QueenZone discussion #953344

<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: If I go to Hell for listening to Q+PR, does that mean I'm going to be where Freddie is ? ... Or is that a different level of Hell ? ... Is it walking distance ? ... I always do get them mixed up... Regardless, Hell should be a fantastic place - I hear that anyone who was anyone is there.

Dr. Perry Cox wrote: Shh shh, you're interrupting my conversation with Zebonka about The Who! In fact, this thread is now about The Who and all their greatness.

NEOLOGiX wrote: I heartily agree that Queen shouldn't release a new album without Freddie Mercury... and not only without Freddie Mercury, but also without John Deacon. I mean, Queen are like an iconic figure for me. How the hell can they decide to release new music without two of their members. That was what was so great about it - the four of them contributed and made songs together. Who the hell is Paul Rodgers anyway? Queen are known for the falmboyant ways of Freddie on stage - I mean that was one of the great things about Queen. What, is this 50-something Rodgers gonna perform like Freddie? Running around with the Union Jack and the microphone stand? The bastard would have a bloody heart attack. Nobody can ever replace Freddie. He himself said it on Live at Wembley '86, Who Wants To Live Forever - "we'll stay together till we bloody well die, I'm sure of it". Well he's dead, and now two of the surviving members are replacing him???? They're in it for the money OBVIOUSLY. They're disgracing the Queen name by making an album with Paul Rodgers. If they want they should just create a new band and make an album with him. Not Queen + Paul Rodgers. That's bullshit. I think Deacon did the best choice by retiring back in the 1990s. What I'd like to see is the three of them performing live once more, playing their classic songs, and using a good vocalist... some guy who was big in the 70s like Queen... I dunno, maybe Elton John or Paul McCartney or something.

pittrek wrote: Neologix : take a photo of your beloved Freddie and go fuck yourself, dirty asshole.

NEOLOGiX wrote: Queen are like an iconic figure for me. How the hell can they decide to release new music

NEOLOGiX wrote: is this 50-something Rodgers gonna perform like Freddie? (...) The bastard would have a bloody heart attack. (...) some guy who was big in the 70s like Queen... I dunno, maybe Elton John or Paul McCartney or something.

NEOLOGiX wrote: Actually Raf840, you bloody fuckwit, I'm not a newbie, I've actually been a member since Sunday, September 22, 2002, unlike you, who has been only since like August 2006. Check out link - it's the old style forum which gives the Registered date at the bottom of each post. And I know that this topic was started before you bloody dumb piece of motherfucking shit. So fuck you and fuck your little pecker, you son of a motherfucked bitch.

NEOLOGiX wrote: Actually Raf840, you bloody fuckwit, I'm not a newbie, I've actually been a member since Sunday, September 22, 2002, unlike you, who has been only since like August 2006. Check out link - it's the old style forum which gives the Registered date at the bottom of each post. And I know that this topic was started before you bloody dumb piece of motherfucking shit. So fuck you and fuck your little pecker, you son of a motherfucked bitch.

NEOLOGiX wrote: Actually Raf840, you bloody fuckwit, I'm not a newbie, I've actually been a member since Sunday, September 22, 2002, unlike you, who has been only since like August 2006. Check out link - it's the old style forum which gives the Registered date at the bottom of each post. And I know that this topic was started before you bloody dumb piece of motherfucking shit. So fuck you and fuck your little pecker, you son of a motherfucked bitch.

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: I still don't understand how people can insist that Queen are F+B+R+J, when plenty of bands changed membership over the years and kept their name. Someone, please explain to me why Queen are exempt from this.

<font color=maroon>bitesthedust wrote: Little history lesson: Brian May, Tim Staffell & Roger Meddows Taylor were originally in a band Smile. After Tim Staffell left to join another band, Freddie Bulsara encouraged Brian and Roger to continue in the music business and together they formed a band called Queen. Freddie designed the crest and helped decide on the band name. Queen did not exist before he joined forces with Brian and Roger. Around 1970-1971, Mike Grose, Barry Mitchell and Doug Bogie were all tried out as bassists with Brian, Freddie & Roger before John Deacon was chosen by the band to be the permanent bass player in the summer of 1971. As far as changing band members is concerned - I'll sound a hypocrite but the Foo Fighters have had 2 drummers and 3 different guitarists since they began in 1995, and to my mind, they are still Foo Fighters. Go figure I guess.

