QueenZone discussion #902615

Bohemian<font size="1"></f! wrote: Fred sucked BIG... long may they continue to reign without him!!!

MrCole wrote: queen not excistant without fredds queen is now Twat and Turd (Brian and Roger) So the new name is: Tward good Tward+ Paul Rogers This is the new band now.

Tannya wrote: OK, then you should build your own website called ROGER TAYLOR AND BRIAN MAY + EVERYONE and create your own Forum. Let the real QUEEN FANS on QUEENZONE ok?. Q-U-E-E-N Z-O-N-E QUEEN = Freddie Mercury (yes FREDDIE MERCURY!), Roger Taylor, Brian May and John Deacon (YES JOHN DEACON!). Sorry, but this is a place where QUEEN FANS can share things about THE BAND and we love it with Freddie. Please don´t tell me what to do. Thank You!

Sharon G.Queen Fan wrote: No Freddie + No John = No Queen.

kenny8 wrote: "i wonder if fans of pink floyd,genesis,rolling stones etc gave the groups as much stick as some queen fans do when their line ups changed through the years.probably not." They never had a Freddie either. I love the band I'v followed for thirty years going back on their word and recording again as Queen, with somebody else on vocals. The ridicule on the radio is an emabrassment. It is a sell out to use the Queen name on new material. The tour I didn't have a problem with for nostalgia's ske, but to try and come up with new material as Queen without Fred is a dreadful move. Shameful! As if the Crazy Frog licence wasn't bad enough. I don't get it, who much money do they need?? The Queen moniker now is only there to make money. Let Rodgers, May & Taylor do what they bloody well want, but don't dare call it Queen. No f*ckin wonder Freddie solo outsells anything by Queen without him on it!!

Another Roger (re) wrote: Can you just get lost? If you dont like it dont bother us with it. There is nothing to be done about it. Cant you just leave and listen to Rolling Stones, Mew, The Coral etc instead? Who cares about which name they use? If you dont have bigger problems in your lives than that, I dont feel sorry for you. If Brian and Roger wants to make new material I am thrilled. If that includes using the Queen name its brilliant. Its none of our business which name they are going under. If you dont like it, get lost. Noone will miss you.

<font color=gold>§|\/|1<font color=1>++ÿ wrote: I reserve the vote to change the name to Paul Rodgers + <font size=1>Queen</font>

Mr Debauchery wrote: Here's a hypothetical question.... Supposing John had died in 1991 and not Freddie - would they be right to call the band Queen after then? Queen plus Danny Miranda maybe? Freddie, by his own statement, was not Queen. Had Freddie had 3 different musicians would they have been as successful? Who knows, but Freddie's Mr Bad Guy album was a flop and the music on it is poor (not the songwriting or the singin, I hasten to add). Queen is as much Brian's guitar sound, Roger's drum sound and John's bass sound as it is Freddie's voice. If having a different singer makes it "not Queen", then surely I'm In Love With My Car, '39 and Drowse aren't Queen either. Furthermore, if you compare the structure, sound and style of the Queen+PR shows with other Queen shows and Brian and Roger's solo shows, you find that the Q+PR shows are very much Queen. Also, don't forget Queen is a brand name - it is known far more than probably even Freddie's name and so if they want to attract people to the shows it is good sense to use the name - after all, even if they don't want the money, they don't want to play to half empty venues. Some very valid points have been made about other bands who have carried on after the death or departure of band members. To say it is not Queen without Freddie or John is like saying that tea isn't tea without milk - of course, it is tea but it just tastes different, some will like it (even prefer it) and others will hate it, but it's not worth arguing over.

<font color=blue>Rick wrote: And besides, Roger and Brian have all the right to use the name 'Queen'. There were the true founders of this band. Freddie joined them later on.

M a t i a s M a y<h6><i>QZ's Rainmaker wrote:

Tannya wrote: OK, then you should build your own website called ROGER TAYLOR AND BRIAN MAY + EVERYONE and create your own Forum. Let the real QUEEN FANS on QUEENZONE ok?. Q-U-E-E-N Z-O-N-E QUEEN = Freddie Mercury (yes FREDDIE MERCURY!), Roger Taylor, Brian May and John Deacon (YES JOHN DEACON!). Sorry, but this is a place where QUEEN FANS can share things about THE BAND and we love it with Freddie. Please don´t tell me what to do. Thank You!

