This really occured to me while I was watching "Bohemian Rapsody". I was thinking Queen should not be the breakout performance of Live Aid. Prince should be part of this history. And lastly, if there ever is a Prince biopic, where oh where is Prince's standout Live Aid performance to top off the movie?

>

Back when it was a big deal for musicians to grace the cover of TIME magazine cutural zietgiesters such as Michael Jackson, Madonna, U2, Bruce Springsteen, pretty much all the important artists, were all respectfully represented. Who turned them down? You know who. But why? It's just a cool thing to be part of your legacy. I wanted my Kieth Haring inspired TIME cover!

This is a no-brainer. Anyone whos anyone was on this thing. It was a huge cultural movement. Everyone loved it. And again he could've been a highlight. But yet again he missed out on something that was a milestone for the decade he represented. I just feel he was being way to contrary with these choices. He took a hard left anyway. He should've lived in the moment. Just one fans opinion.

Why shouldn't he have turned down those?

He did and life went on in a pretty nice way.

MJ wasn't at LiveAid either. He was in the studio allegedly working on something, but I don't know what. His next album wasn't out for another two and a half years.

Queen was a breakout performance because their popularity was in full swing. It was a well-played, showboat moment. 1984, the year prior, belonged to Prince. A number one movie, soundtrack, single after single. He was the zeitgeist of 1984.

I tend to think about his views on the PR tour and how it was so structured that it almost killed him. I thinking coming off the PR tour in March or April, then Live Aid happening a couple of months later, and adding that Geldof maybe would have requested he sing some PR or 1999 era songs, that he was just over that part of his career. I can't see him getting in front of 100K people trying to sing "Raspberry Beret" or "Paisley Park" in the middle of the day. It seems like typical Prince fashion that he was already moving onto something else. ATWIAD was out, "Raspberry Beret" was on the radio, he didn't quite look like the Prince we saw in Purple Rain, so the timing was off.

I also can't forget Geldof's words about Prince not showing up to We Are The World and how it'll forever be to Prince's shame or some stupid shit. Prince is going to come cowering in to make public amends and bend to Mr. Boomtown Rats' scolding? Nope. Too cool for that!

Anyhoo - Prince did what he thought was right for him. Live Aid wasn't the end all of everything. I agree it was very "in the moment" at the time. He donated a song, a video, (Madonna's clothing), and likely money to the cause of world hunger. He didn't need Live Aid, Live Aid needed him.

"I tried to tell them that I didn't want to sing, but I'd gladly write a song instead.

They said 'okay', and everything was cool, until the camera tried to get in my bed."

Prince was never a part of that scene back then.

He would never have fitted in amongst all those top 40 acts.

If you cant see that in Prince, then you're missing half the point of his existance.

Live wise, he might've made an impact, but even then he had already moved on from his PR phase, so you dont know how others wouldve reacted to a Prince with short hair doing an ATWIAD intro, instead of a permed Lets Go Crazy.

Time showed that he made the right call for himself and his true followers.

TrivialPursuit said:

Queen was a breakout performance because their popularity was in full swing.

.

Absolute nonsense.

.

callimnate said:

Prince was never a part of that scene back then.

He would never have fitted in amongst all those top 40 acts.

.

Like... Bob Dylan?

BartVanHemelen said:

callimnate said:

Prince was never a part of that scene back then.

He would never have fitted in amongst all those top 40 acts.

.

Like... Bob Dylan?

LOL

nextedition said:

Why shouldnt queen be the breakout performance? Whats wrong with queen?

Queen was the breakout.

But Prince wasn't there.

That was the point.

Then again as someone pointed out a Prince performance at that time could've easily turned into the WTF performance of the event had he, in typical Prince fashion, decided to do ATWIAD material as opposed to the greatest hits line up Queen did.

BartVanHemelen said:

TrivialPursuit said:

Queen was a breakout performance because their popularity was in full swing.

.

Absolute nonsense.

.

Why? They had just released The Works with Radio GaGa and I Want to Break Free both hitting top 5 everywhere except America. Unless you're trying split hairs over them being very famous in the 70s as well?


I'm fairly sure Prince doing Lets Go Crazy -> Raspberry Beret -> I would Die 4 U -> Baby I'm a Star -> Purple Rain would have went down a storm but sure whatever, he had other things on his mind.

CynicKill said:

nextedition said:

Why shouldnt queen be the breakout performance? Whats wrong with queen?

Queen was the breakout.

But Prince wasn't there.

That was the point.

Then again as someone pointed out a Prince performance at that time could've easily turned into the WTF performance of the event had he, in typical Prince fashion, decided to do ATWIAD material as opposed to the greatest hits line up Queen did.

