[QUOTE] [b]runner_70 wrote:[/b]They split with Paul on common agreement. The band itself did not split because of Paul. Don t believe the May lies[/QUOTE]
Both sides are trying to take credit for getting the band back together, but I couldn't give a flying f*** who did or who is lying.
where both sides of the argument agree on one single point, then it must be true. Prenter's side and the band's side have confirmed that the band split. therefore, the band definitely broke up.
runner_70 · Member since
How can the band split up when they were almost constantly touring in 1984/1985???? Do you ever read a Queen biography Tourdates or justsuck up what Maylor offer?
runner_70 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]
[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]
The Real Wizard, along with one or two other contributors to the forum know a lot more than you know or even understand.
You saying it didn't happen, it didn't happen, I've got no proof but it didn't happen etc etc is far less credible than someone saying in this time frame this might have happened or even this happened because. . . . [/QUOTE]
When May says "yes it is right we did not tour for ages before Live Aid yes it was actually true" all I do is remembering the 1984/1985 tour schedule look up a book or queenconcerts.com and I have plain proof that the guy is a pathetic liar. The last Works concert was in Osaka May 15th 1985 - Live Aid was on July 13th 1985 so not even 2 months in between.
When I look at the solo discography I see that May had a solo EP out and Roger had 2 solo albums out before Freddie started Mr Bad Guy.. All three Queen members helped Freddie during the production and there are pictures of May (and I think Taylor as well) who were the first Freddie played his album after it was finished. Far away from the BLATANT LIE that Freddie broke up the band due to his solo project - Utter Maylor bullshit.
Only 2 of maybe more than a dozen blatant lies on Freddie's expense. And it has nothing to do with "artistic freedom "Bullshit. It was a deliberate try to rewrite Queen history and to make Maylor look like saints.
What is so hard to understand??????
Anyone believing this bullshit from those two liars is a sheep not a fan
Nathan H · Member since
But the point the film was trying to get at was that during The Works Tour they really weren't happy. They probably would've wanted a break or even end the band if they didn't have a contract to complete the tour. If Live Aid didn't happen, the reality probably would've been it for Queen they really needed re-energising and thankfully it happened at the right time.
AlbaNo1 · Member since
The movie portrayed Freddie as being a bit soft when splitting from Mary. Portrayed him without any of the humour or charisma that comes across in his interviews. And portrayed him as the wayward, egotistical one. Brian’s role was that of the anchor and the voice of reason.
We pretty much know that a lot of the band arguments were Freddie vs Brian . And Roger vs Brian. Even after Freddie had gone we know it was Roger &John vs Brian.But we don’t see what drove those.
For sure this movie seems almost like it was from Brian’s perspective, however limited his official contribution is claimed to be.
runner_70 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]AlbaNo1 wrote:[/b]
The movie portrayed Freddie as being a bit soft when splitting from Mary. Portrayed him without any of the humour or charisma that comes across in his interviews. And portrayed him as the wayward, egotistical one. Brian’s role was that of the anchor and the voice of reason.
We pretty much know that a lot of the band arguments were Freddie vs Brian . And Roger vs Brian. Even after Freddie had gone we know it was Roger &John vs Brian.But we don’t see what drove those.
For sure this movie seems almost like it was from Brian’s perspective, however limited his official contribution is claimed to be.
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely - I would call it "Brian's Revenge". Just plain proof of his lifelong rivalry and Jealousy towards Freddie
Man from Zanzibar · Member since
In the theatrical version they didn't even show a bit of The Works '84-85 tour at all, only shooting of IWTBF music video and subsequent argument, which boils down to two points - "Fuck MTV and fuck the US" (rightfully so) and Freddie's "I want to go solo". And then...? Nothing. Before the Live AID there was that ridiculous line by "Movie Roger" - "But we haven't played together in years!".
Yeah, fuck this revisionist movie.
. · Member since
I'm glad I haven't seen the film, and I have no plans to.
Vocal harmony · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]runner_70 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Vocal harmony wrote:[/b]
[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]
The Real Wizard, along with one or two other contributors to the forum know a lot more than you know or even understand.
You saying it didn't happen, it didn't happen, I've got no proof but it didn't happen etc etc is far less credible than someone saying in this time frame this might have happened or even this happened because. . . . [/QUOTE]
When May says "yes it is right we did not tour for ages before Live Aid yes it was actually true" all I do is remembering the 1984/1985 tour schedule look up a book or queenconcerts.com and I have plain proof that the guy is a pathetic liar. The last Works concert was in Osaka May 15th 1985 - Live Aid was on July 13th 1985 so not even 2 months in between.
When I look at the solo discography I see that May had a solo EP out and Roger had 2 solo albums out before Freddie started Mr Bad Guy.. All three Queen members helped Freddie during the production and there are pictures of May (and I think Taylor as well) who were the first Freddie played his album after it was finished. Far away from the BLATANT LIE that Freddie broke up the band due to his solo project - Utter Maylor bullshit.
Only 2 of maybe more than a dozen blatant lies on Freddie's expense. And it has nothing to do with "artistic freedom "Bullshit. It was a deliberate try to rewrite Queen history and to make Maylor look like saints.
What is so hard to understand??????
Anyone believing this bullshit from those two liars is a sheep not a fan[/QUOTE]
Roger's two albums, at the time contained material he'd written but felt didn't fit the Queen framework. He recorded both without the huge advance Freddie was given, and were true solo albums in that he not only wrote but also played most of the instruments. Those two albums were obviously him giving himself free rein and the space to have fun.
Brian's EP really was a weekend jam with some mates that was fashioned into a release. Neither Brian or Roger were aiming big or competing with their own band.
