he has made a film about Freddie in Bo Rhap which was drenched in lies (as a friend towards Freddie, why dd he allow this)? He made Freddie look like a right twat[/QUOTE]
They barely mentioned his drug problem and how difficult it was to work with him by the mid 80s. They didn't mention him smashing a mirror over his assistant's head. They went easy on Mercury. This has been mentioned countless times here, and you continue to peddle your baseless talking points.
Anyone who was there knows that the events portrayed in the film - as anachronistic as some moments are, as per Hollywood's MO - are ultimately accurate.
You weren't there, and you don't know anyone who was there. How would you know? Your knowledge base consists of things you've read on forums like this and in books, which is only a small portion of what happened in an eventful and complicated 20+ year period.
But even if Super 8 video footage of Mercury smashing the mirror over Pete Brown's head popped up, you'd claim it was doctored because it doesn't suit your agenda.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]ST17 wrote:[/b]
For Brian to actually compare Freddie with Adam is wrong as far as vocal ability is concerned because Freddie was more a flexible singer were Adam is west end theatre style of singer.[/QUOTE]
But considering you aren't a musician and haven't even begun to study the evolution of Freddie Mercury's voice, you are unable to grasp the basic reality that Lambert is a far more consistent singer live than Mercury ever was even at his peak.
This has nothing to do with writing, piano playing, expression, stage presence, or even one's personal taste. Brian's comment is purely about technical ability.
Lambert has done hundreds of shows, and his consistency is not only better than Mercury's but amongst the finest in the business.
Show me one video of Mercury live singing Who Wants To Live Forever like the album, in the original key.
Spoiler alert: you can't. But you can find hundreds of Lambert nailing it. every. goddamned. night.
Saint Jiub · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Saint Jiub wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]
Did Freddie leave and than ask to rejoin, I think it's very possible. [/QUOTE]When did Freddie have an opportunity to quit Queen and then beg to rejoin Queen?
[/QUOTE]
list proves nothing. band members can quit for a few days - or less.
Ringo left in Aug 68 - didn't he fuck off skiing?
the Beatles were recording Get Back (at Twickenham, Jan '69) and George just walked out. John even quipped sarcastically "we'll get Eric, he's easy to work with"
George returned to finish recording the album.
[/QUOTE]
Fucking off for a few days is hardly a genuine break up of a band. Going to Bali to see God and Dali for a few days is a whole lot different than permanently quitting the band and then later begging to rejoin the band.
Asked if the band ever looked likely to split while Mercury was alive, May replies “Oh, it was breaking up the whole time! Every time we made an album it seemed like we were about to break up, because of this business of ‘what are we and where are we going?’ All of us left the band at some point, and not just one time – all the way through.”
brENsKi · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Saint Jiub wrote:[/b]Fucking off for a few days is hardly a genuine break up of a band. Going to Bali to see God and Dali for a few days is a whole lot different than permanently quitting the band and then later begging to rejoin the band.
www.mojo4music.com/articles/25514/brian-may-queen-breaking-apart-whole-time/
Brian May:
Asked if the band ever looked likely to split while Mercury was alive, May replies “Oh, it was breaking up the whole time! Every time we made an album it seemed like we were about to break up, because of this business of ‘what are we and where are we going?’ All of us left the band at some point, and not just one time – all the way through.”[/QUOTE]
i think that depends wholly upon the circumstances. you'd need to watch the Beatles Twickenham film to understand that it was a split. George really was walking out for good. Things like watertight recording contracts kind of force bands to "go through the motions" and avoid record company lawsuits. Then once back and recording, perhaps he thought he could see it through, and with time perhaps the ill-feeling eased off.
There were several genuine splits between 68-70.
The Twickenham tapes show the band splitting up - warts and all.
There were allegedly two reasons for the recording/rehearsal sessions being filmed:
1. to get back (geddit) the feel of what they were always about - playing together
2. that with documentary cameras there, they might all be on their best behaviour.
in reality, it really couldn't have turned out any worse. it was like really bad reality TV - people turning up late - or not at all, the friction between Paul and George was palpable
Putting aside George and Ringo's genuine walkouts (multiple times for both), it'd be hard to tell the actual date of the actual split.
