Progarchives, the progressive rock ultimate discography
Progarchives, the progressive rock ultimate discography
Queen - Queen + Paul Rodgers: The Cosmos Rocks CD (album) cover



Prog Related

From, the ultimate progressive rock music website

Bookmark and Share
2 stars I'm a real queen fan even of their work in the 80s but here you won't find any jewel. All tracks are straight forward rock and above all country/blues standards with no imagination. Worst of all, most of the lyrics are dumb or uninteresting. So, you can easily pass your way if you're expecting anything prog. If you are searching for average fm for your road trip, this will do the job but the strict minimum. Only 3 tracks of this release will be played during the tour, so you can see the support of the new album won't be massive (fortunately). 2 stars and I'm kind.
Report this review (#182796)
Posted Thursday, September 18, 2008 | Review Permalink
2 stars I never did have high hopes on this one - Freddie Mercury just cannot ever be replaced - and not just because of his idiosyncratic voice, but also because of his extraordinary songwriting and arranging skills. And, not surprisingly, this shows on The Cosmos Rocks. The songs here are more reminiscent of Bad Company and Free than of Queen - they are too simple, too straightforward, too unimaginative. Not only that, but the album is way longer than it should have been. That being said, if you are a fan of classic rock, after a few listens you'll find a few good numbers, like It's time to shine, We Believe and Say it's not true. They are nothing to write home about, though. Paul Rodgers has a decent voice, and does his best to do the impossible, namely, replace Freddie, and although he fails, he succeeds in evoking compassion with the listener. Overall, I'd say this is a decent effort, but a long, long way from Queen at their best. 2,5/5
Report this review (#186606)
Posted Tuesday, October 21, 2008 | Review Permalink
2 stars I am deeply torn about this album and this incarnation of the band.

On one hand, the idea of Queen carrying on without Freddie is unthinkable, as he was such a prominant and vital part of the band (it seems John Deacon agrees, as he hasn't participated in anything since the the tribute show). It smacks of blasphamy, or at the very least opportunism. But on the other, over fifteen years have passed, and they have given it respectful distance, as well as not noting Paul Rodgers as a replacement, but as an additional singer (hence the +). I admire that they wanted to release new music and not become as May has said their own tribute band. So where do I stand? Putting aside the ethical issues, I just listened to the music.

What suprisingly comes out is a decent classic rock album. Paul Rodgers voice is as rich, warm and soulful as it has always been, and he becomes the real highlight of the album. He succeeds the most in the more bluesy tunes where his full throated delivery transforms pedestrian songwriting. All That Glitters, Time To Shine and Small are all minor gems. May and Taylor show a lot of restraint, adding good texture and warmth to the proceedings.

Two real disappointments to this album though. The songwriting is horrible. Lyrically ridiculous and the music is all cliche. There are real cringe worthy moments here, the greatest being Surf's Up School's Out which while sounding the most like Queen, it also sounds the most like a train crash, overdriven by noise. C-Lebrity sound like any song a fading rock band would release to be relevant in the 00's, and Warboys has got Roger Taylor's writing all over it, being very literal and plodding.

The most upsetting thing is that they didn't take the opportunity to sound like Queen. This album should have been huge, with crushing guitar riffs and huge choruses. Maybe they didn't want to be obvious, but why blow an opportunity to capitalize on their strengths. Both May and Taylor had done it on their solo career, why wouldn't they do it here. It is truly the legacy of Queen, yet they underplay consistantly.

A good, but not great album. I like it, but I am uninspired by it. A real shame.

Report this review (#190088)
Posted Friday, November 21, 2008 | Review Permalink
2 stars As a long time Queen fan, and a very serious collector, I was very excited when I heard that Brian and Roger were going to release something. I was certainly less excited to find that ex Free / Bad Company vocalist was going to add his two cents! The last recorded Queen material was the 1997 tribute to Freddie No One But You. This was and will always be the final Queen song in my opinion. Although Freddie was gone, there was a magic about the tune, and John Deacon was still part of the seems he knew when to pack it in.

I don't want to review this album track by track as I did with EVERY other Queen album, because this is simply not a Queen's a bad collaboration that really didn't work. The ballads, although musically good, have some absolutely terrible lyrics courtesy of Paul Rogers. The rockers never rock as hard as Queen with Freddie, the ballads aren't as emotional as they were with Freddie, and there is nothing that would tell you this is Queen apart from Brian's distinct guitar sound.

