Speaking as an Englishman who listens to your regular radio. No specific genre. Just your current latest hits and classics. You get little to no Metallica on the radio over here. If you want it, you have to find a rock station. So while Metallica are hugely popular, they're nowhere near as big as Queen.
WrestleZone Rock Tournament Finals - Queen vs Metallica
- Thread starter IrishCanadian25
- Start date
Again, I'm completely disappointed in these finals. Metallica and Queen? Two legendary bands, both of whom's discography I own atleast half of, but neither is the greatest rock band in the world. I wouldn't even call them the greatest rock bands of their respective decades. Queen wasn't better or bigger then Zeppelin in the 70s, and Metallica wasn't better or bigger then U2 in the 80s. If you can't even lay claim to being the best band of your decade, how are you going to lay claim as the best band ever?
I'm still absolutely astounded that people voted against the Beatles. Makes me very, very sad. Because the Beatles shouldn't been crowned champions of rock from day one. No one has had a bigger impact on not only music but the WORLD then the Beatles. No one. Not Metallica and not Queen.
That being said, I went with Queen in the final match up based off of a very simple idea. Queen rocked from album one to the last album. Metallica hasn't made a record worth taking a piss on in almost 20 years now, and even die-hard Metallica fans have to admit that one. So Queen wins over Metallica because of their level of consistency to me. Nothing against Metallica though, I wouldn't stop playing "The Four Horseman" on my bar's juke box last night. Though that may have had more to do with the 5 shots of Wild Turkey and 12 pack I had that night, but that's splitting hairs.
Queen gets the nod from me here.
However, this I had to respond to.
So wouldn't the same thing applied to Metallica? If Metallica hasn't "fizzled out" then I must be unaware of what that term means. Because Metallica has sucked so incredibly hard for the last decade plus that they insult their original fan base with each subsequent album.
ROFL...overrated? Yeah, Abraham Lincoln and George Washington, those two assholes were overrated as well too huh? Because without the Beatles or Elvis Justin, James Hetfield is jerkin' off stalefish at some gas station in San Francisco. Without Elvis or the Beatles, there simply is no rock and roll. And that is not an understatement. Without their popularity, rock and roll would've faded away as just another musical fad.
And you want to talk overrated? How about Metallica, the single most overrated band on the face of the Earth? Don't get me wrong, Metallica up until the Black Album were one of the rawest, most powerful and down right talented musicians (not just metal musicians) on the face of the planet. But to say that any of their albums since the Black Album has even been mediocre at best would be a gross overstatement. You realize we're approaching almost 20 years now since Metallica put out a good album? Metallica doesn't have the consistency that Queen did in their quality of music.
I'm still absolutely astounded that people voted against the Beatles. Makes me very, very sad. Because the Beatles shouldn't been crowned champions of rock from day one. No one has had a bigger impact on not only music but the WORLD then the Beatles. No one. Not Metallica and not Queen.
That being said, I went with Queen in the final match up based off of a very simple idea. Queen rocked from album one to the last album. Metallica hasn't made a record worth taking a piss on in almost 20 years now, and even die-hard Metallica fans have to admit that one. So Queen wins over Metallica because of their level of consistency to me. Nothing against Metallica though, I wouldn't stop playing "The Four Horseman" on my bar's juke box last night. Though that may have had more to do with the 5 shots of Wild Turkey and 12 pack I had that night, but that's splitting hairs.
Queen gets the nod from me here.
However, this I had to respond to.
So wouldn't the same thing applied to Metallica? If Metallica hasn't "fizzled out" then I must be unaware of what that term means. Because Metallica has sucked so incredibly hard for the last decade plus that they insult their original fan base with each subsequent album.
ROFL...overrated? Yeah, Abraham Lincoln and George Washington, those two assholes were overrated as well too huh? Because without the Beatles or Elvis Justin, James Hetfield is jerkin' off stalefish at some gas station in San Francisco. Without Elvis or the Beatles, there simply is no rock and roll. And that is not an understatement. Without their popularity, rock and roll would've faded away as just another musical fad.
And you want to talk overrated? How about Metallica, the single most overrated band on the face of the Earth? Don't get me wrong, Metallica up until the Black Album were one of the rawest, most powerful and down right talented musicians (not just metal musicians) on the face of the planet. But to say that any of their albums since the Black Album has even been mediocre at best would be a gross overstatement. You realize we're approaching almost 20 years now since Metallica put out a good album? Metallica doesn't have the consistency that Queen did in their quality of music.
