Forums > Queen - General Discussion > Who wants Queen+Paul Rodgers to make an album?

forum rss feed
Author

thenightcomedown user not visiting Queenzone.com

Rocker: 35 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 16:22 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

youre fucking out of your mind!
IMPOSSIBLE, BECAUSE QUEEN IS G.O.N.E.
maybe you meant: Who wants BRIAN MAY AND ROGER TAYLOR + PAUL RODGERS to make an album?
it would still sound like shit though


Freya is quietly judging you. user not visiting Queenzone.com
Meh.
Freya is quietly judging you.
Deity: 5913 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 16:26 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

thenightcomedown wrote:

youre fucking out of your mind!
IMPOSSIBLE, BECAUSE QUEEN IS G.O.N.E.
maybe you meant: Who wants BRIAN MAY AND ROGER TAYLOR + PAUL RODGERS to make an album?
it would still sound like shit though

How old are you?

lmj user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 132 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 18:13 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Making an album?

What a joke!

Brian and Roger are destroying the Queen image with this stupid project! They are megalomaniac!

THE GAME IS OVER!(since 1991)


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

Royalty: 1181 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 18:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I do

Cheers


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

Bohemian: 342 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 18:36 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

lmj wrote:

Making an album?

What a joke!

Brian and Roger are destroying the Queen image with this stupid project! They are megalomaniac!

THE GAME IS OVER!(since 1991)



yeah i agree..


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

Royalty: 1181 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 18:39 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

<font color="#CC66FF">xloveofmylifex wrote:

All I Hear Is Radio Gaga wrote:

I do

Cheers


wonderful so did u go to any Queen and paul rodgers concerts? i never but i could of... hyde park i was gonna go with my mate jess....



I did get the chance to see them...first time at the Hollywood Bowl last year and the second time this year at Anaheim...

Cheers


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

Bohemian: 561 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Scott_Mercury user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 704 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 19:07 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Bottom Line:
Queen + Paul Rodgers is not Queen as we know it.
Queen plus Paul Rodgers is NOT better than Queen.

Queen plus PR are just...well....different.

Whatever you may think, The double live Queen+PR and DVD rock.

It's just kick ass rock and roll...

Do I like these Queen songs better with Paul than with Freddie?

Duh?? Of course not.

But, the songs still kick ass...and being a fan of the blues...I LOVE Paul's bluesy touch to these Queen classics.

It's like hearing some of these songs all over again.

And to be honest...isn't different sometimes good??

I mean... if I am listening to Queen at the Bowl 1982...I don't want to pop that out, and listen to Wembley...

I just heard Freddie sing 90% of the same songs.

I can pop in Queen+PR live cd, and while I am hearing some of the same songs....they sound completely different.

Paul's versions aren't better...
Just different.

And face it guys, when Freddie died, I knew we would never have **better** .... but I will take "different" over nothing.

Without Paul Rodgers...we have nothing.

Hell yes, I would love to hear a new Queen+PR album.

My wet dream is that Deacon would join them...even if he never toured again... I'd love to see in the liner notes of the new cd:

Brian May
John Deacon
Roger Taylor

and filling in for the legend Freddie Mercury, we have the magnificent Paul Rodgers on vocals.

I want the "Queen 1991 RIP" folks to remember that in 1991 the oldest surviving member of Queen (Brian) was a mere 44 yrs old.

All he had known was "Queen" since he was 23 yrs old. As sad as it is...Freddie died.

Not Brian. Not John. Not Roger

What the "1991 RIP" fans are basically saying is:
Brian, Roger, John....due to some poor judgements that Freddie made in his personal life, you are officially dead too in 1991."

C'mon guys... thats bullshit.

No one, including Brian, and Roger, think this is the heyday with Freddie....

But for them..and us, its either this or nothing.

Given those option's, I'll take this.




Having a smoking area in a restaurant is like having a pissing section in a swimming pool
Sebastian user not visiting Queenzone.com
Sebastian
Deity: 6328 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 19:12 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

That's not Queen + Paul Rodgers, that's Paul + Spike + Danny + Jamie + Two Opportunist Leeches.


John hated HS. Fred's fave singer was not PR. Roger didn't compose 'Innuendo.' Witness testimonies are often inaccurate. Scotland's not in England. 'Bo Rhap' hasn't got 180 voices.
Scott_Mercury user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 704 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 19:18 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sebastian wrote:

That's not Queen + Paul Rodgers, that's Paul + Spike + Danny + Jamie + Two Opportunist Parasits.


What's a Parasit?

Is that similar to a parasite?


Having a smoking area in a restaurant is like having a pissing section in a swimming pool
freddielives 25469 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Rocker: 25 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 19:19 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

perfect Scott, i couldn't have said it better myself.

marcio17@queenzone.com user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 121 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 20:18 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I do.... What a good reply Scott

teleman user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 740 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 20:25 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Scott_Mercury wrote:


Bottom Line:
Queen + Paul Rodgers is not Queen as we know it.
Queen plus Paul Rodgers is NOT better than Queen.

Queen plus PR are just...well....different...
...Given those option's, I'll take this.

Couldn't have said it better Scott.

jordanjo user not visiting Queenzone.com

Champion: 82 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 20:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sebastian wrote:

That's not Queen + Paul Rodgers, that's Paul + Spike + Danny + Jamie + Two Opportunist Leeches.


thats right.
How does that count as 'QUEEN'?

-All i would like to see is a fucking name change.
Its disgusting to look and see how they abuse the QUEEN name, stick it on anything to make whatever shit they are doing sell better.


