Forums > Queen - Serious Discussion > when did Q&PR fall apart?

forum rss feed
Author

e-man user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 697 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 09:59 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I'm trying to pin point when the who thing fell apart.

Some events to make a time line:

* During the German part of the TCR tour, Roger said this might be the last time they tour (to which Brian replies "really?")

 * In a  US radio interview from mid october 2008, Brian says they just
played Barcelona. Everything sounds like it's ok. When asked about a US
tour he says there might be, "but probably not in the spring, maybe
later"

*South America : every interview footage shows Brian looking
really depressed. On his soapbox he posts a picture and says "the very
end of a long journey")

*3.12.2008: Brian writes the following on his
website: Well, I don't know where anyone got that idea - Roger and Paul
and myself haven't made any decisions whatsoever about the future ...
We just need a rest !

*Spring 2009; Paul says Queen is over and that they might do a one off some time

 So; when do you think they pulled the plug? And what caused it?

bigV user not visiting Queenzone.com
bigV
Royalty: 1646 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 10:21 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I always thought it was the studio work that killed the project. Playing live is fine and dandy (even back in the old days Queen rarely had disagreements when they were on the road), but studio work is difficult and they weren't used to each-other's ways. So the friction must have begun there and it escalated during the 2008 tour.

V.


I'm as mad as HELL, and I'm not going to take this anymore!

Adam Unger (QueenVault.com) user not visiting Queenzone.com
Adam Unger (QueenVault.com)
Bohemian: 347 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 10:57 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I thought that the South American tour kind of did it in?


QueenVault.com

Updated October 2, 2016
mooghead user not visiting Queenzone.com
mooghead
Deity: 3664 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 12:54 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Just be thankful they did.

dagi user not visiting Queenzone.com
dagi
Rocker: 41 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 13:06 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I'm pleased that QPR is no more.

The tour, album and the reckless use of the Queen name caused untold damage to the band's reputation and catalogue.

The sad thing is that I suspect no lessons have been learnt from this episode and BM / RT will continue to work as Queen in the future.

Won't they ever learn?

The Real Wizard user is on Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18628 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 13:46 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Um, it's their band that they created.  Who are you to say how they should use their own band name?

A legacy is not something that can be tampered with.  It's not like something from 2008 can make something from 1975 disappear.

With that logic, the following things should have disappeared decades ago:

Yes, Genesis, Supertramp, Pink Floyd, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple, Chicago.

But they haven't.  Music transcends people, and Brian and Roger understand that.  Bands will exist for as long as founding members of the bands exist (and who knows, maybe even afterward, like Yes may soon be - only Chris Squire is left).  Queen are not exempt.


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
mooghead user not visiting Queenzone.com
mooghead
Deity: 3664 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 14:21 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Yes but the early incarnations are always best. Ask any fan of those bands who the best line ups where and/or when the best music was made. I think we all know what the answer would be.

Wiley user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1704 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 15:40 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The first incarnation of each band is always the best? Ringo Starr, David Gilmour and -yes- John Deacon beg to differ.

EDIT: Oops, you said "the early incarnations" and not "the first".

The Real Wizard user is on Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18628 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 16:41 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

mooghead wrote:

Yes but the early incarnations are always best. Ask any fan of those bands who the best line ups where and/or when the best music was made. I think we all know what the answer would be.

================

I agree.  But that doesn't mean they should change the band name because the personnel changed.


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
Djdownsy user not visiting Queenzone.com
Mama Please
Djdownsy
Bohemian: 469 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 20:50 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Afraid to say i agree with Sir GH on this one, any band member has the right to use a band name so long as the other members have no problem with it. I mean, they are a part of that legacy and any fans that try to say otherwise really should just keep their opinions to themselves, i mean, you can't love everything a band does, but to dismiss an entire part of their career just cos you didn't like it, well, thats just silly isn't it?


Tá suil agam go bhuil tú go maith!



Arsebiscuits!!!!!
bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12700 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 08 Jun 11, 23:46 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Great idea for a topic!  I'm guessing 4th of April 2009, 6:32 AM London time.


