mike hunt
I agree
Thread
Posts in chronological order
user1
[QUOTE] [b]matt z wrote:[/b]Living off of two albums and some exaggerated significance isn't rock and roll. It's has beening[/QUOTE]
..and what would you call "Queen+" or any BM/RT solo efforts after Freddie's death? Unsuccessful has beens?
..and what would you call "Queen+" or any BM/RT solo efforts after Freddie's death? Unsuccessful has beens?
matt z
[QUOTE] [b]user1 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]matt z wrote:[/b]Living off of two albums and some exaggerated significance isn't rock and roll. It's has beening[/QUOTE]
..and what would you call "Queen+" or any BM/RT solo efforts after Freddie's death? Unsuccessful has beens?[/QUOTE]
Record contract obligations.
Rather than hit the tapes and dig up some gold for anthology releases they rightfully so recognize their own omnipresence and take advantage of it much to the ire and disgust of hard core fans (*5ive and Britney come to mind)
But that's only their work as QUEEN +
Their solo efforts have actually been pretty fantastic.
I think Roger 's ELECTRIC FIRE beats out Brian's stuff but Brian has done well. (As well)
I love their solo work. It's a niche they'd already made while the band was extant.
Hardly throw away stuff. But yeah ..hardly groundbreaking. I still love it
[QUOTE] [b]matt z wrote:[/b]Living off of two albums and some exaggerated significance isn't rock and roll. It's has beening[/QUOTE]
..and what would you call "Queen+" or any BM/RT solo efforts after Freddie's death? Unsuccessful has beens?[/QUOTE]
Record contract obligations.
Rather than hit the tapes and dig up some gold for anthology releases they rightfully so recognize their own omnipresence and take advantage of it much to the ire and disgust of hard core fans (*5ive and Britney come to mind)
But that's only their work as QUEEN +
Their solo efforts have actually been pretty fantastic.
I think Roger 's ELECTRIC FIRE beats out Brian's stuff but Brian has done well. (As well)
I love their solo work. It's a niche they'd already made while the band was extant.
Hardly throw away stuff. But yeah ..hardly groundbreaking. I still love it
user1
You may think these efforts are fantastic. That's ok as it is subjective.
What can be stated objectively is nothing any member of Queen released after Freddie's death (apart from archival releases, MIH included) had any significant cultural relevance or achieved relevant sales.
So they are basically has beens since 1991.
Nevertheless, I like most of these archival releases and buy them.
And Queen is my all time favourite band.
However, trying to defend ex-Queen members by labelling Liam Gallagher (who just released a solo album consisting of entirely new material that gained a lot of attraction and who was part of a band in which he released seven #1 studio albums between '94 and '08 and that was the most successful act in the UK between '95 and '05) as "has been" is just ridiculous.
What can be stated objectively is nothing any member of Queen released after Freddie's death (apart from archival releases, MIH included) had any significant cultural relevance or achieved relevant sales.
So they are basically has beens since 1991.
Nevertheless, I like most of these archival releases and buy them.
And Queen is my all time favourite band.
However, trying to defend ex-Queen members by labelling Liam Gallagher (who just released a solo album consisting of entirely new material that gained a lot of attraction and who was part of a band in which he released seven #1 studio albums between '94 and '08 and that was the most successful act in the UK between '95 and '05) as "has been" is just ridiculous.
Day dop
[QUOTE] [b]user1 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]matt z wrote:[/b]Living off of two albums and some exaggerated significance isn't rock and roll. It's has beening[/QUOTE]
..and what would you call "Queen+" or any BM/RT solo efforts after Freddie's death? Unsuccessful has beens?[/QUOTE]
They're all successful at living off their former glory. All of them. Gallagher included.
No one would give a shit about him if it wasn't for Oasis's first two albums.
"exaggerated significance". True words.
