Forums > Queen - General Discussion > Rollingstone magazine , BUNCH OF WHORES

forum rss feed
Author

Mercuryking user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 842 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Jun 05, 13:28 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

How they rate the queen albums is just fucked up. How they can say that the Innuendo album is lightweight and forgetable as soon as its over,, its strange , i mean is the man deaf?



doremi user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 5193 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Jun 05, 13:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I don't know where you saw the review. Was it in one of their books The Rolling Stone Book of Albums, or something to that affect that I see in stores, or was it an archive from the magazine?

Please tell me where you saw it..but as usual R.S.'s head's are up their asses!

Must say...your ...er...adjective Bunch Of Whores..LMFAO, but right on the money.

I don't get R.S. and I never will. Well actually I do. Most of their writers are very slanted and what they write or cover (or don't cover) is very biased and based on politics, trends, money, etc.

R.S. has had a running war with Queen since the 1970's. It is virtually impossible for them to say anything of merit, or to even be civil to Queen.

When R.S. reviewed Queen's live South American show in the 80's,...the infamous one that pissed off Roger so bad he wrote them an angry letter on an airline sickness bag...

...the idiot writer from R.S. based his review..on Queen's SOUNDCHECK. How freakin' unprofessional is that? No band is gonna sound good at a soundcheck. THAT's WHY it's called a souncheck. To hammer out and rehearse any glitches in the performance, the instruments, the soundboard, etc.

FYI too. Most of the so called ''GREAT' long term writers for R.S. aren't even trained journalists with college journalism degrees. They all started out as 15, 16 year old kids and groupies in the 1960's hanging out with rockers and the R.S. original ''office'' was a hippy hang out pad in San Fransisco.

It's not like other newspapers or magazines where you have to have a degree and experience in journalism.

And...if for any reason you are on the SH*t list of Publisher/Founder/Editor In Chief Jann Wanner...R.S. will nail your ass to the wall.

If you are on the good side of Jann Wanner...you get continuous glowing coverage even if your music...or film, book, whatever is utter SHITE!!!!




xyz
Mercuryking user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 842 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Jun 05, 14:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

i got it from there website , rollingstone.com

They practicly hate queen, just look at their reviews.

doremi user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 5193 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Jun 05, 14:42 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Here's the worst part I copied it.

''From the circus drumroll that introduces the opening Zep-screech epic about justice and death in the desert sand ''Innuendo'' to the quick rap in the closing bump and grind ''The Show Must Go On'', these old entertainers sound like they've decided to stop trying so hard, like they're finally satisfied with their lot in life.'';

''Innuendo is so lightweight you'll forget it as soon as it's over – which, with this band, should go without saying anyway – but there's nothing cynical about it. Unlike most fortyish rock relics, the boys in Queen are still too kooky and insincere to settle for any of that well-earned wisdom of middle age bunk. They just throw food at the wall, and if it sticks, fine. And if it doesn't stick, well, that's fine too. (RS 599)''

SCUSE me. Innuendo...lightweight, kooky, insincere? No well deserved wisdom? Queen wasn't trying so hard? Where does R.S. come up with this stuff?

Innuendo was their darkest, and simultaneouly most hopeful, most inspired by personal experience, most meaningful album informed with material from their own life's experiences and Freddie's impending mortality as the band came to grips with his illness.

It was defined by the band's wisdom..and resolute reflection and contemplation.

It also was the album they if anything worked hardest on, putting everything they had into it, because it meant so much to the band to work together in Freddie's last days, and Freddie was pushing himself to the outer reaches and limits to write, sing, and record this album.

It addresses prejudice and intolerance through the ages of mankind on the title track.

It addresses Freddie's illness and mortality..yet appreciation for life from the triumphant last hurrah of The Show Must Go On, to the utter sublime depth, conviction, significance, and final goodbye of These Are The Days Of Our Lives.

Yes...this writer is indeed a whore, and R.S.'s editor is the writer's PIMP!





xyz
Mercuryking user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 842 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Jun 05, 14:49 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I know! Its sick ,and they are supposed to be a serious magazine? And they give almost all U2 albums 4 stars!


Taken from Mr bad guy review - Rollingstone

"On Mr. Bad Guy, Freddie Mercury's first solo album, he puts his shamelessly angelic soprano to work on a group of swooping numbers that he describes as "love songs, things to do with sadness and torture and pain, but at the same time they're frivolous and tongue in cheek."

Cheek and overbite being Freddie's operative mode, his trademark braggadocio and choirboy ebullience serve him well.
Mr. Bad Guy is unlikely to win Freddie many new converts, but Queen fans will eat it up"


alphabeth user not visiting Queenzone.com

Be Gentle, I'm a newbie: 8 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Jun 05, 15:12 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Its clear that the reviewer knows SHIT about good music. He is a fucking retard with no taste in music and should stick to crappy bands like U2 and rolling stones.