Bernkastel
Reaper of Miracles
Bands like Nirvana, Foo Fighters, Alice in Chains, Pantera, Stone Temple Pilots among with a host of others all site Chuck Shuldiner of Death as a major musical influence. Does that make Death a better musical group than all these other bands despite the other groups being grossly more popular and arguably more successful than Death? In my view, just because a band can take influence from a band doesn't mean that they're individual success (and individual influence) can' rise above that of the former.
Father:_Polley
Fun's my Chinese neighbour's name
I find it hard that people are having trouble accepting two of the most iconic bands music has produced within the last decade don't deserve to be here.
In Metallica, you have one of the pioneers of metal, while in Queen you have a band which showcased different styles of music, and are probably the most influential Glam Rock band ever.
Both have huge followings, both are very talented. The argument that they have 'fizzled out' is clearly not influencing people, as they have beaten bands who are still producing high quality music.
I feel Queen deserve to take it, not because they've sold more records, made more songs. I feel that they are simply better musically. Metallica may be famed for guitar solos, but I feel people forget the fact that Brian May is constantly rated as one of, if not the best guitarist in the world.
I just enjoy Queen's music more. Pure and simple. Legacy wise, both are different but equally influential. That's all that seperates it for me
In Metallica, you have one of the pioneers of metal, while in Queen you have a band which showcased different styles of music, and are probably the most influential Glam Rock band ever.
Both have huge followings, both are very talented. The argument that they have 'fizzled out' is clearly not influencing people, as they have beaten bands who are still producing high quality music.
I feel Queen deserve to take it, not because they've sold more records, made more songs. I feel that they are simply better musically. Metallica may be famed for guitar solos, but I feel people forget the fact that Brian May is constantly rated as one of, if not the best guitarist in the world.
I just enjoy Queen's music more. Pure and simple. Legacy wise, both are different but equally influential. That's all that seperates it for me
Ugh. Everything through Flash Gordon to The Mirace are dreadful albums. Much worse than post-Black album.
Define "die-hard". I consider myself a huge Metallica fan, yet I think some of the stuff on Load is better than a large chunk of their earlier material.
"insult their original fan base"? So what, should they have wrote one Thrash record after another just to keep their original fan base happy? No, they should progress and write what they want to, not keep a few long haired spotty teens happy.
I think you mean 12 years. Metallica were just as consistent as Queen was. Queen have sucked at releasing original material since 1981.
And as for the people who claim Metallica "sold out" or some stupid bullshit, maybe this (a new song) will make them a little happier:
[youtube]UzhTe5grIoU[/youtube]
IrishCanadian25
Going on 10 years with WrestleZone
Matt, I have to admit you are one of the more tolerable Metallica fans I have read a post from (yes, Justin, you as well) because you don't see thrash metal as the end all be all of human existance.
But some of your Queen bashing is way off base. To claim that Queen has sucked at putting out original material since 1981 is musically naive.
That puts down Queen classics such as "Under Pressure" which was pure gold, the soulful song "Body Language," "Radio Ga Ga," "I Want to Break Free," rock anthem "Hammer to Fall," the entire soundtrack to the film "Highlander" including "Princes of the Universe", "A Kind of Magic", and amazing epic ballad "Who Wants to Live Forever;" "One Vision", "One Year of Love", awesome rock song "I Want it All," everything off of "Innuendo," fantastic trippy song "I'm Going Slightly Mad," the divinatory foreshadowing of "The Show Must Go On" which was one of Mercury's greatest vocal performances EVER, "Headlong," radio and pop culture classic "Bohemian Rhapsody," etc.
Now, I agree that Metallica's post-Black stuff was good as well. I am not in xfear's corner saying they haven't made an album worth pissing in in 20 years. But Matt, if you honestly think Queen left their talent in the 70's alone, you won't get much support. In fact, the entire statement is plain ridiculous.
But some of your Queen bashing is way off base. To claim that Queen has sucked at putting out original material since 1981 is musically naive.
That puts down Queen classics such as "Under Pressure" which was pure gold, the soulful song "Body Language," "Radio Ga Ga," "I Want to Break Free," rock anthem "Hammer to Fall," the entire soundtrack to the film "Highlander" including "Princes of the Universe", "A Kind of Magic", and amazing epic ballad "Who Wants to Live Forever;" "One Vision", "One Year of Love", awesome rock song "I Want it All," everything off of "Innuendo," fantastic trippy song "I'm Going Slightly Mad," the divinatory foreshadowing of "The Show Must Go On" which was one of Mercury's greatest vocal performances EVER, "Headlong," radio and pop culture classic "Bohemian Rhapsody," etc.
