| deleted user 21.04.2006 16:16 |
I mean I know you can vote, but I'm just asking who does lol :) I do! |
| thenightcomedown 21.04.2006 16:22 |
youre fucking out of your mind! IMPOSSIBLE, BECAUSE QUEEN IS G.O.N.E. maybe you meant: Who wants BRIAN MAY AND ROGER TAYLOR + PAUL RODGERS to make an album? it would still sound like shit though |
| Freya is quietly judging you. 21.04.2006 16:26 |
thenightcomedown wrote: youre fucking out of your mind! IMPOSSIBLE, BECAUSE QUEEN IS G.O.N.E. maybe you meant: Who wants BRIAN MAY AND ROGER TAYLOR + PAUL RODGERS to make an album? it would still sound like shit thoughHow old are you? |
| deleted user 21.04.2006 16:32 |
:( I did say Queen+Paul Rodgers... |
| lmj 21.04.2006 18:13 |
Making an album? What a joke! Brian and Roger are destroying the Queen image with this stupid project! They are megalomaniac! THE GAME IS OVER!(since 1991) |
| deleted user 21.04.2006 18:30 |
u r so wrong u no! queen want to move on... life gos on for gods sake! |
| All I Hear Is Radio Gaga 21.04.2006 18:31 |
I do Cheers |
| deleted user 21.04.2006 18:33 |
All I Hear Is Radio Gaga wrote: I do Cheerswonderful so did u go to any Queen and paul rodgers concerts? i never but i could of... hyde park i was gonna go with my mate jess.... |
| biggest_fan_K 21.04.2006 18:36 |
lmj wrote: Making an album? What a joke! Brian and Roger are destroying the Queen image with this stupid project! They are megalomaniac! THE GAME IS OVER!(since 1991)yeah i agree.. |
| All I Hear Is Radio Gaga 21.04.2006 18:39 |
<font color="#CC66FF">xloveofmylifex wrote:I did get the chance to see them...first time at the Hollywood Bowl last year and the second time this year at Anaheim...All I Hear Is Radio Gaga wrote: I do Cheerswonderful so did u go to any Queen and paul rodgers concerts? i never but i could of... hyde park i was gonna go with my mate jess.... Cheers |
| August R. 21.04.2006 18:41 |
Yes, there's many of us who want them to record some new stuff. We're already discussing this at: link |
| Scott_Mercury 21.04.2006 19:07 |
Bottom Line: Queen + Paul Rodgers is not Queen as we know it. Queen plus Paul Rodgers is NOT better than Queen. Queen plus PR are just...well....different. Whatever you may think, The double live Queen+PR and DVD rock. It's just kick ass rock and roll... Do I like these Queen songs better with Paul than with Freddie? Duh?? Of course not. But, the songs still kick ass...and being a fan of the blues...I LOVE Paul's bluesy touch to these Queen classics. It's like hearing some of these songs all over again. And to be honest...isn't different sometimes good?? I mean... if I am listening to Queen at the Bowl 1982...I don't want to pop that out, and listen to Wembley... I just heard Freddie sing 90% of the same songs. I can pop in Queen+PR live cd, and while I am hearing some of the same songs....they sound completely different. Paul's versions aren't better... Just different. And face it guys, when Freddie died, I knew we would never have **better** .... but I will take "different" over nothing. Without Paul Rodgers...we have nothing. Hell yes, I would love to hear a new Queen+PR album. My wet dream is that Deacon would join them...even if he never toured again... I'd love to see in the liner notes of the new cd: Brian May John Deacon Roger Taylor and filling in for the legend Freddie Mercury, we have the magnificent Paul Rodgers on vocals. I want the "Queen 1991 RIP" folks to remember that in 1991 the oldest surviving member of Queen (Brian) was a mere 44 yrs old. All he had known was "Queen" since he was 23 yrs old. As sad as it is...Freddie died. Not Brian. Not John. Not Roger What the "1991 RIP" fans are basically saying is: Brian, Roger, John....due to some poor judgements that Freddie made in his personal life, you are officially dead too in 1991." C'mon guys... thats bullshit. No one, including Brian, and Roger, think this is the heyday with Freddie.... But for them..and us, its either this or nothing. Given those option's, I'll take this. |
| Sebastian 21.04.2006 19:12 |
That's not Queen + Paul Rodgers, that's Paul + Spike + Danny + Jamie + Two Opportunist Leeches. |
| Scott_Mercury 21.04.2006 19:18 |
Sebastian wrote: That's not Queen + Paul Rodgers, that's Paul + Spike + Danny + Jamie + Two Opportunist Parasits.What's a Parasit? Is that similar to a parasite? |
| freddielives 25469 21.04.2006 19:19 |
perfect Scott, i couldn't have said it better myself. |
| marcio17@queenzone.com 21.04.2006 20:18 |
I do.... What a good reply Scott |
| teleman 21.04.2006 20:25 |
