Name one song post Fred's death that went on to be a hit[/QUOTE]
Of course, after Mercury died it was game over. Nobody's arguing that.
But it's not like Mercury found much success on his own without the other band members. He had a few top ten singles, but nothing compared to what he had as part of the band. Brian had a couple top ten singles too. Does that mean he was just fine without Mercury too? Or was the collective more than the sum of the parts?
The fact that Brian and Roger's creativity lagged after the mid 1990s could just as well be due to age or other external factors. Most artists are lucky to get a decade of solid creativity, and these guys had two. Even McCartney - arguably the greatest songwriter of the past century - dried up for quite some time. How many solid albums has he written since 1973?
Had Mercury not fallen ill, who's to say his output would've improved as it did while he faced his mortality? In the 80s it was the other members of the band writing most of the hits while he was absorbed in the gay scene and happy as a clam. Mr Bad Guy is where Mercury was at, and it's basically an album of decent to good hooks without much direction. Maybe he would've gotten even worse had Bob Geldof not happened.
Of course such things will never be known, but it's fun to speculate. But the argument that the band are nothing without Mercury just doesn't fly. The other band members are partly what made Mercury great as well. Sheer Heart Attack isn't a great album because of a quarter of the band.
Vocal harmony · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
. . . . . I'll never forget how excited Brian was in interviews at the beginning of this collaboration in 2005. Never heard him sounding happier before or since.
[/QUOTE]
Well spotted, it's something I often thought about. Proof maybe that they really couldn't see a way of continuing being Queen until that point. Probably that Brian and Roger really wanted too but both had accepted that as a working band there was no future and therefore both had steered solo careers.
The Paul Rodgers thing wasn't planned in advance ( not part of a master plan) but after the awards performance they obviously thought that this was the chance they had hoped for, hence Brian's genuine excitement at the tour. . . . Also during the tour he seemed really excited at the fact they were jamming during sme sound checks and in Brian's words it's early days but there maybe something new here. . . .
Some regard it as a failure, but away from the album, the PR years showed Brian and Roger that they still had an audience and if nothing else was the beginning of the path of success they are now part of.
Dr Magus · Member since
They should never have used the 'Queen' name because it wasn't Queen. Simples.
kosimodo · Member since
Wonder where it is.. There was one moment i said to myself: ho, thats nicely done. Cant recall what or where. One moment in one song...
Man, i can listen to one queen song 10 times i a row and still be exited after all those years.
It wasnt special.
Rick · Member since
Small is such a beautiful song, though,
stevelondon20 · Member since
Small is the best song on the album by far. Completely agree Rick.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]stevelondon20 wrote:[/b]
Small is the best song on the album by far. Completely agree Rick.[/QUOTE]
Small is great, but the solo is just so half-assed that the song loses its strength.
For me it's Some Things That Glitter. It's the only real classic Brian sounding track.
Time To Shine is nice too.
*goodco* · Member since
Band named as 'Good Company'.....I like it, and makes sense. We all wouldn't have been so harsh.
CR was a Paul Rodgers+Queen- album. Brian and Roger in the background. Why Roger didn't do LV on 'Small' (a shame his solo version is so damn slow) and any other song, Brian on 'All That Glitters', more shared LVs, more BVs, more guitars, more......
and less Paul.
I haven't given it a spin since the year it was released, and can't name half the songs.
I'll take side 2 of HS any day.
Matt Z: "I thought 'Sheer Heart Attack' was our THIRD album..." LMAO on that one!
Pim Derks · Member since
Through The Night is awesome as well, a Mother Love kind-of-vibe. I wish every Queen album sounded as good on a production level as TCR and MIH did. In my opinion ofcourse.
PrimeJiveUSA · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Pim Derks wrote:[/b]
Through The Night is awesome as well, a Mother Love kind-of-vibe. I wish every Queen album sounded as good on a production level as TCR and MIH did. In my opinion ofcourse.[/QUOTE]
I agree the production is really good on the TCR and Through the Night is indeed a very good song. Also really like We Believe, Small, Some Things That Glitter, Voodoo and Say It's Not True.
I've always really liked the album. Ironically, the song released as the single(C-lebrity) is my least favorite on the album. It's one of those cynical, negative and gimmicky songs that Roger seems to always produce. Not a huge fan of Call Me and the opening title track but most of the album is a real pleasurable listen.
In fact...this thread has made me want to give it a spin as its been a while!
matt z · Member since
"C-lebrity" is great and has a catchy Roger hook.
...problem is, it was much better in 1992 when it was JUDAS PRIEST 's "A Touch of Evil"
*Now THERE'S a fucking song! A bridge! A solo! A crescendo! Bite!
Anyways, stylistically very different from "QUEEN" ...a poster here had done a fantastic analysis of the albums mixing and with a few attenuations had SERIOUSLY (*for our friend who despises CAPS on a forum that prohibits bold/italics) changed the tonal character of the album.
It "breathed" more. It sounded better.
I'll post a link when i get to work and can more competently SEARCH and LOCATE that POST
HERE IT IS!.. A POST BY A USER "Jeremy" in which he linked examples.
I really DO wish someone would explain what "Cosmos Rockin'" is all about. I am not a scientist.
