Forums > Queen - General Discussion > Pop and Rock review: Queen and Paul Rodgers, The Cosmos Rocks

forum rss feed
Author

mickyparise user not visiting Queenzone.com
mickyparise
Bohemian: 787 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 11 Sep 08, 14:34 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The news that Brian May and Roger Taylor were to record an album as Queen, with Free and Bad Company's Paul Rodgers on vocals, was met with consternation. What harm, it was asked, might such a venture wreak on Queen's artistic legacy? But, really, what damage is there left to do? Unfairly critically reviled in their heyday - their wit and willingness to take outrageous risks overlooked, their ability to craft perfect pop singles and slip easily between genres ignored - Queen's oeuvre had just been favourably reassessed when the former members unleashed We Will Rock You, a musical that bent over backwards to suggest that the 70s rock hacks might have been right all along: here was a band uninterested in anything other than commercial success. It wasn't just the awfulness of the show itself. It was the crushing effrontery: a Queen musical about how appalling manufactured boybands were, that opened shortly after Queen's surviving members collaborated on a version of its title song with a manufactured boyband, Five, and that celebrated Freddie Mercury's 60th birthday by bringing onstage another manufactured boyband, McFly, to perform Don't Stop Me Now. Whatever The Cosmos Rocks sounds like, it can't conceivably be worse than that.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/sep/12/popandrockreview.queen


And another review from Virgin Media

4) Queen + Paul Rodgers - Cosmos Rocks: In their day, Queen were as astounding as they were preposterous - but showmanship like Freddie Mercury's is rare. Meat Loaf could perhaps have replaced him; the guy from Free has no chance.

At best, this sounds like Queen with a lifeless stand-in where their heart should be. At worst, it's not even that, sounding like a third-rate ZZ Top or just anonymously dull stadium rock. Hard to pick the nadir of such a dire selection, but C-lebrity's galumphing satire particularly grates. Rating: 3/10

(Review by Alex Sarll)

http://musicnews.virginmedia.com/news/?news_id=86694


R.I.P. PRINCESS

Living Life on Life's Terms
PieterMC user not visiting Queenzone.com
PieterMC
Deity: 3931 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 11 Sep 08, 14:44 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

mickyparise wrote:

The news that Brian May and Roger Taylor were to record an album as Queen, with Free and Bad Company's Paul Rodgers on vocals, was met with consternation. What harm, it was asked, might such a venture wreak on Queen's artistic legacy? But, really, what damage is there left to do? Unfairly critically reviled in their heyday - their wit and willingness to take outrageous risks overlooked, their ability to craft perfect pop singles and slip easily between genres ignored - Queen's oeuvre had just been favourably reassessed when the former members unleashed We Will Rock You, a musical that bent over backwards to suggest that the 70s rock hacks might have been right all along: here was a band uninterested in anything other than commercial success. It wasn't just the awfulness of the show itself. It was the crushing effrontery: a Queen musical about how appalling manufactured boybands were, that opened shortly after Queen's surviving members collaborated on a version of its title song with a manufactured boyband, Five, and that celebrated Freddie Mercury's 60th birthday by bringing onstage another manufactured boyband, McFly, to perform Don't Stop Me Now. Whatever The Cosmos Rocks sounds like, it can't conceivably be worse than that.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/sep/12/popandrockreview.queen


That would be the review that says that Warboys is offensive.

Ray D O'Gaga user not visiting Queenzone.com
Get down, make love
Ray D O'Gaga
Royalty: 1259 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 11 Sep 08, 15:18 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

*sigh*

Critics reviled Queen until Freddie died. When it was then fashionable to heap praise upon his corpse and the corpse of the band, they did so. No reason to assume they know anymore now than they did then.


Blow it out your ass.
mickyparise user not visiting Queenzone.com
mickyparise
Bohemian: 787 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 11 Sep 08, 15:56 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Agree.... The USA critics always put down Queen especially Rolling Stone mag.........
So I never listen to music/movie..etc critics.....to each there own.....

Remember for a minute for all those that perished 7 years ago on this tragic day.........
9/11 We will always remember.....




R.I.P. PRINCESS

Living Life on Life's Terms
Soul Brother user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 411 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 11 Sep 08, 17:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Basically, you should never hope for any objectivity in the reviews of Alexis Petridis - he is not the type of reviewer who would ever give any kind of positive review to Queen.

His reviews are reguarly belittled in most blogs you will come across. He is obsessed by 'coolness and clothes' and sorry but the lads just ain't gonna score heavily with this twatt. Ignore.


He's my best friend he's my champion
GreatKingSam user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 670 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 12 Sep 08, 07:49 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Queen never got a good review anyway...

Rick user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4796 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 12 Sep 08, 09:13 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Indeed, what about Queen II? Same story. Too many vocals, overdubs and far too extraordinary and bombastic.

Still, it's considered as one of the greatest albums by Queen, amongst fans and even amongst music lovers in general.

Something with "grain" and "salt", I guess.

That's what critics are for: always say and think the opposite of what the majority says and thinks. Hell, they're getting paid.


John: "It's the one thing I wish I could do - sing."

redspecialusa user not visiting Queenzone.com
redspecialusa
Bohemian: 228 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 12 Sep 08, 14:40 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Alex Sarll, has as much common sense as Louis Farrakhan. What a freakin' moron. It doesn't sound like the sorry son of a bitch even heard it.


"Let us cling together as the years go by; Oh my love, my love.

In the quiet of the night,

Let our candle always burn;

Let us never lose the lessons we have learned." - Brian May
ivegotahorn user not visiting Queenzone.com

Be Gentle, I'm a newbie: 3 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 15 Sep 08, 05:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I have to be fair here. After my first listening, I was disappointed and held similar views to these decidedly dodgy reviews. Critics don't seem to care. They're just paid to listen and write down their thoughts. Why would they bother listening a second time if they didn't like the first? Maybe they have the time to be more thorough, maybe they don't. Either way, they're WRONG about this one, as was I. After another couple of listenings, I'm starting to get what the album is about and hear some of the satire and other humour. They styles are so varied. There's obvious Queen bits and obvious Rodgers bits, but I even found myself thinking of Santana at one point. Some of it is chilled out, some of it grooves and some of it rocks. The variety may not suit some listeners, but it certainly suits me.

ALFIE user not visiting Queenzone.com

Be Gentle, I'm a newbie: 2 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 18 Sep 08, 13:33 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

All That Criticts Are Are Failed Musicians, And Entertaeners


STEVEN TOMKINS