Boycott the new 'Queen' shows...

[QUOTE] [b]notimeforlosers wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] I will and have completely ignored anything with the name "Queen" that doesn't include Freddie Mercury. Not one dime have I spent on non-Freddie Queen except for "No One But You" as a download. Freddie is why I love Queen. The others were just good supporting cast members[/QUOTE]
Right. So get lost to a Freddie Mercury forum, 'cause this is a Queen forum. And Queen are Brian, John, Roger and Freddie. And don't forget to throw away your non-Freddie Queen singles, buddy!
Regarding the concert, this is not about Adam Lambert, this is about two great guys, great musicians, half of the band we say we love and admire for about 40 years. Stop this childish story and let them do whathever they want and let people choose if they are gonna pay for it or not.
[/QUOTE]
Listen, moron, nobody is preventing you for choosing. This is a forum where different people express often divergent opinions.
As regarding the other 3 as supporting players it is true. Reality is that Freddie could've fired all three band members and replaced them and remained successful as Queen because he was the face of Queen. After those first four hits he could been Queen with any rhythm section and lead guitarist).

BTW Freddie's the one that convinced Brian & Roger to have another go with the band thing (Brian might be a physics teacher today instead of a rock icon, roger might be homeless or a bag boy at a grocery store). Freddie's the one who came up with the name and logo. He's the one that wrote their first four international hits. The other three owe their careers to Freddie Mercury. Yes the other band members wrote some hits and are very important but Freddie sang them hits. Not a single Queen song sung by Brian or Roger hit the charts until "No One But You" (post Freddie). The idea that Queen was 25% freddie 25% Brian 25% Roger 25% John is just "political correctness" when it comes to the band.
For them to limp along as Queen + is plain ludicrous. There's is no Queen without Freddie. There still could have been Queen if any of the other 3 were dropped.
No other great band has done this shameful practice of Band + after their lead singer died.. Other band members either form a new band (Foo Fighters for example) or just "man up" and keep using the name despite new singers (Journey...though they suck now and sucked then).

[QUOTE] [b]YetAnotherFreddieFan wrote:[/b]
Reality is that Freddie could've fired all three band members and replaced them and remained successful as Queen because he was the face of Queen. After those first four hits he could been Queen with any rhythm section and lead guitarist).
[/QUOTE]

I could just laugh about this. But I'm so annoyed at radical people that I didn't think it was even funny.

Maybe you're right. And your proven point could be Mr. Bad Guy album (Freddie with any rhythm section and a lead guitarist) as a huge and worldwide sucess. Haha

By the way, I Was Born to Love You and Made in Heaven are waaay better in Freddie's solo album than reworked by B+R+J, aren't they?

Peace!

[QUOTE] [b]YetAnotherFreddieFan wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]notimeforlosers wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] I will and have completely ignored anything with the name "Queen" that doesn't include Freddie Mercury. Not one dime have I spent on non-Freddie Queen except for "No One But You" as a download. Freddie is why I love Queen. The others were just good supporting cast members[/QUOTE]
Right. So get lost to a Freddie Mercury forum, 'cause this is a Queen forum. And Queen are Brian, John, Roger and Freddie. And don't forget to throw away your non-Freddie Queen singles, buddy!
Regarding the concert, this is not about Adam Lambert, this is about two great guys, great musicians, half of the band we say we love and admire for about 40 years. Stop this childish story and let them do whathever they want and let people choose if they are gonna pay for it or not.
[/QUOTE]
Listen, moron, nobody is preventing you for choosing. This is a forum where different people express often divergent opinions.
As regarding the other 3 as supporting players it is true. Reality is that Freddie could've fired all three band members and replaced them and remained successful as Queen because he was the face of Queen. After those first four hits he could been Queen with any rhythm section and lead guitarist).
BTW Freddie's the one that convinced Brian & Roger to have another go with the band thing (Brian might be a physics teacher today instead of a rock icon, roger might be homeless or a bag boy at a grocery store). Freddie's the one who came up with the name and logo. He's the one that wrote their first four international hits. The other three owe their careers to Freddie Mercury. Yes the other band members wrote some hits and are very important but Freddie sang them hits. Not a single Queen song sung by Brian or Roger hit the charts until "No One But You" (post Freddie). The idea that Queen was 25% freddie 25% Brian 25% Roger 25% John is just "political correctness" when it comes to the band.
For them to limp along as Queen + is plain ludicrous. There's is no Queen without Freddie. There still could have been Queen if any of the other 3 were dropped.
No other great band has done this shameful practice of Band + after their lead singer died.. Other band members either form a new band (Foo Fighters for example) or just "man up" and keep using the name despite new singers (Journey...though they suck now and sucked then).[/QUOTE]

