Adam Lambert as Lead Singer of Queen??

[Schmittler]

RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE.

I will not tolerate this. Seriously, Adam Lambert is full of himself. Mercury simply loved music. Attempting to replace him in any matter is offensive to me as a Queen fan. I wish that I could see Queen back in its glory, but I'd rather go without seeing them than see a joke like Lambert perform with them.

If this happens I'm going to bust a blood vessel.

 

[DisableThisAccountForCyberbullyingReasons]

As much as I like Adam Labert's singing, I don't think he could ever replace Freddie Mercury. Just like in my opinion on how singer P!nk could never replace Brittany Murphy for the voice of Gloria in the film Happy Feet Two when that came out about four months ago and how do you think I felt with this? Like these two scenarios, they just won't be the same. I'm hoping this is just not true about Adam Lambert being the lead singer for Queen (fingers crossed), otherwise it just won't be successful as Happy Feet Two was financially at the box office (Thanks to that stupid Breaking Dawn movie or as I like to call it Breaking Wind LOL XD).

 

[Disasterpiece Press]

No. Just no. Freddy was a gay man and was still the man. You can not replace him with some eye liner wearing little poof. That little nonce has no place singing with legends like Queen.

Wanna know how bad ass Freddy was?

People are currently mistaking Freddys face for God.

That is an amazing photo. And a very easy mistake to make.

 

[Littaly]

A quick google search only gives a bunch of articles speculating about it. It doesn't seem to be in any way confirmed.

Still, even if it was, I can't say it bothers me all that much. As I understand it they aren't looking for a new front man or replacement for Freddie Mercury, just someone to be their lead singer in live performances. At least that's how they approached it with Paul Rodgers.

If they want to tour again that's cool. Music is meant to be played, and if they think Adam Lambert is the guy to do it then sure, why not.

 

[CrazyJew]

Worst of all, they took him over this guy:

Spoiler

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

They should have gotten Paul Rodgers again. He's completely awesome, and he doesn't try to be Freddie Mercury.

 

[Jaeke]

Worst of all, they took him over this guy:

Spoiler

i was just about to link that.
But seriously if they replace Freddy with that, and i really cant find an easier or more appropriate word, f***ot... i will tear a fucking hole in the universe with my Les Paul Epiphone in hand, and play Bohemian Rhapsody until my fingers fall off or everyone goes deaf so they don't have to listen to that defiler's crap...

 

[Disasterpiece Press]

A quick google search only gives a bunch of articles speculating about it. It doesn't seem to be in any way confirmed.

Still, even if it was, I can't say it bothers me all that much. As I understand it they aren't looking for a new front man or replacement for Freddie Mercury, just someone to be their lead singer in live performances. At least that's how they approached it with Paul Rodgers.

If they want to tour again that's cool. Music is meant to be played, and if they think Adam Lambert is the guy to do it then sure, why not.

I really don't have a problem with them playing with Lambert. I'm not interested in listening to it but I'm sure there are those out there that would be.
My gripe is calling themselves Queen. I'm not even all that okay with the whole "Queen + Paul Rodgers" thing. Just call yourselves something else - Freddie Mercury is synonymous with the name Queen. It's like removing the peanut butter from a PB&J sandwich, replacing it with mustard yet still calling it a PB&J because it contains jelly and is a sandwich.
Or imagine if Paul & Ringo decided to play with Dhani Harrison and Sean Lennon and call themselves the Beatles.
To me, that is just cashing in on a legacy, not paying tribute to it.

 

[DJDarque]

I can't even bring myself to listen to it. It's just too depressing.

 

[technoted]

It won't be called Queen, it'll be the same as they did before "Queen and Paul Rodgers". I think the band themselves know that no one will ever be able to replace Freddie and I think the person who could come closest would actually be Robbie Williams, even though I can't stand him...

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

I don't like Adam Lambert. This news disappoints me.

 

[RipRoaringWaterfowl]

A part of myself just died. If my mother hears about this, a part of her will die. This is a travesty. We cannot let this happen! NEVER!

Oh, and Queen's performance at Live Aid was one of the two greatest performances of all time, not the best; it ties with Roger Water's performance of The Wall at Potsdamer Platz in Berlin in 1990 ( The Berlin Wall once ran through that area).

captcha: tunes esolicka. Indeed.

