Freddie didn't change much from 1979-1987

Freddie Mercury was legendary. He knew he would be dead soon while recording Show Must Go On. How about knowing the day of death? He publicly stated that he had HIV on the 23rd of November in 1991, and one day later he was dead.

"I don't want Freddie to be remembered for his death or what killed him: [I want him to be] remembered as a singer" -- Brian May

Actually Freddie changed as much as anyone in that period. I look different to how I did 8 years ago too.

He changed a reasonable amount in those years - loss of hair and weight gain. Within that time frame I think he changed most from '82 to '86. Compare Queen on Fire – Live at the Bowl to Queen Live At Wembley 1986.

[QUOTE]

[b]Day dop wrote: [/b] He changed a reasonable amount in those years - loss of hair and weight gain. Within that time frame I think he changed most from '82 to '86. Compare Queen on Fire – Live at the Bowl to Queen Live At Wembley 1986.[/QUOTE]

Just compare the '82 videos to the videos shot in '83-early'84

Not sure he actually lost hair, just had it cut shorter and thinned out, which could be the style rather than hair loss, but anyway, mid 30s to early 40s will see a fair change in anyone!

[QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b]
not a chance:
None of the "Freds" i can think of are in heaven...they're all bound to the inferno (for different reasons)
Freddie Mercury, Fred West, Fred Flinstone - all bad f*ckers.[/QUOTE]

Fred Flintstone? Whaaaaaaaaat? lol

[QUOTE]

[b]miraclesteinway wrote: [/b] Not sure he actually lost hair, just had it cut shorter and thinned out, which could be the style rather than hair loss, but anyway, mid 30s to early 40s will see a fair change in anyone![/QUOTE]
His hair-do receded at the front, and thinned out at the back. That's hair loss.

I always thought the weight gain was to offset the digestive issues with AIDS. But that was after I knew he had AIDS.

Re: the HIV/AIDS thing that people are commenting on, if Freddie had died of cancer, would you be going back through old photographs, trying to spot the first signs of weight loss, hair loss due to chemotherapy, saying 'wow, he didn't change much before the effects of the cancer really set in, apart from natural ageing, and then gee he looked sick!' and, 'Hey, you can see his eyebrows haven't grown back properly in that picture.' Probably not, because it would be morbid and mawkish (and pointless).

In terms of natural ageing, I agree that he aged very well, especially given his lifestyle in the late 70s/80s (I mean late nights, smoking, drinking and cocaine, general praying etc). It looked like his hair was thinning from the mid-80s, but apart from that he looked great for his age. People with cheekbones like that are just lucky.

I think that the changes in his voice were predominantly due to prolonged chain-smoking and over-singing while touring, and then stopping both these things. His speaking voice seemed to be higher after he stopped smoking as well, in hard-to-find footage from interviews or informal videos post-1987.

*partying* - not *praying*! Stupid auto-correct!

LOL....slight difference.....'general praying'....hahahaha.....I love 'auto-correct fails'.......:D

If Freddie had died of cancer there probably WOULD be someone who commented on his appearance due to the illness.

So many threads about Freddie start off in good faith, this one included I believe, and end up crawling with comments about his HIV/AIDS.

We know now, after 35 years of AIDS in the western world, or thereabouts, that you simply can not tell when someone is infected by looking at them.

You know what, there are even some pictures of Freddie with the beard, outside his house, taken in 1990-1991, and actually, he doesn't look particularly bad - he looks thinner, yes, but I mean, it wasn't proof that he was ill. The video for Slightly Mad was pretty well done, although it was obvious there that something was wrong, but really, all the shoots for the Miracle videos he looks OK, in Headlong he looks like he's having a good time - yes, I know, it's edited, and yeah, there are some shots where he looks tired - 1990 Brits for example are not his best pictures by a long shot, and of course the last publicity shots, but I mean, apart from that, it's simply not possible to know exactly what is wrong, how much of how he changed was down to HIV and how much of it was natural ageing.

Apparently Freddie was never a big eater, and he could have just changed his regime. I ask another question - if Freddie was still alive, would we be having this conversation? No, probably not. There are no threads on here dealing with 'Roger didn't change much between 1986 and 1990', or 'Roger's weight gain in the last 5 years, is that down to illness or over-eating, or simply that he's in his 60s?', and I haven't seen any threads about 'Brian May's appearance 1988-1995' or 'In 2003, Brian really started to look his age, whereas previously he was OK, do you think this was the onset of what became a problem with his prostate?'

To the original poster - these comments are not directed at you, but I'm highlighting a point - we don't seem to talk too much about the other band members appearances, or why they looked certain ways in certain videos, and I suspect that the reason is, it simply isn't as interesting as speculating on Freddie's health, and trying to spot the signs in retrospect, which is a pointless exercise anyway.

It's true Freddie looked like shit when he performed with Cliff Richard in Time, that could have been stage make up, he could have been puffed up with drugs, or he could have been eating the same amount as when he was on tour the previous year, and not doing the same amount of exercise - it could be that boring. The pale complexion is simply pan-stick make up. It's only because we know in retrospect that something was terribly wrong, that we look for it now in pictures.

Sorry, I didn't quite mean to have an outburst there.

I believe he sneezed once in 1974, clearly evidence that he was actually patient zero for the AIDS epidemic that swept the world in the 80s.

Yes, but more than that, he had the runs when he was a baby at least once, and that was in 1946. Quite clearly he was the source.