"Your not funny, your not a good musician, theres a difference between being funny and being an idiot, you obviously being the latter" - Dave R Fuller
e-man user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 697 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jun 11, 01:24 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I feared this would become a re-hash of old arguments

are no one interested in why the fact that they split up despite claiming otherwise?

ct0409 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Be Gentle, I'm a newbie: 14 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jun 11, 02:26 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I think they just have too many different things on their respective agenda - Brian and Paul seem to be very busy! And lets face it: they are kind of old:-) so I wouldn´´t be surprised if the "time off" thing is just genuine!

BTW: Can all the whining about QPR please stop!! We all know its not Queen as it was - that will never return!! I was very happy to see the new Queen and will be even happier when they return again (with whatever singer).


CT
Rick user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4796 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jun 11, 02:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

dagi wrote: I'm pleased that QPR is no more.

The tour, album and the reckless use of the Queen name caused untold damage to the band's reputation and catalogue.

The sad thing is that I suspect no lessons have been learnt from this episode and BM / RT will continue to work as Queen in the future.

Won't they ever learn?
=====

Did you visit one of the concerts?


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

FriedChicken user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 10641 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jun 11, 04:41 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

mooghead wrote: Yes but the early incarnations are always best. Ask any fan of those bands who the best line ups where and/or when the best music was made. I think we all know what the answer would be.

Oh I really beg to differ! Genesis' Duke album is my favorite Genesis album. And it was recorded 6 years after Peter Gabriel left the band. I'd also pick The Cosmos Rocks over 50% of the Queen albums, and the Cosmos tour over every 1980-1986 Queen show.


"On the first day Pim & Niek created a heavenly occupation. Pim & Niek blessed it and named it 'Loosch'."



(Genesis 1:1)
antiden user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 327 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jun 11, 05:30 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

FriedChicken wrote:
I'd also pick The Cosmos Rocks over 50% of the Queen albums, and the Cosmos tour over every 1980-1986 Queen show.
Poor boy...


Queen rarities for sale: http://www.discogs.com/seller/antiden
DaveyLane user not visiting Queenzone.com

Champion: 69 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jun 11, 07:23 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

dagi wrote: I'm pleased that QPR is no more.

The tour, album and the reckless use of the Queen name caused untold damage to the band's reputation and catalogue.

The sad thing is that I suspect no lessons have been learnt from this episode and BM / RT will continue to work as Queen in the future.

Won't they ever learn?
How did Q&PR damage Queen's catalogue? I don't hear anyone lamenting News Of The World because Paul Rodgers sung We Are The Champions......

ct0409 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Be Gentle, I'm a newbie: 14 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jun 11, 07:27 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

To stay on topic- this is from Bravewords.com:

"According to ContactMusic, Paul Rodgers may tour with Queen again. The vocalist joined Brian May and Roger Taylor to tour as Queen + Paul Rodgers between 2005 and 2009, and while they have all been working on other projects since, the vocalist hasn't ruled out performing with the band again.

When asked if he would tour again with Queen, Rodgers said: "We may do. We left it because we all wanted to do different things. We toured the world twice and after the studio album I didn't feel like there was a lot more we could do. We didn't want to do it forever, but I enjoyed playing the role for a while, so we'll see.""

So QPR is not dead - which will anger some....so let the whining continue;-)


CT
Doga user not visiting Queenzone.com
Doga
Bohemian: 938 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jun 11, 09:20 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I think at some point they were tired, bu maybe with the passage of time they have could appreciate the collaboration.  They do great things. The gig in Kharkiv in front of 350000 was historic, and for all those purist who blame them for name the band Queen + PR... well it was for marketing, thanks to this they had much more demand of tickets and the media focused in their tours than if his name was May + Taylor + Rodgers. Anyway the album could be better... but it fantastic to see again Brian & Roger on stage. Paul is brilliant too

The Real Wizard user is on Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18628 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 09 Jun 11, 17:55 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

e-man wrote:

are no one interested in why the fact that they split up despite claiming otherwise?

================

Nobody really knows.. there is only speculation.  A lot of people seem to think there was some friction between Brian and Paul.

For anyone who dismissed the QPR thing and didn't bother seeing the shows because Freddie wasn't there ... you missed seeing half of Queen.  Your loss... and an incredible experience for just about everyone else.


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca