Teleman, I agree. Except I do take Brian and Roger at their word that Freddie appreciated Paul's work. Not quite that cynical.
It's so simple. Queen + Paul Rodgers means you're going to get musical input from Roger, Brian, and Paul. The end result will [b]necessarily[/b] be different than that from Freddie, Roger, Brian, John = Queen. Q+PR is a new band, albeit with striking similarities to Queen, no doubt due to these 2 groups sharing two common members. If someone (like you Marcos), or even the majority, doesn't like the end result, TCR, that's fine so long as you've made that decision based on what the music IS, not who didn't show up to rehearsals. Those critics who try to justify slamming the album by implying that Paul is somehow inferior to Freddie and that Brian and Roger should have just hung it up in the 1990s are out of line and sadly missing the point. It's their loss.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Back to 1988...
Something strange happened with me when I first heard The Miracle. I was already suspecting that something was wrong with Freddie (I think I had seen some pics somewhere - remember, it was pre-Internet days) and I wasn't really expecting a new album, let alone 2. Then it was released and I bought it ASAP as usual. In the first listenings, I was very frustrated, maybe more than with Hot Space - when HS was released, there was all that "Queen Mania" because of the 81 concerts, so the feeling that it wasn't that good (it has its merits though) wasn't as important as the fact of having a new Queen album to listen to. I thought TM (The Miracle, not that member of the forum) was very... weak, average, boring, ... not sure what is the word to describe it - but the feeling was very similar to TCR. I felt that the band was over, sort of, and ignored it.
After a few years (and after Freddie), I've "rediscovered" it, and started listening to it again - not as much as I listen to the "masterpieces", but at least I wasn't skipping songs after 20 seconds like when the time I bought it. I am not sure, but I think it was because it was the only thing to do now - there wouldn't be another album, so that was all that was left I think. Maybe some people are so attached to TCR for the same reasons that they forget to (or don't want to) analyse it technically/musically or whatever. This is why I've used the word "denial" sometimes in other comments I've made about it. If you leave the sentimental/fan part aside, it's a very poor album.
Another strange thing: although the fact of it being an "average" rock album quality-wise (with all the meanings "average" can have, and in my opinion) doesn't justify per se the quality or the poor ranks in charts, I think. AC/DC is #1, doing the same album they have been doing for about 25 years. But TCR being so low in the charts is not some kind of persecution or conspiracy by the musical press as some insist on saying, neither a joke by the publishers of charts. They could easily have ignored AC/DC too... what's the difference between these 2 average albums? Paul Rodgers? Bon Scott? Freddie? No.
Something strange happened with me when I first heard The Miracle. I was already suspecting that something was wrong with Freddie (I think I had seen some pics somewhere - remember, it was pre-Internet days) and I wasn't really expecting a new album, let alone 2. Then it was released and I bought it ASAP as usual. In the first listenings, I was very frustrated, maybe more than with Hot Space - when HS was released, there was all that "Queen Mania" because of the 81 concerts, so the feeling that it wasn't that good (it has its merits though) wasn't as important as the fact of having a new Queen album to listen to. I thought TM (The Miracle, not that member of the forum) was very... weak, average, boring, ... not sure what is the word to describe it - but the feeling was very similar to TCR. I felt that the band was over, sort of, and ignored it.
After a few years (and after Freddie), I've "rediscovered" it, and started listening to it again - not as much as I listen to the "masterpieces", but at least I wasn't skipping songs after 20 seconds like when the time I bought it. I am not sure, but I think it was because it was the only thing to do now - there wouldn't be another album, so that was all that was left I think. Maybe some people are so attached to TCR for the same reasons that they forget to (or don't want to) analyse it technically/musically or whatever. This is why I've used the word "denial" sometimes in other comments I've made about it. If you leave the sentimental/fan part aside, it's a very poor album.
Another strange thing: although the fact of it being an "average" rock album quality-wise (with all the meanings "average" can have, and in my opinion) doesn't justify per se the quality or the poor ranks in charts, I think. AC/DC is #1, doing the same album they have been doing for about 25 years. But TCR being so low in the charts is not some kind of persecution or conspiracy by the musical press as some insist on saying, neither a joke by the publishers of charts. They could easily have ignored AC/DC too... what's the difference between these 2 average albums? Paul Rodgers? Bon Scott? Freddie? No.
[QUOTE]
[b]GonnaUseMyPrisoners wrote: [/b]
[b]YourValentine wrote: [/b]
You just forget (or ignore) the tiny little fact that the album "The Cosmos Rocks" has the name
QUEEN
on its sleeve.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, no, it bears the name Queen + Paul Rodgers.
That, is the whole point right there... I wish people would read that for what it is, not Queen, but Queen + Paul, it's a new partnership between two artists, and therefore will have familiar elements but will also be a new direction.
Ladies and Gentlemen this is NOT Queen, it's something else, something new that is part of an evolving process, you may not like it? you may love it? but that's what it is.
[/QUOTE]
[b]GonnaUseMyPrisoners wrote: [/b]
[b]YourValentine wrote: [/b]
You just forget (or ignore) the tiny little fact that the album "The Cosmos Rocks" has the name
QUEEN
on its sleeve.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, no, it bears the name Queen + Paul Rodgers.
That, is the whole point right there... I wish people would read that for what it is, not Queen, but Queen + Paul, it's a new partnership between two artists, and therefore will have familiar elements but will also be a new direction.
Ladies and Gentlemen this is NOT Queen, it's something else, something new that is part of an evolving process, you may not like it? you may love it? but that's what it is.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]That,
is the whole point right there... I wish people would read that for
what it is, not Queen, but Queen + Paul, it's a new partnership between
two artists, and therefore will have familiar elements but will also be
a new direction.[/QUOTE]
I see. It's the same as Page + Plant, which was the best Zep concert I've ever seen (or that I could see anyway).
I see. It's the same as Page + Plant, which was the best Zep concert I've ever seen (or that I could see anyway).