Now, I agree that Metallica's post-Black stuff was good as well. I am not in xfear's corner saying they haven't made an album worth pissing in in 20 years. But Matt, if you honestly think Queen left their talent in the 70's alone, you won't get much support. In fact, the entire statement is plain ridiculous.
Just for the record, I'm not bashing Queen. They're an amazing band who I think released some pretty lackluster stuff in the 80's.
Maybe I should have made this clearer. When I made that statement, I was refering to their albums as a whole. Yes, they did indeed write some great classics in the 80's, but when I listen to an album from beginning to end, I'm left with a sour taste in my mouth.
Let's take Hot Space as an example. Here's the tracklist:
A1 Staying Power
A2 Dancer
A3 Back Chat
A4 Body Language
A5 Action This Day
B1 Put Out the Fire
B2 Life Is Real (Song for Lennon)
B3 Calling All Girls
B4 Las palabras de amor (The Words of Love)
B5 Cool Cat
B6 Under Pressure
So here, we have, at most, two great songs. Am I wrong in saying this is, overall, a bad album?
Let's take another 80's Queen album, The Miracle.
A1 Party
A2 Khashoggi's Ship
A3 The Miracle
A4 I Want It All
A5 The Invisible Man
B1 Breakthru
B2 Rain Must Fall
B3 Scandal
B4 My Baby Does Me
B5 Was It All Worth It
Yet again, here we have two great songs. The rest of them could define mediocrity.
All in all, what I'm saying is that Queen wrote amazing albums from beginning 'til end in the 70's. I can sit there and enjoy every single track, with the exception of a stinker or two. But with their 80's output, I can't do that. I'm not denying that they wrote some amazing songs in the 80's, but the albums as a whole just don't hold up.
IrishCanadian25
Going on 10 years with WrestleZone
Fair enough, Matt, but obviously not every single album is going to be wall to wall singles and hits. ANd even on these "lackluster" albums you present, they spent SIGNIFICANT time on the charts in the US, UK, Canada, Austrailia, Sweden, etc. Queen has gone platinum and toured in more countries than Metallica has, and again, that's not a dig at Metallica, it's a straight fact and a representation of how worldly Queen's music truly was.
justinsayne
Cody Rhodes is an excellant
Why is it that the only person in this thread so far to support Queen without trying to bury or discredit Metallica with complete and utter bullshit is IC?, seriously the other Queen supporters should read IC's post and take notes, that being said I still feel Metallica is better and should win this, however if Queen does come out on top I won't be sorely disappointed since they are a pretty good band themselves, but still Metallica is better and should win, just sayin'
Of course not, but when the majority of an album has mediocre to bad songs, it's safe to say it's a pretty weak record. People criticize Metallica for their failure of consistency yet Queen weren't very consistent throughout the 80's in regards to albums as a whole. Sure, their albums sold well, but so did Load and ReLoad, yet people call them garbage.
The generally regarded "lackluster" Metallica albums spent significant time at the top of the charts around the world too. St.Anger debuted at number one in thirty countries. Hell, St. Anger has attained platinum and gold status more times over than any 80's Queen record, and some of those records have over twenty years in album sales over St. Anger.
I'd like a source for this, because as I stated earlier in this thread, comparing around the times both bands began playing arenas and tours, Metallica have played more. Remember, Metallica have been one of the top five touring acts in the world since the 90's and were among the top five concert draws in America during that decade. They've played sold out shows in all fifty states and in over fifty countries to more than thirty million people around the world.
justinsayne, when you are done crying over the mean Queen fans picking on Metallica, I would like to know where I ever insulted Metallica in any of my posts. Is saying they have a more niche fan base than Queen an insult? Is pointing out that they have had less top 40 hits somehow complete and utter bullshit? Perhaps it was pointing out the illogic of a Metallica fan ruling out Queen because they lost Freddie Mercury, when Metallica has changed members as well...Was that an unforgivable offense? I challenge you to find one instance of where I said Metallica sucked, that they were crappy musicians, show me where I said they were completely undeserving to be in the finals...In fact, look at who I voted for in the previous rounds where Metallica was competing, and then come back, and tell me where I did anything but speak highly of Metallica...I voted for Metallica against Foo Fighters and Guns and Roses, voted against them in the U2 round, voted against them when they were going against Michael Jackson, voted for them against Twisted Sister, but just go back and reread what I said about them in previous rounds, and find insult in any of the posts.
