Awesomeness

kdj997 said:

wow , to brian may!

singer is ok

but the song (lyrically)
is dreadful

Not really a fan of the "new" Queen!

Long live Freddie!

It's not "Queen" without Freddie Mercury!
It's as if Led Zeppelin would go out without Robert Plant.
/peace Manki

manki said:

Yep, I wish they wouldn't milk the Queen name. Especially as John Deacon isn't even a part of them any more.

Queen died along with Freddie. I wish Roger and Brian would realise that.

Well I'm off to see them in October. Can't wait as Paul Rodgers has a cracking voice and Brian May is the reason I picked up a guitar all those years ago.

Haystack said:

Weak song, I must say. I hope the upcoming album is better.

As a long-term fan of Queen, I agree they shouldn't call themselves Queen (+ Paul Rogers). Rogers is a decent rock singer with a good voice (formerly of Free and Bad Company), but has none of the vocal range and sheer musical diversity and theatricality of the one and only Mr Mercury. They should have called themselves something like May/Rogers/Taylor (which sounds a little rude if you're British tho ), or Queen Pt.II, if they must use the Queen name.

While not someone who believes Freddie was the be-all and end-all of Queen (all four members wrote top ten hits for the group through the years), using the Queen name (without which it likely would be harder for them to book stadiums, let alone fill them these days imo, good musicians as they are) seems wrong to me. Only May and Taylor remain, with Rogers and an anonymous bass player. Working from their logic, The Beatles could 'reform' and go on the road with Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr, with, say, Elvis Costello and Eric Clapton filling in the other two 'vacancies' . Unlike bands like Deep Purple, Queen had a completely stable, highly recognisable line-up in their years of fame, which makes it seem wrong to do this now.

I would half forgive them if the new material was good, but this first song ain't all that promising, really. Considering Queen were imo at the top of their game on their last couple of 'proper' albums, 'Innuendo' and the coda, 'Made in Heaven', this 'continuation' has much to live up to.

I've thought before, if say, 10 years ago, John Deacon had chosen to be involved, and they'd gotten a more interesting lead singer (than Paul Rogers), with some cool songs, and not called it Queen, they could have had a real future, but I'm not convinced about this new incarnation of 'Queen'.
[Edited 4/19/08 13:36pm]

I don't particularly like the song, but then I never liked Queen that much. But I have no problem with them using the name. What's in a name really.
One the one hand you say if they didn't use their name they couldn't book stadiums and on the other hand you say if they used another name they'd have a future. That is contradictory. If they used another name, they'd be like every other band just starting out playing tiny clubs.
Yes, it's sad Freddie died, but what about the living? What about the other members who want to continue the band? Why do people begrude them the one thing that can help them continue to have success. I don't get it all.
The music business is strange. Everyone is so focused on selling out. If you do things that give you a chance to perform for a lot of people, you are criticized. In every other line of work, if you can find a way to be successful and make money, you are praised. But not in the music business.

This song ROCKS

Well as I said, I'm going as I love the music and to see Brian May will be fantastic. To see Prince was one dream, to see May another. Now all I have to do is pray that Gilmour plays again and I'll have all three wishes made. Those are the three musicians that have made the most impact in my life. Well I'd also love to see Iron Maiden but that's another thing altogether.

Granted the new song is not a great one but it's each to their own.

As for that Beatles line-up mentioned? Hell that'd be good.

How could anyone not like them taking a whack at the paris hiltons and lindsay lohans of the world. It's very topical. I guess they don't have a hit on their hands sense overwhelmingly people don't seem to like it.

Haystack said:

I have to agree here. It's not Queen. It's like Paul and Ringo touring and saying it's Beatles.