NO PUTA

joxerthemighty wrote: so when peter gabriel left genesis or sid barrett left pink floyd or bill wyman left the stones or john entwistle died,the who and all these other bands should of changed their names or quit the music scene then? no? i didnt think so! queen are now brian and roger with paul long live queen!

<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: They cannot adapt to the fact that the world is an ever-changing place, thus they attempt to stick to old values of which they ignore the anachronistic value.

joxerthemighty wrote: some would rather live in the past and not move on in life either

Tannya wrote:

M a t i a s M a y<h6><i>QZ's Rainmaker wrote:

Tannya wrote: OK, then you should build your own website called ROGER TAYLOR AND BRIAN MAY + EVERYONE and create your own Forum. Let the real QUEEN FANS on QUEENZONE ok?. Q-U-E-E-N Z-O-N-E QUEEN = Freddie Mercury (yes FREDDIE MERCURY!), Roger Taylor, Brian May and John Deacon (YES JOHN DEACON!). Sorry, but this is a place where QUEEN FANS can share things about THE BAND and we love it with Freddie. Please don´t tell me what to do. Thank You!

NO PUTA

OK You should be a little more intelligent and don´t ofense people. Shame on you!!!!!

s.m. wrote:

<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: They cannot adapt to the fact that the world is an ever-changing place, thus they attempt to stick to old values of which they ignore the anachronistic value.

why should we settle for less? better something then nothing? i dont think so the fact that world is changing, dosen´t necessary means that it´s changing for the better in this case we are close to armagedon

Sebastian wrote: > Can you just get lost? No > If you dont like it dont bother us with it. Ditto. > There is nothing to be done about it. We can complain here. And so I will "Queen were Freddie, Roger, John and Brian, not these two opportunistic leeches". >Cant you just leave and listen to Rolling Stones, Mew, The Coral etc instead? No. > Who cares about which name they use? I do. > If you dont have bigger problems in your lives than that I have, but I still find room to say the following: they are not Queen. > If Brian and Roger wants to make new material I am thrilled. So am I, but they should use their own names. > If that includes using the Queen name its brilliant. No, it's coward, opportunistic, immoral and unethical. > Its none of our business which name they are going under. Then close your eyes when you see a message stating that they're not Queen, they're just two former members not having enough courage to use their own bloody names. > If you dont like it, get lost. Noone will miss you. Ditto. > There were the true founders of this band. Freddie joined them later on. That's utterly wrong. The three of them founded the band and decided later on that it would end if anyone of the four (now with John) left, ANYONE of the four. So Queen without John aren't Queen, Queen without Roger aren't Queen, Queen without Brian aren't Queen and of course, Queen without Freddie aren't Queen. >Rick,you're wrong:brian and roger founded "Smile" with Tim Staffel, That's not quite right: Brian and Tim founded Smile, then looked for a drummer and found Roger. But if we're saying Queen = Smile (replacing some members), we can also say that Queen = Wreckage (replacing some members), or Queen = Smile = Reaction. > but then he left and Freddie joined and WAS HIM who changed the name to Queen. He didn't join: both bands were off and they decided to form a new one the three of them. So Queen weren't Smile, they were a new band with two members of Smile and one member of Ibex, Wreckage and Sour Milk Sea. > their using "50% QUEEN"?. A new name, that's all. Like Asia, like Velvet Revolver, like Supernova...

Tannya wrote:

M a t i a s M a y<h6><i>QZ's Rainmaker wrote:

Tannya wrote: OK, then you should build your own website called ROGER TAYLOR AND BRIAN MAY + EVERYONE and create your own Forum. Let the real QUEEN FANS on QUEENZONE ok?. Q-U-E-E-N Z-O-N-E QUEEN = Freddie Mercury (yes FREDDIE MERCURY!), Roger Taylor, Brian May and John Deacon (YES JOHN DEACON!). Sorry, but this is a place where QUEEN FANS can share things about THE BAND and we love it with Freddie. Please don´t tell me what to do. Thank You!

NO PUTA

OK You should be a little more intelligent and don´t ofense people. Shame on you!!!!!

<font color=gold>§|\/|1<font color=1>++ÿ wrote: I hate to break it to some of the children here, but Freddie's solo work is only popular today because he's dead. It's the truth.

kenny8 wrote:

<font color=gold>§|\/|1<font color=1>++ÿ wrote: I hate to break it to some of the children here, but Freddie's solo work is only popular today because he's dead. It's the truth.

