[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Dan Corson II: The Revenge! wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Dan Corson II: The Revenge! wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Brian and Roger are kidding themselves if they think this new Queen + PR act is something fans TRULY want. Nobody wants that.[/QUOTE]I'm a fan, and I TRULY want it.[/QUOTE]
Yeah sure. Let's see what happens when the new album is released ok?
If you are right, then Queen will sell MILLIONS of copies of the new album.
if you are wrong, then Queen's latest album will be a failure.
The people will speak with their wallets, and I think most people will say NO!
[/QUOTE]How could I be wrong when I say *I* want something? By the way I never said it would be successful or sell millions of copies. I just said that I wanted it. I could give two shits if anyone else does. When the new album is released, I'll own it and will no doubt enjoy it. [/QUOTE]
Because the original assertion was that most FANS do not want NEW material, or attend concerts to see Paul Rogers sing classic Queen songs. They go because of nostlagia, and love for the band's past.
Just because YOU say YOU want new albums proves nothing.
What would prove anything is if the next album is a success!
If, in the entire world, only YOU happen to buy it, are you still going to sit there and argue the point? You'll probably listen to it once, or twice, and conclude it is not a Queen album.
Paul Rogers + Brian May + Roger Taylor will never been Queen.
[/QUOTE]
That's all well and good, but you KNOW I wasn't talking about the 'original assertion'. I replied to your comment to me. You know, where I said I was a fan and that I wanted it, and you said I was wrong and all that? I just wanted to point out how absurd that statement was.
As far as this being a Queen album or not, it's not. It's a Queen + Paul Rodgers album. Will it be less successful than a Queen album? No doubt. Does that make it bad? Not necessarily. But instead of freaking out about the name, why not just focus on the music? You may be quite surprised.
I mean, if there is a song on the album about how they've replaced John and Freddie, and how they've hired Paul as the new singer of Queen (NOT Queen + Paul Rodgers) then yes, I could see where all the negative attention is coming from. However, to go postal over a name is just unfair. Most fans that I've talked to actually DO want to see them live and hear new material. And a few of them have been fans since the get go.
I can't pretend to know what Freddie and John would say about it, and frankly, I don't care. Freddie's been dead almost sixteen years, while John has made it quite clear that he's done and has been for nearly ten years. On the other hand, Brian and Roger want to continue working. It's unfair to bash them for wanting to go on and use the name the four of them created TOGETHER. They've moved on, and I think it's time we all did the same. Queen's 'legacy' is fine, and Brian and Roger have done, for the most part, a damn fine job keeping it that way.
As far Paul Rodgers, I never really cared for him one way or the other. He had a few songs I liked and that was it. But I have to say, he has impressed me quite a bit. Seeing him go on stage with Queen and pulling off a great show was something I really never would have expected. I went from being VERY skeptical to being a convert. If they work that well together live, I think the album could be fantastic.
The simple fact is that they are good musicians. It sucks to see Queen + Paul Rodgers getting the same treatment from Queen fans that Queen always got from the music press. There IS a real chemistry there, and to try and deny them the right to explore that chemistry, no matter what the name, is selfish.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Why stop at just one Freddie imitator?
Get four or five of them. WOW!
Imagine the orgiastic waves of pleasure you will have being awash in all that Freddie-ness.
Wait!
Even better idea!
Hand out Freddie masks to all the concert-goers.
That way you can see a smiling likeness of Freddie staring back at you every moment you turn your head.
It would be divine. A meta-Queen experience for sure.
Far better than a re-interpretation of great music with some bluesy bloke.
Get four or five of them. WOW!
Imagine the orgiastic waves of pleasure you will have being awash in all that Freddie-ness.
Wait!
Even better idea!
Hand out Freddie masks to all the concert-goers.
That way you can see a smiling likeness of Freddie staring back at you every moment you turn your head.
It would be divine. A meta-Queen experience for sure.
Far better than a re-interpretation of great music with some bluesy bloke.
"Brian and Roger want to continue working. It's unfair to bash them for wanting to go on and use the name the four of them created TOGETHER."
That's ridiculous. It's more than fair. In the real world it's considered laughable that Queen still exists in some way. When the general public think of Queen, they think firstly of Freddie Mercury. That's something I agree is unfair, but I can't deny it. If proof is needed compare sales of Fred's 60th Birthday compilation to Queen+.
Again, try thinking of the Beatles reforming with a couple of ring ins. What's the difference?
That's ridiculous. It's more than fair. In the real world it's considered laughable that Queen still exists in some way. When the general public think of Queen, they think firstly of Freddie Mercury. That's something I agree is unfair, but I can't deny it. If proof is needed compare sales of Fred's 60th Birthday compilation to Queen+.