Oszmercury user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 229 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 21:09 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I want it

remember Back in Black

Exiles on main street

New Order before Joy Division

everything can happens
i want !!


Loser in the end!!!
Daburcor? user not visiting Queenzone.com
Daburcor?
Deity: 9478 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 21:25 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I still can't fathom how so many people would actually be UPSET if Roger and Brian made new material, with or without Paul.


"Elton John and I became really good friends. I don't mean 'good friends' in that sense. I just mean we slept together." -Billy Joel
Sebastian user not visiting Queenzone.com
Sebastian
Deity: 6328 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 21:29 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

> What's a Parasit? Is that similar to a parasite?

Yes, sorry, my mistake.

> I still can't fathom how so many people would actually be UPSET if Roger and Brian made new material, with or without Paul.

If they make new material, good for them, they're great musicians. If they don't and keep playing old songs, good for them, those are great songs. If they wanna join forces with Robbie Williams, good for them, he's a fantastic singer.

The show must go on. The band's name must not.


John hated HS. Fred's fave singer was not PR. Roger didn't compose 'Innuendo.' Witness testimonies are often inaccurate. Scotland's not in England. 'Bo Rhap' hasn't got 180 voices.
chefman5150 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 290 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Apr 06, 21:59 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I want them to make an album...I think it would be absolutely sick!!


Ain't Much I'm Asking...If You Want the Truth...
DreaminQueen user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1382 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Apr 06, 00:27 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Scott_Mercury wrote:

Bottom Line:
Queen + Paul Rodgers is not Queen as we know it.
Queen plus Paul Rodgers is NOT better than Queen.

Queen plus PR are just...well....different.

Whatever you may think, The double live Queen+PR and DVD rock.

It's just kick ass rock and roll...

Do I like these Queen songs better with Paul than with Freddie?

Duh?? Of course not.

But, the songs still kick ass...and being a fan of the blues...I LOVE Paul's bluesy touch to these Queen classics.

It's like hearing some of these songs all over again.

And to be honest...isn't different sometimes good??

I mean... if I am listening to Queen at the Bowl 1982...I don't want to pop that out, and listen to Wembley...

I just heard Freddie sing 90% of the same songs.

I can pop in Queen+PR live cd, and while I am hearing some of the same songs....they sound completely different.

Paul's versions aren't better...
Just different.

And face it guys, when Freddie died, I knew we would never have **better** .... but I will take "different" over nothing.

Without Paul Rodgers...we have nothing.

Hell yes, I would love to hear a new Queen+PR album.

My wet dream is that Deacon would join them...even if he never toured again... I'd love to see in the liner notes of the new cd:

Brian May
John Deacon
Roger Taylor

and filling in for the legend Freddie Mercury, we have the magnificent Paul Rodgers on vocals.

I want the "Queen 1991 RIP" folks to remember that in 1991 the oldest surviving member of Queen (Brian) was a mere 44 yrs old.

All he had known was "Queen" since he was 23 yrs old. As sad as it is...Freddie died.

Not Brian. Not John. Not Roger

What the "1991 RIP" fans are basically saying is:
Brian, Roger, John....due to some poor judgements that Freddie made in his personal life, you are officially dead too in 1991."

C'mon guys... thats bullshit.

No one, including Brian, and Roger, think this is the heyday with Freddie....

But for them..and us, its either this or nothing.

Given those option's, I'll take this.



Wow.... Thats all i can say... Ive been trying to articulate exactly how i feel, and my dear, you could have not said it any better!
So yes, id love to see a new album come out!! And to have them tour again if they desire... :D Because when i saw them in Buffalo it was the greatest night of my life...
I know it wasnt a Freddie show, but i'll never know a Freddie show except on DVDs, but the thing about Queen is it was FOUR individuals coming together in a tour de force to be reckoned with.... So those of you who say "Queen Died in '91" love Freddie and friends... Yes it is sad without Freddie there, but do you really think that he would want things to remain stagnant forever?? NO!

But what i dont understand is how can you say they're dragging the Queen name in the mud?? I mean they are still playing KICK ASS music arent they?? they are Queen songs are they not??? They include elements of Freddie throughout their shows do they not??? They are opening a whole new generation to Queen... And they definatly could have picked a shitty singer, but they didnt settle, this has been a LLOOOONNNG time coming and obviously it felt right to them otherwise, they wouldnt attach the Queen name to it... And Paul Rodgers has a voice, whether you want to admit it or not...
You dont have to agree with that, thats fine. But if you are merely a fan of Freddie and Friends, then say so, dont sit here and say "This is shit what they are doing"...

I would like to understand though how they are dragging the Queen name in the mud... outside of the fact that they are performing without Freddie, but he is dead (sadly, unjustly and unfortunatly for us all and i have cried about it)
Sadly it is without Freddie, but Queen (as each and everyone of them has said throughout the years) is bigger than

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

Posted: 22 Apr 06, 01:05 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

"The show must go on. The band's name must not."

With regards to the many shows since 1992, and the recent 05-06 tour... I think the Queen+ title was appropriate because they were still playing Queen music.

However - if they elect to record new material, then the Queen name will no longer be necessary because it won't be Queen tunes.
And, if you'll look at Brian's last soapbox, he was blubbering about how excited he was to be in a 'new band'. I know they probably won't, but wouldn't it be nice for Roger and Brian to play in something with a new name, for a change?

I've no objection to them using Queen (or any adaption of it) when they're finishing shows with WWRY or TYMD or whatever songs (that they wrote, mind you) made Queen big, but with this new thing they're speculating about, I'd be happy for a new title.


"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