That's one of the stupidist comments I've seen, and frankly you should be ashamed to have written that...

kenny8 wrote: What do you mean, like releasing another Greatest Hits album after an appearance on American Idol perhaps? Or how about letting the Crazy Frog record Mercury's "WATC"?? There's no level to which they won't stoop anymore if there's a buck in it. They'll even now record new music as Queen. Grief is officially over, replaced by greed

s.m. wrote:

<font color=blue>Rick wrote: And besides, Roger and Brian have all the right to use the name 'Queen'. There were the true founders of this band. Freddie joined them later on.

you should learn the facts first brian may and roger taylor only formed the smile along with tim staffel freedie insigated the making of the group, and gave it it´s name nice to see that queen fans dont know the band´s history

<font color=pink>Evil Twin Brother of GB wrote: Queen can't go on without Freddie. It's not the same.

<font color=red>Flash! wrote:

<font color=pink>Evil Twin Brother of GB wrote: Queen can't go on without Freddie. It's not the same.

Queen wouldn't be the same without Freddie, Brianne, Roger Taylore and Jon Dikon.

Another Roger (re) wrote: Alright. I want to apologise for my anger in the opening post. I think I had a bad day or something. But sometimes I just get so fed up hearing how horrible Brian and Roger are touring with the Queensongs. If people dont like it they can choose to not buy it. They will never ruin anything from the past, more likely they will get more people into the original Queen. Queen will always be Fredde, Brian, Roger and John. But we will also see Queen without Freddie I think, but noone will ever replace him. But this has been discussed many times. I will buy the album anyway. Freddie havent written good songs for Queen for about 25 years. His 80s writing in Queen were a disgrace to me. Brian and Roger saved it. But thats my opinion. Freddie was always great live though

mike hunt wrote:

Another Roger (re) wrote: Alright. I want to apologise for my anger in the opening post. I think I had a bad day or something. But sometimes I just get so fed up hearing how horrible Brian and Roger are touring with the Queensongs. If people dont like it they can choose to not buy it. They will never ruin anything from the past, more likely they will get more people into the original Queen. Queen will always be Fredde, Brian, Roger and John. But we will also see Queen without Freddie I think, but noone will ever replace him. But this has been discussed many times. I will buy the album anyway. Freddie havent written good songs for Queen for about 25 years. His 80s writing in Queen were a disgrace to me. Brian and Roger saved it. But thats my opinion. Freddie was always great live though

I guess your not into the innuendo album, freddie wrote most of the material on that album. The song innuendo was mostly his, slightly mad, the hitman and a winter's tale from made in heaven. Some of my all time fav tracks were in his last days. "Roger" is easily the worst songwriter in queen in my opinion.

mike hunt wrote: I don't have a problem with brian and roger working with paul. I have a lot of respect for him as a singer/musician, just don't call it queen, how can you name a band queen without freddie mercury?....who say's people who don't like queen + paul are living in the past?....I can easily turn that around and say it's brian and roger and their stefords who are living in the past. How can brian and roger sink so low!

M a t i a s M a y<h6><i>QZ's Rainmaker wrote:

Tannya wrote:

M a t i a s M a y<h6><i>QZ's Rainmaker wrote:

Tannya wrote: OK, then you should build your own website called ROGER TAYLOR AND BRIAN MAY + EVERYONE and create your own Forum. Let the real QUEEN FANS on QUEENZONE ok?. Q-U-E-E-N Z-O-N-E QUEEN = Freddie Mercury (yes FREDDIE MERCURY!), Roger Taylor, Brian May and John Deacon (YES JOHN DEACON!). Sorry, but this is a place where QUEEN FANS can share things about THE BAND and we love it with Freddie. Please don´t tell me what to do. Thank You!

NO PUTA

OK You should be a little more intelligent and don´t ofense people. Shame on you!!!!!

puta infeliz!! me cago en tu pecho

Another Roger (re) wrote: "

Mr Debauchery wrote: The guitar bit was Brian's idea.

Zebonka12 wrote: Hmmm. Considering everyone in Queen (and Dave Richards) have always said Innuendo was mostly Freddie's.... I fail to see why I should listen to some bumpkin say it was Roger's song. Group effort, sure, but it's Mercury through and through. One cannot claim that it's Roger's song because it has lots of drums in it. What, so he wrote Princes of the Universe as well? Ha-ha.

Drowse1 wrote: ...But as for them using the Queen name then I think we have the right to say no as this is NOT and never will be the Queen we know & love.

greaserkat wrote: Let talk about a band that had the same thing happend to its lead singer. The Doors. Are they the same band if the had replaced Jim a decade after he passed away??