Day dop
They certainly had played in years before Live Aid, despite the character of Roger Taylor saying otherwise in the movie.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Shvili
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Shvili wrote:[/b]
Freddie pleading to be taken back after Mr. Bad Guy? Who came up with this BS? There's no way this is remotely close to reality. [/QUOTE]
How can you be sure?
Brian and Roger have chronically downplayed how bad things were behind the scenes in the 80s.
It is undeniably true that they did have a meeting around this time where Mercury was given an ultimatum - them or Prenter. So it wouldn't surprise me at all if this scene was largely or entirely accurate.
I'm just not sure if a Hollywood film was the right place to tell this part of their story.
[/QUOTE]
There may have been a conversation along this line, but i highly doubt it was dramatic and substantive enough to deserve making a point of it in the movie.
Something like that would have come to light long time ago.
For example, watching this live aid interview, gives no indication Freddie was lat back with conditions or anything like that; the opposite, he seems to be in complete control and full of confidence as usual.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wESZ4SytiM
[QUOTE] [b]Shvili wrote:[/b]
Freddie pleading to be taken back after Mr. Bad Guy? Who came up with this BS? There's no way this is remotely close to reality. [/QUOTE]
How can you be sure?
Brian and Roger have chronically downplayed how bad things were behind the scenes in the 80s.
It is undeniably true that they did have a meeting around this time where Mercury was given an ultimatum - them or Prenter. So it wouldn't surprise me at all if this scene was largely or entirely accurate.
I'm just not sure if a Hollywood film was the right place to tell this part of their story.
[/QUOTE]
There may have been a conversation along this line, but i highly doubt it was dramatic and substantive enough to deserve making a point of it in the movie.
Something like that would have come to light long time ago.
For example, watching this live aid interview, gives no indication Freddie was lat back with conditions or anything like that; the opposite, he seems to be in complete control and full of confidence as usual.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wESZ4SytiM
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]Shvili wrote:[/b]
There may have been a conversation along this line, but i highly doubt it was dramatic and substantive enough to deserve making a point of it in the movie.[/QUOTE]
As we've established, biopics are often anachronistic so that they can be more entertaining. The exchange in question (however it played out) almost certainly took place after Live Aid.
[QUOTE]Something like that would have come to light long time ago.[/QUOTE]
See my previous two posts in this thread for why this is a poor argument.
[QUOTE]For example, watching this live aid interview, gives no indication Freddie was lat back with conditions or anything like that; the opposite, he seems to be in complete control and full of confidence as usual.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wESZ4SytiM
[/QUOTE]
Whatever interpersonal issues the band had in 1985 had weren't going to be acted out in an interview, let alone a couple days before Live Aid when they are in the midst of rehearsing for one of the biggest gigs of their career.
The Sun City debacle caused much internal strain, and Mercury receiving 3x more cash for his solo album than the band did for The Works didn't help matters at all. But they put all the interpersonal stuff behind them and focused on the prize because they knew the show was an excellent opportunity to revitalize their career.
Never underestimate the ability for rock stars to put PR ahead of everything when it matters most.
There may have been a conversation along this line, but i highly doubt it was dramatic and substantive enough to deserve making a point of it in the movie.[/QUOTE]
As we've established, biopics are often anachronistic so that they can be more entertaining. The exchange in question (however it played out) almost certainly took place after Live Aid.
[QUOTE]Something like that would have come to light long time ago.[/QUOTE]
See my previous two posts in this thread for why this is a poor argument.
[QUOTE]For example, watching this live aid interview, gives no indication Freddie was lat back with conditions or anything like that; the opposite, he seems to be in complete control and full of confidence as usual.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wESZ4SytiM
[/QUOTE]
Whatever interpersonal issues the band had in 1985 had weren't going to be acted out in an interview, let alone a couple days before Live Aid when they are in the midst of rehearsing for one of the biggest gigs of their career.
The Sun City debacle caused much internal strain, and Mercury receiving 3x more cash for his solo album than the band did for The Works didn't help matters at all. But they put all the interpersonal stuff behind them and focused on the prize because they knew the show was an excellent opportunity to revitalize their career.
Never underestimate the ability for rock stars to put PR ahead of everything when it matters most.
dysan
Nice little report from Zanzibar on BBC World News if you can find it.
YAFFF
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Fredfan wrote:[/b]
wait Real Wizard - so did Fred really beg for his job?[/QUOTE]
I wasn't there, so how would I know?
