| Bri-Anns Permed Poodle 18.01.2007 19:11 |
I am a follower of the once great Brians Permed Poodle or BPP for short. I am dedicated to the cause. No Freddie = No Queen. I therefore urge people to honour Freddie's memory and do not buy any new Queen album with the overated Paul Rodgers on it. I thank you. |
| skiqueen 18.01.2007 19:33 |
^ bam bam baduuuuuuuum!!!!!!! :O *dramatic drum roll in the background.....* |
| deleted user 18.01.2007 19:47 |
I would like to hear new music from Brian and Roger (and John, but that doesn't appear to be happening) - and I even like Rodgers. I call them, "Half of Queen and Paul Rodgers". I don't care what they call themselves as long as there's music being made. Sure, I might be put off if they picked a name after a less than thrilling bodily function or something, but that's their choice, and I would have to deal with it. |
| kenny8 18.01.2007 19:51 |
Now May reckons he gets bored of playing the old songs....well give it the f*ck away then. You're cashing in on the name and legacy now. One things for sure, overwhelmingly people will see Queen+ for the nostalgia, not to hear new songs. Get used to playing the back catalogue for a while yet if you want to continue as Queen+ He wants to step back and realise that whilst he may be bored with playing the old songs, he should thank his lucky stars that millions of people STILL want to listen to them .......sadly for Brian, the ghost of Freddie Mercury isn't going to be easy to exorcise |
| My Melancholy Blues 18.01.2007 20:17 |
I'm not going to urge someone who's interested in their new stuff not to buy it. As for me, I'll be so sad to see their new stuff released as a new Queen one, because Queen are Freddie, Brian, Roger and John. Brian himself too said so. I can't help but think that Brian has changed from what he was when he said so. But I hope there's no more too much controversy among QZ. That reminds me of the old one we had soon after the news of Queen+Paul Rodgers tours was announced. |
| Winter Land Man 18.01.2007 20:58 |
I haven't bought Return Of The Champions. I don't want to hear Brian and Roger do Bad Company songs or Paul Rodgers sing songs that were made famous by Freddie Mercury. I hardly discuss this and ignore it when someone asks me what I think of Paul Rodgers fronting Brian and Roger (Queen... 50%) I'm actually sad that Brian and Roger go on like this. Now an album they've recorded? Pretty lame really. If I met Brian and Roger I'd tell them to keep the Queen name off the album, or at least cut it in half, and I'm not joking. It's horrible that Roger and Brian think Queen exhists without Freddie and John.. what the hell are they thinking? Freddie Mercury would of been famous with Brian and Roger... I guarantee that he'd of been famous one way or another. And I doubt Brian and Roger would of been famous with anyone else... just look at the 'Tim Staffel Experience' There's too many interviews of Freddie listing musicians he liked... not once did he say Paul Rodgers... it's horrible that Roger says Paul was Freddie's favorite singer. I've never heard him say that out of any interview and I've heard a lot of interviews. I like Bad Company but I don't like Paul Rodgers very much as a person. Remember how he doesn't answer his fan mail? It sends an automatic reply to everyone who e-mails him, and it's the same message every time. I personally think John Deacon should take legal action against Brian and Roger about the Queen name on Roger, Brian, and Paul projects. Roger and Brian better hope they don't end up with Freddie when they die, cause Freddie's going to be doing some major ass kicking, not to mention if he see's Paul, he'll spit in his face. |
| Mr Faron Hyte 18.01.2007 21:06 |
Bri-Anns Permed Poodle wrote: I am a follower of the once great Brians Permed Poodle or BPP for short. I am dedicated to the cause. No Freddie = No Queen. I therefore urge people to honour Freddie's memory and do not buy any new Queen album with the overated Paul Rodgers on it. I thank you.And I thank you for sharing your feeling, buttercup. Don't buy the record. Your problem is thus solved. |
| Phill the Thrill 18.01.2007 21:53 |
kenny8 wrote: Now May reckons he gets bored of playing the old songs....well give it the f*ck away then. You're cashing in on the name and legacy now. One things for sure, overwhelmingly people will see Queen+ for the nostalgia, not to hear new songs. Get used to playing the back catalogue for a while yet if you want to continue as Queen+ He wants to step back and realise that whilst he may be bored with playing the old songs, he should thank his lucky stars that millions of people STILL want to listen to them .......sadly for Brian, the ghost of Freddie Mercury isn't going to be easy to exorciseyeah i love the old stuff and hope they continue to play some key songs, but i am personally looking forward to new material. i still have a few Queen related things to get (guest appearances, solo, cross, etc) but i want some more material for the 2 of them working together. I will be first in line in my neck of the woods for the new disk, video, tour..whatever |
| kdj2hot 18.01.2007 22:16 |
Go smoke somethin you a-holes. I wold ove a Queen and PR album. yes I said it, QUEEN. They were in the band, they know whats appropriate nd inappropriate and have been classy as hell overal since Freddie died. They really feel right abot working with PR so thats good enugh for me to at the very least give them a chance. If they wanted to do it for money they woudve gone on tour with George Michael in '93. Or woulddve chose Robbie Williams, he could've prbably sold more tickets but obviouly they didn go tha route bcause they feel they can do something special with PR. |
| smileexpert 18.01.2007 22:24 |
I vote that this discussion be moved to a completely NEW category... Queen - Useless Discussion If you don't want the album - don't buy it. If you don't want to see a concert - don't go. If you don't support Q+PR - keep it to yourself. Blablabla...I dont support it...blablablablablablablablablablabla...it's not Queen without Freddie...blablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablablabla... Whatever... ...for what it's worth. |
| kenny8 18.01.2007 22:52 |
smileexpert wrote: bla bla bla Whatever... ...for what it's worth.Nothing, just an immature waste of bandwidth. Thanks for contributing to the discussion. At least you prove the mentality of those who believe Queen+whoever is equal to the original Queen. I suggest you go to a Queen+Paul Rodgers site, not a Queen one......and show some fucking respect for Freddie Mercury, without him and him alone this farrago wouldn't be happening anyway. |
| Smitty 18.01.2007 23:08 |
Freddie wasn't Queen you dumbass. |
| kenny8 18.01.2007 23:16 |
.*.Messenger Of Leah.*. wrote: It's horrible that Roger and Brian think Queen exhists without Freddie and John.. what the hell are they thinking?Especially after stating originally that without Freddie "there isn't a band called Queen" Like appearing on American Idol, this is just another attempt to make money from ignorant kids too young to experience having the real Queen as a living, working band. At the same time they alienate and disappoint long time fans and destroy what remains of their credibility. I'm not at all advocating they give up touring or recording at all. Nobody could care less if they called themselves "May,Taylor&Rodgers" or some such, but the reality there is that we all know, whether we admit it or not that the name Queen is what sells tickets. You know the two who are left must know deep down that they couldn't get away with this had Freddie actually quit the band at some point. He was loyal to them to the day that he passed away. That's a special kind of loyalty right there and something that those left behind should honour till their dying day. |
