET A GRIP and stop trying to change our minds. If you wont do that-GET IN THE PEN. |
Sirk 19.08.2005 17:13 |
Why hasn't Bryans Permed Poodle been banned yet? |
bryans permed poodle 15069 19.08.2005 19:30 |
Sirk wrote: Why hasn't Bryans Permed Poodle been banned yet?Because I have a big dick |
NoOneButYou1975 19.08.2005 21:25 |
Bryans Permed Poodle wrote:you have it half right...you ARE a big dick :)Sirk wrote: Why hasn't Bryans Permed Poodle been banned yet?Because I have a big dick |
NoOneButYou1975 19.08.2005 21:25 |
Bryans Permed Poodle wrote:you had it half rightSirk wrote: Why hasn't Bryans Permed Poodle been banned yet?Because I have a big dick |
deleted user 19.08.2005 22:50 |
DOWN WITH THE TOUR |
Hankster 20.08.2005 05:59 |
so sad that one little retard like Poodle had to make more accounts like this Sweeden-guy, so it would look like he has some support. so young .. so retarded .. so sad |
OgreBattleField1980 20.08.2005 07:10 |
thats the cheapest article ive ever read |
Dancer, Dancer 20.08.2005 17:04 |
im afraid i totally agree. i think its great the fact that Bri and Roger still pl |
Dancer, Dancer 20.08.2005 17:07 |
im afraid i totally agree. i think its great the fact that Bri and Roger still want to play together, and id love to see it. But roger and brian have great voices, i dont know why it is even attempted to try and get a frontman after freddie. id love to go and see queen, maybe one day when technology improves, when freddie's vocal parts from the tracks are extracted, and played over, then bri and roger can play theyre instruments over that...!! it doesnt sound amazing, but freddie's dead unfrotunately, and its never going to be the same again. until then, i wont be going to see Queen + Paul Rogers. its just wrong... |
bryans permed poodle 15069 22.08.2005 18:25 |
Well said |
jordanjo 15.03.2006 13:28 |
i agree with BryansPermedPoodle! thanks for a great article btw, i agree with it also |
7Innuendo7 15.03.2006 22:30 |
Thank u for posting the article BPP -- certainly you that know many rock journalists are just frustrated musicians. Your author there is so brilliant, as he uncannily states the obvious and calls Brian and Roger (and thus Paul) great, successful musicians. Critics are just eunuchs in a whorehouse. That said, I'm gonna express some latent anxiety about the setlist of the current tour, here rather than in the personal section, 'cos it seems more relevant here. You see, I don't mind paying $250+ for a ticket/road trip to see QPR once or twice. But I do expect to get what I pay for -- I'm hoping for something more than the New Jersey setlist. Is this an unrealistic expectation? It seems imho we're getting a little less in terms of selection from either the Queen side or Bad Company/Free side. It's SO NICE Paul wrote a new song, but hey I'd rather hear "Stone Cold Crazy" instead. Or "Burning Sky." I guess I won't really form an opinion until after I've seen the show. So BPP -- what are your thoughts on the Freddie Mercury tribute concert? After all, Freddie said the USA wouldn't come back to Queen until someone passed, and *QPR* are proving it AGAIN and AGAIN |
bryans permed poodle 15069 16.03.2006 14:13 |
7Innuendo7 wrote: Thank u for posting the article BPP -- certainly you that know many rock journalists are just frustrated musicians. Your author there is so brilliant, as he uncannily states the obvious and calls Brian and Roger (and thus Paul) great, successful musicians. Critics are just eunuchs in a whorehouse. That said, I'm gonna express some latent anxiety about the setlist of the current tour, here rather than in the personal section, 'cos it seems more relevant here. You see, I don't mind paying $250+ for a ticket/road trip to see QPR once or twice. But I do expect to get what I pay for -- I'm hoping for something more than the New Jersey setlist. Is this an unrealistic expectation? It seems imho we're getting a little less in terms of selection from either the Queen side or Bad Company/Free side. It's SO NICE Paul wrote a new song, but hey I'd rather hear "Stone Cold Crazy" instead. Or "Burning Sky." I guess I won't really form an opinion until after I've seen the show. So BPP -- what are your thoughts on the Freddie Mercury tribute concert? After all, Freddie said the USA wouldn't come back to Queen until someone passed, and *QPR* are proving it AGAIN and AGAINTo answer your question The Freddie Tribute concert wasn't the best ever but had to to be staged as a goodbye to Freddie. Only George Michael, Zucchero and Guns N Roses came out of it with any credit. Again it wasn't Queen even with Deaky. This concert should have been the last under the name Queen. Your second point. I fail to see how you can say America has come back to Queen. Excepted they did very briefly after Wayne's World was released in the early 90's however QPR shows are not selling out at all. If you consider the Rolling Stones ARE completly selling out everywhere all over then really QPR shows are very small scale in comparasion. It's very sad people can get excited about this Queen substitute. It isn't Queen or Queen + in any shape or form, not without Freddie but most people with a brain cell(whoops I've upset a few people on here already!) know this already. Remember Quote Brian and Roger November 1991 "We cannot continue as Queen without Freddie" |
Munchsack 16.03.2006 16:11 |
The Daily Record is a pile of shit and you are no better. Fuck of and leave us alone. |