Freddie confirms Queen are not Queen if four members are not there

[QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]

Indeed he did, but he also said in other interviews that the other three had the ability to function without him. That Queen could be Queen without him, that no one wanted to leave in case things carried on without that persons involvement. All those were things Freddie said about him or anyone else leaving.

Also on one of the DVD documentaries ( I can't recall which at the moment) when talking about Mr Bad Guy which he and CBS were expecting to sell in huge quantities he talks about leaving the band and going on to another phase of his career. When Ian Gillan left Deep Purple they found David Coverdale (who by the way hadn't seen the inside of a recording studio before joining them, Fish was replaced in Marrilion by Steve Hogarth, David Lee Roth by Sammy Hagar in Van Halen, Ozzy By Ronnie James Dio in Sabbath, all those guys left bands and were replaced and got on with careers away from the bands they were in. Roger Waters left Pink Floyd then threw everything out the pram when Floyd carried on withou him, are you saying that Freddie would have acted like a complete fool had he known (or had he left and been replaced). I think not.

And before you mention Led Zeppelin, they have a long history of failed reunions some of which never got past talking, some never got past a small number of rehearsals and some got as far as one off gigs [/QUOTE]

Freddie always said even while recording Mr Bad Guy that he never has/had the intention to leave Queen. So stop rewriting history with your bullshit you clueless dumbass

[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]Thistle wrote:[/b]

Taking ONE quote and using it to suit your (extremely tedious) agenda, whilst others have shown you concrete counters that were said AFTER that, shows how much you just don't get.
[/QUOTE]

Even if Frederick had always said Queen could only exist with the four of them (he didn't), even if he'd never ever changed his mind, that wouldn't make Maylor's collab with Adam (or anybody else for that matter) any less legitimate. They're fully-grown adults (unlike some QZ people) and are entitled to do whatever they want, as long as it's legal (it is) and as long as it's not deliberately hurting anybody (it isn't). Those who aren't interested can refrain from attending those concerts and buying whatever they release, there's no need to moan about it and (pathetically and unsuccessfully) try to persuade others to boycott the partnership.

By the way, doing stuff for money and not giving a toss naysayers was Frederick's favourite activity... so, in that way, they're certainly honouring his memory.[/QUOTE]
Fuck off you stupid asswhipe and take your stupid "Frederick" with you you sad cunt

[QUOTE] [b]runner_70 wrote:[/b]

Fuck off you stupid asswhipe and take your stupid "Frederick" with you you sad cunt
[/QUOTE]

Yet another well thought out and reasoned argument to support your views!!!

[QUOTE] [b]rockchic65 wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]runner_70 wrote:[/b]

Fuck off you stupid asswhipe and take your stupid "Frederick" with you you sad cunt
[/QUOTE]

Yet another well thought out and reasoned argument to support your views!!!

[/QUOTE]

Scumbags like you desrve no well thought out posts. You Lametard cunts need to go

Wow, that all went south really quick!

I'm not sad, by the way. I may be a cunt, though. I don't mind - cunts were Frederick's favourite female sexual organs anyway. Frederick's favourite male sexual organ was the willy.

[QUOTE] [b]runner_70 wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]

Indeed he did, but he also said in other interviews that the other three had the ability to function without him. That Queen could be Queen without him, that no one wanted to leave in case things carried on without that persons involvement. All those were things Freddie said about him or anyone else leaving.

Also on one of the DVD documentaries ( I can't recall which at the moment) when talking about Mr Bad Guy which he and CBS were expecting to sell in huge quantities he talks about leaving the band and going on to another phase of his career. When Ian Gillan left Deep Purple they found David Coverdale (who by the way hadn't seen the inside of a recording studio before joining them, Fish was replaced in Marrilion by Steve Hogarth, David Lee Roth by Sammy Hagar in Van Halen, Ozzy By Ronnie James Dio in Sabbath, all those guys left bands and were replaced and got on with careers away from the bands they were in. Roger Waters left Pink Floyd then threw everything out the pram when Floyd carried on withou him, are you saying that Freddie would have acted like a complete fool had he known (or had he left and been replaced). I think not.

And before you mention Led Zeppelin, they have a long history of failed reunions some of which never got past talking, some never got past a small number of rehearsals and some got as far as one off gigs [/QUOTE]

Freddie always said even while recording Mr Bad Guy that he never has/had the intention to leave Queen. So stop rewriting history with your bullshit you clueless dumbass[/QUOTE]

Right, because rock stars are always honest in interviews...

Mercury's solo album got a 3x bigger cash advance than the previous Queen album did. Do you honestly think he was at the peak of his humility when that went down? He was quoted saying he thought he could make an album as good as Thriller. Quincy Jones went through 500 songs for Thriller and chose the best nine. Mercury wrote about 15.