| akindofmagic 18.01.2007 23:59 |
Well, the people that says «Queen were Freddie», «Freddie was a champion even without Bri and Rog, but the latters would be losers without him», « Freddie the only good songwriters inside Queen..no on the whole world!!», these people are abvously fags! Not intend to insult anyone, but i can see some corporative action. Gay People tend to hyperbolate other gay people! Cmon guys, you still have George Michael or Elton John! Leave us, and Queen+PR, alone!! |
| kenny8 19.01.2007 00:20 |
akindofmagic wrote: Gay People tend to hyperbolate other gay people! Cmon guys, you still have George Michael or Elton John! Leave us, and Queen+PR, alone!!What a load of insulting rubbish. Are you retarded? You should be ashamed of yourself with that sort of crap on a Queen site for cryin out loud Look at the photo at the top of the page...that's Queen, the four of them |
| Vantrini 19.01.2007 03:39 |
hi i am johnny and in 2005 queen+pr brought out return of the champions, and i have to say the only song i actually listened to was bohemian rhapsody, the other three or maybe five was brians '39 and freddie's love of my life(not as good as the wembley performance by freddie) and rogers say it's not tue (never heard it before and i have to say it was alright) and the others being his won songs radio ga ga and these are the days of our lives(no where near as good as freddie's last performance) I know i might be tempted to by the new album and probably won't but i do think that this will nat pay off and queen should stick to nostalgic songs performed with freddie and i do feel as if that is a tribute as it stands Johnny vantrini |
| Sweetie 19.01.2007 03:46 |
Bri-Anns Permed Poodle wrote: I am a follower of the once great Brians Permed Poodle or BPP for short. I am dedicated to the cause. No Freddie = No Queen. I therefore urge people to honour Freddie's memory and do not buy any new Queen album with the overated Paul Rodgers on it. I thank you.] or I could still buy it to complete my collection because as much as I dislike Paul's eyes, it has Roger and Brian in it |
| pittrek 19.01.2007 04:18 |
Oh god, another fucking waste of time. Don't you people have girlfriends / boyfriends ? |
| bigV 19.01.2007 04:53 |
Mr Faron Hyte wrote:I just had to laugh out loud at that one! :)Bri-Anns Permed Poodle wrote: I am a follower of the once great Brians Permed Poodle or BPP for short. I am dedicated to the cause. No Freddie = No Queen. I therefore urge people to honour Freddie's memory and do not buy any new Queen album with the overated Paul Rodgers on it. I thank you.And I thank you for sharing your feeling, buttercup. Don't buy the record. Your problem is thus solved. pittrek wrote: Oh god, another fucking waste of time. Don't you people have girlfriends / boyfriends ?I do. She's at home studying for an accountancy examination. Which explains why I'm wasting my time in moronic threads like this one. V. |
| deleted user 19.01.2007 05:55 |
I liked the new song they were playing on the NA tour. I think I'll buy it, and I don't care what you say. ;) |
| August R. 19.01.2007 06:14 |
Bri-Anns Permed Poodle wrote: I am a follower of the once great Brians Permed Poodle or BPP for short.Oh my... the Poodlians are back. RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!! |
| Raststätte-Knödel 19.01.2007 06:38 |
1/2Queen+Paul Rodgers= some kind of maths it looks like |
| Sharon G.Queen Fan 19.01.2007 07:40 |
No Freddie + No John = No Queen. And there you have it. |
| ermin 19.01.2007 08:03 |
As I said in my review of ROTC (on Queen + Paul Rodgers Tour board), I respect their decision to do what they like to do (touring, playing music etc.). And I won't enter into debates whether Q+PR is really Queen or not. It's common sense. However, I do have a comment on Brian's statement about playing the new material. Brian, how about changing the setlist? Queen had so many albums and so many great songs. Are you lazy to practice and play those 'less-known' songs? Let me think: Brighton Rock, In the Lap of the Gods, You're My Best Friend, Liar, Somebody to Love, Don't Stop Me Now, It's Late, Keep Yourself Alive, March of the Black Queen, Killer Queen, Stone Cold Crazy, Death on Two Legs, White Man, Dreamer's Ball etc. etc. You could come up with a totally different setlist. But, oh, I forgot... You don't have a singer who could sing all these diverse songs... |
| jimi love 19.01.2007 09:58 |
wish it was different, but...............melding pomp-rock of the highest degree with grub-rock of the lowest degree has not, does not and will not, ever work! please, all who support and defend this abomination and dare i say, raping of the queen legacy.....shut the ^#$@ up!...........ps/ simply put, they can still play this junk, just don't call it queen!...........cheers, jimi love |
| thomasquinn 32989 19.01.2007 11:02 |
Bri-Anns Permed Poodle wrote: I am a follower of the once great Brians Permed Poodle or BPP for short. I am dedicated to the cause. No Freddie = No Queen. I therefore urge people to honour Freddie's memory and do not buy any new Queen album with the overated Paul Rodgers on it. I thank you.You are entitled to your (closed-minded and extremely ignorant) opinion; you are, however, NOT entitled to slander, as you do with Mr. Rodgers. It proves you are a musical moron, not fit to give his opinion. As for your "No Freddie = No Queen" reasoning, it is not only debatable, but also in practice very silly: Mercury became a member of a band called Smile, which then changed its name to Queen, without marking a radical departure in style (as 2/3 of the original band were represented in the new one), and thus his impact may have been great, but he was not the decisive factor. Any claims to the opposite point to a weak mind easily influenced by outward appearances and a thorough inability for critical analysis of music. Then there is the issue of a new album: your reasoning is that it should not be there, because Freddie doesn't feature on it. What you are thus saying, is that anyone who has ever played with a great band that does no longer exist, should no longer be allowed to make music. In other words: nothing is better than anything. That is your reasoning, and it is a completely daft reasoning at that. |
| sparrow 21754 19.01.2007 11:02 |
pittrek wrote: Oh god, another fucking waste of time. Don't you people have girlfriends / boyfriends ?do you? |
| john bodega 19.01.2007 11:55 |
What the fuck happened to Live and Let Live?? This bunch of people can listen to this music, and say its fantastic, That bunch of people can simply not listen to it... END OF PROBLEM. Fucking hell... |
| Nathan 19.01.2007 11:59 |
I'll certainly buy the album. |
| deleted user 19.01.2007 12:09 |
Pffft. Get a life. I'll buy the album. If you don't like Paul...at least consider the fact that WITHOUT said person, Roger and Brian wouldn't be touring right now. And you wouldn't have been (if you did) able to see them live. APPRECIATION. Jeez. I certainly will buy the album. And PR is NOT overrated. Ugh. |
| deleted user 19.01.2007 12:30 |
Let them selves decided what to do, at every time Q+PR doing a concert or creating a new album their thoughts goes to Freddie and his family, see what happened when they performed These Are The Days Of Our Lives or Love Of My Life at the "Return Of The Champions" tour. The Show Must Go On, Freddie are dead, he doesn't come back on this world. |
| Freddie's #1 Fan Forever 19.01.2007 13:09 |
It is pretty sleazy for Brian May to continue on with the name "Queen." He is a real sleazeball. |
| PieterMC 19.01.2007 13:19 |
Freddie's #1 Fan Forever wrote: It is pretty sleazy for Brian May to continue on with the name "Queen." He is a real sleazeball.*yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn* |