Crezchi wrote:

<font color=maroon>bitesthedust wrote: Little history lesson: Brian May, Tim Staffell & Roger Meddows Taylor were originally in a band Smile. After Tim Staffell left to join another band, Freddie Bulsara encouraged Brian and Roger to continue in the music business and together they formed a band called Queen. Freddie designed the crest and helped decide on the band name. Queen did not exist before he joined forces with Brian and Roger. Around 1970-1971, Mike Grose, Barry Mitchell and Doug Bogie were all tried out as bassists with Brian, Freddie & Roger before John Deacon was chosen by the band to be the permanent bass player in the summer of 1971. As far as changing band members is concerned - I'll sound a hypocrite but the Foo Fighters have had 2 drummers and 3 different guitarists since they began in 1995, and to my mind, they are still Foo Fighters. Go figure I guess.

Actually Queen were called Smile for months, and were actually even billed as Roger Taylor's Smile in Cornwall, Roger's Hometown. And Tim left to join a band called 'Humpy Bong' lol. And they all made the name, not just Freddie, they had to all agree, so he couldn't have just named the band. lol.

<font color=maroon>bitesthedust wrote:

Crezchi wrote:

<font color=maroon>bitesthedust wrote: Little history lesson: Brian May, Tim Staffell & Roger Meddows Taylor were originally in a band Smile. After Tim Staffell left to join another band, Freddie Bulsara encouraged Brian and Roger to continue in the music business and together they formed a band called Queen. Freddie designed the crest and helped decide on the band name. Queen did not exist before he joined forces with Brian and Roger. Around 1970-1971, Mike Grose, Barry Mitchell and Doug Bogie were all tried out as bassists with Brian, Freddie & Roger before John Deacon was chosen by the band to be the permanent bass player in the summer of 1971. As far as changing band members is concerned - I'll sound a hypocrite but the Foo Fighters have had 2 drummers and 3 different guitarists since they began in 1995, and to my mind, they are still Foo Fighters. Go figure I guess.

Actually Queen were called Smile for months, and were actually even billed as Roger Taylor's Smile in Cornwall, Roger's Hometown. And Tim left to join a band called 'Humpy Bong' lol. And they all made the name, not just Freddie, they had to all agree, so he couldn't have just named the band. lol.

Billed as Smile, but Queen in essence. As far as the naming of the band - to quote myself: "Freddie designed the crest and helped decide on the band name."

NEOLOGiX wrote: Actually Raf840, you bloody fuckwit, I'm not a newbie, I've actually been a member since Sunday, September 22, 2002, unlike you, who has been only since like August 2006. Check out link - it's the old style forum which gives the Registered date at the bottom of each post. And I know that this topic was started before you bloody dumb piece of motherfucking shit. So fuck you and fuck your little pecker, you son of a motherfucked bitch.

Crezchi wrote:

<font color=maroon>bitesthedust wrote:

Crezchi wrote:

<font color=maroon>bitesthedust wrote: Little history lesson: Brian May, Tim Staffell & Roger Meddows Taylor were originally in a band Smile. After Tim Staffell left to join another band, Freddie Bulsara encouraged Brian and Roger to continue in the music business and together they formed a band called Queen. Freddie designed the crest and helped decide on the band name. Queen did not exist before he joined forces with Brian and Roger. Around 1970-1971, Mike Grose, Barry Mitchell and Doug Bogie were all tried out as bassists with Brian, Freddie & Roger before John Deacon was chosen by the band to be the permanent bass player in the summer of 1971. As far as changing band members is concerned - I'll sound a hypocrite but the Foo Fighters have had 2 drummers and 3 different guitarists since they began in 1995, and to my mind, they are still Foo Fighters. Go figure I guess.

Actually Queen were called Smile for months, and were actually even billed as Roger Taylor's Smile in Cornwall, Roger's Hometown. And Tim left to join a band called 'Humpy Bong' lol. And they all made the name, not just Freddie, they had to all agree, so he couldn't have just named the band. lol.

Billed as Smile, but Queen in essence. As far as the naming of the band - to quote myself: "Freddie designed the crest and helped decide on the band name."

Most of my comment about this was directed towards the peeps who keep saying that Freddie named the band. :) i was just adding to your post.

NEOLOGiX wrote: I mean, Queen are like an iconic figure for me. How the hell can they decide to release new music without two of their members.

Dr. Perry Cox wrote: Oh hey Zeb, apparently ol' PT said on his site that the 'oo are coming to Oz later this year. Just wanted to let you know.