Don't even pay any mind, some people feel everyone should just LOVE any Queen spinoff. If everyone would truly admit to themselves including the remaining members, they could see clearly your summation is 100% true. Freddie didn't want it to be viewed as such but it is what it is. Any other individuals might not have blended as well. There will never be another Queen as it was.

Yes there will never be a Queen, as they were. But if BM and RT formed a new band and went on to perform some of the old Queen hits they would be hounded by the press for being Queen wanna be's.

They perform as Queen+ because their is no singer who can replace Freddie. And that seems to be the biggest contention amongst those who don't agree with what they're doing. "no one can replace Freddie" the point is no singer has actually joined the band as a permanent replacement.

Their are many bands who have replaced different members and carried on.

At the end of the day if you don't like what's happening don't buy a ticket. And as for boycotting the show,yeah boycott all you want, it makes no difference to anyone because the two Hammersmith dates have sold out.

[QUOTE] [b]Queen4ever13 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]YetAnotherFreddieFan wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]notimeforlosers wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] I will and have completely ignored anything with the name "Queen" that doesn't include Freddie Mercury. Not one dime have I spent on non-Freddie Queen except for "No One But You" as a download. Freddie is why I love Queen. The others were just good supporting cast members[/QUOTE]
Right. So get lost to a Freddie Mercury forum, 'cause this is a Queen forum. And Queen are Brian, John, Roger and Freddie. And don't forget to throw away your non-Freddie Queen singles, buddy!
Regarding the concert, this is not about Adam Lambert, this is about two great guys, great musicians, half of the band we say we love and admire for about 40 years. Stop this childish story and let them do whathever they want and let people choose if they are gonna pay for it or not.
[/QUOTE]
Listen, moron, nobody is preventing you for choosing. This is a forum where different people express often divergent opinions.
As regarding the other 3 as supporting players it is true. Reality is that Freddie could've fired all three band members and replaced them and remained successful as Queen because he was the face of Queen. After those first four hits he could been Queen with any rhythm section and lead guitarist).
BTW Freddie's the one that convinced Brian & Roger to have another go with the band thing (Brian might be a physics teacher today instead of a rock icon, roger might be homeless or a bag boy at a grocery store). Freddie's the one who came up with the name and logo. He's the one that wrote their first four international hits. The other three owe their careers to Freddie Mercury. Yes the other band members wrote some hits and are very important but Freddie sang them hits. Not a single Queen song sung by Brian or Roger hit the charts until "No One But You" (post Freddie). The idea that Queen was 25% freddie 25% Brian 25% Roger 25% John is just "political correctness" when it comes to the band.
For them to limp along as Queen + is plain ludicrous. There's is no Queen without Freddie. There still could have been Queen if any of the other 3 were dropped.
No other great band has done this shameful practice of Band + after their lead singer died.. Other band members either form a new band (Foo Fighters for example) or just "man up" and keep using the name despite new singers (Journey...though they suck now and sucked then).[/QUOTE]
Don't even pay any mind, some people feel everyone should just LOVE any Queen spinoff. If everyone would truly admit to themselves including the remaining members, they could see clearly your summation is 100% true. Freddie didn't want it to be viewed as such but it is what it is. Any other individuals might not have blended as well. There will never be another Queen as it was.[/QUOTE]

Any band with a Freddie Mercury was bound to succeed eventually. Sure, the chemistry was definitely right with the four. They were a great team...perhaps the best of all possible combos....but Freddie really was THE Queen. They know this deep inside. You notice the DVD/CD covers of Wembley & Montreal? What do you see? An iconic pose by Freddie. It's simply impossible to picture Queen without Freddie. I'm not saying they should have retired as musicians but they should have either continued as Queen with 2 new members if they dared or just started a new band. But their solo careers fizzled out so they turned to desperation by going out as Queen + so they deserve the scorn

Wow. First time I have visited the thread I actually started for a while. I stick with what I say. If you turn up to this monstrosity it will only encourage them and think that people actually want to see this crap.