| Raststätte-Knödel 19.01.2007 13:23 |
Sharon G.Queen Fan wrote: No Freddie + No John = No Queen. And there you have it.agreed :) |
| Winter Land Man 19.01.2007 13:39 |
kdj2hot wrote: Go smoke somethin you a-holes. .Okay, lol, I'm going to go smoke a cigarette! |
| englishyob 19.01.2007 13:40 |
Cheese anyone? I hear the OJ Crops were badly effect by the weather wish i bough some OJ shares now !!!! |
| Winter Land Man 19.01.2007 13:42 |
akindofmagic wrote: Well, the people that says «Queen were Freddie», «Freddie was a champion even without Bri and Rog, but the latters would be losers without him», « Freddie the only good songwriters inside Queen..no on the whole world!!», these people are abvously fags! Not intend to insult anyone, but i can see some corporative action. Gay People tend to hyperbolate other gay people! Cmon guys, you still have George Michael or Elton John! Leave us, and Queen+PR, alone!!They didn't say Queen is Freddie, they said without Freddie, without John, there's no Queen... or at least only 50% Queen, so they should cut off have of the name, haha. |
| Back2TheLight 19.01.2007 16:21 |
I agree with Thomas Quinn, Zebonka, and PieterMC. If you don't like the music that's being put on the CD's, or that's being played at the shows, don't listen to it. Freddie would love that the Queen legacy in some sort of way is being carried on and that he is being remembered by the band itself carrying on. |
| The Real Wizard 19.01.2007 16:52 |
STOP REPLYING TO THIS IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!! If you don't reply, then the topics will DIE. |
| ok.computer 19.01.2007 17:52 |
Bri-Anns Permed Poodle wrote: I am a follower of the once great Brians Permed Poodle or BPP for short. I am dedicated to the cause. No Freddie = No Queen. I therefore urge people to honour Freddie's memory and do not buy any new Queen album with the overated Paul Rodgers on it. I thank you.AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAnnnnnd - you are STILL....a cunt. |
| deleted user 19.01.2007 19:10 |
Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: STOP REPLYING TO THIS IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!! If you don't reply, then the topics will DIE.Wow, you're really doing a great job of helping the cause. |
| englishyob 19.01.2007 20:01 |
im still miffed about the OJ crops DAM DAM DAM why didn’t i buy OJ shares drink milk and eat curry its good for you !! |
| akindofmagic 19.01.2007 21:06 |
bambams-paradise wrote: I agree with Thomas Quinn, Zebonka, and PieterMC. If you don't like the music that's being put on the CD's, or that's being played at the shows, don't listen to it. Freddie would love that the Queen legacy in some sort of way is being carried on and that he is being remembered by the band itself carrying on.I love Freddie, he is my musical hero! I never thought i would cry in a concert but i did twice in Madrid (one during "Love of My Life", the other of course on Bo Rap). And also get emotional at Lisbon concert, dispiste knowing what would happened. But i really don't care if he would be proud with Roger and Brian carring the legacy. I think he wouldn't care either. His life was his choice. he Wanted a life short and fast! Freddie told in many interviews that he wouldn't want to live 'till 60 years old. He wanted not to be an old man. he was not naiff and he knew the dangers of early 80's orgy life style. If Freddie was so worried about Queen, and about what the others would do with the name, he: 1ª Would Kept himself from orgy dangers 2º after knowing he had terminal deasese, he could have made an offical statment showing his desire that the band(name) was buried with him. So i beg people to not create this topics.. they are worthless! another thing: of course Queen+Pr is not Queen. The name says it all, it's a new band:Queen+PR |
| kenny8 20.01.2007 00:29 |
akindofmagic wrote:If Freddie was so worried about Queen, and about what the others would do with the name, he: 1ª Would Kept himself from orgy dangersCongratulations. You read some pretty stupid opinions on the net, but you take the cake. |
| john bodega 20.01.2007 00:39 |
To this thread I can only say : link Everybody wins. Queen left a massive recorded legacy for us to enjoy. There's music there for both 'sides' to enjoy. No one with a working brain gives a rats arse about the morality of calling something X when it doesn't have Y member in it. Grow the hell up and listen to your music of choice, you crazy people! |
| My Melancholy Blues 20.01.2007 12:09 |
Indeed Freddie was a member of Queen, and I don't mean to say that Queen equals Freddie. I don't mean to say that I don't support their newly-made stuff, either. It's no wonder that Bri and Rog have wanted to make new songs through the tours with Paul. But Queen is not a mere band name. Queen means the magic of music those four made, the results of the chemical reaction by four of them. If Brian, Roger and Paul do and release newly-made stuff, it should be a Brian, Roger and Paul trio album. |
| Serry... 20.01.2007 13:09 |
Queen - (John + Freddie) = Smile - Tim + anyone else. (the using-Queen-name-anytime-it-helps-to-sell-tickets-albums haters, don't fucking give up - Serry's with you!) |
| August R. 20.01.2007 18:09 |
ok.computer wrote: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAnnnnnd - you are STILL....a cunt.I was kinda expecting that. :) What took you so long, ok.computer? Now, if we could only get a nice list of cheese brands, it would be like BPP never left this forum... :) |
| john bodega 20.01.2007 22:16 |
<font color=#FF6666>My Melancholy Blues wrote: Indeed Freddie was a member of Queen, and I don't mean to say that Queen equals Freddie. I don't mean to say that I don't support their newly-made stuff, either. It's no wonder that Bri and Rog have wanted to make new songs through the tours with Paul. But Queen is not a mere band name. Queen means the magic of music those four made, the results of the chemical reaction by four of them. If Brian, Roger and Paul do and release newly-made stuff, it should be a Brian, Roger and Paul trio album.Thats the thing. It wasn't magic. It was a band. 4 guys who made it very very big - John Lennon said the exact same thing about the Beatles. We must (as a species) learn to move on, now and again I think (That doesn't mean 'pick a new name' or 'accept the old name' - it just means find something more worthwhile to talk about). People should not be so precious about a five letter word when Lord knows there's more important things to fuss about. |
| mike hunt 21.01.2007 01:20 |
with all the problems in the world we shouldn't be wasting our time getting angry about such things. Queen + paul or brian, roger and paul. It's not exactly my idea of a crisis. |
| Danny Buoy 21.01.2007 05:46 |
It's hard for any of us to know for sure the inner workings of the band and what they accepted as morally right amongst each other, so I can only be left assuming Brian and Roger know what they are doing. If I was in their position and the situation was how I imagine it (however inaccurate) I would feel compelled to change the name out of respect for Freddie. But, as I say, there is every chance that Brian and Roger know sumfing we do not, sumfing that influences such a decision. I'll be buying the album because Brian and Roger are on it (not for Paul Rodgers, as I'm not a fan of his music). |
| _Bijou_ 21.01.2007 13:34 |
Bri-Anns Permed Poodle wrote: I am a follower of the once great Brians Permed Poodle or BPP for short. I am dedicated to the cause. No Freddie = No Queen. I therefore urge people to honour Freddie's memory and do not buy any new Queen album with the overated Paul Rodgers on it. I thank you.Purlease. |
