Think there are plans for a blu ray release with all the videos and outtakes etc. It's an idea Rhys Thomas has always been a fan of and i personally think it makes perfect sense rather than releasing a greatest hits 3 dvd, with only 3 or 4 genuine 'hits'.
RafaelS · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]cmi wrote:[/b]
Of course there will be no GVHIII as it was project for EMI abandoned in the end. All hopes for Blu-Ray/DVD complete (1973-2014) video collection in the future.[/QUOTE]
I would go to 1973-1997 at max. After, it's my opinion, it's not Queen. It's two guys from Queen performing with other singers.
user1 · Member since
Full Ack. It would be sad if Queen Fans had to support the "Queen+" cover band when all they want is a complete Queen Video Collection in decent quality.
winterspelt · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]RafaelSomma wrote:[/b]
I would go to 1973-1997 at max. After, it's my opinion, it's not Queen. It's two guys from Queen performing with other singers.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed. Specially because, AFAIK, they never recorded any video with Paul and havent recorded anything with Adam.
If they want to add something outside Freddie, I think a little bit of the Tribute would be cool, but I would not expect something outside STL with George Michael.
If they want to add something from Q+ I think they should release it as a separate package or give the choice to buy the whole Queen and Queen + stuff (for those of us who enjoy both parts of the history) or split in different eras for those who are only interested in a specific era.
RafaelS · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]winterspelt wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]RafaelSomma wrote:[/b]
I would go to 1973-1997 at max. After, it's my opinion, it's not Queen. It's two guys from Queen performing with other singers.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed. Specially because, AFAIK, they never recorded any video with Paul and havent recorded anything with Adam.
If they want to add something outside Freddie, I think a little bit of the Tribute would be cool, but I would not expect something outside STL with George Michael.
If they want to add something from Q+ I think they should release it as a separate package or give the choice to buy the whole Queen and Queen + stuff (for those of us who enjoy both parts of the history) or split in different eras for those who are only interested in a specific era.[/QUOTE]
Like you say the STL and TATDOOL sung by George Michael at the Tribute would be okay to be put in, No-One But you (last John's video)...but I don't want the following stuff to be shove down my throat since it doesn't interest me at all. My two cents.
matt z · Member since
I'll take the snotty fan ism up a notch and say. ...
If they release any QUEEN + and solo Brian/Freddie material on a forthcoming dvd/blu-ray like it's original VHS counterpart, then we MUST receive THE BIGGLES "there's no turning back" fully remastered in 5.1!!!!
(Just kidding)
A complete retrospective would have the MIH art videos as well then eh?
I only liked YDFM off of that one.
LucasDiego · Member since
The better way is doing the video collection
Disc 1: 73-80
Disc 2: 81-89
Disc 3: 91-99
Disc 4: Alternative versions, documentaries, etc
winterspelt · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]RafaelSomma wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]winterspelt wrote:[/b]
Agreed. Specially because, AFAIK, they never recorded any video with Paul and havent recorded anything with Adam.
If they want to add something outside Freddie, I think a little bit of the Tribute would be cool, but I would not expect something outside STL with George Michael.
If they want to add something from Q+ I think they should release it as a separate package or give the choice to buy the whole Queen and Queen + stuff (for those of us who enjoy both parts of the history) or split in different eras for those who are only interested in a specific era.[/QUOTE]
Like you say the STL and TATDOOL sung by George Michael at the Tribute would be okay to be put in, No-One But you (last John's video)...but I don't want the following stuff to be shove down my throat since it doesn't interest me at all. My two cents.[/QUOTE]
It should cover from the earliest material available (with or without John, if such thing exist) to No One But You and the Q+EJ performance of SMGO which is the last performance with John.
I like when people who disagree in many topics (like Q+AL) agree in other topics, such like this!
I just hope someone at QP is reading and taking note!
user1 · Member since
Queen & Elton John, please ;) The performance has nothing to do with "Queen+" (=cover band including only Brian and Roger with various mostly crappy "artists" as freddie imitators/replacements)
matt z · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]user1 wrote:[/b]
Queen & Elton John, please ;) The performance has nothing to do with "Queen+" (=cover band including only Brian and Roger with various mostly crappy "artists" as freddie imitators/replacements)[/QUOTE]
^ et al...
Yeah they're in an unprecedented limbo as far as after works are concerned. AC/DC'S Bon Scott vs Brian Johnson period is far more substantiated.
The WHO minus Moon and Enwistle came after several years then a decade. They were role players in the fanatical scheme of things and not the singers (not discounting Johns great work)
it only makes sense that fans would be so divisive along those lines. The only other band to do it successfully actually catered and PANDERED to their eastern ties: JOURNEY. ... somewhat similarly. .. that one curly haired dude did a good job (I don't like the band enough to go look at that dvd right now and find the singer) and that one short Asian dude they've got now does it well enough.
People have to make a living. These rockers have got to get laid. If they don't have something current NOBODY (under 30 like most attractive women) JUST PLAIN WOULDN'T BELIEVE IT! !!
Gotta hand it to them. Still getting laid in their 60's by people they won't know tomorrow.
Just like the Stones.
Ah well.
That said. The show is lacking, but Oddly enough Lambert attracts many.
Maybe THAT'S part of the reason for carrying on?
Who's to judge em?
If you don't enjoy going to "work" when you don't need to why do it at all?
Cynical Bastard at 5am; Me.
They now have a history of recording with OTHERS less than stellar but for what it's worth, you've gotten to listen to Brian rail some lines on Tony Iommi 's albums and some FOO FIGHTERS etc
Enjoy it if you want to
But from my experience... The pacing is all wrong, they're old (* it happens) so if you wanna go, Go. If you don't then don't.