John announced in Sept 69 that he'd be leaving after the recording was finished.
Paul announced he'd officially left in April 1970.
So when Paul actually legally dissolved the band (at the end of 1970) they'd long since split for the final time anyway.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]runner_70 wrote:[/b]
He was talking about the movie and how it was shown that Freddie begged to get back into the band after a lengthy hiatus.[/QUOTE]
The time frame was a Hollywood exaggeration.
But the event in question happened *after* Live Aid, when the rest of the band gave Mercury an ultimatum - to choose between them and Paul Prenter.
Looking forward to you predictably rejecting this new information because it does not suit your narrative.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Saint Jiub wrote:[/b]
Fucking off for a few days is hardly a genuine break up of a band. Going to Bali to see God and Dali for a few days is a whole lot different than permanently quitting the band and then later begging to rejoin the band.
Asked if the band ever looked likely to split while Mercury was alive, May replies “Oh, it was breaking up the whole time! Every time we made an album it seemed like we were about to break up, because of this business of ‘what are we and where are we going?’ All of us left the band at some point, and not just one time – all the way through.”[/QUOTE]
Queen actually did break up at one point in the 1980s, but as per Hollywood, the timeline is just shifted for dramatic effect.
I'd elaborate further, but when the trolls who have taken over this place are just going to smear the bringer of new information that contradicts their dogmatic and ill-informed worldview, what's the point?
The movie is far more accurate than these self-proclaimed experts will ever understand, but since they've made forums like this a place where such things will never be openly discussed, they'll never quite understand why. Such is life.
May they enjoy their mental masturbation. It is all they get.
Saint Jiub · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Saint Jiub wrote:[/b][QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Saint Jiub wrote:[/b][QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]Did Freddie leave and than ask to rejoin, I think it's very possible. [/QUOTE]When did Freddie have an opportunity to quit Queen and then beg to rejoin Queen?
[/QUOTE]
list proves nothing. band members can quit for a few days - or less.
Ringo left in Aug 68 - didn't he fuck off skiing?
the Beatles were recording Get Back (at Twickenham, Jan '69) and George just walked out. John even quipped sarcastically "we'll get Eric, he's easy to work with"
George returned to finish recording the album.
[/QUOTE]Fucking off for a few days is hardly a genuine break up of a band. Going to Bali to see God and Dali for a few days is a whole lot different than permanently quitting the band and then later begging to rejoin the band.
www.mojo4music.com/articles/25514/brian-may-queen-breaking-apart-whole-time/
Brian May:
Asked if the band ever looked likely to split while Mercury was alive, May replies “Oh, it was breaking up the whole time! Every time we made an album it seemed like we were about to break up, because of this business of ‘what are we and where are we going?’ All of us left the band at some point, and not just one time – all the way through.”[/QUOTE]
i think that depends wholly upon the circumstances. you'd need to watch the Beatles Twickenham film to understand that it was a split. George really was walking out for good.
Also, there were several splits between 68-70.
The Twickenham tapes show a band splitting up - warts and all.
Putting aside George and Ringo's genuine walkouts (plural for both), it'd be hard to tell the actual date of the actual split.
John announced in Sept 69 that he'd be leaving after the recording was finished.
Paul announced he'd officially left in April 1970.
So when Paul actually leagally dissolved the band (at the end of 1970) they'd long since split for the final time anyway.
[/QUOTE]
During Ringo's and George's snits, the rest of the band continued to record.
Ringo was greeted with flowers upon returning from his two week hiatus. George was gone for 5 days before the band convinced him to return. Water over the bridge ... for a little while ...
There was not a genuine break up until John finally filed the "divorce papers" after completing Abbey Road, and then Paul confirmed months later.
In contrast, Deaky's Bali disappearance appeared to be a spontaneous mini-vacation.
Also, Mr Bad Guy took over two years to complete, and Queen stayed intact despite friction within the band.
I ask again ... When did Freddie have an opportunity (and the time) to both quit Queen and then beg to rejoin Queen?
Saint Jiub · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Saint Jiub wrote:[/b]
Fucking off for a few days is hardly a genuine break up of a band. Going to Bali to see God and Dali for a few days is a whole lot different than permanently quitting the band and then later begging to rejoin the band.
