"In Queen: The Early Years, there's a story from somebody who had worked with Queen at a show in Manchester: "Queen had just taken the stage, and this bloke shouted to Freddie, 'You fucking poof". Freddie demanded that the crew turn the spotlight on the crowd and find this fella. He then said to him, 'Say that again, darling,' and the bloke didn't know what to do. I saw him literally shrink this six-foot bloke down to an inch."
Cheers,
Martin
mooghead · Member since
It was me... he shrunk me down to 10 inches and used me in a way that still gives me nightmares.. :/
Nitroboy · Member since
Well, it must have been either of the 2 Manchester '79 shows, considering we didn't hear Freddie saying that on the recordings of Manchester '73 or '75?
musicland munich · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]mooghead wrote:[/b]
It was me... he shrunk me down to 10 inches and used me in a way that still gives me nightmares.. :/[/QUOTE]
Wishful thinking...eh ?
tomchristie22 · Member since
Some of the comments in that thread are a pretty stark reminder of how much Queen listeners are pretty much divided into binary opposite camps - on one hand, those who are fully invested and know at least the majority of their discography. On the other, those who know the hits and that's it, while generally upholding Freddie Mercury as some infallible figure (while not really understanding or appreciating the depth of his ability), often times spouting the same old superficial wisdom or general misconceptions. It's a strange dichotomy and there doesn't seem to be much of a middle ground.
For instance, it's a shame to see how many people think Wembley 86 is the absolute pinnacle of Queen as a live band. Hopefully the 70s releases are changing that a little, but it's pretty well engrained by now.
Freddie being hailed as a great 'showman', with less regard for his outstanding songwriting, is another frustration. I think it's often motivated by underlying bigotry - unable to outright deny the importance and impact of such a well-loved figure, but unwilling to directly acknowledge his talent, they resort to a faint and dismissive praise which mainly focuses on his ability to strut around on stage.
Saif · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]tomchristie22 wrote:[/b]
Some of the comments in that thread are a pretty stark reminder of how much Queen listeners are pretty much divided into binary opposite camps - on one hand, those who are fully invested and know at least the majority of their discography. On the other, those who know the hits and that's it, while generally upholding Freddie Mercury as some infallible figure (while not really understanding or appreciating the depth of his ability), often times spouting the same old superficial wisdom or general misconceptions. It's a strange dichotomy and there doesn't seem to be much of a middle ground.
For instance, it's a shame to see how many people think Wembley 86 is the absolute pinnacle of Queen as a live band. Hopefully the 70s releases are changing that a little, but it's pretty well engrained by now.
Freddie being hailed as a great 'showman', with less regard for his outstanding songwriting, is another frustration. I think it's often motivated by underlying bigotry - unable to outright deny the importance and impact of such a well-loved figure, but unwilling to directly acknowledge his talent, they resort to a faint and dismissive praise which mainly focuses on his ability to strut around on stage. [/QUOTE]
Why do you think that? Almost everyone over the age of 13 knows who Freddie Mercury was. He is just as often hailed as a great singer too. Bohemian Rhapsody is still considered one of the greatest songs ever and people know he wrote it. So I don't see people being dismissive of his ability. Maybe most people make the judgments based on a smaller corpus of his work, but that doesn't disqualify their opinions and not having heard everything by Queen hardly makes life meaningless. Queen is more popular than ever, possibly the most popular classic rock band while Freddie is certainly one of the three, if not singular, most admired figures of that age.
tomchristie22 · Member since
I'm probably generalising and projecting based on my own negative experiences - lots of young men in Australia who I've encountered have a thinly veiled homophobia about Queen.
Costa86 · Member since
I had read this anecdote before, a few years ago - can't remember where. Actually it might have been in this Rolling Stone article http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/queens-tragic-rhapsody-20140707?page=3
I have no doubt that Freddie was capable of reducing most men to an inch in size. Apart from being supremely talented, intelligent, and having an air of complete confidence in himself, he was also capable of being very serious and stern if he felt aggrieved. Or at least that's what people who know him and most of his biographies say.
Sebastian · Member since
Regarding the alleged Manchester anecdote: it could easily be true, it could easily be false. That's the thing with witness testimonies (or alleged witness testimonies). People can lie, misremember or have accurate recollection and there's no way to tell the difference without evidence (e.g. a bootleg) to confirm or deny any claim.
Regarding Freddie's current public perception: the fact he died over two decades ago has certainly nourished certain 'mystique' and he's certainly largely respected as a singer and entertainer, but I agree he's not too often hailed for his abilities as composer or arranger, let alone producer. But that happens to loads of people: Michael Jackson wrote about that on his autobiography ... people would ask him about who had 'really' written some of his songs and that was quite disappointing.
MercurialFreddie · Member since
In the Freddie Mercury : The Great Pretender docu, Brian says that he above else was a rock god. General audience would define this term as: wonderful performer, excellent singer but composer, song-writer, producer ? nah... Making Days of Our Lives docu was too a great opportunity to present Freddie's skills in context of the strength of band's musicianship. If I recall correctly, this was discussed only in the "extras" section of TDOUL documentary.
So the accident did not happen at neither of the following Manchester gigs: 86', 75' or 73'. Is there a possibility that it did not happen at that particular venue. It is also strange that we've heard about it only recently.
Stopping the show, and taking the time to order the lightning crew to direct the light at that awful person and responding to said person was not that short accident to not remember it. It is something really extraordinary and how come that only one person came forward and shared this recollection ?
musicland munich · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]tomchristie22 wrote:[/b]
For instance, it's a shame to see how many people think Wembley 86 is the absolute pinnacle of Queen as a live band.
[/QUOTE]
QP worked really hard on that myth I have to let you know ;)
Pretty different opinions I guess....for me 8/ 10 Queen Fans knowing exactly that the guys were at their prime ( live-wise) from the mid to the late 70`s.
Martin Packer · Member since
86 is "biggest" but not necessarily "best".
My "best" for them is Dec 10, 1980 - Wembley Arena. But then again I suspect FOR MY TASTE Crazy Tour would've been the pinnacle. And FOR OTHERS' TASTE yet other tours.
Doga · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]musicland munich wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]tomchristie22 wrote:[/b]
For instance, it's a shame to see how many people think Wembley 86 is the absolute pinnacle of Queen as a live band.
[/QUOTE]
QP worked really hard on that myth I have to let you know ;)
[/QUOTE]
This.
Why they picked Wembley over Nepstadion as the iconic release is a mystery . The latter is superior in every aspect, including band performance and cinematrography.
Sebastian · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Doga wrote:[/b]
Why they picked Wembley over Nepstadion as the iconic release is a mystery
[/QUOTE]
Not so much.
Queen are far more popular in their native Britain than anywhere else (perhaps Netherlands are rivalling Albion in that department), so it makes sense that their signature live release is at the quintessential British football stadium ... or, more to the point, English (I very much doubt they'll ever officially release a concert in Wales or Scotland and they never played in Northern Ireland).
Biggus Dickus · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Doga wrote:[/b]
Why they picked Wembley over Nepstadion as the iconic release is a mystery
[/QUOTE]
Not so much.
Queen are far more popular in their native Britain than anywhere else (perhaps Netherlands are rivalling Albion in that department), so it makes sense that their signature live release is at the quintessential British football stadium ... or, more to the point, English (I very much doubt they'll ever officially release a concert in Wales or Scotland and they never played in Northern Ireland).[/QUOTE]
And also they didn't have all of the Budapest show on film. The thing I find annoying with Budapest is the lack of several songs in full and the editing of some other tracks. At least both Wembley shows were filmed in full.