In all of the rounds of this tournament, I dare you to find one challenge to Metallica's manhood in any post I have made about them. Quit complaining about all the mean Queen fans picking on your boys, because its simply not true. You are under this false impression that anyone saying Queen has been more successful is discrediting Metallica, and get all huffy over it, yet, if someone were to say you were trying to discredit Queen, and ranted about Metallica fans dissing Queen, in the way you rant against Queen fans, you would be all up in their face. Get over yourself already.
In all of the rounds of this tournament, I dare you to find one challenge to Metallica's manhood in any post I have made about them. Quit complaining about all the mean Queen fans picking on your boys, because its simply not true. You are under this false impression that anyone saying Queen has been more successful is discrediting Metallica, and get all huffy over it, yet, if someone were to say you were trying to discredit Queen, and ranted about Metallica fans dissing Queen, in the way you rant against Queen fans, you would be all up in their face. Get over yourself already.
Dragonslayer
Getting Noticed By Management
Well I've already made my post in this thread, giving the nod to Queen, and I stick with that.
That being said, though, that I for one can - at least partially - understand the heated arguments.
We obviously have two great bands here. Now by the difference in styles alone, these two bands will probably have very different groups of fans. While I see Queen as a more "Mainstream"-compatible band, since their music isn't what one could consider too "hard" or too "metal", and some of their (especially the 80ies) stuff is quite close to "Pop" music, with the massive use of synthie sounds in that period of time, additionally to the still basic "rock" foundation of their music, the larger commercial success for Queen worldwide doesn't really come as a surprise for me.
On the other hand there's Metallica, a band that evolved from a raw thrash ensemble in the early 80ies over a band that garnered some Mainstream success in the 90ies with their black album (I won't say "major" mainstream success, for even though Nothing Else Matters was a huge hit, they were not able to follow up that level of mainstream attention ever again, not even with other hit singles such as "The Memory Remains" or the St.Anger-sinlges), which served some tuned-down Metal compared to their older, more aggressive stuff, but who essentially always remained one of the leading acts in the Metal scene more so than in any "Mainstream".
Now while that doesn't say anything about the quality of the music, it most likely says something about the fan communities - I believe a die hard Metallica fan will hardly find the music of Queen attractive, and vice versa. I, as an avid fan of European Power Metal, love both bands - Metallica for their work they did for the foundations of "Heavy Metal", with their heavy duty riffings and also for their work in making Metal "socially accepted" in the 90ies with the success of their Black Album; and Queen for their brilliant work with choruses and great harmonies that paved the way for the entire genre of (Euro) Power Metal more than any other band did; without Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody, Innuendo, The Show Must Go On etc... I believe we would never have seen bands like Helloween, Blind Guardian (who actually also named one of their albums "A Night At The Opera") or Stratovarius, who created a genre of their own in the 80ies, which is heavily inspired by the works of Queen.
Now I can understand someone who likes Metallica, which is a band with a more socially critical (especially in their great lyrics, which I consider among the very best Metal has to offer), no-nonsense attitude that doesn't rely on "show" elements that much, but focuses on "kicking butt" with their music; whereas Queen have always been much more flamboyant and over-the-top, both in their music and also in their image; and naturally I'd say that those two very different styles would almost inevitably provoke conflicts. Personally, as said, I like both bands - but for my personal taste, Queen was much more important - both because they were more accessible to a greater group of people, not only because of their work on the movies Highlander and Flash Gordon, and because they laid the groundwork for many Power Metal bands of the 80ies - and also had the musically much more interesting and sophisticated material of the two. Metallica? Great band, but to me, not the best or most important Rock band of all time. But a very deserving second place.
The one advantage Metallica (might) have, though, is that they're still going strong - and while I highly doubt they'll ever regain the importance they had in the 80ies as one of the "founding fathers" of Thrash Metal, they still have a huge fan following today, and nowadays music stations, MTV etc... are all much more likely to play Rock and especially Metal again than they were in 90ies - so together with their fan following and more promotion on mass media, I believe it is a safe bet to say that Metallica will have more success in the years to come than Queen, even if they are doing new albums and tour now. Because generally, the Queen fan demographic is an older one and I believe that statistically, older people are less likely to purchase any CDs than the younger following Metallica has - so that will give Metallica an additional boost when it comes to CD sales and chart entries.