Again, try thinking of the Beatles reforming with a couple of ring ins. What's the difference?
I say let them go for it.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Paul Rogers is not a great vocalist
[/QUOTE]
Ok. I was kinda getting part of your point and thought there was some kind of valid argument over here but that phrase made me stop paying attention.
Let's say there was a singer almost as "good" as Freddie and sounded almost exactly like him. Mmmm, well, maybe they could have reformed Queen with him and (who knows?) maybe have some success. But I think that in order to be a real band this new person has to "jell" and get together with the other musicians.
You just can't expect Brian and Roger to write songs like if they were for Freddie and have this sound-a-like sing them. Queen was a tight unit and (particulary in their last years) collaborated with one another.
Having Gary Mullen or any other Freddie impersonator singing with Queen and PRETENDING to be Freddie would be A JOKE! Simply ridiculous, sorry. Paul is a very good singer with a style on his own. He also plays piano and guitar and writes.
In the future everyone will have an opinion about this album. Some will like it, some won't. I think Queen in their heyday did pretty much everything different from what the general public expected from them and this is just more of the same.
Did they ditch Brian when he fell sick in 74?
Did they release a 3 minute radio friendly song as their lead single for ANATO in 75?
Did they decide against releasing Champions because people might be offended by it?
Did they break up after Sun City?
They were always surprising their audience, doing things differently. Freddie might not be around but the Queen spirit carries on with Brian and Roger and the fans, and this spirit drives them. I prefer they GO ON AND CREATE SOMETHING NEW than sit on their asses and count their millions, which they are entitled to do but I still prefer they do something else.
I am extremely grateful to Paul Rodgers for being able to bring that spark and excitement back into Brian and Roger's eyes and taking them on the road.
Sorry for the long post.. :S
Wiley
[/QUOTE]
Ok. I was kinda getting part of your point and thought there was some kind of valid argument over here but that phrase made me stop paying attention.
Let's say there was a singer almost as "good" as Freddie and sounded almost exactly like him. Mmmm, well, maybe they could have reformed Queen with him and (who knows?) maybe have some success. But I think that in order to be a real band this new person has to "jell" and get together with the other musicians.
You just can't expect Brian and Roger to write songs like if they were for Freddie and have this sound-a-like sing them. Queen was a tight unit and (particulary in their last years) collaborated with one another.
Having Gary Mullen or any other Freddie impersonator singing with Queen and PRETENDING to be Freddie would be A JOKE! Simply ridiculous, sorry. Paul is a very good singer with a style on his own. He also plays piano and guitar and writes.
In the future everyone will have an opinion about this album. Some will like it, some won't. I think Queen in their heyday did pretty much everything different from what the general public expected from them and this is just more of the same.
Did they ditch Brian when he fell sick in 74?
Did they release a 3 minute radio friendly song as their lead single for ANATO in 75?
Did they decide against releasing Champions because people might be offended by it?
Did they break up after Sun City?
They were always surprising their audience, doing things differently. Freddie might not be around but the Queen spirit carries on with Brian and Roger and the fans, and this spirit drives them. I prefer they GO ON AND CREATE SOMETHING NEW than sit on their asses and count their millions, which they are entitled to do but I still prefer they do something else.
I am extremely grateful to Paul Rodgers for being able to bring that spark and excitement back into Brian and Roger's eyes and taking them on the road.
Sorry for the long post.. :S
Wiley
I have a question,
hang on, it'll come to me one day...heh heh heh, come...
oh yeah,
Why did they get someone old and with evil eyes?
why not Felix?
hang on, it'll come to me one day...heh heh heh, come...
oh yeah,
Why did they get someone old and with evil eyes?
why not Felix?
Let's try looking at this the otherway; if Brian or Roger or passed away (we'll not consider John because he probably would've opted out anyways), how easy would it be to replace one of them and carry on as Queen if the remiaing two wanted to? Would people be screaming that (insert a name) isn't Roger Taylor? I'm sure some fans would be pissed, but I'll venture the majority would be OK with it. When it comes to Brian, I'm sure they'd find someone to imitate his sound quite well. I'll guess about 60 % of Queen fans would say it was OK, at least while touring on a sort of Greatest Hits tour. But the minute they decided to head into the studio, well there's where fans would be divided about the new sound that would inevitably be made by Brian's absence and his replacement's contribution (or lack there of). Also, Freddie and Roger would probably "dominate" any replacement because the dynamics of the band power would shift by neccessity. As a matter of fact, consider how divided Queen fans are at each album anyways? I mean everytime they changed their sound, they angered some fans and gained new ones. Once the album is released, we can each judge it on it's own merits.
