Oscar J wrote:
Sebastian: I think you might be missing the significant difference between a song being "overlooked" and just "not well known". Overlooked usually means that it got a lot less exposure than it deserved. So - if you consider Good Company their second best song ever, and it's their (for example) 60th most well known song, then it's a very, very overlooked song indeed. Even though there are many Queen tracks that are even less in the public's consciousness (Party, Yeah, Flash Gordon tracks), they might not be considered as overlooked, simply because they aren't as good as Good Company.
While the term is certainly not a synonym of 'not well known,' it's not the same as 'proportionally underrated' either. Although, at the end of the day, it's about how you choose to interpret its meaning.
'Overlooked' means 'unnoticed,' and in that sense I don't think 'Good Company' was ignored. It comes up in biographies, reviews, documentaries, it's often mentioned as an example of a Queen gem and praised for its craftsmanship (e.g., here, on this thread). It's been remixed for surround, it's got an official video of some sort (made three decades after the fact but still), it's been included on the 'Making of' and its author has spoken in some sort of detail about how it was made. Its multitrack sheets have also been shown.
So, sure, on a 'how great the song is' vs 'how well known this song is' ratio, 'Good Company' might score higher than, say, 'Leaving Home Ain't Easy,' but on an 'is this song vastly ignored?' way, it's not. 'Leaving Home' is far more overlooked in my opinion. It doesn't make it better or anything, but it is, in my opinion, more fitting for the title of this thread.