I often like to browse Wikipedia articles for an artist/band's entire discography to find the point at which they fell off. Often once the album quality drops, then there's less and less reviews, charts in fewer places, and eventually they fall into obscurity. More or less a direct correlation between commercial and critical success for any long-term act.
That isn't really the case for Queen. Critically, they peak with A Night At The Opera, then it's downhill from there. Most of their '80s output has woefully low scores across the board. And yet, they kept getting #1 hits and albums right through to Innuendo. Many of their post-1975 songs are still played commonly on buttrock and pop stations. Some of their biggest, most well-loved songs are from their critical "nadir" (Flash, Under Pressure, Radio Gaga, IWTBF, Hammer To Fall, One Vision, A Kind of Magic etc.)
So, what happened? Did they say something to upset critics? Were they mad some bucktoothed bong buttpirate was effortlessly mogging all of their preferred acts? (yes I know he was a Parsi born in Zanzibar) It's so strange seeing these classic albums with 3/10, 2/5 scores etc.
What exactly makes them "cheesy"? I always see people calling them that
Juan Rivera
It was obnoxious buttrock and was regarded that way by most people up until the present day when it became considered good because the singer was gay.
Lincoln Ross
It's because they were fantastic songwriters who made catchy pop tunes that capitalised on contemporary trends and appealed directly to the masses through sleek musicianship, glamorous production, awe-inspiring vocals, and exciting, crowd-rallying lyrical bravado. At any level of analysis beyond surface-level, it's plainly obvious that there isn't much meaningful or thought-provoking substance beyond that, which is the music critic's job to split apart and examine meticulously.
Jeremiah Hernandez
Singing a lot of notes or singing really high or making a song that's really 3 short songs together was not impressive to anybody who knows anything about music. And there were better rock bands doing all those things earlier than Queen.
Asher Turner
>what exactly makes them cheesy Have you ever listened to them?? That’s like their whole schtick not saying they are bad but come on also they are definitely overrated imo
Leo Perry
Post-Night At The Opera they put out absolutely amazing singles - like pretty much all the songs you mention - but the albums themselves had an utter ton of filler. There's a reason their first Greatest Hits album sold so astonishingly well, because the singles were so much better than most of the album tracks.
Luis Morales
Queen is the definition of midwit filter band
Asher Morris
Lmao at all the "experts" on here knocking Queen with their pathetic little insults.
Isaiah Collins
YOu need to put them in context, which was the 80s. The zeitgeist was more focused on new wave, post-punk, later even hair rock. Queen with its musical rock shtick seemed too theatrical and dramatic for that decade. Seemed cheasy and out of place. They just didn't sound modern, they sounded like they were try-harding to be symphonic rock. In the 80s, of all times. But they still got hits because the melodies were appealing to the masses. But the style was kinda over-dramatic and camp.
Cooper Ramirez
Almost every Queen fan I have met has been a bland and generic dude. Basic likes and taste on most things in life. They like everything to simple and easy. They sing along loudly to Bohemian Rhapsody in the pub, yet probably have no idea what it is they are actually singing about.
Plus, when a member dies, they almost become untouchable, like at rap fans with Biggie and 2Pac. They all nod along to the Greatest of All Time BS.
Nathan Young
Queen BTFO all music in 1978 and all their politically correct journalist core music, as can be viewed, people are seething to this day. Your band never produced a note of beauty and intellectual lyricism like this.
this. Queens fans are basic as shit. Some guy on Any Forums a while back said that Queen is the greatest band that had no good albums because half of the songs were good and the other half were absolute garbage. They were a singles band plain and simple
Ryan Lewis
Too campy yet adult contemporary at the same time
Kayden Gonzalez
About as much a singles band as The Beatles, all of their 70s albums are amazing front to back. Sheer Heart Attack is one of the best mainstream Rock records of the time, it just shows how you know jack about the band.
Kevin Wright
Bro Queen is the most normal, top of the curve, Z = 0, largest percentile-tier band. It's literally a midwit attractor. If 'Reddit' was a band, it'd be Queen, with le quirky astronomer guitar man, le flashy homosexual and some other simps.
Camden Ramirez
Freddy was amazing but the band's music was bland and boring. Bohemian Rapsody is nothing like the rest of their music.
Samuel Bennett
BII-CYCLE! BII-CYCLE! BII-CYCLE! I want to RIde my biCYCLE I want to ride my BIKE
Fuck Queen.
Jason Gray
>t-they just are, OK?! >So, what happened? they were too popular for the snobbish critics
Daniel Wright
I feel like you guys have never actually tried to listen to their albums. Their first four are really damn good front to back. I don't know how this board is obsessed with MCR but hates Queen.
Dominic Bell
hating "normie" things doesn't make you interresting