[QUOTE] [b]matt z wrote:[/b]Living off of two albums and some exaggerated significance isn't rock and roll. It's has beening[/QUOTE]
..and what would you call "Queen+" or any BM/RT solo efforts after Freddie's death? Unsuccessful has beens?[/QUOTE]
They're all successful at living off their former glory. All of them. Gallagher included.
No one would give a shit about him if it wasn't for Oasis's first two albums.
"exaggerated significance". True words.
LOTV
What I find quite interesting is how the world is now younger in outlook. Whatever you think of him Liam Gallagher doesn't come across as an old fart, the world is younger now, he's 45 but he doesn't dress like a fuddy duddy (in my opinion, as I dress quite similarly). Rock stars in their 40s no longer appear ancient. Where as sadly Freddy only made 45 and illness aside was starting to consider himself an old man in rock star terms towards the end of his 30s.
As much as I love him I do have to say Fred's dress sense off stage when just kicking about was pretty bloody dire in his latter years, but I suspect he didn't give a fuck and was going for comfort. I do have a pastel yellow Fred Perry because Fred's wearing one in an interview from 82.
As much as I love him I do have to say Fred's dress sense off stage when just kicking about was pretty bloody dire in his latter years, but I suspect he didn't give a fuck and was going for comfort. I do have a pastel yellow Fred Perry because Fred's wearing one in an interview from 82.
matt z
^farking ugly ass 1980's color palette. It wasn't "hip" to do the old suit n tie look.
Just take a look at Duran Duran and Whitesnake from the era.
Also Robert Plant. ...Mick Jagger, Bowie etc.
Absolutely hideous clothing.
Brian May as well.....his spandex jumpsuit onstage looked like some old ladies track suit
Just take a look at Duran Duran and Whitesnake from the era.
Also Robert Plant. ...Mick Jagger, Bowie etc.
Absolutely hideous clothing.
Brian May as well.....his spandex jumpsuit onstage looked like some old ladies track suit
Day dop
[QUOTE] [b]LOTV wrote:[/b]
What I find quite interesting is how the world is now younger in outlook. Whatever you think of him Liam Gallagher doesn't come across as an old fart, the world is younger now, he's 45 but he doesn't dress like a fuddy duddy (in my opinion, as I dress quite similarly). Rock stars in their 40s no longer appear ancient. Where as sadly Freddy only made 45 and illness aside was starting to consider himself an old man in rock star terms towards the end of his 30s.
As much as I love him I do have to say Fred's dress sense off stage when just kicking about was pretty bloody dire in his latter years, but I suspect he didn't give a fuck and was going for comfort. I do have a pastel yellow Fred Perry because Fred's wearing one in an interview from 82. [/QUOTE]
He probably doesn't appear accent to you as you're getting older yourself. I don't think there's any getting around it - Gallagher is a product of the 90s and seems to be stuck there.
He looks like an old bloke (he seems to have aged a lot in the last few years) having a midlife crises, unable to get past the 90s, what with the way he dresses and that hair do. He acts like a stroppy teenager too, which is a bit cringe worthy in your mid 40s.
What I find quite interesting is how the world is now younger in outlook. Whatever you think of him Liam Gallagher doesn't come across as an old fart, the world is younger now, he's 45 but he doesn't dress like a fuddy duddy (in my opinion, as I dress quite similarly). Rock stars in their 40s no longer appear ancient. Where as sadly Freddy only made 45 and illness aside was starting to consider himself an old man in rock star terms towards the end of his 30s.
As much as I love him I do have to say Fred's dress sense off stage when just kicking about was pretty bloody dire in his latter years, but I suspect he didn't give a fuck and was going for comfort. I do have a pastel yellow Fred Perry because Fred's wearing one in an interview from 82. [/QUOTE]
He probably doesn't appear accent to you as you're getting older yourself. I don't think there's any getting around it - Gallagher is a product of the 90s and seems to be stuck there.
He looks like an old bloke (he seems to have aged a lot in the last few years) having a midlife crises, unable to get past the 90s, what with the way he dresses and that hair do. He acts like a stroppy teenager too, which is a bit cringe worthy in your mid 40s.