I don't, however see them including further efforts in a cumulative PRODUCT anymore unless it's the remnants of this Q+AL tour live in Australia or something.
It's really. .. REALLY too much to ask for. ... THIS ISN'T MOTORHEAD after all... it's QUEEN..
And the music is far more delicate to be dealt with
If you don't like it, TRY to find a substantially talented band that's current to "worship"... you guys heard TCR.... what exactly do you EXPECT from subsequent outings?
Nobody can touch Freddie. It's proven. You can't create that kind of natural flow. The band was organic from their youth. Can't rag on the blokes for having another go at it.
malicedoom · Member since
Hey, the picture of Greatest Video Hits 3 that tempusfugit posted... is that out there somewhere? I know not officially but as a bootleg that someone put together?
Or is it just an incredibly well-done 'wish'???
Looks damn good.
winterspelt · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]user1 wrote:[/b]
Queen & Elton John, please ;) The performance has nothing to do with "Queen+" (=cover band including only Brian and Roger with various mostly crappy "artists" as freddie imitators/replacements)
[/QUOTE]
It is Queen+ Elton John, it's the official name of the collaboration.
Semantics aside, the "cover band" argument always sounds wrong in my opinion. Under that definition, Queen (Brian, Roger, Freddie and John) are a cover band of the previous encarnation(s) of Queen. In the same way, how can someone call him/herself purist when John was not the first or second (or third) bassist? (but that's another story)
As for the imitators performing with Queen/Queen+, besides Marc Martel, who else is a Freddie imitator?
Adam? Paul? Both of them did tours with the band, none of them is an impersonator.
Or are you considering the one song/time performers as replacements? Jessie J, Tom Chaplin, Seal, Five etc just played once with them so they were never considered replacements and none of them were impersonators.
user1 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]winterspelt wrote:[/b]It is Queen+ Elton John, it's the official name of the collaboration.[/QUOTE]
Actually it was only called Queen+ Elton John on GHIII to build a bridge to the Army of crappy Artists Roger and Brian worked together as "Queen+". The Freddie Tribute and Under Pressure were also originally not called Queen+, Therefore I don't regard these performances as "Queen+" (which is Roger and Brians new band name of her cover band), no matter how they call these collabos nowadays.
[QUOTE] [b]winterspelt wrote:[/b]Semantics aside, the "cover band" argument always sounds wrong in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
The cover band argument is totally right. Or how would you call similar bands like Riders On the Storm/Doors of the 21st Century or Creedence Clearwater Revisited (cover bands from members of The Doors and Creedence Clearwater Revival)? Just have a look at their setlist. Only covers from a certain band called Queen.
http://www.setlist.fm/setlist/queen-adam-lambert/2014/vector-arena-auckland-new-zealand-7bce46b8.html
[QUOTE] [b]winterspelt wrote:[/b]As for the imitators performing with Queen/Queen+, besides Marc Martel, who else is a Freddie imitator?
Adam? Paul? Both of them did tours with the band, none of them is an impersonator.
Or are you considering the one song/time performers as replacements? Jessie J, Tom Chaplin, Seal, Five etc just played once with them so they were never considered replacements and none of them were impersonators.[/QUOTE]
I called them imitators/replacements to underline the gap in artistic quality between a former band called Queen and the "new singers".
Jedi Knight · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]malicedoom wrote:[/b]
Hey, the picture of Greatest Video Hits 3 that tempusfugit posted... is that out there somewhere? I know not officially but as a bootleg that someone put together?
Or is it just an incredibly well-done 'wish'???
Looks damn good.[/QUOTE]
Actually I did that double DVD about five years ago. It's still online somewhere. Over the years I've felt dissatisfied with it. I think it was a mistake to include "Queen +" videos (Robbie Williams, Paul Rodgers, Five, etc), so I decided to do it again but only with Queen material, with the exception of some Greatest Flix III video (taken from a DVD copy of the Laserdisc) relegated to the bonus disc.
winterspelt · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]user1 wrote:[/b]
The cover band argument is totally right. Or how would you call similar bands like Riders On the Storm/Doors of the 21st Century or Creedence Clearwater Revisited (cover bands from members of The Doors and Creedence Clearwater Revival)? Just have a look at their setlist. Only covers from a certain band called Queen.
http://www.setlist.fm/setlist/queen-adam-lambert/2014/vector-arena-auckland-new-zealand-7bce46b8.html
[/QUOTE]
Setlist.fm can be edited by everybody, pretty much like Wikipedia, but at least in wikipedia some editors try to remain neutral, something that doesnt happen in setlist.fm. In fact I know one or two persons who were editing the Queen setlist adding the "Queen Cover" at the end of the set.
Now, Creedence Clearwater Revisited (not Revival, as "Revival" is the original band) is another story. John Fogerty was THE leader of the band, the one who wrote the hits, singer, frontman, Creedence was 95% Fogerty, 10% (or less) Cliford and Cook.
When they became jealous of Fogerty's success and filled a lawsuit trying to get money from Fogerty's songs.
Queen members were very prolific writers and all of them wrote hits. Creedence Clearwater Revival and Creedence Clearwater Revisited may share some members, but its not the same as Queen.
I dont have opinion about the Doors/Raiders band as I never liked their music and I dont know anything about them, but you may have a valid point.
I hope someone with knowledge about them could add some info.
[QUOTE] [b]user1 wrote:[/b]
I called them imitators/replacements to underline the gap in artistic quality between a former band called Queen and the "new singers".
[/QUOTE]
Oh, I got your point!
Imitator may not be the right word but I got your point.
I could provide an opinion about it (and agree to a certain extent with you) but I think it would be very, very offtopic, lol
