QueenZone discussion #610744
How We Feel About Queen At The Moment...
| Localboy80 25.08.2005 13:49 |
I just wanted to say that the last few days, there has been a lot said about the tour, BPP and Queen in general at the moment, so I would just to like to mention a few things. I would like to point out that I personally respect everybody's opinion and I will be the first one to say, that it does not make you less of a Queen fan if you would prefer 4 members to the 2 remaining. If I had a choice of having Freddie and John there as well, then of course I would, I would be in Heaven! But 2 members (and let us remember that Brian and Roger are excellent at what they do) is a lot better than none at all! I just don't like it when people like Sharon. G and BPP slag off the tour in the way that they do, because if they were true Queen fans, then they would/could just say, 'Well, I don't fancy the tour myself but good luck to them and good on them for keeping the Queen name alive'. I have also heard some people say that John Deacon has only given his blessing for the tour, because of the share of the royalties, then that is a fair point and of course he would love a share of the profits but we can only speculate on this but I personally think, that being the type of person he is, he genuinely would be happy for this tour, otherwise you would have heard otherwise! At the end of the day, there are so many things I wish was different. I wish Freddie was alive and well and that Queen (all members) were still producing the music we all loved and enjoyed. I also wish the box-sets would have been released by now. It would also be nice if Queen Productions had got the ball rolling a long time ago with new dvd's, cd's etc... The point is, it is an exciting time being a Queen fan at the moment (yes it could be a hell of a lot better, in regards to some of the reasons I just mentioned). There is this tour, where 2 of Queen's members, Brian May, great voice, stupendous guitar player and Roger Taylor, great voice, excellent drummer, are performing live with Paul Rodgers. By no means anywhere near the standard of Freddie Mercury (but who is) but he has an excellent voice and Queen songs are being heard live again, to old and new fans, all around the world, which is excellent. New dvd's and cd's are being released a lot more than they ever have been and Queen are 'in' at the moment, due to everything that is happening. Yes, as Queen fans, they are always 'in, but I just mean in the context of Queen are a band that is 'in' at the moment, it is cool to like Queen, with loads of accolades coming from Foo Fighters, The Darkness, Robbie Williams, that dire ITV show 'Queen Mania', the release of Live Aid and this tour is the icing on the cake! Let us enjoy Queen being the best band of all time!!! Queen will never, never, never, ever, ever, ever be the same again. It is an impossibility. Freddie Mercury was... well, there are no words. His voice was astounding, he was the greatest frontman and he wrote incredible songs. Paul Rodgers is not the new Freddie Mercury and never will be, nor does he think he is Queen's new lead singer (as he has stated this in interviews), hence why this is called Queen and Paul Rodgers and not just Queen. For us fans, there could be nothing happening or going on with Queen at the moment. Why should there be? Their lead sing passed away in 1991, John Deacon has retired and Queen Productions could be doing a worst job than they are actually doing now, by not even producing any dvd's or cd's. Queen will be a band that will last forever and their name will go down as one of (the best in my opinion) the best band of all time. At this moment in time, the Phoenix is flying high and the Queen name is well and truly alive!!! |
| deleted user 25.08.2005 14:04 |
now you see what will happen here is it will either be ignored or people will start sayin what an idiot you are etc, and slag off the tour and Paul Rodgers too, i have my opinion but i wont say it cos i have sed it plenty and i know it will lead to people slaggin me and the tour off. |
| doremi 25.08.2005 14:16 |