Vocal Harmony's argument is perfectly reasonable. Had Mercury's album been a hit, it's entirely possible that he would've left the band. Queen were in inner turmoil by 1985, and it's not far fetched to suggest that they were considering calling it quits at the end of the Works tour anyway. Roger is quoted saying their show had become stale by then. They went to most gigs in separate limos. It was all work. The cohesion and camaraderie of the 1973-77 period was long behind them.

The combination of Mr Bad Guy's commercial failure and Bob Geldof's phone call saved Queen, without a doubt. The band have done well in telling revisionist history to cover up how bad things were behind the scenes from 1982 to 85. But make no mistake - things were bad.

[QUOTE] [b]Mr Right wrote:[/b]

Real Wizard Freddie has spoken and you surely you are not that thick to dismiss what the man is saying here.
Queen are not Queen if 4 are not there as a group, has that not registered in your head yet???
[/QUOTE]

Actually Gerryhappyright there are six people in the band now so its obviously more of a band than it ever was. Using the rule of Freddie and Gerryhappyright.

[QUOTE] [b]Mr Right wrote:[/b]

Im sure if Freddie was looking down at the other two Queenies he would say it was ridiculous.
Freddie once said he would never want to perform on the stage running around as an old man so god knows what he would say about Roger and Brian still at it and Brian in his 70s now![/QUOTE]

Yeah and in 1982 Mick Jagger said he couldn't see himself touring after another five or six years!

By the way you mentioned Freddie looking down on the other two... Does that mean he's hiding in the lighting rig? Only I thought he was dead!

[QUOTE] [b]runner_70 wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]Thistle wrote:[/b]

Taking ONE quote and using it to suit your (extremely tedious) agenda, whilst others have shown you concrete counters that were said AFTER that, shows how much you just don't get.
[/QUOTE]

Even if Frederick had always said Queen could only exist with the four of them (he didn't), even if he'd never ever changed his mind, that wouldn't make Maylor's collab with Adam (or anybody else for that matter) any less legitimate. They're fully-grown adults (unlike some QZ people) and are entitled to do whatever they want, as long as it's legal (it is) and as long as it's not deliberately hurting anybody (it isn't). Those who aren't interested can refrain from attending those concerts and buying whatever they release, there's no need to moan about it and (pathetically and unsuccessfully) try to persuade others to boycott the partnership.

By the way, doing stuff for money and not giving a toss naysayers was Frederick's favourite activity... so, in that way, they're certainly honouring his memory.[/QUOTE]
Fuck off you stupid asswhipe and take your stupid "Frederick" with you you sad cunt
[/QUOTE]

Mr 70 your such a jolly little chap aren't you.

He was Frederick's favourite runner anyway.

In what sense?


“Deep Purple, along with many other bands had members who were/are more accomplished musicians then the members of Queen.”

And remember, Peter Freestone said, they had a meeting to talk about the future of the band after live aid. Roger, Brian and John said him Paul Prenter was not good for him. Freddie left Prenter given a lot of money and later Prenter sold Freddie to The Sun the next year.
I think, if Mr. Bad Guy was a hit, Queen will separate it without any doubt. Even was a gossip about Limahl as new singer of Queen. I don't think Brian, Roger and John thought in Limahl, but who knows what they were thinking at that moment of the story.
Talking about that, Roger said to Pelo (argentine rock magazine) something like that "Queen are four members, if one of us left the band, we left the band together".

Indeed Queen were four members but according to May & Taylor Queen can also be two members!
To me that says hypocrisy of the highest level, and they keep using the name Queen to rake the millions of pounds in rather than start a new band and have a clean slate from ripping many dumb people off big time. I am not one of them thankfully.
Paul McCartney never continued The Beatles he formed Wings and the same for the other Beatles they never found new members to continue been The Beatles, and personally that is what Queen should have done instead of milking a the name Queen .
Queen truthfully was 4 band members.

[QUOTE] [b]Mr Right wrote:[/b]

Indeed Queen were four members but according to May & Taylor Queen can also be two members!
To me that says hypocrisy of the highest level, and they keep using the name Queen to rake the millions of pounds in rather than start a new band and have a clean slate from ripping many dumb people off big time. I am not one of them thankfully.
Paul McCartney never continued The Beatles he formed Wings and the same for the other Beatles they never found new members to continue been The Beatles, and personally that is what Queen should have done instead of milking a the name Queen .
Queen truthfully was 4 band members.[/QUOTE]

Serious question, if they are using the name Queen + ........., playing Queen music how is that ripping people off? Everyone who goes to a show knows exactly what they're getting, they aren't pretending to be original Queen, they've made it very obvious in every interview that it's a collaboration, they aren't pretending to be anything other than that, so how can that be ripping people off, they have a choice whether they think it's worth paying to see two of the four members of Queen with a different bassist and singer and if not fair enough, like you they just don't go.