Wow, could the bootleggers have been more oblique? What was wrong with "Queen: At The Beginning" then?
Thanks for the clarification. I still don't get how this "release" get issued through regular distribution channels in order to land on HMVs shelf. There's no way such a product is official. I can't see Freddie's estate giving them the rights to release the Larry Lurex material, or QP saying yes to a shitty copy of "Mad The Swine."
Anyway, I don't buy this crap, so I don't really care, I just don't want some kid thinking he's scored a real find with these.
[QUOTE]
[b]rhyeking wrote: [/b]
No one said bootleg crap like this had to make sense.
[/QUOTE]
Which makes the whole of your post utterly pointless.
[QUOTE]
[b]mooghead wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]rhyeking wrote: [/b]
No one said bootleg crap like this had to make sense.
[/QUOTE]
Which makes the whole of your post utterly pointless.
[/QUOTE]
Thanks, Douche McNitpick.
These "Under Review" things are absolute garbage, Marcelo- but as others have said, at least your unsatisfying experience with them and subsequent post here will warn others. Being a huge Pink Floyd fan also,I am aware that there are dozens of Pink Floyd "Under Review" ones around too. Invariably they feature the wafflings of self-appointed critics and Floyd 'experts' giving their views about the album in question. None of these 'experts' have any affiliation with the band in question, so you could ask the guy who works at your local post office the same questions and get equally ' valid ' answers. And because these co-called "Under Review" DVD's are not authorised by band management, most of them have really lame, generic background music by some anonymous band trying to sound like the band "Under Review". Avoid like the plague, but for people who must have them do a bit of looking around and download them free of charge!
