screw Adam Lambert, Queen should team up with Susan Boyle

Sir GH wrote:

Band Forever wrote:































Paul Rodgers was made by one song Alright Now, which I admit i like immensely, but he is a one trick pony his vocals are nothing special

I see you haven't heard of Bad Company and The Firm.  Ever heard of Jimmy Page, while we're at it?

Paul Rodgers is one of very few to front three multi-platinum-selling bands.  His take on the blues is one-of-a-kind.  How many singers could have pulled off the end of Bohemian Rhapsody like he did on the last few tours?

If Queen choose to work with someone for 5 years after having worked with Freddie Mercury for 20 and selling 200 million records, chances are they're gonna pick the right guy.  It's not their fault that you don't understand what they saw in him.

Sir GH, Paul Rodgers's success is irrelevant, when discussing on a forum like this whether or not Queen should have teamed up with him. There are plenty of Queen fans (myself included) who do consider it a mistake, and who do not believe that Queen was right in choosing him. It's not that we don't understand what they saw in him, we simply disagree that he should have been picked.

Amazon wrote:

Sir GH wrote:

Band Forever wrote:































































Paul Rodgers was made by one song Alright Now, which I admit i like immensely, but he is a one trick pony his vocals are nothing special

I see you haven't heard of Bad Company and The Firm.  Ever heard of Jimmy Page, while we're at it?

Paul Rodgers is one of very few to front three multi-platinum-selling bands.  His take on the blues is one-of-a-kind.  How many singers could have pulled off the end of Bohemian Rhapsody like he did on the last few tours?

If Queen choose to work with someone for 5 years after having worked with Freddie Mercury for 20 and selling 200 million records, chances are they're gonna pick the right guy.  It's not their fault that you don't understand what they saw in him.

Sir GH, Paul Rodgers's success is irrelevant, when discussing on a forum like this whether or not Queen should have teamed up with him. There are plenty of Queen fans (myself included) who do consider it a mistake, and who do not believe that Queen was right in choosing him. It's not that we don't understand what they saw in him, we simply disagree that he should have been picked.

Very Well worded, as sales dont real mean anything as we could use any other high selling artist and suggetst that they are worthy

Sir GH wrote:

Band Forever wrote:































Paul Rodgers was made by one song Alright Now, which I admit i like immensely, but he is a one trick pony his vocals are nothing special

I see you haven't heard of Bad Company and The Firm.  Ever heard of Jimmy Page, while we're at it?

Paul Rodgers is one of very few to front three multi-platinum-selling bands.  His take on the blues is one-of-a-kind.  How many singers could have pulled off the end of Bohemian Rhapsody like he did on the last few tours?

If Queen choose to work with someone for 5 years after having worked with Freddie Mercury for 20 and selling 200 million records, chances are they're gonna pick the right guy.  It's not their fault that you don't understand what they saw in him.

Sir GH,

Do you like the comsos rocks???

Sir GH wrote:

Band Forever wrote:































Paul Rodgers was made by one song Alright Now, which I admit i like immensely, but he is a one trick pony his vocals are nothing special

I see you haven't heard of Bad Company and The Firm.  Ever heard of Jimmy Page, while we're at it?

Paul Rodgers is one of very few to front three multi-platinum-selling bands.  His take on the blues is one-of-a-kind.  How many singers could have pulled off the end of Bohemian Rhapsody like he did on the last few tours?

If Queen choose to work with someone for 5 years after having worked with Freddie Mercury for 20 and selling 200 million records, chances are they're gonna pick the right guy.  It's not their fault that you don't understand what they saw in him.

Sir GH,

Do you like the comsos rocks???

Holly2003 wrote:

 







shemp wrote:







 

 







 







 







queenplusplus wrote:







 







mmm......After Paul Rogers kicked them off, I don't think Brian and Roger should hire another famous person....I believe they should host a reality show themselves and select an underdog...







 

hhhmmm that would be to much like Inxs......  

Paul Rodgers wont go that far after queen........     He has a big ego and I suppose people wanted to see queen.... not him.... hence why he left

Paul Rodgers last DVD concert went to number three in the US charts while Queen Rock Montreal disappeared without trace. I don't think it even charted. Rodgers was successful before Queen and will be successful after Queen. Whether or not he has a big ego, I don't know, but what I do know is that a lot of Queen fans know fuck all about music. 

Ahh, the CHART TELLS ALL, right? So Britney Spears is better than anyone mentioned in this thread?

[deadpan mode] Yes Britney is better than Queen and Paul Rodgers. That's exactly what I was saying. [/deadpan mode]

every one's sort of drifted away from the subject here...

 I cant really think of anyone tht would complete queen...
susan would be a laugh, but completely hopless!!

Britney??????
 what on earth are we going on about this for...

 we shoulnt think about this... we should just consentrate on building a time machine to get queen back to the way it was before!