Scott_Mercury wrote: Bottom Line: Queen + Paul Rodgers is not Queen as we know it. Queen plus Paul Rodgers is NOT better than Queen. Queen plus PR are just...well....different... ...Given those option's, I'll take this.Couldn't have said it better Scott. |
| jordanjo 21.04.2006 20:31 |
Sebastian wrote: That's not Queen + Paul Rodgers, that's Paul + Spike + Danny + Jamie + Two Opportunist Leeches.thats right. How does that count as 'QUEEN'? -All i would like to see is a fucking name change. Its disgusting to look and see how they abuse the QUEEN name, stick it on anything to make whatever shit they are doing sell better. |
| deleted user 21.04.2006 20:41 |
look yeah, whether it is has spike or jamie or paul it still has 50% of Queen.... BRIAN and ROGER! hello? lol.... anyway you guys are missing out on alot... they are great live brian roger and paul and the rest :) hehehe :) |
| Oszmercury 21.04.2006 21:09 |
I want it remember Back in Black Exiles on main street New Order before Joy Division everything can happens i want !! |
| Daburcor? 21.04.2006 21:25 |
I still can't fathom how so many people would actually be UPSET if Roger and Brian made new material, with or without Paul. |
| Sebastian 21.04.2006 21:29 |
> What's a Parasit? Is that similar to a parasite? Yes, sorry, my mistake. > I still can't fathom how so many people would actually be UPSET if Roger and Brian made new material, with or without Paul. If they make new material, good for them, they're great musicians. If they don't and keep playing old songs, good for them, those are great songs. If they wanna join forces with Robbie Williams, good for them, he's a fantastic singer. The show must go on. The band's name must not. |
| chefman5150 21.04.2006 21:59 |
I want them to make an album...I think it would be absolutely sick!! |
| DreaminQueen 22.04.2006 00:27 |
Scott_Mercury wrote: Bottom Line: Queen + Paul Rodgers is not Queen as we know it. Queen plus Paul Rodgers is NOT better than Queen. Queen plus PR are just...well....different. Whatever you may think, The double live Queen+PR and DVD rock. It's just kick ass rock and roll... Do I like these Queen songs better with Paul than with Freddie? Duh?? Of course not. But, the songs still kick ass...and being a fan of the blues...I LOVE Paul's bluesy touch to these Queen classics. It's like hearing some of these songs all over again. And to be honest...isn't different sometimes good?? I mean... if I am listening to Queen at the Bowl 1982...I don't want to pop that out, and listen to Wembley... I just heard Freddie sing 90% of the same songs. I can pop in Queen+PR live cd, and while I am hearing some of the same songs....they sound completely different. Paul's versions aren't better... Just different. And face it guys, when Freddie died, I knew we would never have **better** .... but I will take "different" over nothing. Without Paul Rodgers...we have nothing. Hell yes, I would love to hear a new Queen+PR album. My wet dream is that Deacon would join them...even if he never toured again... I'd love to see in the liner notes of the new cd: Brian May John Deacon Roger Taylor and filling in for the legend Freddie Mercury, we have the magnificent Paul Rodgers on vocals. I want the "Queen 1991 RIP" folks to remember that in 1991 the oldest surviving member of Queen (Brian) was a mere 44 yrs old. All he had known was "Queen" since he was 23 yrs old. As sad as it is...Freddie died. Not Brian. Not John. Not Roger What the "1991 RIP" fans are basically saying is: Brian, Roger, John....due to some poor judgements that Freddie made in his personal life, you are officially dead too in 1991." C'mon guys... thats bullshit. No one, including Brian, and Roger, think this is the heyday with Freddie.... But for them..and us, its either this or nothing. Given those option's, I'll take this.Wow.... Thats all i can say... Ive been trying to articulate exactly how i feel, and my dear, you could have not said it any better! So yes, id love to see a new album come out!! And to have them tour again if they desire... :D Because when i saw them in Buffalo it was the greatest night of my life... I know it wasnt a Freddie show, but i'll never know a Freddie show except on DVDs, but the thing about Queen is it was FOUR individuals coming together in a tour de force to be reckoned with.... So those of you who say "Queen Died in '91" love Freddie and friends... Yes it is sad without Freddie there, but do you really think that he would want things to remain stagnant forever?? NO! But what i dont understand is how can you say they're dragging the Queen name in the mud?? I mean they are still playing KICK ASS music arent they?? they are Queen songs are they not??? They include elements of Freddie throughout