Forums > Queen - General Discussion > Queen should of stopped when John Deacon left

forum rss feed
Author

renzo user not visiting Queenzone.com

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

Posted: 22 Feb 06, 18:35 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Queen have lost all my respect,they are like a kareokee band and its like they are flogging a dead horse now.When John left they should of called it a day out of respect to him and freddie even the die hard fans must be biting a lip now with Pr on vocals and session musicans its a bit of a joke.Had Brian or roger left at the time instead of John do you think queen would of carried on,i dont think so.John was a great bass player and just got on with the job of playing music,He knew when it was over the day Freddie died.Why now are they ruining the great legacy that was queen,they should of started other bands instead of this sham,think about if other great bands like U2,The beatles continued without there 2 main men it would never be the same or half as good.Collaborations with Robbie williams,Five and PR has made this a disgrace and its like they are trying to bleed the queen name for all they money they can get.


Renzo
Dear Friends user not visiting Queenzone.com

Champion: 86 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Feb 06, 18:49 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I agree.


Anyway the wind blows...
bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12703 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Feb 06, 23:35 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Queen should have stopped when Barry Mitchell left. No wait. Queen should've stopped when they stopped being Smile and that plonker Freddie Mercury joined the group.

RIP SMILE 1969 or 1970 or whatever.


"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
Sherwood Forest user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 3547 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Feb 06, 23:39 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

my respect stopped growing when freddie died. Now Q+PR are just it/ w/e take it or leave it. They, personally dont count as Queen to me so thats why im alright with the tour


One should ANALize the Poetry on page 43, when Oedipus is rollin' in his benzo and he has to bust a cap on some flagrants in the under city



http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/image/essay/1
luthorn user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 609 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Feb 06, 23:49 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Amen.

willza user not visiting Queenzone.com

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

Posted: 22 Feb 06, 23:58 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I have to agree with you on that renzo. But then im a roger and brian fan to so ijust think of them as their own band.

The Flash Danny Project user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 166 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 00:12 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I think Queen should stop whenever they run out of petrol, and judging by the current prices, it probably won't be too long.


Insert stupid signature here
Freddie's #1 Fan Forever user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 386 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 01:25 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I totally have to agree with you here. In a lot of ways I see the current tour as a result of their over bloated egos. I mean, I think that Brian and Roger may actually think that they constitute Queen! It is about time that real Queen fans complain about this sleazy tour.

Jakobe user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 197 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 03:02 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I can't believe you are comparing Queen and/or The Beatles to U2.

The prophet's song user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1044 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 03:05 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I agree, Queen should have stopped when John left. However, I do agree mostly with the tour, because I see nothing wrong with two musicians who want to keep doing what they do best before arthritis sinks in. I suppose my full support to it could only be given if they changed their name to like "Royal Company" or something.


"Either this kid has a lightbulb up his ass or his colon has a great idea"
Thanks user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 615 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 05:15 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I make it a rule never to agree with people unable to use basic grammar and punctuation.

You should HAVE listened when your teacher taught English.

bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12703 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 06:56 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I find it a ludicrous discussion.

Ok, point blank - this isn't Queen. Freddie's dead, John's retired, whatever.

But I believe you people have an almighty gall to say that two of the people that *made* Queen what it was (and don't tell me it was all Freddie, he was merely their frontman - it was a 4 piece) don't have the right to play the music?
Perhaps their choice of name is questionable, but it's not about the name is it? Who cares??? It's about the music, and you'll always have the old stuff to listen to.
Enjoy it, or shut the hell up.


"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
The Flash Danny Project user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 166 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 07:16 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Zebonka12 wrote:

I find it a ludicrous discussion.

Ok, point blank - this isn't Queen. Freddie's dead, John's retired, whatever.

But I believe you people have an almighty gall to say that two of the people that *made* Queen what it was (and don't tell me it was all Freddie, he was merely their frontman - it was a 4 piece) don't have the right to play the music?
Perhaps their choice of name is questionable, but it's not about the name is it? Who cares??? It's about the music, and you'll always have the old stuff to listen to.
Enjoy it, or shut the hell up.


Here here.

But I think you're going too far off track when you refer to Freddie as "merely their frontman", LOL. Technically, Freddie WAS merely 25% of Queen. Artistically, hmmm, what do we have?

1. Freddie came up with the name 'Queen'
2. Freddie designed the band's logo
3. Freddie wrote all the songs that set Queen apart from every other band
4. Freddie was almost exclusively responsible for the band's reputation as a superb live act.
5. Freddie was solely responsible for the band's reputable appearance at Live Aid
6. Freddie also happened to be the reason why Queen even formed at all

Hmmm, would you still say Freddie was just "merely their frontman"? I mean, you minus those attributes from Queen's history... and what do you have left? A lot less than 75%...


Insert stupid signature here
-luke_taylor- 28432 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 664 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 10:40 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I say carry on touring, lol that would make a good carry on film with brian and roger lol, i want a liza minelli & queen tour after the paul rodgers one


purples a fruit
bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12703 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 10:56 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

"But I think you're going too far off track when you refer to Freddie as "merely their frontman", LOL. Technically, Freddie WAS merely 25% of Queen. Artistically, hmmm, what do we have?

1. Freddie came up with the name 'Queen'
2. Freddie designed the band's logo
3. Freddie wrote all the songs that set Queen apart from every other band
4. Freddie was almost exclusively responsible for the band's reputation as a superb live act.
5. Freddie was solely responsible for the band's reputable appearance at Live Aid
6. Freddie also happened to be the reason why Queen even formed at all

Hmmm, would you still say Freddie was just "merely their frontman"? I mean, you minus those attributes from Queen's history... and what do you have left? A lot less than 75%... "

Well no. See, the behind the scenes operation of it all... it really was a 4 way thing. We only got one side of the picture, which was this amazing double-sided personality that Freddie Mercury seemed to put across.
But they maintained that the actual running of the band (not the setting up stuff you mention in points 1 and 2) was largely an equal and democratic (if heavily argued, hehe) thing.

