"Queen's long-fingered guitarist Brian May has announced that Queen are going to reform for a tour with ex-Free/Bad Company's Paul Rodgers on lead vocals.

A UK tour will definitely go ahead, with the possibility of a European leg and a world tour under discussion. The tour will feature material by both Queen and Rodgers.

A statement on BrianMay.com reads: "It really all came about because of the Fender 50th Anniversary gig that I did with Paul Rodgers. We were both so amazed at the chemistry that was going on in All Right Now, that suddenly it seems blindingly obvious that there was something happening here." "

What do you think of this? Personally, I think it's a bad idea. I love Queen to bits, but I don't think Paul Rogers has an ouce of talent that makes him slightly worthy of being given the task of performing Queen songs on a tour. his performance on UK Music Hall Of Fame was dire to say the least.

Brian May said himself in interviews that Queen could not carry on as there couldn't be anyone to replace Freddie Mercury, yet now the band are doing it, ad have chosen a 4th rate performer to do it. Sad...

I wonder if John Deacon has agreed to go on the tour aswell, probably not, at least he had the sense to know when enough was enough.

Padzter

It'll flop badly and show how much Brian May etc. need the money. You never replace someone as iconic as Freddie Mercury - as it will never be the same.

Freddy was Queen.

Its not Queen though if it is just Brian and Roger. Its like Paul and Ringo doing a Beatles tour.

They certainly don't need the money though so I guess they just miss playing together - if they feel OK about doing it then why not I guess.

There certainly is a chemistry between Rogers and May that can't be denied. Did anyone see the Guitar legends concert in Seville in the early 90s?

Paul Rodgers is a fantastic singer, and I was a big Bad Company fan at school. I'm not sure about him as singer for Queen though as he's a different type of singer to Freddie Mercury.

I think if they gave themselves a different name and produced some new material it would be brilliant, but if I try to imagine Paul Rodgers doing Queen stuff it doesn't really work for me.

Queen doing All Right Now as an encore perhaps? I wouldn't be surprised. Black Sabbath did Smoke On The Water when Ian Gillan was singing for them. That didn't work either.

Paul Rodgers? Fourth rate? Shows what you know.

Agreed. No way is Paul Rodgers 4th rate, hes an excellent rock singer, with a long pedigree.

Paul Rodgers is one of the greatest Rock and Blues singers ever. He recorded the first album with Free (Tons Of Sobs)when he was 17 and it is an all time classic. The band then went on to even better things with Alright Now, Wishing Well and Little Bit Of Love. If anybody has any doubtlisten to the album "Highway" for some of the best rock ever recorded. He then went on to bigger things with Bad Company who, IMO, became a shadow of themselves when he left.

BOT - I actually think this is quite intriguing. It obviously wont be Queen as we know and love them but Paul is such a different vocalist to Freddie it may work. If they choose the correct material from the Queen catalogue and combine it with the correct material from Paul's then this could be excellent. But what would make it would be some good solid new material as well. I hope John Deacon has a change of heart and joins them.

By the way if anybody thinks Queen (or Brian and Roger) need the money, catch the documentary that has been on BBC 3 a few times about Freddies millions - it equally applies to the three remaining members.

whats really the problem? Queen fans will know what to expect and if they don't fancy it they won't go.

What I saw of the UK Hall of Fame when Brian , Roger and Paul played live and Paul Rogers fluffed his line up in We Will Rock You. John won't be joining them on stage I don't think, because when Freddie died that was when John retired from the Rock scene.

Why can't Brian and Roger be called Queen. They owe a quarter each of the name and don't forget as Queen was made of four members the other two get still royalties as well as Brian and Roger. Maybe that's why Roger and Brian are so keen to keep the name alive (Freddie's royalities going to his long time friend and ex-girlfriend Mary Austin).

Also John's way of thinking is that why should I go back out touring with the band when he's still getting royalties for the songs he wrote and from album sales as well.

I would go to see it. A long standing Queen fan....

Personally I hope they don't call themselves Queen. I appreciate they have every right to do that, but for me Freddie Mercury was such an integral part of the band that it just doesn't seem right to me.

I think the fact that Queen's line up remained unchanged throughout their existence stands for a lot. This could be a great band, but why not think of a new name? Especially if they are doing a lot of Paul Rodgers stuff too, as suggested.