their shows do they not??? They are opening a whole new generation to Queen... And they definatly could have picked a shitty singer, but they didnt settle, this has been a LLOOOONNNG time coming and obviously it felt right to them otherwise, they wouldnt attach the Queen name to it... And Paul Rodgers has a voice, whether you want to admit it or not... You dont have to agree with that, thats fine. But if you are merely a fan of Freddie and Friends, then say so, dont sit here and say "This is shit what they are doing"... I would like to understand though how they are dragging the Queen name in the mud... outside of the fact that they are performing without Freddie, but he is dead (sadly, unjustly and unfortunatly for us all and i have cried about it) Sadly it is without Freddie, but Queen (as each and everyone of them has said throughout the years) is bigger than |
| john bodega 22.04.2006 01:05 |
"The show must go on. The band's name must not." With regards to the many shows since 1992, and the recent 05-06 tour... I think the Queen+ title was appropriate because they were still playing Queen music. However - if they elect to record new material, then the Queen name will no longer be necessary because it won't be Queen tunes. And, if you'll look at Brian's last soapbox, he was blubbering about how excited he was to be in a 'new band'. I know they probably won't, but wouldn't it be nice for Roger and Brian to play in something with a new name, for a change? I've no objection to them using Queen (or any adaption of it) when they're finishing shows with WWRY or TYMD or whatever songs (that they wrote, mind you) made Queen big, but with this new thing they're speculating about, I'd be happy for a new title. |
| That guy who digs energy domes 22.04.2006 01:12 |
I want it and I'll be sure to buy it |
| deleted user 22.04.2006 06:02 |
I don't. And if they do, I'm not going to buy it or listen to it |
| boca 22.04.2006 07:10 |
IT'S OKAY WHEN BRIAN AND ROGER WANT TO DO SOMETHING, BUT WITH THAT PAUL RODGERS - NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!PAUL RODGERS, GO AWAY!!!!!! |
| boca 22.04.2006 07:13 |
Dan Corson wrote: I still can't fathom how so many people would actually be UPSET if Roger and Brian made new material, with or without Paul.Because I heard new song "Take love" and it's - shit! Far away from Queen. Tottally different style. If they record an album with name "Queen" on it, they'll ruin everything. How you don't understand |
| August R. 22.04.2006 07:26 |
boca wrote:Totally different style?!?! Have you ever even heard a Queen album? There are lots of different styles and musical experiments on Queen records. I think Brian will come up with a couple of more traditional Queen songs, but IMO it's just great if there is a couple of Paul's blusier tunes on the album as well.Dan Corson wrote: I still can't fathom how so many people would actually be UPSET if Roger and Brian made new material, with or without Paul.Because I heard new song "Take love" and it's - shit! Far away from Queen. Tottally different style. If they record an album with name "Queen" on it, they'll ruin everything. How you don't understand |
| Poo, again 22.04.2006 07:40 |
Sure, I have no problem with them making a new album, as long as they don't call themselves Queen. |
| it was electric7 22.04.2006 08:49 |
Lets just say Freddie was alive and 1 other bandmate and they were to go on tour would you mind if it was called Queen then? |
| Hippolyte 22.04.2006 09:30 |
If a new album gets them touring again, I'll be the first in line to buy it. |
| deleted user 22.04.2006 09:31 |
yup i would be cos i love dem there just gr8 live i saw on my mates dvd ROTC and they have freddie on the screens thats a gr8 tribute 2 him :) |
| liam 22.04.2006 09:35 |
I definetly dont want them too! |
| its_a_hard_life 26994 22.04.2006 09:37 |
Hippolyte wrote: If a new album gets them touring again, I'll be the first in line to buy it.I'm 100% behide that, I just cant wait for another tour, they rock live! Golden tickets straight away. :D |
| Fraz 22.04.2006 10:06 |
a new QUEEN and paul rogers album would be great !! |
| Bono Mercury 22.04.2006 10:38 |
i do why not these things have to be tried so go for it. _____________________________ and all i can do is surrender |
| Gordie Howe 22.04.2006 11:18 |
If they want to, all power to them. But I wont buy it. Ive never liked Paul or his music but thats my opinion, yet people on here believe that a persons opinion doesnt matter because they have to be right. No, I wont buy it if they make one. |
| deleted user 22.04.2006 11:37 |
Yes i will buy it!!! Then people can comment if it's the best album or not! |