[/QUOTE]
Don't be daft. There's no friggin' way the band would consider for a second to not let Freddie back in the band. They are the ones who would be truly nothing without Freddie. It's just an insult to the intelligence to say otherwise. Want proof? It's 2018 and they have only attempted one album of new material without Freddie and it was a piece of shit flop ("The Cosmos Rocks"). They've been living off of their Freddie days since then. People have gotten careers thanks to Freddie- Marc Martel and Adam Lambert being the most obvious. Queen **is** Freddie Mercury (Edit: Meant to say Freddie Mercury IS Queen). It is not Queen with him. And YES Queen could've swapped out any other member and still succeeded. I doubt they'd be as good or AS successful but Freddie is the only irreplaceable member and Brian and Roger are trying to chance that perception. Only the casual ones will buy it.
[QUOTE] [b]Fredfan wrote:[/b]
wait Real Wizard - so did Fred really beg for his job?[/QUOTE]
I wasn't there, so how would I know?
[/QUOTE]
Don't be daft. There's no friggin' way the band would consider for a second to not let Freddie back in the band. They are the ones who would be truly nothing without Freddie. It's just an insult to the intelligence to say otherwise. Want proof? It's 2018 and they have only attempted one album of new material without Freddie and it was a piece of shit flop ("The Cosmos Rocks"). They've been living off of their Freddie days since then. People have gotten careers thanks to Freddie- Marc Martel and Adam Lambert being the most obvious. Queen **is** Freddie Mercury (Edit: Meant to say Freddie Mercury IS Queen). It is not Queen with him. And YES Queen could've swapped out any other member and still succeeded. I doubt they'd be as good or AS successful but Freddie is the only irreplaceable member and Brian and Roger are trying to chance that perception. Only the casual ones will buy it.
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]YAFFF wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Fredfan wrote:[/b]
wait Real Wizard - so did Fred really beg for his job?[/QUOTE]
I wasn't there, so how would I know?
[/QUOTE]
Don't be daft. There's no friggin' way the band would consider for a second to not let Freddie back in the band. They are the ones who would be truly nothing without Freddie.[/QUOTE]
By 1985 they'd had enough of his ego (the ego that thought he could make an album as good as Thriller without the rest of the band), and they had made more than enough money that they could've walked away ten times over.
After Mr Bad Guy colossally flopped, it was Mercury who realized he was nothing without them. His best creative days were behind him. How many hit songs did Mercury write between 1980-85 vs the other band members who picked up the slack?
Their creative choices post-1997 are completely irrelevant.
Don't you be daft.
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Fredfan wrote:[/b]
wait Real Wizard - so did Fred really beg for his job?[/QUOTE]
I wasn't there, so how would I know?
[/QUOTE]
Don't be daft. There's no friggin' way the band would consider for a second to not let Freddie back in the band. They are the ones who would be truly nothing without Freddie.[/QUOTE]
By 1985 they'd had enough of his ego (the ego that thought he could make an album as good as Thriller without the rest of the band), and they had made more than enough money that they could've walked away ten times over.
After Mr Bad Guy colossally flopped, it was Mercury who realized he was nothing without them. His best creative days were behind him. How many hit songs did Mercury write between 1980-85 vs the other band members who picked up the slack?
Their creative choices post-1997 are completely irrelevant.
Don't you be daft.
blueroom
Haven't seen the movie yet but that "We haven't played together in years" bit really confuses me. Works tour Japan leg was May 85, Live Aid was July 85. Even if they never spoke to each other in that interim it would have been a 2 month gap. Why they choose to make these things up is beyond me.
Well, now all this movie crap is over, maybe they can get back to that anthology.
Well, now all this movie crap is over, maybe they can get back to that anthology.
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]YAFFF wrote:[/b]
Queen **is** Freddie Mercury. It is not Queen with him. And YES Queen could've swapped out any other member and still succeeded. I doubt they'd be as good or AS successful but Freddie is the only irreplaceable member and Brian and Roger are trying to chance that perception.[/QUOTE]
Absolute nonsense.
The Queen sound almost entirely came from Smile. Have you heard the recordings of Mercury's band in 1969? It's utter shite.
It was the combination of them that created the magic. They all brought the best out of each other, best exemplified in the 1974-77 period.
They kept each other in check, and they are the only band in history where every member wrote a #1 song. A true collaboration of four equals. While Mercury and May wrote the bulk of the earlier material, all four of them were absolutely vital to the creative process and the business side of things.
Queen **is** Freddie Mercury. It is not Queen with him. And YES Queen could've swapped out any other member and still succeeded. I doubt they'd be as good or AS successful but Freddie is the only irreplaceable member and Brian and Roger are trying to chance that perception.[/QUOTE]
Absolute nonsense.
The Queen sound almost entirely came from Smile. Have you heard the recordings of Mercury's band in 1969? It's utter shite.
It was the combination of them that created the magic. They all brought the best out of each other, best exemplified in the 1974-77 period.