Page and Plant never called themselves Led Zeppelin, after all.

maybe they could be called Princess?

ahem sorry

i've read about this and i gues it depends on what they are going to call themselves and size of venue etc. Not seen any of the Brian \ Paul Rodgers stuff yet so can't comment on how well this will work. While Paul is an excellent singer just watch the Freddie tribute concert again and you will see that when someelse tries to play Queen even George Michael at the end it just isn't the same. If they try to do this as Queen I won't go if they do this as Roger, Brian and Paul then I would be interested in seeing it.

I suspect it may be more difficult not to call themselves Queen. A lot of musicians have the difficulty of living down past glories. Mick Moody and Bernie Marsden from Whitesnake had real problems stopping promoter mentioning Whitesnake when they went out as the Moody/Marsden band.

However it will probably be Queen featuring Paul Rodgers.

I think its a bad idea, Freddy was queen, its like Nirvana trying to replace Kurt Cobain. Some bands can replace members, but legendary band like Queen can't, with great bands there is a chemistry, I don't care how much May and Rodgers like each other it wont be Queen

maybe it should be billed as Paul Rodgers with Brian May playing guitar then it won't be sold under a false name..

Queen are my fav band and having never got to see them live i never saw any of the others solo as I didn't want to taint my memories of then live and knew i'd be expecting it to be like the queen vids i've got and go away dissapointed.

I hear what most are saying and I agree in part. However, it really does a huge disservice to the other members of Queen to suggest that Freddie was Queen.

I recall that Peter Gabriel was Genesis before he left and Collins was brought to the front of the stage.

I remember reading that Gillan was the unique voice of Deep Purple until Dave Coverdale took over the mike.

Yes, Freddie was unique. A fine singer if you enjoy that sort of thing (although my OH couldn't stand his voice ). Providing they can use the name Queen legally (Yes had issues when two versions of the band existed in the late 80s and I remember arguments between Waters and the rest of Pink Floyd over the latter using the name for future albums without the mardy bassist), then I don't see why it's such a problem. Whether they are called Queen or Queen featuring Paul Rogers, everyone surely knows what they're going to get and it sure as hell isn't going to be Freddie! They will sell-out whatever anyone says and fair play to them. They have a huge legacy of fantastic music which deserves to be heard live. Better to hear them this way than one of a huge number of tribute bands which have emerged over the years.

I may be slated for this but as an aside, if Queen were ever to record again, one would hope they could persuade Robbie Williams to join and sing. He's not Freddie either, but he has a manner about him that suggests he is an equal showman and would cut it live too.

Even with how highly I rate and respect Roger Taylor and Brian May, I have to say that any reformation of Queen would be highly degraded without John Deacon let alone Freddie Mercury.....



I may still go and see them though. Looks like it could be a good show, but this touring band isnt Queen. Its Brian May and Roger Taylor.. again..

true Freddie wasn't the ONLY member of Queen and they shared writting credits as well but seeing them live was really all about Freddie and seeing him perform.

I guess we will just have to wait and see with this one.

I can think of only one legendary rock band thats survived the loss of a key member and thats Pink Floyd, when Roger Waters left everyone thought Floyd were dead in the water but Dave Gilmour made them a very successful live band.

Of course Waters is no Mercury in the showman stakes.

speaking of Pink Floyd, my second fav band behind Queen you could argue they had already lost their most influential member in 68 when Syd left.

the first Floyd album post Waters is still a good album with quite a few good tracks but it was mainly done with session players and other writters brought in. Rick and Nick didn't really have much to do with it. The tour and album from that were great but it was just a best of type thing played live.

The second album basically written by Dave and his wife was far better had no real weak points. The tour was great as well although i only saw them once and they didn't do Dark Side that night

With Queen i'd rather they went through the vaults and released some of the demo or other live stuff then the fans could get stuff with Freddie. The Dylan bootleg series is an example of what they could do

I saw Floyd on the Momentary Lapse tour and they were awesome, I've seen the Pulse tour on video and it was even better but it does go to show that bands can survive the loss of influential people.

i think the difference between Waters and Mercury is that although Waters was the creative force behind the band he shared the singing with Gilmour and Dave prob did more of the singing with Rick doing a few numbers as well. As a live band they usually just reproduced the album they were touring in full with a few other numbers thrown in as encores.

Therefore replacing Roger wasn't as big as replacing Freddie is going to be. Still as you said it's not impossible.

They are talking about this on 5Live at the moment. It certainly sounds like they are going to be touring as 'Queen'.

I dont have a problem with a tour just the name Queen.

It will never be the same. The world is a duller place without Freddie. I will never ever forget that day when they blew everybody off the stage at Live Aid.
Im getting the DVD for Christmas its the first thing I'll play on it.