 

[Disasterpiece Press]

A part of myself just died. If my mother hears about this, a part of her will die. This is a travesty. We cannot let this happen! NEVER!

Oh, and Queen's performance at Live Aid was one of the two greatest performances of all time, not the best; it ties with Roger Water's performance of The Wall at Potsdamer Platz in Berlin in 1990 ( The Berlin Wall once ran through that area).

captcha: tunes esolicka. Indeed.

Live Aid Performance is my #1 just because I haven't seen the Roger Water performance - though I have been to Potsdamer Platz and I will get to see Roger perform the Wall in May, so I'll try to imagine the two together haha

 

[SycoMantis91]

For the record, they've already replaced Freddie Mercury with Paul Rodgers of Bad Company. But yea, this one is atrocious. At least Paul was a talented artist, as well as being without gender-role confusion. Also, thanks for reminding me who the new character model from Dante of DMC looks like. That makes me weep...

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

In that case you might as well put Animal on the drums and Bieber on electric guitar.

... I'd pay good money to see that concert.

OT: It's how these things work. Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, and Deep Purple are all still going, too, despite the fact that Ozzie left Sabbath ages ago, Dio is dead, Ritchard Blackmore's current band is Blackmore's night, and Pink Floyd has, at most, one original member left -- so does Styx, for that matter. Point being, band lineups change, occasionally to the point that you have a Ship of Theseus paradox. Queen never really left, they just never found someone who could replace Freddie Mercury -- because no-one can. But a singer alone does not make a band, and when you get a group of musicians who enjoy working together, the death of one does not have to break up the rest of them -- in fact, it really shouldn't.

 

[Captain Booyah]

Queen as an active band isn't important, they made their impact a long time ago. If they want to ruin what's left of the band by putting Lambert in there, they can go for it.

No, just.....no.

I don't care who the hell that guy is, you just don't do that. NO ONE replaces Freddy Mercury.

This and this. I honestly don't have much more to add. What's the band's motivations behind this, anyway? I doubt bringing in a new camp frontman is going to make them relevant again (in terms of current music), and the original songs are still pretty popular with everybody, young and old. I mean...you don't try and replace Freddie. That's something approaching blasphemy.

I don't get it, guys.

 

[Laser Priest]

No one replaces Freddie Mercury.

Especially not Lambert. My god, his voice is an atrocity towards music.

 

[Furioso]

I'd be a lot more ok with it if they changed the band name or something, because no matter who you get to sing, it just isn't Queen anymore

 

[Littaly]

A quick google search only gives a bunch of articles speculating about it. It doesn't seem to be in any way confirmed.

Still, even if it was, I can't say it bothers me all that much. As I understand it they aren't looking for a new front man or replacement for Freddie Mercury, just someone to be their lead singer in live performances. At least that's how they approached it with Paul Rodgers.

If they want to tour again that's cool. Music is meant to be played, and if they think Adam Lambert is the guy to do it then sure, why not.

I really don't have a problem with them playing with Lambert. I'm not interested in listening to it but I'm sure there are those out there that would be.
My gripe is calling themselves Queen. I'm not even all that okay with the whole "Queen + Paul Rodgers" thing. Just call yourselves something else - Freddie Mercury is synonymous with the name Queen. It's like removing the peanut butter from a PB&J sandwich, replacing it with mustard yet still calling it a PB&J because it contains jelly and is a sandwich.
Or imagine if Paul & Ringo decided to play with Dhani Harrison and Sean Lennon and call themselves the Beatles.
To me, that is just cashing in on a legacy, not paying tribute to it.

If it was just Adam Lambert putting together a cover band, or if it was some record company owning the rights to the music and the name "Queen" who decided that it was time to dig it back up in the name of profit, then I could see why people would be upset. But as I understand it, that's not the case. I mean, it's still Queen songs, being played by what is left of Queen and a guy they personally chose to include in order to make it work. Sure they could call it something else, like "The Band Formerly Known as Queen + Adam Lambert" or whatever, but what purpose would that really serve?

I guess it depends on how sacred the name "Queen" is to you. The way I see it names are just names. Sure Queen carries a lot of powerful, positive associations for a lot of people, but at the end of the day, it's not like it's some magical holy word that will be defiled if you don't lock it away in some vault forever.