Forums > Queen + Adam Lambert > Rolling Stone reviews "The Cosmos Rocks"

forum rss feed
Author

Michael Allred user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1704 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Oct 08, 13:56 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The newest issue of 'Rolling Stone' magazine (with Barack Obama on the cover not to mention the magazine has been redesigned to magazine sized proportions) has reviewed "The Cosmos Rocks." Here's the text:

"Without Freddie Mercury, Brit-rock veterans prepare for Lite FM.

Queen's first studio album in 13 years sounds a little like the band's old albums with stomping rockers, over-the-top power ballads and pyrotechnic solos difficult to replicate on 'Rock Band' but one thing's missing: late frontman Freddie Mercury, whose charisma Bad Company's Paul Rodgers can't match. Under Rodgers' command, 'Cosmos Rocks' evokes an unmemorable stretch of drive-time radio, with slow songs like 'Say It's Not True' recalling Air Supply. The classic rock cliches aren't all Rodgers' fault: original  band members helped write 'Still Burnin,' a generic bar-band jam laced with chestnuts like "music makes the world go round." Queen 2.0 are competent enough to rock arenas but don't expect a repeat of the glory days."

** stars (out of ***** stars)

-adventure seeker- user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 182 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Oct 08, 15:59 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

yaawn


'ill see you in hell, some other time'



I MET BRIAN MAY!! 14th april 2008



THE COSMOS ROCKS!
April user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 440 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Oct 08, 16:15 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

They are Queen, they are British and they are the best!

Marcelo_argentina user not visiting Queenzone.com
Marcelo_argentina
Bohemian: 219 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Oct 08, 08:22 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I always thought some Rock magazines are totally crap...I read better reviews here on Queenzone!

Holly2003 user not visiting Queenzone.com
Hot Buttered Soul
Holly2003
Deity: 4706 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Oct 08, 09:50 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



Michael Allred wrote:

The newest issue of 'Rolling Stone' magazine (with Barack Obama on the cover not to mention the magazine has been redesigned to magazine sized proportions) has reviewed "The Cosmos Rocks." Here's the text:

"Without Freddie Mercury, Brit-rock veterans prepare for Lite FM.

Queen's first studio album in 13 years sounds a little like the band's old albums with stomping rockers, over-the-top power ballads and pyrotechnic solos difficult to replicate on 'Rock Band' but one thing's missing: late frontman Freddie Mercury, whose charisma Bad Company's Paul Rodgers can't match. Under Rodgers' command, 'Cosmos Rocks' evokes an unmemorable stretch of drive-time radio, with slow songs like 'Say It's Not True' recalling Air Supply. The classic rock cliches aren't all Rodgers' fault: original  band members helped write 'Still Burnin,' a generic bar-band jam laced with chestnuts like "music makes the world go round." Queen 2.0 are competent enough to rock arenas but don't expect a repeat of the glory days."

** stars (out of ***** stars)    





I think that's a fairly accurate review. It's an average album, with two really good songs, a number of so-so songs, and one or two real stinkers (yes, I'm talking about Still Burnin'). And there will never be another It's Late, Bo Rap, NOTW or ANATO.



"With a population of 1.75 million, Northern Ireland should really be a footballing minnow. Instead, they could be better described as the piranhas of the international game" (FIFA.com)
PieterMC user not visiting Queenzone.com
PieterMC
Deity: 3931 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Oct 08, 10:27 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

My problem with many of the negative reviews are that they are basically saying it's not "Queen" enough without Freddie. Yet the same people hated Queen when Freddie was alive.


Jazz 78 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 502 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Oct 08, 10:50 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

With or without Freddie Queen has ALWAYS gotten poor reviews from Rolling Stone. Back in 1981 Roger wrote a letter to them on an air sickness bag which they printed. Don't let negative reviews get to you people. Critics get their copies for free but we're the ones who pay for the music and come to our own conclusions.

Holly2003 user not visiting Queenzone.com
Hot Buttered Soul
Holly2003
Deity: 4706 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Oct 08, 12:02 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



 



PieterMC wrote:



My problem with many of the negative reviews are that they are basically saying it's not "Queen" enough without Freddie. Yet the same people hated Queen when Freddie was alive.



A fair point. Like a lot of 'trendy' journalists and mags, Rolling Stone despised Queen. When Fred died, a lot of them suddenly became fans, which of course meant they could do lots of Queen stories and benefit from the renewed public interest in the band. Now it's as if the early anti-Queen period never existed.

Still, their review is about right. I don't dislike the album - it's actually not too bad. But it's not Queen reborn or anything similar, as some here would have it.







"With a population of 1.75 million, Northern Ireland should really be a footballing minnow. Instead, they could be better described as the piranhas of the international game" (FIFA.com)
Drummer imense! user not visiting Queenzone.com
Drummer imense!
Bohemian: 267 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Oct 08, 12:49 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I love the way Rolling Stone has always hated Queen. And now they're Queen + Paul Rodgers that means they can hate them MORE! I, for one, loved the album (after about 5 listens).


I'm not a river or a giant bird, that soars to the sea, an if i'm never tied to anything i'll never be free!
April user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 440 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Oct 08, 14:23 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Has Rolling Stone ever featured Queen, guys? I`ve looked through Rolling Stone 1,000 covers, 2006, and you know what? Not a SINGLE cover devoted to Queen with Freddie or to any Queen members. What`s that???