Let's take a look at point 3 : sorry, I don't agree with that. Save Me. Who Wants To Live Forever.

Point number 4 largely consists of their public image, which again was dominated by Freddie's on stage persona.
My point was that behind the scenes, it was 25% all around; at best, 30 for Freddie :D
And him 'merely' being a frontman doesn't diminish his big time role in the group, it just means that it was his job to be the focus, to appear to be the leader.

Coming back to this:

"Hmmm, would you still say Freddie was just "merely their frontman"?"

Yes, yes I would! He was a frontman who wrote songs, delivered bigtime performances that kicked arse, but let's not get ahead of ourselves - I wasn't talking about the image that the band put across, I was talking about the day-to-day running of things, the behind the scenes stuff that we didn't really see often.
I'd say you just misunderstood me. :D


"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
Oszmercury user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 229 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 11:08 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

don't waste your time please, let's talk bout the music, the beatles are still the beatles, the who, zeppelin, deep purple without ritchie blackmore and john lord, genesis without peter gabriel, king crimson without greg lake or bill bufford, black sabbath without ozzy...

and continues... Pink Floyd without Barret and Waters... Rolling Stones without Mick Taylor and Brian Jones, it's all bout music, not about people, and i'm not sayin nothin against the all mighty mercury, when you have a creative motor you can't stop so easily, and if you have 20 years workin on it, you have the choice of still workin if somebody has left the band...



Loser in the end!!!
it was electric7 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 709 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 12:01 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

you people complain too much

flash! 28068 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 2995 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 13:30 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

<font color=FF0099>Linda Of The Valley wrote:

it was electric7 wrote:

you people complain too much


I know. It's annoying.


Indeed. There is no point having constant argumentative discussions about it.
All 4 members made Queen what it was and still is....everyone had their contribution. Without even only one of them Queen wouldn't be Queen! Simple as that, dears!


"It’s not often we play in daylight, and I fucking well wish we did before, I can see you all now. And there are some beauties here tonight, I can tell you!" ;)
biggest_fan_K user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 342 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 13:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The Flash Danny Project wrote:

Zebonka12 wrote:

I find it a ludicrous discussion.

Ok, point blank - this isn't Queen. Freddie's dead, John's retired, whatever.

But I believe you people have an almighty gall to say that two of the people that *made* Queen what it was (and don't tell me it was all Freddie, he was merely their frontman - it was a 4 piece) don't have the right to play the music?
Perhaps their choice of name is questionable, but it's not about the name is it? Who cares??? It's about the music, and you'll always have the old stuff to listen to.
Enjoy it, or shut the hell up.


Here here.

But I think you're going too far off track when you refer to Freddie as "merely their frontman", LOL. Technically, Freddie WAS merely 25% of Queen. Artistically, hmmm, what do we have?

1. Freddie came up with the name 'Queen'
2. Freddie designed the band's logo
3. Freddie wrote all the songs that set Queen apart from every other band
4. Freddie was almost exclusively responsible for the band's reputation as a superb live act.
5. Freddie was solely responsible for the band's reputable appearance at Live Aid
6. Freddie also happened to be the reason why Queen even formed at all

Hmmm, would you still say Freddie was just "merely their frontman"? I mean, you minus those attributes from Queen's history... and what do you have left? A lot less than 75%...


i agree

Wiley user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1704 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 23 Feb 06, 13:57 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Freddie's importance to the band is undeniable. He was the most visible member and probably the most creative musician in the band but he WAS NOT Queen. He said it himself "I'm not the leader of the band, just the lead singer". You might say he was being modest, but I think that the band was more like 4 equal members in the decision taking process for the group.

Freddie as a songwriter wrote some of the more complex and unconventional songs in the Queen catalog, yet live they used to play almost as many Brian May tracks in every tour. In the first couple of tours they actually played more Brian tracks than Freddie tracks and the tendence was pretty much the same. Usually, most of Freddie's songs would be mixed in the medley part of the concert and you can say most of them were hits, but not all of them were live favorites.

In the Hot Space tour they played more Brian tracks than Freddie's and you can see this in the Queen On Fire DVD, which is regarded as the best Queen Live DVD out by now. The best performances of the DVD are (arguably) Fat Bottomed Girls and Save Me, both Brian tracks.

Now let's talk about Freddie's compositions in the 80's and 90's. I know he had a great influence in some of Roger's and John's tracks (which became hits) but his output was not quite as magnificent as his 70's songs. Body Language? Man on the prowl? Pain is so close to pleasure? Delilah, for Christ's sake!

I think Brian was the most consistent writer of them all. You can say he didn't write many top 10 hits but think again. The show must go on was not a top 10 hit (charted at 16 in the UK), nor it was Too Much Love Will Kill You, or No-one But You, Who wants to live forever, Headlong, Hammer to fall, Fat Bottomed Girls! These are all great tracks, and are Queen Classics aswell.

And maybe you'll be surprised to know that QUEEN'S MOST COVERED SONG IS ACTUALLY WE WILL ROCK YOU(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_version). It's also one of the most known and played all over the world (just as Champions, I know).

For all these reasons, I don't think it's fair to diss Brian's (or Roger's or John's) contribution to the band's legacy just to say Freddie was way more important.

See ya,

Wiley