Localboy80 wrote: I just wanted to say that the last few days, there has been a lot said about the tour, BPP and Queen in general at the moment, so I would just to like to mention a few things. I would like to point out that I personally respect everybody's opinion and I will be the first one to say, that it does not make you less of a Queen fan if you would prefer 4 members to the 2 remaining. If I had a choice of having Freddie and John there as well, then of course I would, I would be in Heaven! But 2 members (and let us remember that Brian and Roger are excellent at what they do) is a lot better than none at all! I just don't like it when people like Sharon. G and BPP slag off the tour in the way that they do, because if they were true Queen fans, then they would/could just say, 'Well, I don't fancy the tour myself but good luck to them and good on them for keeping the Queen name alive'. I have also heard some people say that John Deacon has only given his blessing for the tour, because of the share of the royalties, then that is a fair point and of course he would love a share of the profits but we can only speculate on this but I personally think, that being the type of person he is, he genuinely would be happy for this tour, otherwise you would have heard otherwise! At the end of the day, there are so many things I wish was different. I wish Freddie was alive and well and that Queen (all members) were still producing the music we all loved and enjoyed. I also wish the box-sets would have been released by now. It would also be nice if Queen Productions had got the ball rolling a long time ago with new dvd's, cd's etc... The point is, it is an exciting time being a Queen fan at the moment (yes it could be a hell of a lot better, in regards to some of the reasons I just mentioned). There is this tour, where 2 of Queen's members, Brian May, great voice, stupendous guitar player and Roger Taylor, great voice, excellent drummer, are performing live with Paul Rodgers. By no means anywhere near the standard of Freddie Mercury (but who is) but he has an excellent voice and Queen songs are being heard live again, to old and new fans, all around the world, which is excellent. New dvd's and cd's are being released a lot more than they ever have been and Queen are 'in' at the moment, due to everything that is happening. Yes, as Queen fans, they are always 'in, but I just mean in the context of Queen are a band that is 'in' at the moment, it is cool to like Queen, with loads of accolades coming from Foo Fighters, The Darkness, Robbie Williams, that dire ITV show 'Queen Mania', the release of Live Aid and this tour is the icing on the cake! Let us enjoy Queen being the best band of all time!!! Queen will never, never, never, ever, ever, ever be the same again. It is an impossibility. Freddie Mercury was... well, there are no words. His voice was astounding, he was the greatest frontman and he wrote incredible songs. Paul Rodgers is not the new Freddie Mercury and never will be, nor does he think he is Queen's new lead singer (as he has stated this in interviews), hence why this is called Queen and Paul Rodgers and not just Queen. For us fans, there could be nothing happening or going on with Queen at the moment. Why should there be? Their lead sing passed away in 1991, John Deacon has retired and Queen Productions could be doing a worst job than they are actually doing now, by not even producing any dvd's or cd's. Queen will be a band that will last forever and their name will go down as one of (the best in my opinion) the best band of all time. At this moment in time, the Phoenix is flying high and the Queen name is well and truly alive!!!I think you framed this very well, open minded, intelligently, and articulate. You state things in a supportive manner for Queen with Freddie fans, Queen with Paul Rodgers fans, for the music itself, and what this forum is all about, lovin |
| Erin 25.08.2005 14:18 |
Anyone who has a problem with the tour need only to remember this: link or this: link |
| doremi 25.08.2005 14:22 |
Erin wrote: Anyone who has a problem with the tour need only to remember this: link or this: linkARGHHHHH!!!!! Run for your lives! LMAO! :-) |
| Crazy LittleThing 25.08.2005 15:08 |
Erin wrote: Anyone who has a problem with the tour need only to remember this: link or this: linkMy eyes! It burns! It burns! AAAAUUUGGGHHH!!!! |
| RohemianBapsody 25.08.2005 18:54 |
Although the collaboration with Five may have been shit, it still made the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end when they performed it live (scuse the pun). It was the first time in many years that Brian and Roger had played live together, and I watched the whole crappy program to see it ! |
| Gunpowder Gelatine 25.08.2005 19:50 |
the_hero wrote:Oh, God...that Pepsi commercial was awful. There's so many better ways to stay relevant than that...Erin wrote: Anyone who has a problem with the tour need only to remember this: link or this: linkhahaha |
| *3*Playful as a pussycat 25.08.2005 20:18 |
well said, LocalBoy80... |
| AmeriQueen 26.08.2005 05:00 |