Freddie was given a huge advance, which he, Paul Prenter and Jim Beach looked for. Mr Bad Guy had a huge marketing budget ad was aiming for huge sales.
It wasn't just a solo album, it was a major campaign, one that he was hoping would lead to a Michael Jackson type of career. He failed. He might have played it to the band, it doesn't mean they liked it or thought it was good. . . Who really knows. What a lot of people seem to have forgotten or maybe not registered was an interview at the time of Mr Bad Guy in which Freddie says ( excuse the paraphrasing ) it's time for a change and by that I mean leaving the band!
Yes the dates you quote are a fact, what you don't know is that the second half of The Works Tour was probably a band who had all but split and were fulfilling a contractual obligation.
Dougie 4 · Member since
Movie is a waste if time, very badly written. You don't have to flat out lie like they did in the movie to make it dramatic or an interesting watch. Quite a betrayal of Freddie who is dead and not there to veto
JS21 · Member since
@VocalHarmony
Can you please share the source where Freddie said ''It is time for change' ? I have seen Musical Prostitute interview where he talks about his solo project and he mentions that he feels time has come for him to do a whole album of his own since Roger and Brian have already done solo albums. Even in Mary Turner interview in 1984 he says he loves touring with queen and he says he doesn't have any aspiration to go on stage with out them.
Jim Beach negotiated the deal for Freddie and I don't think even Freddie expected to be paid such a large advance! Is it Freddie's fault that he got a huge advance? When you were paid a large advance why not use some for Marketing it ? what is wrong with that?
I have seen videos of both Roger and Brian going on TV in USA and UK for promoting their solo albums. I have seen music videos of their solo albums too.
Similar to Roger, Freddie wanted to do material that did not fit the Queen framework. He even said in SImon Bates interview the same calling MBG as 'Hotspace 2' Why should it be different for Freddie?
The fact is Roger and Brian did have solo albums before Freddie which cannot be disputed. Movie completely ignored it .
Thriller was a huge success and was a benchmark for all artistes at that time ! What is wrong in setting a high benchmark or goal when setting out to do your first solo album? Whether you achieve or not is a different matter.
I don't understand why it is being mocked at. Even Queen when they started out wanted to achieve what Led Zeppelin achieved and they did not attain it in their first album. But it was a goal worth setting.
Yes MBG was not successful as it was his first project outside of queen his comfort zone without his colleagues. He is not a multi instrumentalist like Brian or Roger or John to do a complete album by himself. He had to rely on session musicians for whom working him would have been new as well. He also had to juggle with Works album, Works tour while was doing MBG. Why not cut him some slack ? He learnt from the experience and made a great album in 'Barcelona' collaborating with Mike Moran.
Yes I agree by the second leg of the works tour the enthusiasm had waned for the band. Jealousy can play havoc to in relationships. People always only talk about Freddie acting arrogant or being a diva. People seem to forget other band members are strong individuals having strong egos too not giving an inch of their quarter, fighting for their corner. The fact that Freddie was paid a huge advance more than even Queen album could have made other band members act differently too and hence all of them were just going thru the motions during 2nd leg of Works tour.
brENsKi · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]JS21 wrote:[/b]The fact is Roger and Brian did have solo albums before Freddie which cannot be disputed. Movie completely ignored it .[/QUOTE]
I think you've maybe missed the point here.
Roger and Brian could've had a dozen million-selling solo LPs - they'd still be completely irrelevant to the movie.
The movie is a [b]Freddie Mercury Biopic[/b] - therefore, Brian and Roger's solo careers, hobbies, socialising, drinking, drug-taking and shagging etc are not - and should not be any significant part of the story.
Star* · Member since
The film was making Freddie out to be the reason Queen may split up when he had his solo album out but Roger and Brian already had solo stuff released before Freddie !
If anything Roger & Brian may have started the fracture within Queen?
JS21 · Member since
@Brenski -
Is it not important information for the viewer to know that he is not the first member from the band to do a solo album from Queen? I think it is definitely important to at least give it a mention.
I also feel they should have shown bits of his childhood to show what shaped Freddie Mercury the person.
brENsKi · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]ST17 wrote:[/b]The film was making Freddie out to be the reason Queen may split up when he had his solo album out but Roger and Brian already had solo stuff released before Freddie !
If anything Roger & Brian may have started the fracture within Queen?[/QUOTE]
It doesn't say for sure. it just makes it clear they fell out (for a while) which they did. And the "advance" for the solo album may have made the others jealous and may have been an underlying factor behind the split...we'll never know.
It didn't actually blame anyone and it didn't claim anything - it left everything open to the viewer's own interpretation - which is fair, and people will interpret it differently - which is also to be expected (it's a piece of art, and art is supposed to be down to the viewer, individually). you can't blame them for how you (or myself, or others) interpret it - that's down to us as individuals.
the situation itself was fairly accurately represented in a vague and blame-free manner.
[QUOTE] [b]JS21 wrote:[/b]@Brenski - Is it not important information for the viewer to know that he is not the first member from the band to do a solo album from Queen? I think it is definitely important to at least give it a mention.
I also feel they should have shown bits of his childhood to show what shaped Freddie Mercury the person. [/QUOTE]
er no. it isn't. if you do that, where do you stop? what other aspects of Brian/Roger/John do we have to include? It's a Freddie Biopic, so the only aspects of the other three (or anyone else) that are relevant, are their direct interaction with Freddie. For example, you wouldn't make a Biopic on (say) Paul McCartney and include a a whole section discussing the fact that Harrison recorded a 3 solo albums first. It's not relevant.
The childhood thing I agree with, but then - where would you go for the anecdotes and details? and how would you corroborate these?