And nonetheless, no matter how successful Metallica will still be in the future (and even St. Anger was a very big success, and I personally hate that album because of its sound) - for me, Queen has still done more, or at least, the more important things throughout their career than the Mets. But who knows what is yet to come? At this point in time, for me the greater Rock band of the two remains Queen.
That being said, though, that I for one can - at least partially - understand the heated arguments.
We obviously have two great bands here. Now by the difference in styles alone, these two bands will probably have very different groups of fans. While I see Queen as a more "Mainstream"-compatible band, since their music isn't what one could consider too "hard" or too "metal", and some of their (especially the 80ies) stuff is quite close to "Pop" music, with the massive use of synthie sounds in that period of time, additionally to the still basic "rock" foundation of their music, the larger commercial success for Queen worldwide doesn't really come as a surprise for me.
On the other hand there's Metallica, a band that evolved from a raw thrash ensemble in the early 80ies over a band that garnered some Mainstream success in the 90ies with their black album (I won't say "major" mainstream success, for even though Nothing Else Matters was a huge hit, they were not able to follow up that level of mainstream attention ever again, not even with other hit singles such as "The Memory Remains" or the St.Anger-sinlges), which served some tuned-down Metal compared to their older, more aggressive stuff, but who essentially always remained one of the leading acts in the Metal scene more so than in any "Mainstream".
Now while that doesn't say anything about the quality of the music, it most likely says something about the fan communities - I believe a die hard Metallica fan will hardly find the music of Queen attractive, and vice versa. I, as an avid fan of European Power Metal, love both bands - Metallica for their work they did for the foundations of "Heavy Metal", with their heavy duty riffings and also for their work in making Metal "socially accepted" in the 90ies with the success of their Black Album; and Queen for their brilliant work with choruses and great harmonies that paved the way for the entire genre of (Euro) Power Metal more than any other band did; without Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody, Innuendo, The Show Must Go On etc... I believe we would never have seen bands like Helloween, Blind Guardian (who actually also named one of their albums "A Night At The Opera") or Stratovarius, who created a genre of their own in the 80ies, which is heavily inspired by the works of Queen.
Now I can understand someone who likes Metallica, which is a band with a more socially critical (especially in their great lyrics, which I consider among the very best Metal has to offer), no-nonsense attitude that doesn't rely on "show" elements that much, but focuses on "kicking butt" with their music; whereas Queen have always been much more flamboyant and over-the-top, both in their music and also in their image; and naturally I'd say that those two very different styles would almost inevitably provoke conflicts. Personally, as said, I like both bands - but for my personal taste, Queen was much more important - both because they were more accessible to a greater group of people, not only because of their work on the movies Highlander and Flash Gordon, and because they laid the groundwork for many Power Metal bands of the 80ies - and also had the musically much more interesting and sophisticated material of the two. Metallica? Great band, but to me, not the best or most important Rock band of all time. But a very deserving second place.
The one advantage Metallica (might) have, though, is that they're still going strong - and while I highly doubt they'll ever regain the importance they had in the 80ies as one of the "founding fathers" of Thrash Metal, they still have a huge fan following today, and nowadays music stations, MTV etc... are all much more likely to play Rock and especially Metal again than they were in 90ies - so together with their fan following and more promotion on mass media, I believe it is a safe bet to say that Metallica will have more success in the years to come than Queen, even if they are doing new albums and tour now. Because generally, the Queen fan demographic is an older one and I believe that statistically, older people are less likely to purchase any CDs than the younger following Metallica has - so that will give Metallica an additional boost when it comes to CD sales and chart entries.
And nonetheless, no matter how successful Metallica will still be in the future (and even St. Anger was a very big success, and I personally hate that album because of its sound) - for me, Queen has still done more, or at least, the more important things throughout their career than the Mets. But who knows what is yet to come? At this point in time, for me the greater Rock band of the two remains Queen.
HBK-aholic
Shawn Michaels ❤
Easily, the toughest match up of the whole tournament. I don't honestly think we could have had a better, or closer, final match up. Which is a credit to just how good this tournament was, and to just how great rock music is.