Micrówave user not visiting Queenzone.com
Delilah, on Medium Power
Micrówave
Deity: 7037 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Oct 08, 17:40 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Wow.  Rolling Stone gave a Queen album 2 stars??? 

Then it MUST be good!

Remember to use the 'converter' when deciphering RS reviews:

4 stars = Absolute trash.  Don't buy it, it will be worn out within 2 weeks
3 stars = A reach.  Those two songs are possibly worth the price you paid for the whole album
2 stars = Very promising.  Don't expect any articles in here anytime soon.
1 star = A must have.


Edit
Oh, April...  Actually they did make the cover... well Freddie did.  Look for the Michael Jackson issue (91), there at the very bottom (pun intended?) is Freddie's name.  So technically, HE made it.

Mlaimo user not visiting Queenzone.com

Rocker: 31 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Oct 08, 12:02 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I agree with the review. The album is good, but it's really bluesy, and if not for some Queen signatures, could very well act as a Paul Rodgers solo album.

Mr.Jingles user not visiting Queenzone.com
Mr.Jingles
Deity: 10532 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Oct 08, 12:16 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I have to say that 'The Cosmos Rocks' disappointed me, so I can understand why they got a 2 star review from Rolling Stone. IMO I'd give it 3/5 stars.

What I don't understand is why The Jonas Brothers get a 4 star review, but Queen and PR get a 2 star review.



[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Brandon wrote: [/QUOTENAME]... and now the "best you can offer is Mr. Jingles? HA! He's... just pathetic.[/QUOTE]
Erin user not visiting Queenzone.com
Erin
Deity: 8445 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Oct 08, 12:38 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



Mr.Jingles wrote:

What I don't understand is why The Jonas Brothers get a 4 star review, but Queen and PR get a 2 star review.


Use Microwave's converter, and it makes more sense. ;-)

"4 stars = Absolute trash.  Don't buy it, it will be worn out within 2 weeks"






Micrówave user not visiting Queenzone.com
Delilah, on Medium Power
Micrówave
Deity: 7037 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Oct 08, 12:41 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



 



@ Mr. Jingles

Use my RS Secret Decoder ring (see above).  It all makes sense then.



 



 



EDIT

Wow, scary Erin.  We even worded it pretty dang close, too!



Erin user not visiting Queenzone.com
Erin
Deity: 8445 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Oct 08, 12:46 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



Micrówave wrote:



 



 EDIT

Wow, scary Erin.  We even worded it pretty dang close, too!



 




Jinx!!





PieterMC user not visiting Queenzone.com
PieterMC
Deity: 3931 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Oct 08, 16:18 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



Mr.Jingles wrote:

I have to say that 'The Cosmos Rocks' disappointed me, so I can understand why they got a 2 star review from Rolling Stone. IMO I'd give it 3/5 stars.

What I don't understand is why The Jonas Brothers get a 4 star review, but Queen and PR get a 2 star review.



It would not matter what the album sounded like, Rolling Stone were never going to like it.

I wish all those Disney "music" artists would just vanish.





April user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 440 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Oct 08, 16:41 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



Micrówave wrote:

Wow.  Rolling Stone gave a Queen album 2 stars??? 

Then it MUST be good!

Remember to use the 'converter' when deciphering RS reviews:

4 stars = Absolute trash.  Don't buy it, it will be worn out within 2 weeks
3 stars = A reach.  Those two songs are possibly worth the price you paid for the whole album
2 stars = Very promising.  Don't expect any articles in here anytime soon.
1 star = A must have.


Edit
Oh, April...  Actually they did make the cover... well Freddie did.  Look for the Michael Jackson issue (91), there at the very bottom (pun intended?) is Freddie's name.  So technically, HE made it.

Oh, you are great!!! I love your comment!







Michael Allred user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1704 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Oct 08, 19:46 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



 



PieterMC wrote:



 



 



 



 



Mr.Jingles wrote:



 



I have to say that 'The Cosmos Rocks' disappointed me, so I can understand why they got a 2 star review from Rolling Stone. IMO I'd give it 3/5 stars.

What I don't understand is why The Jonas Brothers get a 4 star review, but Queen and PR get a 2 star review.



 




It would not matter what the album sounded like, Rolling Stone were never going to like it.

I wish all those Disney "music" artists would just vanish.






It's important to remember a few things.

Wishing ill will towards other artists does nothing to improve the situation for the bands you like.

Kids need music that speaks to them too, sure it's not your cup of tea but they fill their roles and do their job. Being snobbish benefits no one.

We should all remember that artists have to get their start somewhere. Anyone remember Kurt Russell, child star of family friendly Disney movies back in the day? He eventually became an accomplished and respected actor with millions of fans due to his iconic work when he became an adult. If Russell never got that start from Disney, chances are nobody would have ever heard of him because he wouldn't have a career. Does that mean the Jonas Brothers will become the next Beatles? Of course not but that doesn't mean they won't mature over time and create some worthwhile music. 





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

Posted: 23 Oct 08, 20:17 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I think I speak for the majority of Queen fans when I say...FUCK ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE!!!!



"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