MercuryLines wrote: I don't mind if Brian, Roger and Paul would relase an album, but NO Queen album!! it's just not Queen, so it shouldn't be called a Queen album!! Queen is John, Freddie, Roger and Brian...after all

sbrown wrote:

Dr. Perry Cox wrote: Oh hey Zeb, apparently ol' PT said on his site that the 'oo are coming to Oz later this year. Just wanted to let you know.

I thought they postponed.... In fact, I'm quite sure they put off the Asia/Australia leg because they had other stuff on. BTW, Zeb, the US 2-disc version of Endless Wire is at JB Hi-Fi for $18.99....

sbrown wrote:

Dr. Perry Cox wrote: Oh hey Zeb, apparently ol' PT said on his site that the 'oo are coming to Oz later this year. Just wanted to let you know.

I thought they postponed.... In fact, I'm quite sure they put off the Asia/Australia leg because they had other stuff on.

<b><font color=gold>SMI<font color=1>TTY wrote: My favorite part is the fact that that guy is basically saying "How dare they release an album I won't like. It's a mortal sin!!!1"

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: I still don't understand how people can insist that Queen are F+B+R+J, when plenty of bands changed membership over the years and kept their name. Someone, please explain to me why Queen are exempt from this.

Zebonka12 wrote: "TO BE CONTINUED" Oh please no... we've had enough already.

Dr. Perry Cox wrote:

<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: If I go to Hell for listening to Q+PR, does that mean I'm going to be where Freddie is ? ... Or is that a different level of Hell ? ... Is it walking distance ? ... I always do get them mixed up... Regardless, Hell should be a fantastic place - I hear that anyone who was anyone is there.

Shh shh, you're interrupting my conversation with Zebonka about The Who! In fact, this thread is now about The Who and all their greatness.

<font color=black>*Space Ace* wrote:

Dr. Perry Cox wrote:

<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: If I go to Hell for listening to Q+PR, does that mean I'm going to be where Freddie is ? ... Or is that a different level of Hell ? ... Is it walking distance ? ... I always do get them mixed up... Regardless, Hell should be a fantastic place - I hear that anyone who was anyone is there.

Shh shh, you're interrupting my conversation with Zebonka about The Who! In fact, this thread is now about The Who and all their greatness.

Right on! Long Live The Who!!

<font color="#FF00FF">its_a_hard_life wrote:

<font color=black>*Space Ace* wrote:

Dr. Perry Cox wrote:

<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: If I go to Hell for listening to Q+PR, does that mean I'm going to be where Freddie is ? ... Or is that a different level of Hell ? ... Is it walking distance ? ... I always do get them mixed up... Regardless, Hell should be a fantastic place - I hear that anyone who was anyone is there.

Shh shh, you're interrupting my conversation with Zebonka about The Who! In fact, this thread is now about The Who and all their greatness.

Right on! Long Live The Who!!

Keeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeith Mooooooooooooooooooon!!!! :D :D :D My hyper monkey.

Boy Thomas Raker wrote: Oddly enough, after seeing Brian on The Hour in Canada, he's so passionate and sincere, (...) I'm happy that he's carrying on with the Queen banner for his sake and happiness. (...) They can call it Queen, but it won't be Queen music without Freddie.

<font color=black>*Space Ace* wrote:

<font color="#FF00FF">its_a_hard_life wrote:

<font color=black>*Space Ace* wrote:

Dr. Perry Cox wrote:

<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: If I go to Hell for listening to Q+PR, does that mean I'm going to be where Freddie is ? ... Or is that a different level of Hell ? ... Is it walking distance ? ... I always do get them mixed up... Regardless, Hell should be a fantastic place - I hear that anyone who was anyone is there.

Shh shh, you're interrupting my conversation with Zebonka about The Who! In fact, this thread is now about The Who and all their greatness.

Right on! Long Live The Who!!

Keeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeith Mooooooooooooooooooon!!!! :D :D :D My hyper monkey.

Uhhhhh... Jess...? Whaddya mean...?

gnomo wrote:

Boy Thomas Raker wrote: Oddly enough, after seeing Brian on The Hour in Canada, he's so passionate and sincere, (...) I'm happy that he's carrying on with the Queen banner for his sake and happiness. (...) They can call it Queen, but it won't be Queen music without Freddie.

When all that is left is a pic and a few words on a grave, then we really are lost in the past forever. Music shares the same destiny: a song dies when there's no longer anyone singing and playing it and making others sing it with passion and meaning and a knowledge of where it came from. (...) I feel that, oddily enough, using the Queen name is helping keep the memory alive, not just the record sales.