| maxpower 22.01.2007 14:11 |
Well for me if he's bored of playing them - can you blame him? how tedious must it be playing bo-rhap on queens last tour it had been permantly in for over 10 years, & you can level that at we are the champs, tie your mother down, but they would never be dropped so bring on the new material. I liken it to when McCartney toured again after 10 years away there are songs which will never be dropped ie hey jude, let it be, yesterday but he did re-jig the set list dropping all my loving for i'll get you, or kicking out cant buy me love for drive my car, to maintain some freshness so i for one wouldnt be bothered if hammer to fall was dropped for now im here etc. ref" Thats the thing. It wasn't magic. It was a band. 4 guys who made it very very big - John Lennon said the exact same thing about the Beatles. " off the subject a touch but that was John in his "i hate everything about the beatles in 1970 mode" He had slightly mellowed by 1980 - lol PLAYBOY: "Alright, but get back to the music itself. You don't agree that the Beatles created the best rock 'n roll that's been produced?" LENNON: "I don't. The Beatles, you see... I'm too involved in them artistically. I cannot see them objectively. I cannot listen to them objectively. I'm dissatisfied with every record the Beatles ever fucking made. There ain't one of them I wouldn't remake... including all the Beatles records and all my individual ones. So I cannot possibly give you an assessment of what the Beatles are. When I was a Beatle, I thought we were the best fucking group in the god-damned world. And believing that is what made us what we were... whether we call it the best rock 'n roll group or the best pop group or whatever. But you play me those tracks today and I want to remake every damn one of them. There's not a single one... I heard 'Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds' on the radio last night. It's abysmal, you know. The track is just terrible. I mean, it's great, but it wasn't made right, know what I mean? But that's the artistic trip, isn't it? That's why you keep going. But to get back to your original question about the Beatles and their music, the answer is that we did some good stuff and we did some bad stuff." Back to Paul Rodgers, young kids may actually discover free, bad company & some paul's blues stuff, as well as going down the queen route, so its not all bad |
| Another queen fanatic 22.01.2007 14:26 |
To be honest its probbably a good thing they are making an album so they stop ruining the songs that were meant to be sung by freddie, but also it will get today's ignorant kids into realising that Queen exist. I meet lots of kids of my own age who think that G4 wrote bohemiam Rhapsody, they have no idea who wrote WWRY or ABTD even though they sing them every day (that or they think they are all gay anthems, which is arguably even worse). And also ignorant kids like me (as kenny8 likes to refer to them) who were born too late to see Queen as a living breathing band have been waiting for a long time for at least some reminants of Queen to release something new so we are not stuck listening to the same 100 or so songs. Plus Brian May is just as much of Queen as Freddie Mercury, you look at who wrote the songs, and you see a fair amount are written by May, so you can still have a Queen without freddie. I know this is mostly a unintelligable rant, to be fair guys, im sure the majority of younger fans cant wait for a new "Queen" album, even if it does sound craip. The show must go on, and this is probably the only way it can. |
| Another queen fanatic 22.01.2007 14:47 |
Now ive had time to think logically, what i meant to say was we are probbaly doing more for Freddie's memory by buying this album and putting it in the charts, so there is some publicity for it than by just ignoring it because we think its wrong for some reason or other. There is much more damage being done to freddie's memory from all the stupid documentaries focussing on his private life and not his music. |
| Hooligan's Holiday 22.01.2007 16:57 |
*siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh* Let me begin my exasperated post with a quote from part III of Rush's "2112": "We have no need for ancient ways, our world is doing fine..." Yeah. We don't necissarily NEED Queen to be out in the open again with a new singer, namely Paul Rodgers. But what about all those new kids who weren't around to see the real thing? Huh? What about THEM? Jesus, people like you make me sick, man. So what - you don't like it. That's you and probably a small percentage of the rest of us. SOME of us appreciate Queen no matter what they do. So ya know what? Shut up and leave them the hell alone. It's THEIR choice, not YOURS. If you're gonna whine about how they're "replacing Freddie", which is total crap and isn't true,m go tell it to someone who actually cares. |
| will1 22.01.2007 17:58 |
I hope that Brian dies before he attempts to make a 'Queen' album. Are they deaf or blind or what? If Freddie and John are not there why is there Queen? |
| kenny8 22.01.2007 18:59 |
<font color=black>*Space Ace* wrote: *siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh*But what about all those new kids who weren't around to see the real thing? Huh? What about THEM? Jesus, people like you make me sick, man....but the "kids" aren't seeing the real Queen, as you yourself admit. It seems some don't have the mental capacity to get their heads around the idea that, as much as I'd like to have seen the Beatles, or even the Marx Brothers, it won't happen. It's over. Paul & Ringo obviously have enough dignity (or money) not to tour and/or record material as the Beatles just to indulge the "kids" who never got a chance to experience the "real thing" They're probably well aware that any attempt to revive the Beatles with half the original members (sound familiar??) would be met with howls of laughter and only be seen as a sad, disrespectful footnote to the bands name and legacy. |
| kenny8 22.01.2007 19:06 |
....actually, how much money do these "Queen+" guys need? If they want to come out of this oncoming debacle with a shred of dignity I'd hope that all profits will go to AIDS charities. If the Who can record and tour for charity, I'd like to think "Queen+" would do the same. Sadly, I think those days are long over for Brian & Roger. Don't believe the guff that they're doing this "for the music" If that was the case we would've been spared the Crazy Frog and American Idol cash grabs |
| QueenTaylor 22.01.2007 21:04 |
I really say that if there's no Freddie, there's no Queen! That's it. I know that there were 4 people, but now that two people are gone, it has taken like 10 people to replace them. That tells you how much talent just those two had. I'm really not looking forward to a new Q+PR album because personally, I don't think he's right for Queen. Not that I want someone like Freddie (thats impossible anyway), but he just can't reach those high notes and he adds a bit of southern rock on to it, i dont know. He was good with Bad Company and Free, but he just can't sing Queen...I'm sorry! That's just my opinoin though...no need to come back with anything nasty... believ me, I've had enough of that on classic rock magazine....check it out...and let em know what you thing....are these guys losers or what? link I'm sorry, but I'm going to support Queen no matter what!!! |
| Smitty 22.01.2007 21:40 |
I sorta respect your post Taylormad101, but I gotta add something. Q+PR Tour Musicians Paul -Vocals, Some Guitar Brian -Guitar, Vocals Roger -Drums, Vocals Danny -Bass, Vocals Jamie -Backup Guitar, Vocals Spike -Keyboards, Vocals Magic Tour Musicians Freddie -Vocals, Some Guitar Brian -Guitar, Vocals Roger -Drums, Vocals John -Bass Spike -Keyboards, Vocals, Some Backup Guitar There's only one more musician, and it's all of the same positions covered, in my opinion, it seems to add to the harmonies since there's six vocalists instead of four. The only people I cannot stand are Kenny8 and BPP(+Clones). To you guys, most of your information is incorrect and you aren't even backing it up. That's all I have to say. |
| QueenTaylor 22.01.2007 21:47 |
<b><font color=gold>SMI<font color=1>TTY wrote: I sorta respect your post Taylormad101, but I gotta add something. Q+PR Tour Musicians Paul -Vocals, Some Guitar Brian -Guitar, Vocals Roger -Drums, Vocals Danny -Bass, Vocals Jamie -Backup Guitar, Vocals Spike -Keyboards, Vocals Magic Tour Musicians Freddie -Vocals, Some Guitar Brian -Guitar, Vocals Roger -Drums, Vocals John -Bass Spike -Keyboards, Vocals, Some Backup Guitar There's only one more musician, and it's all of the same positions covered, in my opinion, it seems to add to the harmonies since there's six vocalists instead of four. The only people I cannot stand are Kenny8 and BPP(+Clones). To you guys, most of your information is incorrect and you aren't even backing it up. That's all I have to say.I respec that, but Fred only needed to have extra cause he was busy performing for his fans...he still had all those skills...like playing the piano...he never lost them...they were always there...except sometimes he needed a little help so he could entertain the crowd. You should read clasic rock magazine cause u should see some of the things people wrote about Freddie! |
| Smitty 22.01.2007 21:59 |
Yeah, what jerks! I actually find it funny that people can be this stupid. P.S. I get this all of the time at school, so I'm used to it. Not as bad as that though. |
| QueenTaylor 22.01.2007 22:03 |
<b><font color=gold>SMI<font color=1>TTY wrote: Yeah, what jerks! I actually find it funny that people can be this stupid. P.S. I get this all of the time at school, so I'm used to it. Not as bad as that though.Oh, I know, I hate people like that, I just ignore those people who judge...or just tell them off...they know nothing about talent anyway...if they think that Queen are terrible! |
| Smitty 22.01.2007 22:16 |
Amen to that. |
| QueenTaylor 22.01.2007 22:21 |
<b><font color=gold>SMI<font color=1>TTY wrote: Amen to that. |
| Smitty 22.01.2007 22:32 |
I listen to a lot of Classic Rock generally, I listen to a lot of The Who, some Led Zeppelin, and also some old Free/Bad Company stuff. What about you? |
| QueenTaylor 22.01.2007 22:38 |
<b><font color=gold>SMI<font color=1>TTY wrote: I listen to a lot of Classic Rock generally, I listen to a lot of The Who, some Led Zeppelin, and also some old Free/Bad Company stuff. What about you?I like Zeppelin too...into Foreigner, and Journey also....a litlle Def Leopard,not a whole lot though...mostly just Queen |
| kenny8 23.01.2007 03:12 |
<b><font color=gold>SMI<font color=1>TTY wrote: The only people I cannot stand are Kenny8 and BPP(+Clones). To you guys, most of your information is incorrect and you aren't even backing it up.Go back and read my posts jackass. You're stupidly trying to justify carrying the name of Queen on by proving there's a comparable amount of musicians involved. You simply miss the point, but as you're in school you obviously missed seeing the real Queen |
| QueenTaylor 23.01.2007 07:27 |
excuse me, I just want to say something, and don't get offended in anyway, but I'm sure he has seen the real Queen.... I have 24 dvds and I watch them over and over. From concerts, to videos. Interviews to documentaries. I don't know about Smitty, but I've seen the real Queen and they're AWSOME!!!! |
| Queen You ROCKED US! 23.01.2007 07:59 |
This is what I posted on the Queen board on the IMDB. I was having an argument with someone saying Freddie had been replaced. There are 2 entries: They have NOT replaced Freddie! Sorry that annoys me quite a bit. Hence it's Queen + Paul Rodgers! OK I didn't say that earlier but still. I went to see Queen + Paul Rodgers in 2005 and it was the best night of my entire life!! It was bloody worth it just to see Brian + Roger!! Freddie would have wanted Brian + Roger to continue with their lives in the music buisness. In the Brian May Story it mentions the single of Driven By You coming out on 25th November 1991, which most people will know as the day after Freddie died. Brian knew Freddie didn't have long left and asked him whether this new release should be stopped... Freddie's answer: he must go ahead because, if nothing else, just think of the boost to sales if he did die! Apparently that flippancy was very Freddie ^_^ link SIGN THE PETITION!!!!!! It isn't virtually replacing Freddie. Even Brian and Roger said that Paul wasn't replacing Freddie. He was just working with them. How the hell can Freddie be replaced?? Queen wasn't just about Freddie. Take either Brian, Roger or John out as well and Queen wouldn't be the same. They are all Gods in their own role within the band. What were Brian and Roger supposed to do? Just dissapear from the music world altogether?? It is a known fact that Brian loves working and touring. Why would you begrudge him that chance? Just because Freddie has gone doesn't mean Brian should have to stop doing what he loves. If he wants to tour, why not tour with his good friend Roger? Well that's all of Queen that's left since John retired. And I don't blame him since he has 6 children. I still respect him for that and plus he gave Brian and Roger his blessings for the tour. So yes, Brian and Roger want to tour, and they'd naturally want to perform Queen songs. Brian has often been quoted as saying "I'm not the singer". He just prefers playing guitar. As for Roger... sorry to say his voice isn't fantastic, so they'd have to get a singer from somewhere. And of course they'd need a new bassist as well. Why anyone would have to be so picky as to another singer going on tour with Queen I don't know. Is it just the name Queen that bothers you? It's only a name... but also it'd draw people in because if a new name came along it'd confuse people. I think people need to get over the fact that life has carried on after Freddie. Don't get me wrong I love him a lot. He has the best voice in the whole of the music business and his death was such an enormous tragedy, and he is sorely missed by everyone, but that's life. As Brian's song goes, The Show Must Go On! Queen will never ever be the same with him of course. But not going to see Queen live now just because Freddie isn't there is just crazy. Why waste the chance of seeing one of the greatest guitarists and drummers in the world?? If no-one likes them going on tour now then no-one would like them touring alone... surely? Yeah OK rant over ^_^ LONG LIVE QUEEN + PAUL RODGERS!!!!!!!!!! |
| The Real Wizard 23.01.2007 11:27 |
<font color=space>sweden_man wrote:I wasn't replying *to* him. I was encouraging others not to.Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: STOP REPLYING TO THIS IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!! If you don't reply, then the topics will DIE.Wow, you're really doing a great job of helping the cause. Can you suggest a better way to accomplish this, as people are still continuing to post and encourage BPP as they always have? |
| Micrówave 23.01.2007 12:34 |
kenny8 wrote: ....actually, how much money do these "Queen+" guys need? If they want to come out of this oncoming debacle with a shred of dignity I'd hope that all profits will go to AIDS charities.....actually , how much more money do Brian and Roger have to donate to AIDS? No one in the band has it and only Danny is gay. I think they should distance from the AIDS/gay thing and draw an even larger fan base. |
| QueenTaylor 23.01.2007 14:52 |