Queen were always a rather regal band...they always maintained some level of majesty. You don't have to like Queen's music, but if it was recorded in 1974 or knew it was Queen. This album is a collection of disjointed songs that do nothing for me at all. There are attempts at anthemic choruses on this album, and for the most part they get the job done...but at times they also sound forced, like a band trying way too hard at recapturing some identity and failing.

If you look at this as just an album of music, and you like blues / hard rock, go grab it...just don't expect any of the trademark sound. Even Hot Space is better than this simply because of Freddie's involvement on the former. In my opinion, the song Say It's Not True, written by Roger Taylor, may be the best song on the album. It contains vocal performances from all three members and a great guitar may be the only song on the album where you can hear the Queen of old...begging to be put to sleep before all dignity is lost. Leave this alone and go listen to anything with Freddie...even if you hate the Freddie stuff...even if you hate Queen...although if you do hate Queen, this review will mean nothing to you and you'll probably never see it in the first place.

Report this review (#191012)
Posted Saturday, November 29, 2008 | Review Permalink
1 stars Why did gods of rock punish us this way? Why the use of the Queen brand in an un-queen album with an un-queen singer? I knew this was going to be a failure, but I didn't ever expect this. According to my sources this is an album pleased Bad Company's fans (a band that I don´t care) but not Queen's. Of course not! There's nothing Queen in The Cosmos Rocks. Sure some note here, some note there, some reminiscet queen-esque chorus over there, but that's all, no energy, no melody, no voice, no lyrics....nothing. Heck, even Brian May's solo albums are much, much, much, better than this aberration. A bad album for two of the best musicians (May and Taylor) of the rock world. And this proves the best music Mercury, May, Taylor and Deacon could make was being a group, and only this way. Only.
Report this review (#191954)
Posted Friday, December 5, 2008 | Review Permalink
2 stars When you see a collaboration named Queen + Paul Rodgers you expect Queen with Paul Rodgers as a guest musician. What you really get is Bad Company with guest appearance by Brian May and Roger Taylor...

That's how I see it. It's simply not Queen. All the little elements that made Queen such a great band are absent here. No vocal harmonies, no uplifting melodies, no "feeling"... Paul Rodgers is an OK musician but just not in the same league as Queen has always been in. If he had only filled in as a vocalist on couple of songs, maybe that wouldn't be so bad. But he dominated the album too much. Brian May and Roger Taylor are additions to Rodgers, not other way round. Rodgers' bluesy style 'purged' the old Queen style. What you get is mostly just a generic blues rock. There are some catchy melodies here and there (especially in the May-penned ballads "Small" and "We Believe") but Paul Rodgers vocals kill it all. If only Brian and Roger sung more on this album it would feel more Queen-like...

All the mentioned circumstantes, plus the fact that I'm reviewing it on a progressive rock site, force me to give it no more than 2 stars. And I'm being really generous...

Report this review (#218670)
Posted Thursday, May 28, 2009 | Review Permalink
Marty McFly
Errors and Omissions Team
1 stars You know guys, this is blasphemy. Not much rock groups had such a distinctive voice like Freddie had. First death blow was gig which they had with this Paul Rogers not-so-trusty guy. He just can't be with Queen. Even when his name is behind them. It's just not Queen anymore. They could have done nice collaboration, something new, but use for this Queen's name, it's not something I could like. Music itself is uneasy to listen for me, because I lack Freddie's voice. Well, who doesn't, huh. One of few bands which had exactly the same lineup for all band's duration.

Enough, it's hard to continue with this one, so I better stop now. Don't Stop Freddie Now, flush out this PR crap. Like John Deacon said, (well, you know what he said about him).