Metallica are one of the best bands ever to hit the music industry. I don't think they've ever released an album that was bad. You can credit so many good rock bands today to Metallica, and so many of them list Metallica as an influence of theres. For years to come this band will be 'the' band of metal music. I think every new band will be compared to them, and will be thought of in comparison to Metallica. On a scale of 1-10 Metallica are 10, and every other metal band will be rated against them.
What's funny, is that I can say exactly the same thing about Queen. Queen aren't a heavy metal band. And therefore both these bands are the highest of the high on their specific genres. In my opinion, it is so hard to choose between the 2 when it comes to the greatest of all time. In the end I think it comes down to the personal preference of the bands. And I apologise but that's what I have to put it down to, because everything else about them is so evenly matched.
Metallica are pretty much the only heavy metal band I listen to, apart from a few other randoms. They are all that is right about metal and people should listen to them before slating the genre. However, queen are one of my all time favourite bands. everyone knows a queen song, and I love pretty much every one they have ever brought out. I listen to them on almost a daily basis. Therefore my vote has to go to Queen. It seems unfair on Metallica, but at the same time, if the only band that could beat them is Queen, that says a lot.
Metallica are one of the best bands ever to hit the music industry. I don't think they've ever released an album that was bad. You can credit so many good rock bands today to Metallica, and so many of them list Metallica as an influence of theres. For years to come this band will be 'the' band of metal music. I think every new band will be compared to them, and will be thought of in comparison to Metallica. On a scale of 1-10 Metallica are 10, and every other metal band will be rated against them.
What's funny, is that I can say exactly the same thing about Queen. Queen aren't a heavy metal band. And therefore both these bands are the highest of the high on their specific genres. In my opinion, it is so hard to choose between the 2 when it comes to the greatest of all time. In the end I think it comes down to the personal preference of the bands. And I apologise but that's what I have to put it down to, because everything else about them is so evenly matched.
Metallica are pretty much the only heavy metal band I listen to, apart from a few other randoms. They are all that is right about metal and people should listen to them before slating the genre. However, queen are one of my all time favourite bands. everyone knows a queen song, and I love pretty much every one they have ever brought out. I listen to them on almost a daily basis. Therefore my vote has to go to Queen. It seems unfair on Metallica, but at the same time, if the only band that could beat them is Queen, that says a lot.
K
Koko B Ware's Parrot-Kes!
Guest
I really don't want to get dumb for 'flaming' or whatever, but to everyone in this debate, whether you are supporting Metallica or Queen, just look at the sheer idiocy of this statement.
Two of the biggest singalongs of all time and he only knows them through made-for-kids film about a kids' ice hockey team.
Oh. My. God.
justinsayne
Cody Rhodes is an excellant
I fail to see the idiocy in his comment, I'm sure there are a shit load of people who wouldn't know of Queen if it weren't for that movie, hell I grew up with people who had never heard Bohemian Rhapsody until Waynes World came out, many people first hear bands from them having their songs used in movies, that by no means makes his statement that of sheer idiocy what so ever, fuck do you have any idea of how many people hadn't heard Johnny Cash before Walk The Line Came out?!?, it make perfect sense for any young Queen fan to have first heard Queen because of that movie, now I'm not sure how young jmt is but I'm willing to bet he was relatively young when Mighty Ducks came out, and probably didn't listen to a lot of classic rock at that age, so it's very easy for him to have never heard of them until he saw that movie
IrishCanadian25
Going on 10 years with WrestleZone
Tied at 24. Awesome.
I wanted to post something that Matt Moses posted originally in the Covers and Remakes thread, to remind us all just how cool having these two bands in the finals really is.
[youtube]RMWwOgeg2nA[/youtube]
I wanted to post something that Matt Moses posted originally in the Covers and Remakes thread, to remind us all just how cool having these two bands in the finals really is.
[youtube]RMWwOgeg2nA[/youtube]
FoleyIsGod
Hardcore Legend
I voted for Queen as they have influenced me more than Metallica ever did. That said however, Metallica are an awesome band(who seem to have lost thier way past couple ofalbums) and I hope they can continue their success.
Freddie Mercury was an excellent songwriter who was taken from us far too early. R.I.P!
Freddie Mercury was an excellent songwriter who was taken from us far too early. R.I.P!