<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: What if the members of Queen were playable characters in "Mortal Combat" ? Could Freddie impale people with his microphone stand ? Would Roger be able to hurl his drum-kit ? ... O, the mysteries of life...

Dr. Perry Cox wrote:

<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: What if the members of Queen were playable characters in "Mortal Combat" ? Could Freddie impale people with his microphone stand ? Would Roger be able to hurl his drum-kit ? ... O, the mysteries of life...

In response to your third question, someone's already beaten you to the punch in asking it: link

Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: I still don't understand how people can insist that Queen are F+B+R+J, when plenty of bands changed membership over the years and kept their name. Someone, please explain to me why Queen are exempt from this.

Bri-Anns Permed Poodle wrote: This poodle agrees. Leave the name Queen alone. Paul Rodgers has always been a nobody compared to our Freddie. You lot make me sick No respect for the dead. Freddie Haters!!!

Bri-Anns Permed Poodle wrote: Paul Rodgers has always been a nobody compared to our Freddie.

pittrek wrote: if I like apples, that means that I hate oranges ?

pittrek wrote: Neologix : take a photo of your beloved Freddie and go fuck yourself, dirty asshole.

Paul Rodgers wrote: Hey Neowhatever... The band is mine now. We're calling it Q+PR. Deal with it. Keep it up, and the new album will be called Paul Rodgers + Queen. While you're probably busy watching The Matrix again, maybe you can put in Return Of The Champions for about 15 minutes. I think my performance will pretty much blow your pants off, if they aren't already from watching The Matrix. Now, piss off. I've got to re-write a couple of these Roger tracks so they make sense. Thanks for visiting my website.

kenny8 wrote: Who cares? Nobody cares about Queen without Freddie Mercury The fact that Robbie Williams may be dressing as Fred in the 46664 concert only goes to highlight how Queen are remembered

kenny8 wrote: The fact that Robbie Williams may be dressing as Fred in the 46664 concert only goes to highlight how Queen are remembered

NEOLOGiX wrote: I heartily agree that Queen shouldn't release a new album without Freddie Mercury... and not only without Freddie Mercury, but also without John Deacon. I mean, Queen are like an iconic figure for me. How the hell can they decide to release new music without two of their members. That was what was so great about it - the four of them contributed and made songs together. Who the hell is Paul Rodgers anyway? Queen are known for the falmboyant ways of Freddie on stage - I mean that was one of the great things about Queen. What, is this 50-something Rodgers gonna perform like Freddie? Running around with the Union Jack and the microphone stand? The bastard would have a bloody heart attack. Nobody can ever replace Freddie. He himself said it on Live at Wembley '86, Who Wants To Live Forever - "we'll stay together till we bloody well die, I'm sure of it". Well he's dead, and now two of the surviving members are replacing him???? They're in it for the money OBVIOUSLY. They're disgracing the Queen name by making an album with Paul Rodgers. If they want they should just create a new band and make an album with him. Not Queen + Paul Rodgers. That's bullshit. I think Deacon did the best choice by retiring back in the 1990s. What I'd like to see is the three of them performing live once more, playing their classic songs, and using a good vocalist... some guy who was big in the 70s like Queen... I dunno, maybe Elton John or Paul McCartney or something.

Treasure Moment wrote:

kenny8 wrote: Who cares? Nobody cares about Queen without Freddie Mercury The fact that Robbie Williams may be dressing as Fred in the 46664 concert only goes to highlight how Queen are remembered

at least robbie willims admits that he is nothing compared to freddie, i liked when he said that because its the truth. Yes, there is no Queen without freddie, its a cover band basically, he was SO important and is totally irreplacable.

<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote:

Treasure Moment wrote:

kenny8 wrote: Who cares? Nobody cares about Queen without Freddie Mercury The fact that Robbie Williams may be dressing as Fred in the 46664 concert only goes to highlight how Queen are remembered

at least robbie willims admits that he is nothing compared to freddie, i liked when he said that because its the truth. Yes, there is no Queen without freddie, its a cover band basically, he was SO important and is totally irreplacable.

All cover bands tend to share one characteristic: the authors of the songs aren't in them.

Zebonka12 wrote: The fact that you seem to have taken that piece of 'news' seriously shows how you're more concerned with repeating your tired rhetoric than with making sense.

kenny8 wrote:

Zebonka12 wrote: The fact that you seem to have taken that piece of 'news' seriously shows how you're more concerned with repeating your tired rhetoric than with making sense.

No dickhead. It's not whether Williams dresses as Fred or not, it's that the rumour is even newsworthy.