Suigi user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 856 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Jun 05, 15:47 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Quick show of hands: Who here thinks that Rolling Stone has its face shoved so far up the record industry's ass that it can't even hear the music it's reviewing?

Case in Point: Queen.

Case Closed, Biatch.

For example, what ding-dong brainiac ranks AKoM and The Miracle below Hot Space?
On top of that, they constantly reference previous Queen material, and compare the newer albums to them.

Well, DURRRR! Of course the later albums can't match ANATO/ADATR/NOTW. Those were the band's heydey.
When one is reviewing music, one should take it at face value, NOT compare it to previous works, and freakin' ENJOY it.


HE ROCKS US STILL.

Proud Supporter of the Queen Lives Compilation
Grantcdn user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 200 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Jun 05, 00:56 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Rollingstone is such a crappy magazine...and yes they know shit about music...

They'll like it if it's 3 or 4 chords or if they can understand grade 4 calibre lyrics...

anything complex or musical they won't like and if it's Queen they'll hate it before hearing it...personally I'd say that there is some bigotry vs Freddie there too...just my opinion after one of their previous articles...



Mercuryking user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 842 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Jun 05, 06:43 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Well i can only say one thing - Fuckem ,ignorant pieces of dirt.

All I Hear Is Radio Gaga user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1181 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Jun 05, 09:43 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Exactly why i hate the press, and the same reason they wrote "Scandal".


"Take The First Step In Faith, You Don't Have To See The Whole Staircase, Just Take The First Step."
GreatKingSam user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 670 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Jun 05, 10:08 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Opinions are opinions, but Rolling Stone magazine is absolute shite.

Their reviews of Queen are in exactly the same vein as when people on here used to say "Queen RIP 1991" - all pre-prepared answers becuase it is cool for them to do it.

And if I read one more magazine that says the Stones are the greatest live act, and Bono is the best thing since God, I may, just may, kill myself.

The Fairy King user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Fairy King
Deity: 8686 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Jun 05, 10:34 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

alphabeth wrote:

Its clear that the reviewer knows SHIT about good music. He is a fucking retard with no taste in music and should stick to crappy bands like U2 and rolling stones.


U2 aren't crappy.
The fact that RS praises them doesn't mean they suck. They're actually pretty good, especially live. Don't bash them them because of jealousy. :P


Killed by drones.
The Real Wizard user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18638 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Jun 05, 13:10 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Mercury SingerOfLife wrote:

Taken from Mr bad guy review - Rollingstone

"On Mr. Bad Guy, Freddie Mercury's first solo album, he puts his shamelessly angelic soprano to work on a group of swooping numbers that he describes as "love songs, things to do with sadness and torture and pain, but at the same time they're frivolous and tongue in cheek."

Cheek and overbite being Freddie's operative mode, his trademark braggadocio and choirboy ebullience serve him well.
Mr. Bad Guy is unlikely to win Freddie many new converts, but Queen fans will eat it up"


Actually, I almost completely agree with this review of Mr. Bad Guy.

But their review of Innuendo is crap.

Brian May once said something to the effect of, 'most reviews are statements about the reviewer, not about the piece of art they are reviewing'.

So true. But anyway, anyone with brains knows that most of the time, Rolling Stone can't be taken too seriously... they're all about fads, and they have a very US-geared set of ears.



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



http://www.queenlive.ca
Suigi user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 856 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Jun 05, 13:11 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

This is why I use allmusic's reviews.
More reliable.


HE ROCKS US STILL.

Proud Supporter of the Queen Lives Compilation
doremi user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 5193 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Jun 05, 13:52 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

rawraw wrote:

Arlene R. Weiss wrote:

utter SHITE!!!!


Just curious, since you are an American why do you type like you are British?


Sometimes I am on QZ so much, I fall into the Brit speak without realizing it.

Besides, Brits speak so much better. I used to have a boss and the way he just Pronounced the words schedule ''sshedule'', and paprika, ''Pap..rika'' sounded so much more articulate.

Anyhow I like SHITE!


xyz
evil_felix_girl user not visiting Queenzone.com

Be Gentle, I'm a newbie: 4 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Jun 05, 15:49 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

i think there's some sort of history between the editor i=of RS and queen... he seems to make comments wherever he can about how rubbish they are, even when he's reviewing bands like FooFighters or Rammstein. on the other hand, some people are just jerks. some people think the height of musical achievement is daniel o'donal. some people's taste is not to be trusted!

***Debz***

written_in_the_stars user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 357 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Jun 05, 22:26 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

People working for Rolling Stone are a bunch of assholes. They don't know a shit about real music. They deeply hate a band like Queen, and like to put on their covers the little teenagers' pop-stars as Gwen Stefani and Jennifer Lopez. I can't stand this.
F*CK ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE


yes it was plain to see, yes it was meant to be...