Asked if the band ever looked likely to split while Mercury was alive, May replies “Oh, it was breaking up the whole time! Every time we made an album it seemed like we were about to break up, because of this business of ‘what are we and where are we going?’ All of us left the band at some point, and not just one time – all the way through.”[/QUOTE]
Queen actually did break up at one point in the 1980s, but as per Hollywood, the timeline is just shifted for dramatic effect.
You weren't there, so how can you know for sure? Not everything that happened behind closed doors was written in a book or spoken about in an interview before 2018.
Yes, they didn't break up per se. But in 1985 they were a touring act purely on a professional basis, travelling in separate limos to and from the gig. They were internally a mess by that point largely because of Mercury's ego and drug issues which are well documented.
In reality, it was after Live Aid that the rest of the band held an intervention with Mercury, forcing him to choose between them and Prenter. You'd have to cultivate relationships with people who were around at the time if you want to learn more, but that's basically what went down.
...
Was there really an ultimatum? Absolutely no diplomacy implied?
It would seem Freddie did not have such a hard time ditching Prenter.
By mid-1985 Freddie was beginning to settle down with Jim, and had already begun plotting to abandon Munich and move into the Garden Lodge.
runner_70 · Member since
The Real Wizard is a Brian May sheep who thinks he is shitting golden bricks and always tells the truth. Too bad none of that is true.....
Nathan H · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]runner_70 wrote:[/b]
The Real Wizard is a Brian May sheep who thinks he is shitting golden bricks and always tells the truth. Too bad none of that is true.....[/QUOTE]
Can you prove it then? The Real Wizard has got more credibility then you.
JS21 · Member since
@Real Wizard:
We have to go by what was told by the Queen members in interviews and Magazines and nowhere any of them mentioned they broke up at any point. None of us exactly know what happened unless you have first hand information from Brian or Roger or John or Jim Beach? Else, Let one of them come out categorically and say it. Brian May himself said it is a movie and it is not a documentary. Now are we saying that we should believe the movie rather than documentary?
According to interviews given by different members of band, Queen were breaking up all the time , not just Freddie, even Brian, Roger and John at different point in time. John even wrote 'I want to break free'. In this interview, Brian May said, “We went through a bad period in Munich” We struggled bitterly with each other. I remember John saying I didn’t play the kind of guitar he wanted on his songs. We all tried leave the band more than once. But then we’d come back to the idea that the band was greater than any of us. It was more enduring than most of our marriages.”
Roger Taylor in a recent Mojo interview when talking about live aid mentions that he went to Freddie's house after live aid and this is what he said.
http://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/music/1153084/Queen-Live-Aid-Anniversary-Roger-Taylor-Freddie-Mercury-band-music-fans-Bohemian-Rhapsody
Q Taylor told Mojo: " There was a point during We Are The Champions where the audience was swaying as one, like a field of wheat, and I thought, 'Oh, OK.'
"I went back to Freddie's later and at some point in the night said, 'You know what, Fred, I think we were really good.'
"It gave us a second wind."
Roger going to Freddie’s house after live aid does not sound like a band breaking up!
In the interview that Freddie gave to SImon Bates in 1985 2 weeks before Live aid, he clearly mentions that he has told the band that he is exhausted after the works tour and his solo project and wants to take a break until December 1985 to make a new Queen album. He clearly says that he is happy with Queen. Listen around 3.09 mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K63qkenvggY
All these interviews tell not about the band breaking up, just taking a break from each other for some time as they did after the end of Hot space tour in 1982 ! Why would they want to break up after live aid after that enormous success? It does not make sense. I believe Freddie’s interview than the movie. In fact I trust all the band member interviews before 1991 and to a certain extent until John Deacon was still part of Queen. Anything after that I am not entirely sure.
2. I don't agree with the ultimatum to Freddie after live aid either. It could have been a frank discussion between 3 colleagues and friends on their future and of course about Paul Prenter but not in the way Movie has portrayed.
Brain May talks about finding about the damage done by paul Prenter in USA, when trying to promote Freddie’s solo album in USA.
“Relations with Radio was not taken care of – we had a new man in charge of Promotion on the road, who, unknown to us at the time, was very high handed and rude with the media people and gave them the impression that we no longer cared. We only later discovered the huge extent of the damage much later, when trying to get Freddie’s solo record played. There was great resentment (radio people, like the rest of us, need to feel loved, and important!), and word of mouth on our tour was distorted by people who now wanted to see us fail”
This is probably when Freddie found out about Prenter’s damage too and that's when Queen decided to fire Prenter but Freddie chose to keep him may be out of loyalty.
3. Another part I don’t agree is about Freddie’s portrayal in the movie.
The movie should have clearly made a distinction about whether it was a completely Freddie movie or a queen movie. If it was a Freddie movie then they should have showed a little bit about his childhood at least. Him being sent away to boarding school at such an young age and seeing his parents only once in 7 years and having to fend for himself, his family’s conservative views, played a major role in shaping of his character, good and bad.
If it was a queen movie, they should have shown faults of all characters. All of them had tantrums not just Freddie. All had strong egos. Ofcourse, Freddie said he threw a lot of tantrums in early career, as he believed that’s how rockstars behaved. But are we saying that Brian or Roger or John never threw a fit and were well behaved all the time in their entire career!
http://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/episode-1-peter-hince-queen/id1481579080?i=1000451437667
Peter Hince in a recent podcast, mentioned 'Freddie and Brian fought all the time but movie showed they never fought and Brian comes off as an angel'. He also said Brain once wanted his garden rubbish taken out! He clearly says the script bears no relevance to what had happened. It was cruel to show Freddie thrown out of the band and had to ask the band if he can join them for live aid. He said it was complete bollocks (his words).
In another interview, he said, “People talk about Freddie and his ego, but his ego was not as big as people think. It was all a persona. He could make fun of himself, whereas some of the other guys in the band couldn’t do it in the same way. You could have a laugh with Freddie, but you knew were the line was. He wasn’t necessarily the prima donna that everybody thought he was.”
http://www.loudersound.com/features/what-freddie-mercury-was-really-like-an-insider-s-story
Fred Mandel and Spike Edney also echo the same thing. Fred Mandel in a podcast said he would not have anyone talk bad about Freddie. Yes Freddie had his wild ways but by all accounts by 1984 he had sobered down.
http://kesq.com/news/2019/11/04/queen-keyboardist-talks-bohemian-rhapsody-film-rami-malek/
Edney said his Queen band mates were all characters and quick workers. He remembers them all having their own opinions and defending their corners, as is seen in the film, but it was usually Freddie Mercury who had the last word. "The Freddie Mercury I knew was all professional and a fun man to be around. I didn't see the sort of deep insecurity that this film portrays," said Edney. He also mentions that by 1984 he had sobered down and was playing trivial pursuit with him and others during off time!
So it was not all Freddie’s ego, there were creative tensions, big egos of all 4 of them. Per Hince, all of them took drugs except Brian May. But he also said none of them were ever unprofessional !
Showing Roger as an idiot is a lot different than showing some one as the sole destroyer of Queen. I used the word destroyer as that was the word used by some in the comments section about the movie ' Freddie destroyed Queen'. Please tell me if this is a fair judgement of Freddie. Not all of them who watched the movie would go on to read about Queen history. Heck, Lot of the Adam Lambert fans who follow Q+AL, still don't know or care about Queen history even after 10 years! But this unfair perception of Freddie will stay in their minds forever.
Reg. Pete Brown incident, Freddie did throw stuff by his own account and told by David Wigg, John Reid. But I doubt if Freddie was that violent so as to throw stuff at someone and seriously injure them. Here is what probably might have happened. Freddie probably threw a mirror in the wall or somewhere which might have accidentally hit him slightly and caused an injury and he might have exaggerated it a bit for effect.
Anyway, who in their right mind would talk flippantly if they were smashed on their head by a huge mirror and also tell Freddie told him to pick up the pieces afterwards? Did he have a huge gash in his head after the incident? Was there any photos of him with injury or anyone else corroborating th
JS21 · Member since
Smashing a huge mirror on someone’s head would cause serious injury to head or his face. It is not something to be flippantly talked about! If it had happened as he described, it is serious and Freddie is absolutely wrong in doing that. Freddie is not here to defend himself either! Is Pete Brown the guy who pushed the ice sculpture down in News of the World Documentary. He seems like ‘quite a character’.
c. Before the release of the movie, In the first bbc interview given by Brian, in March 2018, Brian is clearly nervous in my opinion, about the reaction to the movie which made him say 'I hope we don't come across badly' and ‘"This is an interesting experience for Roger and me because we have so little power. To get the movie made you basically sign away all your control." What could have made him say that they don’t come across very badly. It makes me believe that clearly they knew that somethings were not right!
http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-43581609
But as the movie became successful,their statements changed too!
But I do believe Brian and Roger to a certain extent when they say they did not have as much control as they were only musical producers. I blame Jim Beach though as he was one of the producers and would have had more say in how the movie turned out. As executor of Freddie's will and the fact that he was given cart blanche to do whatever with Freddie's work, he let Freddie down in my opinion in more ways than one ('Barcelona 2012, Never boring' etc ) .
I totally appreciate John stepping away from it all. He knows he will have to answer questions about Freddie and he knows how the music business works and how people turn and twist statements and Freddie is not here to defend himself against anything and probably decided not to speak at all !
PS: I enjoy your queenlive.ca site very much. Thank you for the same. Apologize for the long post.
brENsKi · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]JS21 wrote:[/b]c. Before the release of the movie, In the first bbc interview given by Brian, in March 2018, Brian is clearly nervous in my opinion, about the reaction to the movie which made him say 'I hope we don't come across badly' and ‘"This is an interesting experience for Roger and me because we have so little power. To get the movie made you basically sign away all your control." What could have made him say that they don’t come across very badly. It makes me believe that clearly they knew that somethings were not right! [/QUOTE]
or possibly...just possibly mind, they knew that the harsh reality laid bare for all to see might shatter a few illusions and therefore, be an impossible pill for some to swallow?
there's also the uncomfortable issue of movie making "signing away control" can result in a huge amount of dirty laundry being seen in public.
i don't know, just putting that out there for consideration.
brENsKi · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Saint Jiub wrote:[/b]During Ringo's and George's snits, the rest of the band continued to record.
Ringo was greeted with flowers upon returning from his two week hiatus. George was gone for 5 days before the band convinced him to return. Water over the bridge ... for a little while ...
There was not a genuine break up until John finally filed the "divorce papers" after completing Abbey Road, and then Paul confirmed months later.[/QUOTE]
sorry, but you have this wrong.. you can't say "they didn't really split" just because YOU consider that to be the case. the only intent that matters is that of the departee. every split is a split - even when a band gets back together. okay some splits are permanent (Dec 1970)...but at the time when a member leaves - for all intents and purposes they'd split - and more times that were generally publicized.
Ringo really had left - regardless of how it played out in the short term.
[color=blue][i]"I had definitely left, I couldn’t take it any more. There was no magic and the relationships were terrible. I’d come to a bad spot in life. It could have been paranoia, but I just didn’t feel good – I felt like an outsider. But then I realized that we were all feeling like outsiders, and it just needed me to go around knocking to bring it to a head."[/color][/i]
George was writing more songs at this point, he had an album's worth of solo stuff ready (so much so that by the time ATMP came out - it was a triple LP). He wrote "Wah-Wah" during his brief split. George confirmed that he left:
[color=blue][i]"It never came to blows, but I thought, 'What's the point of this? I'm quite capable of being relatively happy on my own and I'm not able to be happy in this situation. I'm getting out of here.' Everybody had gone through that. Ringo had left at one point. I know John wanted out. It was a very, very difficult, stressful time, and being filmed having a row as well was terrible. I got up and I thought, 'I'm not doing this any more. I'm out of here.'"[/color][/i]
But back on track, Queen definitely split at different points too.
JS21 · Member since
@Brenski - My point about Roger and Brian's comments in the bbc interview was about them worrying that people may blame them for not stopping to correct the errors in movie i.e showing Freddie poorly in some places for which they rightly said immediately they did not have any control over the movie and not for 1 minute the other way that they are telling the truth!
If as you say, they meant to say that movie is the truth, then in the next line, they say they did not have any control in the movie. It does not make sense. why are they then defending themselves?
Sorry I am not able to articulate it properly. Did it make sense?