Freddie is the most important part of the Band. He is irreplaceable.
Why? Because of his voice. Queen was about great vocals, and great live shows. You can't have that if Freddie is gone.
In the past, we'd hear things from Queen like, "We're 4 equal members". I think such statements were made because at the time, they did function like 4 equal members, but in reality, they were never equal. Freddie's death proves that Freddie was more equal than the others.
So, as long as Freddie was in the band, losing Brian, Roger, or John could be overcome, I believe. But if you lose the lead singer, then the band is gone, forever.
Remember when Freddie said, "The reason for our success? My overall charisma!". I think that is a very true statement.
Why? Because of his voice. Queen was about great vocals, and great live shows. You can't have that if Freddie is gone.
In the past, we'd hear things from Queen like, "We're 4 equal members". I think such statements were made because at the time, they did function like 4 equal members, but in reality, they were never equal. Freddie's death proves that Freddie was more equal than the others.
So, as long as Freddie was in the band, losing Brian, Roger, or John could be overcome, I believe. But if you lose the lead singer, then the band is gone, forever.
Remember when Freddie said, "The reason for our success? My overall charisma!". I think that is a very true statement.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Wiley wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I am extremely grateful to Paul Rodgers for being able to bring that spark and excitement back into Brian and Roger's eyes and taking them on the road[/QUOTE]Amen!!!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
In the past, we'd hear things from Queen like, "We're 4 equal members". I think such statements were made because at the time, they did function like 4 equal members, but in reality, they were never equal. Freddie's death proves that Freddie was more equal than the others.
[/QUOTE]
That doesn't make sense to me-how did his passing prove he was "more equal"? I'm not saying he can be replaced, I just don't see his death as proving what you're claiming.
In the past, we'd hear things from Queen like, "We're 4 equal members". I think such statements were made because at the time, they did function like 4 equal members, but in reality, they were never equal. Freddie's death proves that Freddie was more equal than the others.
[/QUOTE]
That doesn't make sense to me-how did his passing prove he was "more equal"? I'm not saying he can be replaced, I just don't see his death as proving what you're claiming.
Freddie's death was also the end of Queen, signifying the greater importance of Freddie Mercury to the band's existence compared to the other members. Losing any other member would not have the same effect. Since Freddie's death, I think most fans have come to realize that Freddie's importance was so high that he was an irreplaceable member of Queen, whose passing also meant the end of Queen.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Freddie's death was also the end of Queen, signifying the greater importance of Freddie Mercury to the band's existence compared to the other members. Losing any other member would not have the same effect. Since Freddie's death, I think most fans have come to realize that Freddie's importance was so high that he was an irreplaceable member of Queen, whose passing also meant the end of Queen.
[/QUOTE]
I understand what you're saying, however, we knew of Freddie's greatness long before his death. The problem I have with what you said is that his death did not signify the end of Queen. It didn't. It was the end of a chapter. I don't know Freddie, and I definitely never met him, but if I were in a band and I passed away I wouldn't want to see the band I worked so hard on to just "give up." If you're lover passed away, would you really want to see him/her never to love again? I'm merely stating an opinion.
About you and your idea of an "impersonater" filling the role of Freddie Mercury: What the fuck? Can't you see that would make a lot of fans very upset? I'm happy that Queen(Brian and Roger) found somebody like Paul Rodgers. To me, he isn't filling the role of Freddie Mercury, rather he is collaborating with Queen (and yes, I have no problem with them using the name). This isn't the first time Queen has ever collaborated which I'm sure all of you are aware. Only, this is the first time the band made a collaboration involving a full album and tours.
Believe what you want to believe, I'm not here to fight with you. You just need to realize that Brian May and Roger Taylor have a right to use the Queen name, that Paul Rodgers is a great singer, that an impersonater is not what Queen needs, and that an impersonater could actually kill Queen. If I'm being honest, it's a retarded idea. An impersonater? Ha!!!
[/QUOTE]
I understand what you're saying, however, we knew of Freddie's greatness long before his death. The problem I have with what you said is that his death did not signify the end of Queen. It didn't. It was the end of a chapter. I don't know Freddie, and I definitely never met him, but if I were in a band and I passed away I wouldn't want to see the band I worked so hard on to just "give up." If you're lover passed away, would you really want to see him/her never to love again? I'm merely stating an opinion.
About you and your idea of an "impersonater" filling the role of Freddie Mercury: What the fuck? Can't you see that would make a lot of fans very upset? I'm happy that Queen(Brian and Roger) found somebody like Paul Rodgers. To me, he isn't filling the role of Freddie Mercury, rather he is collaborating with Queen (and yes, I have no problem with them using the name). This isn't the first time Queen has ever collaborated which I'm sure all of you are aware. Only, this is the first time the band made a collaboration involving a full album and tours.