For as long as people do that they will not dig into the archives and give Queen fans what they need.

Am I being stupid? Why would you release an 'Anthology' if people are still interested in your current 'work'. Even if it is with some stupid TV drag artist.

THINK!!! durr....

Brian May and Roger Taylor only think about MONEY. Everyone else in the world does not exist. Let them think a 3x double cd of outtakes/demo's.. whatever, will make them a million and they will do it. Turning up to the X Factor with a twat singing will boost their (already stupidly massive) ego's.

JUST SAY NO!!!!!!

A 'live' Queen show without Freddie?
`Don`t be ridiculous``!
For me, No Freddie + No John = No Queen.
Perhaps Brian and Roger should perform as `Smile`.

i don't think a boycott will be necessary

let's wait n see how this shit circus pans out

Hopefully the Sonisphere failure has at least given them some idea that people aren't at all interested in their recent collaborations

Noone will ever recognize Brian and Roger as anything else but Queen. It is engrained in their very being and even if they tried calling themselves something else, no matter they are and forever will be Queen. Their choice of who joins them leaves a lot to be desired. Sure they are influenced by their management for whatever reason the "Queen machine" has in driving them in that direction. The money gets distributed a lot of ways that we're not even aware of, Queen is a big business.

hope you don't mind me cut n pasting from two separate replies but here goes
[QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]The ticket price of most gigs has little or nothing to do with the band.
The promoter hires the venue, pays for ticketing and advertising costs and usually sets the ticket price. The promoter pays the artist what ever their agreed fee is. The ticket price is usually a reflection of the promoters belief in the band being able to sellout at the highest possible price.[/QUOTE]
i agree with you 100% on this. people need to get an understanding of how these things work. only a couple of years ago the best tickets for Killers and AC/DC were on sale at £200 !!!!, it's the promotoers knowing what they can get away with. entertainment has always been about those who can afford it, those who can't afford to go are of no interest to anyone.

[QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]
Yes there will never be a Queen, as they were. But if BM and RT formed a new band and went on to perform some of the old Queen hits they would be hounded by the press for being Queen wanna be's..[/QUOTE]
sorry but no way. other artists/bands have "moved on" and continue to perform their old songs. this has been particularly evident with the offshoot bands of Deep Purple - who all moved on by doing various songs like smoke, mistreated, burn etc, also applies to pink floyd's gilmour and waters - who both perform floyd songs solo. loads and loads of artists rely on their "previous career" for a live set - there's no shame in it and it is quite refreshing to see old songs getting a new arrnagement - even Dr May did it on his solo tour in the 90s.

[QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]
They perform as Queen+ because their is no singer who can replace Freddie. And that seems to be the biggest contention amongst those who don't agree with what they're doing. "no one can replace Freddie" the point is no singer has actually joined the band as a permanent replacement.
Their are many bands who have replaced different members and carried on.[/QUOTE]
again, i disagree on this one too. i think they perform as Queen+ because the queen name is their only real earner. you and i know that if they use any other name they have no market.

I think a lot of the augment of whether or not BM and RT should continue using the Queen name has come about because Queen were one of the very few bands whose line up remained intact from the first album to the last.

If they had gone through the number of members that say, Whitesnake or Rainbow had, or any number of bands that could be listed then the issue of them touring now with only half the original line up wouldn't be viewed as a problem.

Yay! Could this be my first 100+ thread? Erm... changed my mind, love Adam Lambert, gonna buy 50 tickets and give them to all my friends.

Mooghead = dickhead
Absolutely the biggest dumb cunt on this forum