They kept each other in check, and they are the only band in history where every member wrote a #1 song. A true collaboration of four equals. While Mercury and May wrote the bulk of the earlier material, all four of them were absolutely vital to the creative process and the business side of things.
YAFFF
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]Absolute nonsense.
The Queen sound came from Smile. Have you heard the recordings of Mercury's band in 1969? It's utter shite.
[/QUOTE]
"Liar" formerly know as "Lover" was 10x better than anything Smile ever created so, fail.
[QUOTE]
It was the combination of them that created the magic. They all brought the best out of each other, best exemplified in the 1974-77 period.[/QUOTE]
I don't disagree with this at all. Of course it's so but Freddie is the heart and soul of the band/the sound/etc..
[QUOTE]
They kept each other in check, and they are the only band in history where every member wrote a #1 song. While Mercury and May wrote the bulk of the earlier material, all four of them were absolutely vital to the creative process and the business side of things.
[/QUOTE]
No argument here. Still, Queen IS NOT Freddie Mercury. Freddie Mercury IS Queen. I need to go back and change my post. This is what I meant. The other three just helped Freddie help them get where they are today.
The Queen sound came from Smile. Have you heard the recordings of Mercury's band in 1969? It's utter shite.
[/QUOTE]
"Liar" formerly know as "Lover" was 10x better than anything Smile ever created so, fail.
[QUOTE]
It was the combination of them that created the magic. They all brought the best out of each other, best exemplified in the 1974-77 period.[/QUOTE]
I don't disagree with this at all. Of course it's so but Freddie is the heart and soul of the band/the sound/etc..
[QUOTE]
They kept each other in check, and they are the only band in history where every member wrote a #1 song. While Mercury and May wrote the bulk of the earlier material, all four of them were absolutely vital to the creative process and the business side of things.
[/QUOTE]
No argument here. Still, Queen IS NOT Freddie Mercury. Freddie Mercury IS Queen. I need to go back and change my post. This is what I meant. The other three just helped Freddie help them get where they are today.
Golden Salmon
[QUOTE] [b]YAFFF wrote:[/b]
Still, Queen IS NOT Freddie Mercury. Freddie Mercury IS Queen.
[/QUOTE]
So, 4 is not 1 but 1 is 4?
Still, Queen IS NOT Freddie Mercury. Freddie Mercury IS Queen.
[/QUOTE]
So, 4 is not 1 but 1 is 4?
YAFFF
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
By 1985 they'd had enough of his ego (the ego that thought he could make an album as good as Thriller without the rest of the band), and they had made more than enough money that they could've walked away ten times over.
After Mr Bad Guy colossally flopped,
[/QUOTE]
In America. It was actually quite successful overall. Just not Queen standards.
[QUOTE]
it was Mercury who realized he was nothing without them. His best creative days were behind him. How many hit songs did Mercury write between 1980-85 vs the other band members who picked up the slack?
[/QUOTE]
Yeah he may have realized that but it was also obvious that the other three were less than nothing with him even if they didn't say it publicly
Let's see. 1979/1980 "The Game"
Freddie alone:
"Crazy Little Thing Called Love" & 'Play The Game"
2 hits
John Deacon "Dust"
1 hit
Brian May "Save Me"
1 hit
Roger Taylor
no hits
1982 "Hot Space"
all four
"Under Pressure"
1 hit
Freddie Mercury
"Body Language" #11 (highest charting single from the album in America)
1 hit
Brian May
"Las Palabras De Amor"
1 minor hit (only in UK)
Roger Taylor
John Deacon
No Real hits. "Backchat" barely made Top 40
1984 "The Works"
Freddie Mercy "It's A Hard Life"
1 hit
Roger Taylor "Radio Ga Ga"
1 hit credited to Roger Taylor but transformed into a hit by Freddie (just like he did with "A Kind Of Magic")
John Deacon "I Want To Break free"
1 hit
Brian May "Hammer To Fall"
1 hit
Sorry Freddie kept pace just fine. Freddie & Brian still most of the hits.
Yes Roger added 1 hit and John 2 hits
By 1985 they'd had enough of his ego (the ego that thought he could make an album as good as Thriller without the rest of the band), and they had made more than enough money that they could've walked away ten times over.
After Mr Bad Guy colossally flopped,
[/QUOTE]
In America. It was actually quite successful overall. Just not Queen standards.
[QUOTE]
it was Mercury who realized he was nothing without them. His best creative days were behind him. How many hit songs did Mercury write between 1980-85 vs the other band members who picked up the slack?