Queen at the moment makes me wonder how many great musicians over time have gone unremembered. Today we have recordings which allow music made today to last forever, but with Queen's lack of respect, I wonder if while Motzart and Beethoven were becoming legends, someone better may have gone unnoticed. I will understand rape, murder, the popularity of Seinfeld and a number of other fucked up things in this world long before I will ever truly understand why Queen is not thought of as the obvious masters of, not just rock, but music as a whole. How Rolling Stone magazine can print a top 100 rock albums ever list without a single Queen album, and remain respectable is a mystery. The only reason why the Beatles can be argued as a better band than Queen is because they came first. |
| Localboy80 26.08.2005 06:05 |
I love the Beatles AmeriQueen and I completely agree with you, hun! They are classed as the best, because they were the first! |
| deleted user 26.08.2005 06:27 |
have you seen the full length advert for pepsi? where they perform hte whole song, not just part of it, shows roger drumming away on a bongo and brian with his hand in the air singing! the full version is better than the shitty short one, still pink cannot sing it to save her life, she really killed it, ugh! |
| tomyorenes 26.08.2005 07:46 |
AmeriQueen wrote: How Rolling Stone magazine can print a top 100 rock albums ever list without a single Queen album, and remain respectable is a mystery.Rolling Stone magazine has always hated Queen, and that's a FACT. If they ever write something about Queen it's about Freddie's flamboyancy or Queen's early years dealing with drugs when the '05 Tour came to Spain. I don't know why, maybe it's because Roger's letter to Rolling Stone a few years ago or maybe it's something else. But if Rolling Stone hates Queen it doesn't mean that Queen are true champions like The Beatles. |
| AmeriQueen 26.08.2005 07:58 |
You know, I have said this before... Even If I hated Queen's guts to the core. If I was a respected music journalist and I hated Queen worst than anyone else, I would not write about them. The last thing I would do would be bash or discredit them. This is simply because no matter how much I didn't like them, how in the hell could I keep my respect by bashing them?? "Hi, I am an expert critic of music and I don't like this band Queen." That's like saying, "Hi, I'm a movie critic and I must say, that Alfred Hitchcock guy sure did suck, didn't he? He was almost as bad as Orson Welles." Bashing Queen is automatic proof that your music tastes sucks ass. Isn't the Queen thing a bit odder than normal though? I mean, I know I am a fan and that I worship their music to extremes, but wouldn't you objectively think that a band like Queen would be more likely to get critical praise just because of their classical/opera/rock style? I honestly think that if I didn't like them, I would still be able to recognize their brilliance. They were the evoloutionary next step of the Beatles. An honest to goodness world famous magazine with highly paid critics working together, honestly can find 100 rock albums better than A Night at the Opera and News of the World???? Bullshit! |
| LIZAWITHAZ 26.08.2005 09:49 |
My heavens! Brilliant post LocalBoy and I could not agree more, but as you all see Queen from the point of view as a fan, Brian and Roger see Queen as a business venture. Queen is their commodity and what they have to offer as far as their product (so to speak) and let's also remember that Freddie had stated many times that he felt his songs should be compared to disposable razors, played and then move on to the next song. Fans of course know much better and appreciate Queen's music which is timeless and wonderful. As much as Freddie Mercury is missed by his family, his friends and his fans through his music (as little as he thought of it sometimes)he will always be IMMORTAL! Now Im off to have a good cry...cheers! David |
| GreatKingSam 26.08.2005 10:46 |
The problem is, with magazines like Rolling Stone, they will completely love anything that is commercially good. No offence to any fans, but bands like Oasis, U2, REM etc etc will always be praised because they release things that people want to hear and say the things that people want to hear. Queen were not, are not and never will be a band who do that. They do their own thing their own way and I think that is what people don't like. They were four blokes from relatively oridnary backgrounds who happened to excell far greater than most musically, and actually achieve something off their own back and not really care about voicing their opinions. That is what people don't like I think. |