| john bodega 22.04.2006 12:08 |
it was electric7 wrote: Lets just say Freddie was alive and 1 other bandmate and they were to go on tour would you mind if it was called Queen then?That's an easy answer. These people would eat *dogshit* if it went on tour with Freddie. |
| Oszmercury 22.04.2006 12:14 |
how could they ruin 20 years of queen music only with an album common, Hot Space didn't do it hehehe |
| MOANZONE TWAT 22.04.2006 12:41 |
lmj wrote: Making an album? What a joke! Brian and Roger are destroying the Queen image with this stupid project! They are megalomaniac! THE GAME IS OVER!(since 1991)THE SHOW MUST GO ON.....Freddie Mercury, 1991. Live with it! |
| its_a_hard_life 26994 22.04.2006 12:46 |
YoungStratMan wrote:WOOOOOOOOOT! Get over it!lmj wrote: Making an album? What a joke! Brian and Roger are destroying the Queen image with this stupid project! They are megalomaniac! THE GAME IS OVER!(since 1991)THE SHOW MUST GO ON.....Freddie Mercury, 1991. Live with it! If Brian and Roger can why cant you all? Brian and Roger knew Freddie and were close so they are the people who are hurting the most in all of this, ofcourse let's not forget family and friends, but really if they can get on with they're lifes why cant you people do the same? |
| deleted user 22.04.2006 12:58 |
Zebonka12 wrote:whos dogshit?it was electric7 wrote: Lets just say Freddie was alive and 1 other bandmate and they were to go on tour would you mind if it was called Queen then?That's an easy answer. These people would eat *dogshit* if it went on tour with Freddie. |
| DavidRFuller 22.04.2006 14:17 |
ONLY make a new album if Brian has enough new and good audio of Freddie in the studio. |
| its_a_hard_life 26994 22.04.2006 14:23 |
Sheer Pressure wrote: ONLY make a new album if Brian has enough new and good audio of Freddie in the studio.He said in a interview I have that he or Roger wont be doing that kind of stuff. It's all new material. |
| john bodega 22.04.2006 14:59 |
<font color="#CC66FF">xloveofmylifex wrote:Ah, I had a feeling I might've not been very clear.Zebonka12 wrote:whos dogshit?it was electric7 wrote: Lets just say Freddie was alive and 1 other bandmate and they were to go on tour would you mind if it was called Queen then?That's an easy answer. These people would eat *dogshit* if it went on tour with Freddie. What I mean to say is - a lot of these punks think that Queen = only Freddie. This is patently untrue, and obviously so if you listen to Barcelona or Mr. Bad Guy. What I meant to say, is that if Freddie came back from the grave Ghostbusters-style, that these mindless drones would see *any* shit with him in it. |
| Poo, again 22.04.2006 15:27 |
Zebonka12 wrote:Well, thank you, but I'm one of those 'punks' who happens to think that only 50% of Queen just isn't enough. I'd prefer 100% or nothing.<font color="#CC66FF">xloveofmylifex wrote:Ah, I had a feeling I might've not been very clear. What I mean to say is - a lot of these punks think that Queen = only Freddie. This is patently untrue, and obviously so if you listen to Barcelona or Mr. Bad Guy. What I meant to say, is that if Freddie came back from the grave Ghostbusters-style, that these mindless drones would see *any* shit with him in it.Zebonka12 wrote:whos dogshit?it was electric7 wrote: Lets just say Freddie was alive and 1 other bandmate and they were to go on tour would you mind if it was called Queen then?That's an easy answer. These people would eat *dogshit* if it went on tour with Freddie. |
| jimmy sextonret 22.04.2006 15:46 |
just when i turned the corner on the whole queen/ paul thing[ i was against it] he says somthing as dumb as sheryl crow wooould be a good replacement........that which gives lite, must endure burning!.jimi |
| john bodega 23.04.2006 00:52 |
"I'd prefer 100% or nothing." Yet this is entirely antithetical to the band that you claim to like so much. They were very much in the business of doing new things. If you want 100%, then shuddup and put one of their records on! No one ever said Paul Rodgers was better or anything, some people just happen to like experimentation. And I happen to agree that if they make an all new album, that there should be no Queen title on it, because unlike the tour, there'd be no 'Queen' music. Honestly, I'm no different to you people in my love for Queen music, I've got a playlist longer than a welfare queue. I just happen to think that doing something *new* for a change will not hurt. Otherwise, where are you? Where have you been since 1991? I'll tell you where you've been - STUCK IN THE EXACT SAME BLOODY PLACE. :D |
| Poo, again 23.04.2006 07:54 |
