From the first moment alot of people agreed with the fact that paul rodgers was the wrong singer for queen.I certainly agree too.He turned queen into paul rodgers band,with paul rodgers songs.
[/QUOTE]
Alert Brian and Roger immediately before they do something rash, such as going out on a couple of international tours with him! Whew! Crisis averted!
[/QUOTE]
good idea.I'll go to court right away,to let paul rodgers stay solo.
john bodega · Member since
He's not the wrong singer - his head is just in the wrong place most of the time. It only really worked when he was giving it 150%. Some great moments, but most of the time he was just lame. He sounded bored, and it made me just wish Brian would hop back on the mic. At least he sounds like he's trying.
Pim Derks · Member since
Paul Rodgers belting out Fat Bottomed Girls with only 50% of his capacity is still 100 times as good as Brian's version from the 1998 tour. Don't get me wrong, I love Brian and Roger - but Paul is just the better singer, even though there maybe were indeed some point of him cruise controlling.
pittrek · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]david (galashiels) wrote: [/b]
here we go again...........
i liked him,i enjoyed the concerts..
and it was.QUEEN+PAUL RODGERS.
the boy done well in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
Amen, brother.
Band Forever · Member since
[b] Paul Rodgers lacks the Power, and vocal range to emulate Freddie.
Perhaps his 50% so called effort is a concession that even if he gave the Queen songs the full gun he still wouldn't nail half the songs, therefore saving his voice for his own tours!
Sorry Paul Rodgers fans you cannot hide from the truth, he tried he just aint got it.[/b]
Soundfreak · Member since
It's somehow sad to see how much energy is wasted on topics like this.
It was the chemistry between those three musicians that gave them confidence to add another chapter to the Queen story.
And this was the only chance for all those younger fans to see Queen at all. And for the old fans it was some kind of encore. I rarely ever saw a concert audience mixed with so many generations.
And the relatively poor sales of their album is not a "Paul Rodgers"-problem. Even Paul McCartney or the Rolling Stones or Fleetwood Mac do no longer sell new material in large quantities, although they still write good songs. The times have changed. Music is no longer that important in the age of the internet.
Sometimes I have the feeling that certain fans would prefer that the whole band was dead, so that they could create their own fantasy of some perfect god-like band. But they were human and luckily three of them still are.
Rubbersuit · Member since
I have a bad gut feeling that Brian and Roger could be up to something so stupid that we'll long for the days of Paul Rodgers.
Canadian May Fan · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Piett wrote: [/b]
From the first moment alot of people agreed with the fact that paul rodgers was the wrong singer for queen.I certainly agree too.He turned queen into paul rodgers band,with paul rodgers songs.
[/QUOTE]
That's funny, because the Q+PR live DVDs and CDs all show mostly QUEEN songs.
[b]FAIL.[/b]
john bodega · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Pim Derks wrote: [/b]
Paul Rodgers belting out Fat Bottomed Girls with only 50% of his capacity is still 100 times as good as Brian's version from the 1998 tour. Don't get me wrong, I love Brian and Roger - but Paul is just the better singer, even though there maybe were indeed some point of him cruise controlling. [/QUOTE] Yeah but FBG just isn't a good song for Brian to sing. For all the ones he stank at, there are other Queen ones which suit him better, and where he owns Mr. Rodgers. Which is ridiculous because he's a bloody guitarist. [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]Spot on with the cruise thing though. When PR gave hit a good effort he was great. Most of the rest of the time he wasn't much better than chloroform.[/QUOTE]
Freddie Mercury. · Member since
i think a lot of people have misunderstood the concept of Queen+Paul Rodgers, because it wasn´t meant to be Queen with a new lead singer. it was meant to be a new group that createed their own materiel without trying to make it sounlike Queen. a lot of people is mad at Paul Rodgers but it was actually Brian and Roger that contacted him so there is no reason to be mad at Paul Rodgers.
i think that he did a great job because he knew that he wasn´t a new Freddie Mercury, he was singing the songs in his own way, and i now that he has huge respect for Freddie.
GratefulFan · Member since
However it may have failed in execution at times, I think the instincts were right. A singer of their generation credible in a partnership of equals who explicitly did NOT sound and look like Freddie was the right vibe. Something that came out sounding and feeling like a Freddie Mercury tribute act would have been really, really bad. In my view, Roger and Brian's voices could not carry an entire Queen concert and the use of Fred by video is effective only if it's limited. So they need something else for at least part of it.
mike hunt · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Zebonka12 wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Pim Derks wrote: [/b]
Paul Rodgers belting out Fat Bottomed Girls with only 50% of his capacity is still 100 times as good as Brian's version from the 1998 tour. Don't get me wrong, I love Brian and Roger - but Paul is just the better singer, even though there maybe were indeed some point of him cruise controlling.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah but FBG just isn't a good song for Brian to sing. For all the ones he stank at, there are other Queen ones which suit him better, and where he owns Mr. Rodgers. Which is ridiculous because he's a bloody guitarist.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
Spot on with the cruise thing though. When PR gave hit a good effort he was great. Most of the rest of the time he wasn't much better than chloroform.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
I'm not a paul rodger's fan, but what Queen songs does brian own paul?....It sure isn't tie your mother down, or fat bottomed girls....It sure isn't the show must go on, or another one bites the dust. It isn't we are the champions or Crazy little thing called love. I understand being a brian may fan, but paul is a better singer hands down....whether it's singing queen songs or not.
Piett · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Canadian May Fan wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]Piett wrote: [/b]
From the first moment alot of people agreed with the fact that paul rodgers was the wrong singer for queen.I certainly agree too.He turned queen into paul rodgers band,with paul rodgers songs.
[/QUOTE]
That's funny, because the Q+PR live DVDs and CDs all show mostly QUEEN songs.
[b]FAIL.[/b]
[/QUOTE]
but not the live concerts.idiot.
georgs1963 · Member since
Isn't Freddie Mercury the lead singer of Queen ?
brENsKi · Member since
i think Paul Rodgers was right for queen because he has shown Brian, Roger and queen fans everywhere:-
1. just how great freddie was
2. that brian shoulda retired the queen name in '98
3. make brian and roger tour using a different band-name - stand on their own four feet - no living off past glories
4. brian and roger shouldn't make music unless they have something worthwhile to sell
5. that they are incapable of doing something different...
...it's funny how without Freddie, the band has just gone thru the motions....much as i hated the works, HS and Magic....at least Freddie took the band in new directions......at least HE took risks and tried new stuff...Brian and Roger are doing little more than milking the emaciated tits of a long-dead cash cow.