Amazon wrote:

Sir GH, Paul Rodgers's success is irrelevant, when discussing on a forum like this whether or not Queen should have teamed up with him. There are plenty of Queen fans (myself included) who do consider it a mistake, and who do not believe that Queen was right in choosing him. It's not that we don't understand what they saw in him, we simply disagree that he should have been picked.

Fair enough to disagree that Paul Rodgers was not the best choice for Brian and Roger to work with but it was never up to the fans.
What I find annoying is that those people on this forum who don't like Paul Rodgers feel it necessary to discount his success and achievements.
I'm not a huge fan of Paul Rodgers and I was really unsure of how he would do on Queen's catalogue but there's no denying the respect he has among his peers nor is there any way you can possibly refute the fact that his catalogue has sold extremely well.
For my tastes I enjoyed the way he sang some of Queen's songs and not so much others. I liked some of 'The Cosmos Rocks' and didn't care for some of it. I look at his time with QPR the way I do much of Paul Rodgers work. I really liked some of it and I'm indifferent to the rest. However I enjoyed immensely the 2 shows I saw in Toronto and Detroit.
If Brian and Roger chose to work with another singer whether it is Adam Lambert, Susan Boyle, another go with Paul Rodgers or someone else it's their choice. I wait to see if I like it.

teleman wrote:

Amazon wrote:



Sir GH, Paul Rodgers's success is irrelevant, when discussing on a forum like this whether or not Queen should have teamed up with him. There are plenty of Queen fans (myself included) who do consider it a mistake, and who do not believe that Queen was right in choosing him. It's not that we don't understand what they saw in him, we simply disagree that he should have been picked.

Fair enough to disagree that Paul Rodgers was not the best choice for Brian and Roger to work with but it was never up to the fans.
What I find annoying is that those people on this forum who don't like Paul Rodgers feel it necessary to discount his success and achievements.
I'm not a huge fan of Paul Rodgers and I was really unsure of how he would do on Queen's catalogue but there's no denying the respect he has among his peers nor is there any way you can possibly refute the fact that his catalogue has sold extremely well.
For my tastes I enjoyed the way he sang some of Queen's songs and not so much others. I liked some of 'The Cosmos Rocks' and didn't care for some of it. I look at his time with QPR the way I do much of Paul Rodgers work. I really liked some of it and I'm indifferent to the rest. However I enjoyed immensely the 2 shows I saw in Toronto and Detroit.
If Brian and Roger chose to work with another singer whether it is Adam Lambert, Susan Boyle, another go with Paul Rodgers or someone else it's their choice. I wait to see if I like it.

Of course it was never up to the fans, but this is still a discussion forum. We have as much right to criticise the decision to team up with Rodgers as we have to applaud the fact that Bo Rap was chosen as a
single. That was also not up to the fans. Furthermore nobody are saying that it's not their choice; certainly I've never said that. But I do believe that it was a mistake to team up with Rodgers, irrespective of his success, or more to the point to use the name 'Queen.' Yes, it's their right to use the name, but IMO 'No-one But You' was a perfect way to bring the curtain down on 'Queen.'

Amazon wrote:































Sir GH, Paul Rodgers's success is irrelevant, when discussing on a forum like this whether or not Queen should have teamed up with him. There are plenty of Queen fans (myself included) who do consider it a mistake, and who do not believe that Queen was right in choosing him. It's not that we don't understand what they saw in him, we simply disagree that he should have been picked.

Well, fair enough!  It's just when people use the "nobody can compare to Freddie" line to justify their dislike for Paul, they completely miss the point.  But in this case I was attempting to refute someone's claim that Paul's legacy is reduced to a single song and a single trick to his vocal style.

shemp wrote:















Do you like the comsos rocks???

Much of it, yeah.  There were some very strong tracks on there, like Some Things That Glitter and Surf's Up (which I see as a continuation of track 13 from Made In Heaven).  They weren't re-inventing the wheel, and it shows.  They treaded a bit of new ground, faithfully incorporating elements of each of their styles.  They made the record they wanted to make, and overall it's very good.

I can see Susan singing "I'm Going Slightly Mad" though...

SaskQueenFan wrote:

 Geez, Adam Lambert rumours and now Susan Boyle? Some people need to get a grip! IMO, the Cosmos Rocks taints Queen's legacy a little, as it is not as strong an album as it could have been. It seems a bit contrived and rushed, there is no flow to the record. I think Queen+PR could have done much better, and did so with Return of the Champions. Its time for Roger and Brian to let the band's and Freddie's legacy of great music live on.

cool, when you get that grip, let us know

haha poor susan boyles has been completely forgotton in this thread

i think paul rodgers is a great singer! He's got a really great voice.

Me personally, I hated him with Queen. Although Brian and Roger could've chosen someone far worse! Think about THAT.

I would have been front row at their concert, had they come to Australia, which they didnt :( Its my dream to actually see Brian perform, and with who, well I don't really mind.

I think some people on here are being very rude about the opinions of others.. everyone is entitled to their own and some people on here take things a little too personally. Just enjoy the music and be grateful to have a website like this where we can communicate with fellow fans. I sure am!