Fine, maybe I will "shuddup" and put one of their records on! So I dislike the use of the name, but what do want from me, really? Sure, you can call me narrowminded or whatever you like, but it's just my opinion really, and I think a lot of people would agree with me. |
| john bodega 23.04.2006 13:10 |
"Fine, maybe I will "shuddup" and put one of their records on! So I dislike the use of the name, but what do want from me, really? Sure, you can call me narrowminded or whatever you like, but it's just my opinion really, and I think a lot of people would agree with me." Yeah well a lot of people agreed that the hydrogen filled airships of the early 20th century were safe enough to travel on. KABOOM! No look, first of all - when I say 'shuddup and put a record on', I say it because that's pretty much what *I* do to get away from this crap. What I really am trying to say is, it really should be about the music, and people need to stop crying because a 5 letter word that's been around a *shitload* longer than the band gets thrown around after some guy died. I mean BOOHOO! The guy that we're supposedly 'respecting' by demanding the name 'Queen' not get used... he'd probably look at this crap and just sigh. It really isn't worth the bother. I wasn't so much saying 'your opinion sucks, shut up', I really was saying (to myself and to others) just forget it and listen to the music that *got* us here in the first place. |
| Poo, again 23.04.2006 15:04 |
Sure, maybe you'd like to think it's all about the music, but for some of us it's not ALL about music. I find it disrespectful to Freddie and John to use the name, for it's not Queen without them. It really isn't, and it shouldn't be that hard to just change the name. Sure, maybe I'm being annoying, but I think it's a really important detail. |
| Tim June 23.04.2006 19:35 |
I deeply agree with the words of Scott M. . I would like to hear a new 'different' album, it would be far more better than nothing, and a little substitute for the sad early lost of Freddie. I still miss him and his spirit, he was such an great artist. The original band Queen are the love of my life, since 20 years and I'm very happy that people of the original group try to do some new material. Instead of doing mainly another musical etc. It's different - but not automatically bad. I saw three concerts in Germany last year and it was always a powerfull experience, with many highlights and (of course) some low points (e.g. too much stuff without Paul as leadsinger and the setlist). Paul is an awesome musican and seems to be a very nice and polite guy. I think it fit's. I'm 'reaching out' for a Q+PR album, with a smile on my face! And that this would not count as a real Queen album is obvious, or ?! |
| john bodega 24.04.2006 02:13 |
"Sure, maybe you'd like to think it's all about the music" Hahaha, of course I do. HELLO MCFLY - they're a band. If I like a painter it's not because his second name sounds like a kind of pasta, and it's not because of the behind-the-scenes aspects of his work - it's because I like his painting. That's just me though. "but for some of us it's not ALL about music. I find it disrespectful to Freddie and John to use the name, for it's not Queen without them. It really isn't, and it shouldn't be that hard to just change the name." Well it depends. If they're making an all-new album, yes - I would like them to change the name purely for reasons of accuracy. On every show they've played since 1986, they've been right to at least include Queen in the title, because they are playing mostly a Queen catalogue. This new album they go on about however, will not be Queen music. I will welcome a new title. "Sure, maybe I'm being annoying, but I think it's a really important detail." No, your head is honestly in the right place. You say these things ostensibly out of respect for Freddie and John and I can't bail you up for that. I just think the priorities are skewiff, if a simple Name problem is enough to turn you off potentially good music. Look at the amount of people that cheat themselves out of Q+PR stuff. There's some damn good playing in there, regardless of whether or not one likes Paul Rodgers. "And that this would not count as a real Queen album is obvious, or ?!" My point of view is basically, I don't CARE what they call it. I will perhaps think it's wrong to put Queen on it, but it comes down to this - *I* know whether or not it's Queen, right? So it doesn't matter what Brian calls it, or what BPP calls it, or what anyone calls it. The label don't mean shit. I don't need someone to tell me what it is, I can make up my own mind. |