[/QUOTE]
Yeah he may have realized that but it was also obvious that the other three were less than nothing with him even if they didn't say it publicly
Let's see. 1979/1980 "The Game"
Freddie alone:
"Crazy Little Thing Called Love" & 'Play The Game"
2 hits
John Deacon "Dust"
1 hit
Brian May "Save Me"
1 hit
Roger Taylor
no hits
1982 "Hot Space"
all four
"Under Pressure"
1 hit
Freddie Mercury
"Body Language" #11 (highest charting single from the album in America)
1 hit
Brian May
"Las Palabras De Amor"
1 minor hit (only in UK)
Roger Taylor
John Deacon
No Real hits. "Backchat" barely made Top 40
1984 "The Works"
Freddie Mercy "It's A Hard Life"
1 hit
Roger Taylor "Radio Ga Ga"
1 hit credited to Roger Taylor but transformed into a hit by Freddie (just like he did with "A Kind Of Magic")
John Deacon "I Want To Break free"
1 hit
Brian May "Hammer To Fall"
1 hit
Sorry Freddie kept pace just fine. Freddie & Brian still most of the hits.
Yes Roger added 1 hit and John 2 hits
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]YAFFF wrote:[/b]
"Liar" formerly know as "Lover" was 10x better than anything Smile ever created so, fail.[/QUOTE]
And you've heard the original version of Lover before the other three members made their contributions?
"Liar" formerly know as "Lover" was 10x better than anything Smile ever created so, fail.[/QUOTE]
And you've heard the original version of Lover before the other three members made their contributions?
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]YAFFF wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
By 1985 they'd had enough of his ego (the ego that thought he could make an album as good as Thriller without the rest of the band), and they had made more than enough money that they could've walked away ten times over.
After Mr Bad Guy colossally flopped,
[/QUOTE]
In America. It was actually quite successful overall. Just not Queen standards.[/QUOTE]
In other words - it flopped.
It had one single in the top 20, and went gold in the UK largely because of advance sales.
Mercury was aiming for Thriller, and he cost Columbia millions because he couldn't deliver. There's a reason why Barcelona was on another label.
[QUOTE]Sorry Freddie kept pace just fine. Freddie & Brian still most of the hits.
Yes Roger added 1 hit and John 2 hits[/QUOTE]
Your numbers there are skewed. You are conflating "hits" with "misses".
Dust, Ga Ga, Break Free and Magic are the biggest songs of that period - none of which Mercury (or May) wrote. Mercury wrote most of the big songs between 74-79, but not after that.
But you can spin that however you'd like, including "transforming" songs written by others into hits. Revisionist history at its finest. One could easily argue that the others helped Mercury's songs along just as much.
Queen's most famous song is Bohemian Rhapsody. Imagine it without Roger Taylor's voice in the opera section.
Get off your lectern.
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
By 1985 they'd had enough of his ego (the ego that thought he could make an album as good as Thriller without the rest of the band), and they had made more than enough money that they could've walked away ten times over.
After Mr Bad Guy colossally flopped,
[/QUOTE]
In America. It was actually quite successful overall. Just not Queen standards.[/QUOTE]
In other words - it flopped.
It had one single in the top 20, and went gold in the UK largely because of advance sales.
Mercury was aiming for Thriller, and he cost Columbia millions because he couldn't deliver. There's a reason why Barcelona was on another label.
[QUOTE]Sorry Freddie kept pace just fine. Freddie & Brian still most of the hits.
Yes Roger added 1 hit and John 2 hits[/QUOTE]
Your numbers there are skewed. You are conflating "hits" with "misses".
Dust, Ga Ga, Break Free and Magic are the biggest songs of that period - none of which Mercury (or May) wrote. Mercury wrote most of the big songs between 74-79, but not after that.
But you can spin that however you'd like, including "transforming" songs written by others into hits. Revisionist history at its finest. One could easily argue that the others helped Mercury's songs along just as much.
Queen's most famous song is Bohemian Rhapsody. Imagine it without Roger Taylor's voice in the opera section.
Get off your lectern.
k-m
If anything like that ever happened and Freddie was forced to asking if they can kindly let him back in, then even worse for them. And if it's pure fiction (which I think it is), it simply amounts to an insult by Maylor, getting even and all that. Either way, not a good result, is it? Can't wait to see it actually. But gosh, I wish this day progressed differently. Sounds like such a lost opportunity, but I bet they will actually live off it for another few years. Blu-Ray, special editions, full feature with Bri's behind the scenes commentary, etc.
MemeOverlord69
In the midst of all this bickering:
I havent seen the film yet, so what's the deal with Bo Rhap from Edinburgh 1976?
Is that what was originally suspected to be from 6/7/1977, and is it actually from Edinburgh?
I havent seen the film yet, so what's the deal with Bo Rhap from Edinburgh 1976?
Is that what was originally suspected to be from 6/7/1977, and is it actually from Edinburgh?