Queen have lost all my respect,they are like a kareokee band and its like they are flogging a dead horse now.When John left they should of called it a day out of respect to him and freddie even the die hard fans must be biting a lip now with Pr on vocals and session musicans its a bit of a joke.Had Brian or roger left at the time instead of John do you think queen would of carried on,i dont think so.John was a great bass player and just got on with the job of playing music,He knew when it was over the day Freddie died.Why now are they ruining the great legacy that was queen,they should of started other bands instead of this sham,think about if other great bands like U2,The beatles continued without there 2 main men it would never be the same or half as good.Collaborations with Robbie williams,Five and PR has made this a disgrace and its like they are trying to bleed the queen name for all they money they can get.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
I agree.
Queen should have stopped when Barry Mitchell left. No wait. Queen should've stopped when they stopped being Smile and that plonker Freddie Mercury joined the group.
RIP SMILE 1969 or 1970 or whatever.
RIP SMILE 1969 or 1970 or whatever.
my respect stopped growing when freddie died. Now Q+PR are just it/ w/e take it or leave it. They, personally dont count as Queen to me so thats why im alright with the tour
Amen.
I have to agree with you on that renzo. But then im a roger and brian fan to so ijust think of them as their own band.
I think Queen should stop whenever they run out of petrol, and judging by the current prices, it probably won't be too long.
I totally have to agree with you here. In a lot of ways I see the current tour as a result of their over bloated egos. I mean, I think that Brian and Roger may actually think that they constitute Queen! It is about time that real Queen fans complain about this sleazy tour.
I can't believe you are comparing Queen and/or The Beatles to U2.
I agree, Queen should have stopped when John left. However, I do agree mostly with the tour, because I see nothing wrong with two musicians who want to keep doing what they do best before arthritis sinks in. I suppose my full support to it could only be given if they changed their name to like "Royal Company" or something.
I make it a rule never to agree with people unable to use basic grammar and punctuation.
You should HAVE listened when your teacher taught English.
You should HAVE listened when your teacher taught English.
I find it a ludicrous discussion.
Ok, point blank - this isn't Queen. Freddie's dead, John's retired, whatever.
But I believe you people have an almighty gall to say that two of the people that *made* Queen what it was (and don't tell me it was all Freddie, he was merely their frontman - it was a 4 piece) don't have the right to play the music?
Perhaps their choice of name is questionable, but it's not about the name is it? Who cares??? It's about the music, and you'll always have the old stuff to listen to.
Enjoy it, or shut the hell up.
Ok, point blank - this isn't Queen. Freddie's dead, John's retired, whatever.
But I believe you people have an almighty gall to say that two of the people that *made* Queen what it was (and don't tell me it was all Freddie, he was merely their frontman - it was a 4 piece) don't have the right to play the music?
Perhaps their choice of name is questionable, but it's not about the name is it? Who cares??? It's about the music, and you'll always have the old stuff to listen to.
Enjoy it, or shut the hell up.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I find it a ludicrous discussion.
Ok, point blank - this isn't Queen. Freddie's dead, John's retired, whatever.
But I believe you people have an almighty gall to say that two of the people that *made* Queen what it was (and don't tell me it was all Freddie, he was merely their frontman - it was a 4 piece) don't have the right to play the music?
Perhaps their choice of name is questionable, but it's not about the name is it? Who cares??? It's about the music, and you'll always have the old stuff to listen to.
Enjoy it, or shut the hell up.[/QUOTE]
Here here.
But I think you're going too far off track when you refer to Freddie as "merely their frontman", LOL. Technically, Freddie WAS merely 25% of Queen. Artistically, hmmm, what do we have?
1. Freddie came up with the name 'Queen'
2. Freddie designed the band's logo
3. Freddie wrote all the songs that set Queen apart from every other band
4. Freddie was almost exclusively responsible for the band's reputation as a superb live act.
5. Freddie was solely responsible for the band's reputable appearance at Live Aid
6. Freddie also happened to be the reason why Queen even formed at all
Hmmm, would you still say Freddie was just "merely their frontman"? I mean, you minus those attributes from Queen's history... and what do you have left? A lot less than 75%...
Ok, point blank - this isn't Queen. Freddie's dead, John's retired, whatever.
But I believe you people have an almighty gall to say that two of the people that *made* Queen what it was (and don't tell me it was all Freddie, he was merely their frontman - it was a 4 piece) don't have the right to play the music?