Micrówave wrote:I know for a fact...that Brian does a lot of work with the Mercury Phionex Trust for AIDS...check it out on brianmay.com I mean it's like people are saying that Brian and Roger don't care about that and that's not rue at all!!kenny8 wrote: ....actually, how much money do these "Queen+" guys need? If they want to come out of this oncoming debacle with a shred of dignity I'd hope that all profits will go to AIDS charities.....actually , how much more money do Brian and Roger have to donate to AIDS? No one in the band has it and only Danny is gay. I think they should distance from the AIDS/gay thing and draw an even larger fan base. |
| kenny8 23.01.2007 16:11 |
Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:Yeah freedom of speech must really piss you off<font color=space>sweden_man wrote:I wasn't replying *to* him. I was encouraging others not to. Can you suggest a better way to accomplish this, as people are still continuing to post and encourage BPP as they always have?Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: STOP REPLYING TO THIS IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!! If you don't reply, then the topics will DIE.Wow, you're really doing a great job of helping the cause. |
| kenny8 23.01.2007 16:13 |
Micrówave wrote: I think they should distance from the AIDS/gay thing and draw an even larger fan base....coz it's all about the money, isn't it....you homophobe |
| QueenTaylor 23.01.2007 16:37 |
kenny8 wrote:Micrówave wrote: I think they should distance from the AIDS/gay thing and draw an even larger fan base.Why would they need the money...??? They love to perform and they love music. They do it for their fans! Maybe your just jealous cause they have more money than you! ...coz it's all about the money, isn't it....you homophobe |
| FredRICE 23.01.2007 16:58 |
they have enough money already but maybe roger wants more to buy a bigger ferrari and brian wants to start his own astronomy centre |
| QueenTaylor 23.01.2007 16:59 |
FredRICE wrote: they have enough money already but maybe roger wants more to buy a bigger ferrari and brian wants to start his own astronomy centreexactly what I'm trying to say...I mean have you seen Roger's houses? Come on...they're just talented and they love to do it...it mkaes the fans happy! |
| FredRICE 23.01.2007 17:02 |
not all fans But maybe all fans: link they sweat so much..and get so hot during concerts they sure need these |
| QueenTaylor 23.01.2007 17:04 |
FredRICE wrote: not all fans But maybe all fans: link they sweat so much..and get so hot during concerts they sure need theseha ha...very funny...i mean the Queen fans...unless they hate Paul Rodgers and refuse to go to the concerts! |
| The Real Wizard 24.01.2007 10:31 |
kenny8 wrote: Yeah freedom of speech must really piss you offClearly you don't come here too often, because you're not aware of the months upon months of the same posts over and over again from BPP. It's got nothing to do with my tolerance of the freedom of speech, which I have plenty of. It's slightly different when someone is a broken record. If he was posting "Go Paul Go" for months on end, my reaction would be the same. For the sake of others, I'd rather they didn't get themselves all upset over this guy, because all he's trying to do is get people's attention and rattle them up. After a while, I learned not to communicate with him. If others would do the same, the guy would stop posting and wasting everyone's time. Take the time if you'd like to check his history, and you'll see that he has not contributed to any other kind of discussion. |
| john bodega 24.01.2007 12:54 |
I'd like Freedom of Speech a lot more if it entailed people thinking before talking. In particular, I'm thinking of the Bungie.net forum. My nephew is a moderator there... now there's a hive of people who need their jaws wired shut. |
| Hooligan's Holiday 24.01.2007 13:12 |
kenny8 wrote:Good point, but it is the next closest thing, am I right?<font color=black>*Space Ace* wrote: *siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh*But what about all those new kids who weren't around to see the real thing? Huh? What about THEM? Jesus, people like you make me sick, man....but the "kids" aren't seeing the real Queen, as you yourself admit. |
| kenny8 24.01.2007 19:56 |
Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: Clearly you don't come here too oftenI come here often enough. So what if someone starts a thread you think is repetitive? That's their call. You don't like it, stop wading into them. Who are you to decide what others post anyway? |
| The Real Wizard 24.01.2007 20:58 |
The Freddie vs. Paul topic has been discussed hundreds of times, and it is becoming tiresome. So shoot me because I would like this forum to be a place of worthy discussion. |
| Bri-Anns Permed Poodle 28.01.2007 15:20 |
These posts need to continue until Brian and Roger listen to the fans. Go and form a new band leave FReddie's band to rest in Peace. Nuff said. |
| The Real Wizard 28.01.2007 23:45 |
Which fans? The 500,000+ who have filled the arenas for the past two years? |
| mike hunt 29.01.2007 00:55 |
this topic is old and getting older by the minute. Who really cares about this anymore, everyone knows who queen were and always will be. It's only music and in 20 years nobody will care about any of this. Black Sabbath and many others kept making music when their famous singer left or died. Get over it!...this whole thing Queen + paul is nothing new. |
| john bodega 29.01.2007 02:51 |
Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: Which fans? The 500,000+ who have filled the arenas for the past two years?They aren't 'real fans'. Obviously. (Belly laugh) |
| Sabazzz 29.01.2007 09:03 |
Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: Which fans? The 500,000+ who have filled the arenas for the past two years?If Freddie would be alive, the number would be 5 000 000 +. Q_PR tour is not the same as Q_PR studio album. The setlist was filled mostly from well known Queen songs, so everybody this project identified as Queen, with a help from Paul Rogers. But now there wouldnt be well known Queen songs at all, and I have some doubts this album would be received as Paul's album recorded with guest musicians, 'cause there will be no strong recognized Queen references at all, except the fact music would be played by 2 ex Queen members. |
| kenny8 29.01.2007 20:06 |
Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: Which fans? The 500,000+ who have filled the arenas for the past two years?You're missing the real point that has been stated time and time again. It's one thing to do a nostalgia tour, playing the old favorites, it's a completely different matter to record NEW music as "Queen"....especially when Brian May says he's "tired" of playing the old songs. At least he's fair enough to admit recently that there's a lot of people angry and disappointed with their decision to carry the name on this far. It's disingenous for May & Taylor to ridicule INXS on US radio and rubbish "Idol/Rockstar" like TV shows, then go ahead and lower the name of Queen to those same levels |
| AlexRocks 29.01.2007 22:10 |
Not only has Queen NOT been lowered by them continuing but they also have ceased the dead hippy ideology that one should be a quiter and a loser because one person passes away and therefore made themselves into something FAR greater. What a pathethic thinking proccess that is that you hippies and looser quiters share. Thank God I am not like that. Who wants to bet people who think like that have chemical substance abuse problems as well? Otherwise it is scary to think that your judgement could become so clout without such things. Then again those things do happen. |
| john bodega 29.01.2007 23:21 |