Adam Ant had his time cut and only did one song, a new song, and he is famously the only artist whose sales dropped after Live Aid.

[Edited 1/24/20 6:44am]

I think that Prince did pretty well without Live Aid.

And lastly, if there ever is a Prince biopic, where oh where is Prince's standout Live Aid performance to top off the movie?

Obviously, The Superbowl.

it was the madness of his decsions & the oft F.U. attitude that made me love him so.

Testimony of a true fan.

PURPLEIZED3121 said:

it was the madness of his decsions & the oft F.U. attitude that made me love him so.

CynicKill said:

I wanted my Kieth Haring inspired TIME cover!

That ain't Keith Haring.

You forgot Hands Across America.

jdcxc said:

Prince picked and choose his big events and charity contributions just fine. And We are the World (the song) was corny and 4 the Tears in Your Eyes was a nice contribution to Live Aid. And as a fan, “Hello” is better than any of those songs. Lol. Who doesn’t appreciate the iconoclast Prince?

Extended version of Hello is one of my favourite Prince songs, well worth the "no show"

bonnie184 said:

CynicKill said:

I wanted my Kieth Haring inspired TIME cover!

That ain't Keith Haring.

I was unclear.

Of course Prince wouldn't mimic Michael with a Warhol cover.

Just a thought that popped into my head i.e. "who was the quintessential artist of that time".

I used to think the same but..it kind of adds to the Prince legacy that he turned down the biggest live event of the decade. The way that Bob described it wasn't Prince at all. "A Global Jukebox". Prince didn't want to just play his hits, he wanted to play what he felt at the time, and if it included some of his hits, then cool. You can't capture the magic of Prince in 20 minutes, period.

BartVanHemelen said:

TrivialPursuit said:

Queen was a breakout performance because their popularity was in full swing.

.

Absolute nonsense.

.

You're ridiculous and wrong.

PliablyPurple said:

You forgot Hands Across America.

We all forgot it. On purpose.

Andy Warhol, not Keith Haring, you bozo.

Now go read the most evident bios and familiarize yourself with the subject, get some Prince culture before you ridicule yourself.

nextedition said:

Why shouldnt queen be the breakout performance? Whats wrong with queen?

Almost everything.

Namely being the poster child for the repressed homosexuality
present in all hypocrite homophobic stadium heterosexuals.
Sing "We Are The Champions" in choir at the Sunday game,
insult or beat up a faggot in dark alleys on Friday night.

On an artistic level, they suck.
Lame hard rock, vulgar Opera-like references.
That guitar sound is an abomination.
It buzzes like a giant malarial disease mosquito.

Freddie Mercury was indeed a sympathetic character, with tons of charisma.
He waved the homo flag with more balls than George Michael,
who was busy trying to fool teenage girls.

But their music is simply atrocious.
Like almost anything past the sixties that met global consensus.
It's only fun when you're drunk enough.
Which happens to lots of people in the Western World on a daily basis.
Cause and Effect.

[Edited 1/24/20 18:01pm]

"Huge cultural movement" my ass.

You're politically incompetent.
You know nothing of the sad state Africa was left in for decades.
Oh no, I got news for you, it still is!

Man, despite Geldof and Quincy Jones!
Pinch me, I must be dreamin'.

There's more to the world than middle-class (the Africans spell it "rich") white kids auto-congratulating themselves while they attend concerts sponsored by Coca-Cola®.

Prince gave a lot to charities in his lifetime, and never made it public.
The only times he did was during the Purple Rain Tour.
Never heard of anyone else of his stature giving a concert for the deaf.

Certainly no one from the gang of arrivists
that ran to the studios right after the Awards to give
themselves some good conscience and free publicity.

Oh my God!
They sang for a few hours!
For free!
Let's praise their names for ever and ever.

And please spare us the suspected pedophile cover, thank you very much.

[Edited 1/24/20 18:04pm]

TrivialPursuit said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Absolute nonsense.

.

You're ridiculous and wrong.

No he ain't.

Queen weren't huge at the time. At all.
Big maybe, but certainly not huge.
Fact.

The world began to suck Freddie's dick after he passed away.
Before that, it couldn't care less.

And the top performance of the 1985 Live Aid remains "Bad" by U2.
In spite of, or because of Bono's last honest Christic moment.

[Edited 1/24/20 18:11pm]

TrivialPursuit said:

"I tried to tell them that I didn't want to sing, but I'd gladly write a song instead.

They said 'okay', and everything was cool, until the camera tried to get in my bed."

We're against hungry children
Our record stands tall
But there's just as much hunger here at home