Perhaps their choice of name is questionable, but it's not about the name is it? Who cares??? It's about the music, and you'll always have the old stuff to listen to.
Enjoy it, or shut the hell up.[/QUOTE]
Here here.
But I think you're going too far off track when you refer to Freddie as "merely their frontman", LOL. Technically, Freddie WAS merely 25% of Queen. Artistically, hmmm, what do we have?
1. Freddie came up with the name 'Queen'
2. Freddie designed the band's logo
3. Freddie wrote all the songs that set Queen apart from every other band
4. Freddie was almost exclusively responsible for the band's reputation as a superb live act.
5. Freddie was solely responsible for the band's reputable appearance at Live Aid
6. Freddie also happened to be the reason why Queen even formed at all
Hmmm, would you still say Freddie was just "merely their frontman"? I mean, you minus those attributes from Queen's history... and what do you have left? A lot less than 75%...
I say carry on touring, lol that would make a good carry on film with brian and roger lol, i want a liza minelli & queen tour after the paul rodgers one
"But I think you're going too far off track when you refer to Freddie as "merely their frontman", LOL. Technically, Freddie WAS merely 25% of Queen. Artistically, hmmm, what do we have?
1. Freddie came up with the name 'Queen'
2. Freddie designed the band's logo
3. Freddie wrote all the songs that set Queen apart from every other band
4. Freddie was almost exclusively responsible for the band's reputation as a superb live act.
5. Freddie was solely responsible for the band's reputable appearance at Live Aid
6. Freddie also happened to be the reason why Queen even formed at all
Hmmm, would you still say Freddie was just "merely their frontman"? I mean, you minus those attributes from Queen's history... and what do you have left? A lot less than 75%... "
Well no. See, the behind the scenes operation of it all... it really was a 4 way thing. We only got one side of the picture, which was this amazing double-sided personality that Freddie Mercury seemed to put across.
But they maintained that the actual running of the band (not the setting up stuff you mention in points 1 and 2) was largely an equal and democratic (if heavily argued, hehe) thing.
Let's take a look at point 3 : sorry, I don't agree with that. Save Me. Who Wants To Live Forever.
Point number 4 largely consists of their public image, which again was dominated by Freddie's on stage persona.
My point was that behind the scenes, it was 25% all around; at best, 30 for Freddie :D
And him 'merely' being a frontman doesn't diminish his big time role in the group, it just means that it was his job to be the focus, to appear to be the leader.
Coming back to this:
"Hmmm, would you still say Freddie was just "merely their frontman"?"
Yes, yes I would! He was a frontman who wrote songs, delivered bigtime performances that kicked arse, but let's not get ahead of ourselves - I wasn't talking about the image that the band put across, I was talking about the day-to-day running of things, the behind the scenes stuff that we didn't really see often.
I'd say you just misunderstood me. :D
1. Freddie came up with the name 'Queen'
2. Freddie designed the band's logo
3. Freddie wrote all the songs that set Queen apart from every other band
4. Freddie was almost exclusively responsible for the band's reputation as a superb live act.
5. Freddie was solely responsible for the band's reputable appearance at Live Aid
6. Freddie also happened to be the reason why Queen even formed at all
Hmmm, would you still say Freddie was just "merely their frontman"? I mean, you minus those attributes from Queen's history... and what do you have left? A lot less than 75%... "
Well no. See, the behind the scenes operation of it all... it really was a 4 way thing. We only got one side of the picture, which was this amazing double-sided personality that Freddie Mercury seemed to put across.
But they maintained that the actual running of the band (not the setting up stuff you mention in points 1 and 2) was largely an equal and democratic (if heavily argued, hehe) thing.
Let's take a look at point 3 : sorry, I don't agree with that. Save Me. Who Wants To Live Forever.
Point number 4 largely consists of their public image, which again was dominated by Freddie's on stage persona.
My point was that behind the scenes, it was 25% all around; at best, 30 for Freddie :D
And him 'merely' being a frontman doesn't diminish his big time role in the group, it just means that it was his job to be the focus, to appear to be the leader.
Coming back to this:
"Hmmm, would you still say Freddie was just "merely their frontman"?"
Yes, yes I would! He was a frontman who wrote songs, delivered bigtime performances that kicked arse, but let's not get ahead of ourselves - I wasn't talking about the image that the band put across, I was talking about the day-to-day running of things, the behind the scenes stuff that we didn't really see often.
I'd say you just misunderstood me. :D