"Who wants to bet people who think like that have chemical substance abuse problems as well?" Uhh?? Come on - they simply disagree with you. It's not like they robbed a bank. I suppose I'm too insular to care about the Q+PR name anymore. I spend an awful lot of time listening to Queen - future projects with surviving members simply don't bother me because : 1). They aren't even out yet so I can't call them good or bad 2). I have better things to do - like *listen* to the band I'd otherwise be defending from this 'awful' Paul Rodgers guy (apparently). Fuck it! It just doesn't matter. |
| mike hunt 30.01.2007 00:50 |
kenny8 wrote:good point. I'v talked to plenty of queen fans since this queen + paul thing happened, and most agree that it's ok to do a tour with the queen name, but it's a whole new ball game to record a new queen album with paul. A lot of queen fans shake their heads when I mention their plans.Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: Which fans? The 500,000+ who have filled the arenas for the past two years?You're missing the real point that has been stated time and time again. It's one thing to do a nostalgia tour, playing the old favorites, it's a completely different matter to record NEW music as "Queen"....especially when Brian May says he's "tired" of playing the old songs. At least he's fair enough to admit recently that there's a lot of people angry and disappointed with their decision to carry the name on this far. It's disingenous for May & Taylor to ridicule INXS on US radio and rubbish "Idol/Rockstar" like TV shows, then go ahead and lower the name of Queen to those same levels |
| HugoWanKenobi 30.01.2007 00:54 |
I´ve read a book called "Queen: as it began". If everything the authors wrote is true, it's absolutly clear to me that Roger and Brian have the right to continue with the band, and the name, and the songs and anything else. They played together before queen, Freddie joined'em and they made a lot of their greatest songs; they even choose their bass player... I mean, it was their initiative. period. |
| kenny8 30.01.2007 03:30 |
HugoWanKenobi wrote: I´ve read a book called "Queen: as it began". If everything the authors wrote is true, it's absolutly clear to me that Roger and Brian have the right to continue with the band, and the name, and the songs and anything else.It's not so much who started it, it's what it became. You'll find plenty of interviews saying that the actual name of "Queen" was another one of those crazy Freddie ideas anyway. Trying to continue Queen without Freddie Mercury (of all people!!) can only be motivated by greed. Don't get me wrong though, I'm looking forward to Roger, Brian and Paul Rodgers continuing to make new music for years to come yet. They don't need to pass themselves off as Queen in doing so, surely?? Queen was something completely different |
| kenny8 30.01.2007 03:35 |
AlexRocks wrote: Who wants to bet people who think like that have chemical substance abuse problems as well? Otherwise it is scary to think that your judgement could become so clout without such things.You might want to get on some substances then, you might make some sense. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 30.01.2007 12:42 |
HugoWanKenobi wrote: I´ve read a book called "Queen: as it began". If everything the authors wrote is true, it's absolutly clear to me that Roger and Brian have the right to continue with the band, and the name, and the songs and anything else. period.That's entirely true Hugo. What's "right" isn't the question. It has nothing to do with Paul Rodgers either. I believe Paul Rodgers is a fantastic, legendary rock singer. However, one of the performers in the Vegas version of WWRY (Patti Russo?) said that Queen weren't a group, they were a genre. It was the combination of four unique talents coming together that made Queen. Queen will never be Brian May, Roger Taylor, Paul Rogers, plus the ex-bassist from Blue Oyster Cult and various session men whether they call themselves Queen or not. I'm sure that the album will be filled with great songs. But John and Freddie wrote some of the oddest songs stylistically (Bohemian Rhapsody, Somebody to Love, Who Needs You, AOBTD, Mustapha, Leroy Brown) in the Queen catalogue, stuff that was more out there than Brian's stuff (save Good Company), or Roger's for the most part. THAT'S what will be missing from this version of Queen. I love Queen as a heavy band, but if a stranger listened to Quuen Rocks as an indicator of Queen music, they'd be missing an awful lot of the wit and style that made Queen unique, and different from their peers. So, yes, they do have the right to do what they want, no fair minded person would ever question that, and this topic has been beaten to death over the last two years. But to the best of my knowledge, John Deacon is still a member of Queen. Forget Freddie for a second, if John decided to take his funk version of Queen on the road with a horn section and his old colleague Errol Brown from Hot Chocolate as the new Queen singer (after all he has the "right" to do so), would we all be alright with John calling his new act Queen? I doubt it. |
| john bodega 30.01.2007 12:45 |
"if John decided to take his funk version of Queen on the road with a horn section and his old colleague Errol Brown from Hot Chocolate as the new Queen singer (after all he has the "right" to do so), would we all be alright with John calling his new act Queen? I doubt it." That's actually a neat idea. Errol Brown kicks arse. |
| Wiley 30.01.2007 14:37 |
kenny8 wrote: You're missing the real point that has been stated time and time again. It's one thing to do a nostalgia tour, playing the old favorites, it's a completely different matter to record NEW music as "Queen"....especially when Brian May says he's "tired" of playing the old songs.It looks to me like it's pretty much the same. I keep seeing the same boring threads about this or that thing Brian and Roger are doing that is some kind of sacrilege or a disgrace to Queen's legacy. First it was GH3, then Five, then Robbie, then the musical, then Britney, then the tour with Paul Rodgers, now the possible release of an album. BIG DEAL! I still think of Queen with Freddie and don't think less of it because of GH3 or the tour with Paul. The legacy is intact. If we go back to the 80's I think I almost can see the same happening with the release of Hot Space, Sun City, Queen not touring anymore, etc. Queen never cared a lot about appearances or maybe they did but ended doing whatever the hell they wanted. The tour was a great treat for the fans and I don't fucking care if they got filthy rich with it!! Now they are moving on, they want to do something new and become more than just a nostalgia act. It's a new phase, a new and different Queen collaborating with Paul Rodgers. You are free not to like it and also to express it. They don't care, they never have cared and they never will. They are too old to care about shit right now and they'll do whatever they want. Believe me, a loser's rant in some board online is not making any difference. It only pisses intelligent members of the same board. And by this, I mean this BPP asshole that keeps on coming back again and again just to stir the pot. This thread has been done DOZENS of times in the course of two years. Did it stop the tour? No. They even thought of recording an album. Maybe you should try another approach to stop the next tour ;). Good luck with that. Wiley |
| kenny8 31.01.2007 19:22 |
To be fair, I have to say I have less of a problem with them calling themselves Queen Mark Two as Brian May has recently stated rather than Queen+ somebody else. Does give the impression of being a different entity. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 31.01.2007 20:58 |