Believe what you want to believe, I'm not here to fight with you. You just need to realize that Brian May and Roger Taylor have a right to use the Queen name, that Paul Rodgers is a great singer, that an impersonater is not what Queen needs, and that an impersonater could actually kill Queen. If I'm being honest, it's a retarded idea. An impersonater? Ha!!!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote:[/QUOTENAME]
Paul Rogers + Brian May + Roger Taylor will never been Queen.
[/QUOTE]
A correction is in order.
Queen + Paul Rodgers [notice the spelling is actually correct and is seperate from both Brian May and Roger Taylor (aka Queen)] is in fact a collaboration between two (not one) very good artists.
There is no, and I repeat, no replacement. [just making it clear of my opinion]
Now, carry on...
Paul Rogers + Brian May + Roger Taylor will never been Queen.
[/QUOTE]
A correction is in order.
Queen + Paul Rodgers [notice the spelling is actually correct and is seperate from both Brian May and Roger Taylor (aka Queen)] is in fact a collaboration between two (not one) very good artists.
There is no, and I repeat, no replacement. [just making it clear of my opinion]
Now, carry on...
Exactly
Queen + Paul Rodgers will always be Queen + Paul Rodgers.
It's very simple.
Queen + Paul Rodgers will always be Queen + Paul Rodgers.
It's very simple.
[QUOTE]
I understand what you're saying, however, we knew of Freddie's greatness long before his death. The problem I have with what you said is that his death did not signify the end of Queen. It didn't. It was the end of a chapter.
[/QUOTE]
Like the end of any book, Freddie's death was in fact, the end of the final, and last chapter for the band. What else can you call it when the last Real Queen album was over 15 years ago? Made In Heaven's status as a real Queen album is debateable since it was released after Freddie's death, and much of the content was rehashed songs that were never released under Queen name.
Queen is, whether you like it or not, dead since 1991.
Just because Brian and Roger chose to resurrect the name Queen doesn't mean it's Queen. In what way is Queen + PR Queen? 50% of the original members is no longer there!
[QUOTE]
I don't know Freddie, and I definitely never met him, but if I were in a band and I passed away I wouldn't want to see the band I worked so hard on to just "give up." If you're lover passed away, would you really want to see him/her never to love again? I'm merely stating an opinion.
[/QUOTE]
Your statement about the lover is illogical. If your gf or wife died, you can have another wife or gf.
But would you call your new gf / wife the same name as your former wife?
Would you expect your family and friends to also think your new gf/wife is your old gf/wife?
I think not!
[QUOTE]
About you and your idea of an "impersonater" filling the role of Freddie Mercury: What the fuck? Can't you see that would make a lot of fans very upset?
[/QUOTE]
If Brian and Roger found a singer who sounded 95% like Freddie, I don't think most fans would mind at all! I think they'd be really happy to hear a voice as good as Freddies singing Queen songs!
I understand what you're saying, however, we knew of Freddie's greatness long before his death. The problem I have with what you said is that his death did not signify the end of Queen. It didn't. It was the end of a chapter.
[/QUOTE]
Like the end of any book, Freddie's death was in fact, the end of the final, and last chapter for the band. What else can you call it when the last Real Queen album was over 15 years ago? Made In Heaven's status as a real Queen album is debateable since it was released after Freddie's death, and much of the content was rehashed songs that were never released under Queen name.
Queen is, whether you like it or not, dead since 1991.
Just because Brian and Roger chose to resurrect the name Queen doesn't mean it's Queen. In what way is Queen + PR Queen? 50% of the original members is no longer there!
[QUOTE]
I don't know Freddie, and I definitely never met him, but if I were in a band and I passed away I wouldn't want to see the band I worked so hard on to just "give up." If you're lover passed away, would you really want to see him/her never to love again? I'm merely stating an opinion.
[/QUOTE]
Your statement about the lover is illogical. If your gf or wife died, you can have another wife or gf.
But would you call your new gf / wife the same name as your former wife?
Would you expect your family and friends to also think your new gf/wife is your old gf/wife?
I think not!
[QUOTE]
About you and your idea of an "impersonater" filling the role of Freddie Mercury: What the fuck? Can't you see that would make a lot of fans very upset?
[/QUOTE]
If Brian and Roger found a singer who sounded 95% like Freddie, I don't think most fans would mind at all! I think they'd be really happy to hear a voice as good as Freddies singing Queen songs!