If Freddie was still alive would Queen still be able to fill stadiums ?

Queen would definetly fill more stadiums. I mean look at all of the fans here. We would all go and they still have millions of fans in 100s of countries.

dragonzflame wrote:

It would surely depend on whether people still liked their music - I'd have to hope like fuck that they didn't follow their disco experimentation a la Hot Space with hip-hop experimentation.

That would be horrible. Just imagine Freddie rapping!

The era of stadium sell outs has pretty much faded for anyone.

I saw dylan play a few years ago at a not-too-huge stadium. They had to shuffle everyone around because they only sold enough to fill the lower level.

Granted, I saw BNL at the same venue and that was sold out so what do I know?

albyboy wrote:

Are we sure that all this interest would have been the same if Freddie hadn't died?

Dunno, but not that sure... Nice points, anyway.

Albyboy

yeah..well...in this case it would definitely depend on the music they'd be making. I am pretty sure they wouldn't have done another Hot Space type of thing, cos in the end none of them was really keen on that.
But there are so many things that we have to consider in this 'what if...' topic...
I mean, look at the music business now and then. It's all changed A LOT, record companies are losing money, record sales are going down, internet downloads are increasing....
These are all influences that also change bands.
They surely wouldn't be the same.

But, also true... who knows what would've happened if Freddie hadn't died.
Sadly enough, many artists celebrate their biggest success after they've died because just then people seem to realize what the world has lost.
Like 'you don't know what you've got till it's gone'...

this 'what if...' thing could go on forever though....

of course!!, they would have to stop playing in stadiums and play in big parks

Definitely!

When Freddie said it would be ridiculous running around a stage when he gets old, I think he probably ment about 70, not 50. And ofcourse they would still fill stadiums. They are up their with The Stones. Second in popularity worldwide only to The Beatles.

They prob'ly could to a point, but I'm sure they'd get sick of it by now (if they had been all along). After all "It's better to burn out than to fade away"

To be perfectly honest. I don't think Queen would still be together today, but if they got together as sort of a one off special, sort of what pink floyd do now, then they definately would fill wembley, the old wembley of course, havn't seen the new one yet, i don't even think it's finished. x

I always that thye would one day do a European tour of castles and stately Homes in some enormo mega tour, play Buckingham Palace, Hampton Court, Longleat etc

Let me start off by saying that Queen was a UNIQUE and ONE OF A KIND band of there ERA, and still are UNIQUE and ONE OF A KIND of today's Day and Age. You can not put them in 2 different Eras which they were not apart of. YES! I do think they would have filled Stadiums if Freddie was still alive and I am speaking in terms of him NOT having Aids! Because I believe that he should have been able to be helped at least to live alitttle longer than he did. I will LOVE QUEEN till my last breath and that is that.

Yep I agree with Sonja.
Look in 70's stadium shows weren't usual, it made it's rise in the 80's and nowadays it i usual to fill at least a 40.000 seater stadium in holland even if it is your first tour (hey britney spears!?).

It mostly has to do with communication and organisation. When Queen played wembley in 86 people had to drive to scotland to get tickets because the tickets were distibuted over the whole UK. there was no digital file base which counted the tickets. So the distibution was very difficult.

So the time makes real changes to the music industrie, e.g. The Beatles I don;t think they'd played over 30.000 at one show!!

I think you compare a 11.000 seated venue whith the nowadays 45.000 seater shows!

And when you compare Queen to the stones: I think Queen would be a lot bigger nowadays because their concert show quality is famous!! And they surely would fill bigger stadiums than the stones!!

Did anyone of you see the new KIT-KAT commercial ? They used WWRY in it, I like it!

I don't think they'd still be going right now. I think they would have called it quits at least five years ago, which would probably have meant they would have only made one more album after Made in Heaven and would have definately done a pre-planned send off tour in the biggest stadiums around (cause that's what they'd need for it). I'm sure as much as we love their songs to death, in turn, they are probably sick to death of playing some of them. I find it amazing that they can still do shows here and there and still play WWRY and Tie Your Mother Down. I love them, but I could care less if I ever hear either of those songs played live again. Too much is too much.

I think Queen could totally fill up stadiums. Besides, if they were touring now they would have old fans and loads of new ones too. There could be generations of happy adoring Queen fans! Oh what a wonderful world it would be!!!!

Biggest Band On The Planet wrote:

U2 they cant fill stadiums anymore.

I beg to differ...

But bringing it back to Queen: that's a tricker question than you may think, really, because there are few bands that even play stadiums anymore (Aerosmith, Bon Jovi come to mind). The whole huge stadium/rock festival thing went out of vogue at the end of the '80s. Today, if a band plays an outdoor venue, it's usually a large park/field area (kinda like Knebworth), but rarely ever a traditional stadium.

I think a large part of the reason for the decline of stadium rock is the decline of the stadiums themselves! So many of the huge venues of the past have fallen in recent years; we all know what happened to Wembley. Here in the US, the backlash is even bigger. The style in the '60s and '70s was for a city to build a multipurpose Astroturf-covered monstrosity in the hopes of attracting more events and cutting the cost of housing multiple pro sports teams by housing them under one roof (so to speak).

That's exactly what happened in Philadelphia with Veterans Stadium. People really hoped to attract big-name acts to the Vet, and there were a few, but by and large musical acts simply chose to play across the street at the Spectrum! The constant complaining of the baseball and football teams that shared the Vet eventually led to new construction for each of them and the implosion of a stadium that was barely 30 years old. The large stadiums were just too impersonal and too obstructive for any type of event (though Freddie often found a way to make everyone feel involved).

This is probably all too analytical for a simple question, but I found it funny how the 70,000-seat monoliths could be rejected in favor of the arena scene as the large-capacity venue of choice in only a few years without an explanation. Perhaps if more acts had put as much effort into their stadium performances as Queen, stadium shows would be much more common today.