Brian's favourite album has long been Queen II. I see no reason that the recorded version of the band including Paul Rodgers and whoever else couldn't, and shouldn't use this name. It keeps their brand, legacy and logo alive, but says they're a new entity while respecting their past. |
| john bodega 31.01.2007 22:08 |
"Queen Mark Two" Indeed. Thats actually how I see the Queen+ label, mind you. The moment they started using that, I began to see them somewhat differently. Queen +, Queen Mk II... meh. All the same I spose. |
| The Real Wizard 01.02.2007 13:51 |
LT_United wrote:Perhaps, but what does that have to do with anything? We're not talking about Freddie.Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: Which fans? The 500,000+ who have filled the arenas for the past two years?If Freddie would be alive, the number would be 5 000 000 +. But now there wouldnt be well known Queen songs at all,What are you talking about? You think they'll drop all the old songs from the setlist? Research the attendance figures for this year's The Who tour. Their setlist was 1/3 new songs. They are down to two original members from four, and they are still called The Who. Why not jump on the "don't call it The Who" bandwagon? What makes them different than Queen? Or Deep Purple? Or Black Sabbath? Or Chicago? and I have some doubts this album would be received as Paul's album recorded with guest musicians, 'cause there will be no strong recognized Queen references at all, except the fact music would be played by 2 ex Queen members.How do you know there will be no resemblance to Queen on the new album? It's people like you who are making Brian and Roger's success that much more difficult, because you're judging their new music before even hearing it. |
| Drowse1 01.02.2007 14:06 |
This story has been done to death. People like me hate the idea of Brian & Roger using the Queen name, that's all. If they want to record under another name I'd love it but it will never be Queen as we know it ever again. And it won't sound like Queen because half of the band won't be there, including, as Brian himself said in 1991 the man who was the biggest part of the band, FM. |
| kenny8 01.02.2007 20:03 |
The Who analogy is a tricky one. Or The Who2 as Townshend likes to call it. "Endless Wire" is a direct descendant of "Psychoderelict" and "Lifehouse" by the same writer, obviously. If fate had it the other way around and Moon & Entwhistle were alive and touring as The Who it would be a different kettle of fish. Where The Who2 score credibility is that they don't participate in tacky things like American Idol in an attempt to sell ANOTHER compilation album, or release "My Generation" as a Crazy Frog ring tone....they're doing what they do for charities. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 01.02.2007 22:20 |
Excellent points Kenny8. Good writers often say if a scene doesn't "move the story forward", cut it out. As I've stated ad nauseum, Queen's peers, IMHO, are the Beatles and Zeppelin, meaning Queen is a notch above amazing bands like the Stones and the Who. Yet compared to the Beatles and Zeppelin, Queen seems content on resting on their sales marks and keeping the Queen brand in the public eye rather than their musical legacy. Let's be honest: NOTHING that Queen has done post-Freddie's death has added to Queen's legacy. If someone can honestly, and intelligently explain to me how WWRY with 5ive, WATC with Robbie Williams, WWRY with John Farnham, WWRY with Britney, Pink and Beyonce have added to the Queen musical legacy, and how, I'd love to hear it. (I will not mention the horrific MIH, for fear that Adam Baboolal will go nuts on me! Just kidding Adam, I'm being a smart ass :) All of those efforts were fantastically inferior to the original. That being the case, why were the done? How did they 'move the story forward?' If it's not art, it's commerce. No shame in that, but Queen are becoming the Garth Brooks of rock. I'm not naive, I realize that sales drive the Queen engine, but I find Brian incredibly disingenous when he states that it's too bad that all that most people know are the greatest hits albums, and that he wishes they'd discover the albums. Brian is a true hero of mine for his musical genius and grace and intelligence. However, people on the last tour were dying to hear something rare like Long Away of Drowse, or any other gems from the catalogue. Please don't tell me that while the record company may force Queen to keep the Greatest Hits albums in print that they are dictating the setlist for Queen and Paul Rodgers. They'd played the hits because the hits are risk free and good for business. If that's the case then Brian can't complain that people don't know the catalogue because he and Roger are afraid to play it live. Wow, quite a tangent there, but to sum up, fine post Kenny8! |
| john bodega 01.02.2007 23:25 |
"Why not jump on the "don't call it The Who" bandwagon?" It's not how many people you cut out, I think. It's who you cut out! It kinda works for the Who because they've got the songwriter, and the singer, and a drummer who is (for personal and technical reasons) the perfect dude for the job. As a touring act, I think Q+PR was justifiable, but they'll have a hard time convincing huge numbers of people that new material should have Queen written on it. "Where The Who2 score credibility is that they don't participate in tacky things like American Idol in an attempt to sell ANOTHER compilation album, or release "My Generation" as a Crazy Frog ring tone....they're doing what they do for charities." True true. I mean... I happen to like their new music as a standalone thing, they don't need to do charity to justify it - but it's fantastic to see a band do that for a change. "Yet compared to the Beatles and Zeppelin, Queen seems content on resting on their sales marks and keeping the Queen brand in the public eye rather than their musical legacy." I dunno... some people did look at the "LOVE" album with raised eyebrow. Aside from that, most Beatles releases have been great - it's the John Lennon stuff that smacks of moneymaking, I think. (But then again, Yoko did triple his personal fortune in the 70's, and she didn't do that by selling lemonade). "horrific MIH" Are you kidding?! "However, people on the last tour were dying to hear something rare like Long Away of Drowse, or any other gems from the catalogue." I'm dying to know why he left "White Man" off the North American tour. If I had to pick one 70's song that might work with Paul Rodgers, it'd be that one - and it'd be more than relevant I think. Us white folk can't be indicted enough for what we've done to natives all over the planet. |
| Boy Thomas Raker 01.02.2007 23:44 |
Hi Zebonka, agree about White Man, among many others that I feel they could or should have added that tour. Sometimes I think that Brian (as Roger doesn't open himself up like Brian does) has no idea what songs like White Queen, or Long Away to name but two, mean to Queen fans. When he played a snippet of Long Away, people on this board were fired up. But there was no adventure in the set list. Same old, same old. MIH? :) I absolutely hate it, nice sentiment to complete the Queen catalogue, IMHO and apparently very few others, an unfinished, unsatisfying work that never should have seen the light of day, but that's another thread altogether and I realize I'm in the minority here. |
| john bodega 02.02.2007 00:01 |
Well it's an interesting view... I never thought of it as unfinished. Actually I could imagine people looking at it as 'overfinished' (ie. overproduced). Fair enough I guess! But I'm like that with posthumous releases, I was one of the only people I knew at the time who liked Free as a Bird or Real Love. |