My$terio_Fan
I can do whatever I want
I voted for Queen. This was a hard choice since Metallica is a great metal band but I think Queen has definetly influenced alot of other bands. Queen was just not a rock band per say, their songs covered from rock, pop, arena rock, ect....and many of their songs are world wide known classics. I bet alot of people could name at least 5 Queen songs(and I mean general public not just this board)Many general fans probably wouldnt know 5 metallica songs. Both have sold Millions of records(Queen is the bigger known world wide). Queen just seems like the epitome of rock and imo they deserve to win.
edge_head2008
New Member
I voted for Metallica. They've been my favorite band for as long as I can remember. They're just so great. I don't think they've ever written a bad song. I even liked St. Anger, though I didn't like the snare drum that Lars used. It sounded like someone hitting a barrel with a crowbar. I never really liked Queen that much, but I can respect their music. Still I had to vote for Metallica.
Ill go with Queen here. Metallica isn't a good Rock band, they are a good Metal Band. Queen is the best band who I would consider Rock. They were able to take out Led Zeppelin, So you have to give them that. The Final should have been LZ vs Queen. Queens impressive streak of amazing albums and songs are no match against the recently poor Metallica.
Last Monday I went to see we will rock you-the queen musical.
Best 2 hours of my fucking life.
Every song was memorable and funny to watch being acted out.The band were loud and simply amazing.And the songs were just.........perfect really.....
Another reason why I'm voting for Queen is......can anyone actully remember a full Metallica song of the top of there head?With Queen you can do it easily!
Simple as-Better songs,Better music,Better Everything-Queen.
Best 2 hours of my fucking life.
Every song was memorable and funny to watch being acted out.The band were loud and simply amazing.And the songs were just.........perfect really.....
Another reason why I'm voting for Queen is......can anyone actully remember a full Metallica song of the top of there head?With Queen you can do it easily!
Simple as-Better songs,Better music,Better Everything-Queen.
Wow, Queen won by a single vote...Holy close call, Batman! I think we all knew this was going to be a fiercely contested battle, but, to win by a single vote? Awesome! Better that, than a complete runaway I think. The suspense was great...always checking back to see of someone new voted, to change the outcome, not knowing until you woke up today who the winner was going to be...this tournament was a blast!
Bentallica
Work in progress
Man, did it cut close. Big kudos to the Metallica voters, they really made it interesting. I think this one match was the most voted for and closest match of the entire tournament, but that would be expected for the finals.
Jeez, it came SO CLOSE! I was worrying about it from time to time, especially the several times it was tied. But, Queen stands (barely) triumphant. So, as we should, let's break out in song...
We are the champions, my friends
And we'll keep on fighting till the end
We are the champions
We are the champions
No time for losers
Cause we are the champions...
Of the world
Great tourny, guys.
Jeez, it came SO CLOSE! I was worrying about it from time to time, especially the several times it was tied. But, Queen stands (barely) triumphant. So, as we should, let's break out in song...
We are the champions, my friends
And we'll keep on fighting till the end
We are the champions
We are the champions
No time for losers
Cause we are the champions...
Of the world
Great tourny, guys.
IrishCanadian25
Going on 10 years with WrestleZone
1st Ever WrestleZone Rock Tournament Champions
QUEEN!
Wow, one vote. Could not have asked for a better final. Everyone posted, the arguments got hot, and two of THE GREATEST bands ever, Metallica and Queen, came within one vote of each other. Had this been a blowout, it would have been a disappointment. I found myself checking the votes every few hours, all week long.
I also want to thank EVERYONE who took part in this marathon. From everybody who nominated bands and helped narrow the field, to those who took time to post and debate, thank youf or making this tournament a relative success. Justin, Shadow, Foley, Ben, KB, Derf, HBK, Davi, Sam, HBP, Jake, etc. You're all awesome, and I hope you had fun.
Plenty of time for reaction, and to let us know which bands YOU feel got screwed, which you feel were over rated, and which you learned new respect for. For me, I got into Muse thanks to this tournament and Sam's efforts to let us know about them. But I still can't do the Arctic Monkeys. Sorry Luth.
Let people know which bands I personally think got screwed? I dunno if anyone got outright robbed, but I do have to say I was disappointed to see the Beatles, Elvis, and U2 bow out as early as they did. I think the Beatles and Elvis were both vastly unappreciated by the voters for their influence over the entire genre of rock and roll, both were huge pioneers, enormously successful, and left the tournament too early...as for the boys from Dublin, what can I say, I am a U2 mark, and wanted them to do well just because I love their music.