Which dates are you going to?

As great as Freddie was: He was never a successful solo-artist. It was only the four members of Queen together, who were great and successful.

Agreed Sealion, none of them had the solo success they had as a group for some reason. Maybe it was the distinctive Queen sound that was missing in their solo projects.

Happystar I'm actually a Queen fan who only heard of Adam through seeing vids on YouTube with Queen. I went back and watched his Idol stuff etc later because, to me at least he has that thing that stands out, whatever you want to call it, charisma, it factor? I've no idea what will happen after the Queen thing ends, I do think the thing going against Adam as a solo artist is his choice of direction music wise. He was clearly drawn to pop and IMO was too old to be the next bieber etc. I personally think he'd do better showing his actual voice rather than the over processed stuff that passes for music these days. It's great if you're not that good a singer but his edge is his vocal theatrics, and people do love them, but not much chance to show that on a commercial pop record.

I agree about Freddie, he had one of the most unique voices I've ever heard and his falsetto was stunning, especially because of his gorgeous lower register.

"the truth of the matter is since Freddie died and John rightly f*cked off, Queen are crap".

Yet here you are on a Queen forum posting EVERYDAY... contributing nothing in the Serious or General section, You have nothing to contribute when it comes to discussions about the band during the time you say they were great, only deciding to whinge on here each day, if they are so crap why given it's 27 years after Freddie died are you here each day? You seem VERY interested in them in there current form.

It could be argued that you are actually helping to promote them and keep them current....

There you go again waving the flag for Q+AL, like they say no publicity is bad publicity, I see you're keeping the post count on the Q+AL thread up nice and high ha

Robert Plant probably wouldn't give two hoots, as far as he's concerned Led Zep is in the past, but as a point of correction here, Freddie wasn't replaced, he died.... Led Zep 'replaced' Bonzo after he died, The Who 'replaced' Moon, and Entwistle The Stones 'replaced' Jones and Wyman, Genesis carried on without Gabriel and Hackett, it's just a band.... not the Pope.... oh wait he gets replaced when he dies, Why can't a band continue after someone leaves

The Eagles have just replaced Fry.... there's too many to mention here, literally everybody gets replaced if they leave, the ONLY reason the Beatles didn't replace someone was because they were all fed up with the band, but in reality they replaced Best and Sutcliff as well.... Had McCartney walked out on the Beatles and Lennon, Ringo and Harrison wanted to go on they would have found another Bass player, everybody does.

Seriously get over it, he died 27 years ago, time to move on, surely if nothing else Brian and Roger are bringing thousands of new Queen fans to the fold that will buy and listen to Freddie as a result, one would imagine Fred would have been pretty happy with that, 27 years after his death his music is alive and well and bringing in new fans daily

^^^ these are the simple facts of the situation. .

But it's also something that has been explained over and over again, in the past. Accepting applications he present means you can move forward. There are those who never will.

The list of bands that have undergone lineup changes is huge, those who haven't is much smaller. The point that happystar seems to miss is that the band and those people buying tickets are really enjoying the shows. Some of those people , like me saw the band with Freddie some weren't that lucky. However that in no way means we can't enjoy them as a live band now.

Freddie himself said that if he ever left they would have the ability to replace him and carry on. I don't think ( though I'm not saying this is fact) he expected Queen to stop being Queen when he was no longer there.

The band as they are now are as successful as a live band as they ever were. Surely any genuine Queen fans would see past liking or not liking Lambert to understand that what is happening is that they are carrying the banner that was dropped ( through no ones fault) in 1986.

You are spot on as usual happy. This drivel like "other bands had replacements as well" is getting so old. Can you really compare Keith Moon or Entwhistle from the Who with Freddie, who was the focus of the band Queen? Even if iconic frontmen were replaced, they either were
replaced by another icon or at east did they try to be creative. I dont know any other band , whose iconic frontman was replaced by a talentshow guy and endless greatest Hits tours followed. This is selling out and making money only out of your glorious past. And to justify this circus act they hype it up and use Freddie in EVERY interview that they give , that he "would have loved it": What a piece of BS!
AC/DC replaced Bon Scott, who was an icon too (not in Freddie's league though as Angus was and is the main man in DC), was replaced by Brian Johnson, but they released thei biggest album bBack in Black before they went on tour.
Pink FLoyd let Waters go and Gilmour took the vocals only by himself. SOme frontmen can NEVER be replaced: Robert Plant, Mick Jagger, Bono. Can you really imagine a "Stones plus Adam Lambert" or a "U2 plus Adam Lambert" - you have to laugh when you think about it. Noone ever replaced SUCH an icon but the definition of an icon is replaced by a talentshow muppet half their age, with no rock music background or even a career? Thats just plain silly and disrespectful to their past.
Brian and Roger have become big hippocrites nowhaving lost everything they once stood for. I always had the feeling that Brian May envied Freddie for being recognized as the Main focus of QUeen instead of Brians Guitar licks. There is evidence in past interviews where he comes across as bitter. I think Freddie and Brian were never the best of friends. Freddies closest friend in the band was John and he did thertight thing to avoid this awful awful flogging of a dead horse.

LMIYH again was so amazing - but the rest of the album such a ripoff. Plain proof that they just want the money. And I still assume that one of them (or even both) need the money badly. We all assume that they are fed up with $$ but there are lots of BIG rockstars or sportsmen who have invested badly. Maybe thats one of the reasons too to give up their own credibility and just sell out. YOU never know. These "worth lists" are pointless and not proof.

I think they are beyond wealthy and if you don't, you don't know much. They are doing all these things for the love of their music. If you think otherwise, you really don't understand the spirit of Queen, which lives on for many more new fans. You can have your negative opinions, but why inflict them on people who would like to positively discuss QAL? I just don't get why someone will crap all over something just for the spite of it!

So you said it yourself. You just want to "discuss" with lamebert sheep. Whats the point if a discussion then????

Sniff you obviously have seen Brians bank statements have you?

Funny reading "You don't understand the spirit of Queen" from a delusional Glambert. Maybe you have no clue about Queen whatsoever when you dont even realize that Maylor are sad hippocrites when they post links to tabloids that haunted Freddie in his last days. Under which rock are you living???

Is sweet Caroline and snifflese one and the same person??? I think so...

Well I think we can just leave the two of you to moan daily on here about it, seems like the band are doing fine, sales of Queen albums and tickets are doing fine and and the World keeps turning despite you two not being able to move on 27 years later... Queen were always one of the most commercially aware bands out there, promoting their tours and albums was highly orchestrated, we didn't have the internet but we had massive advertising campaigns in the music press, far more then most other bands, much more promotional work than others like Led Zep or Stones or The Who, so commercially they were right up there. Your constant repeating of the same stuff is completely futile, the band don't care what you think and it certainly won't change anything so much like King Canute screaming at the tide isn't going to stop it coming in... so good luck with that

runner & happystar

Serious question, if this collaboration upsets you as much as it clearly does, why do you keep inflicting it on yourselves in the Q+AL part of the forum when there's the rest of the forum dedicated to Queen stuff where you could discuss all the Freddie & John related stuff you want?

happystar the internet provides instant access to every major bands tours. That's how it is now.

To say Queen weren't at the forefeet of advertising commercially in the 70's and 80's is very wide of the mark.

The 77 UK summer tour had full page advertising in the weekly music papers MM, NME, Sounds, Record Mirror etc As did the 78, 79, 80, etc. Knebworth in 86 had double page ad's all of the albums and singles in the UK from Killer Queen onwards again had full page ad's. Tours and albums were given bill board space too.

Had the internet existed back then they would have been all over that instead.

It's ironic that people who don't like QAL are being told to "move on" or "stop living in the past" while half of Queen play their Greatest hits setlists on every tour.