Report this review (#224564)
Posted Sunday, July 5, 2009 | Review Permalink
1 stars What's this,boys ? Do you believe that you bring back good old times with Freddie ? You know that's impossible.I know it, too, but there were times when i believed it (when I was a child). I don't understand of meaning this album. I'm not sayin' that Rodgers is bad singer, but simply it's NOT Queen with him. Almost everyone who likes real Queen know that Queen is (unfortunately) away in the sea of past, in spite of that their songs are still with us (remember about 'We Are The Champions' and some sport matches like soccer or hockey championships). I haven't anything against your actual music style, it's rock and this no one take away from you, but this album ... It hurts me. I am Queen fan for several long years, but this drag me down on the floor. Brian, Roger, don't be angry with me if you'll read this review, but I can't abide it. I take it like a treachery on past times. Sorry.
Report this review (#228447)
Posted Sunday, July 26, 2009 | Review Permalink
1 stars Now in the moment I'm writing this review most of the people that will read it will probably think : "this is another queen fan who's really enraged with Brian May and Roger Taylor because they dared releasing a brand new studio album without Freddie, so he's going to smash it to pieces with these lines"...that's not true. First of all the release is not a Queen release, but it's Queen + Paul Rodgers, so that's not the problem at all. The problem is that: 1. this album is not absolutely prog. 2. The songs are awful. 3. It's boring.

All the tracks are surrounded by a certain "shade of grey" as Pink Floyd said once on "A great day for freedom", since they move on bluesy grounds never succeeding in keep the listener interest high. This release is really a waste of time and money, the only "decent" song is "Say it's not true" that anyway loses very soon its magic because of the chaotic arrangement. Rarely happened to me to write a 1 star review, anyway this time I'm absolutely sure of what I'm doing.

My rating is 1 star.

Report this review (#233359)
Posted Friday, August 21, 2009 | Review Permalink
2 stars A lot of this is unfair on Paul Rogers, and has much to do with the disappointment of him not being Freddie. There's no doubt in my mind that Paul is the more talented singer by a long way (though Freddie had a great voice and style, that's not the same thing as being a great vocalist per se). I was very interested to see what the combination of Paul and Queen would produce, I thought of it as an unusual combination, like a Mars bar with ice cream.

I never liked Free or Bad Company, they seemed too simplistic and corny to me, but I always thought that Paul Rogers was an exceptional singer, and saw that as the reason his two bands were successful. So I was intrigued to check out the results of the new collaboration. I have to say categorically that it just doesn't work. I think the legacy of Queen is too difficult for anyone to transcend and should be left there. Paul should not be stigmatised, he's still a great vocalist, but this was a mismatch, anyone but Freddie would be. Queen should pack it in and never be seen again, let the legacy live, not the band.

Report this review (#361903)
Posted Thursday, December 23, 2010 | Review Permalink
Honorary Collaborator
3 stars I dusted this album off this morning and gave it a spin and was actually quite surprised on how much I enjoyed it. As a standalone, this album is much better than it is given credit for. Paul Rodgers is no Freddy Mercury, but he has a very good and distinctive rock and roll voice. With previous listens to this album, I do remember thinking that it was decent enough, but this really isn't Queen. I sat down with the lyrics book to listen to this album this morning, with the anticipation that this would be bad. I was pleasantly surprised. It seemed as though I would go into each song thinking that this will be bad, and then it would start to play, and it was like, "nope this song is good too". The standout songs for me were Small, Warboys, We Believe, and Some Things That Glitter. The song C-lebrity is oh-so-real commentary on reality TV, and pseudo C-lebrities like the Kardashians and Hiltons of the world, and it includes Taylor Hawkins from the Foo Fighters with some guest vocals. Unfortunately, the worst part of this album is the use of the Queen name. Even though it is Queen + Paul Rodgers, the lack of Freddy Mercury and John Deacon makes it a bit of a travesty to use the Queen name. I would really have to say that in a "blind taste test" I am pretty certain that most people would not have been able to guess that this was Queen, although I think that Brian May's guitar technique and sound does show up from time to time to add that bit of Queen touch. Overall, I think that this is a really good album, but it is non-essential. Really, the worst thing about it is the exploitation of the Queen name, but if you can get beyond that, the underlying music and lyrics are actually worthy of the Cosmos' love.
Report this review (#855345)
Posted Saturday, November 10, 2012 | Review Permalink

QUEEN Queen + Paul Rodgers: The Cosmos Rocks ratings only

chronological order | showing rating only

Post a review of QUEEN Queen + Paul Rodgers: The Cosmos Rocks

You must be a forum member to post a review, please register here if you are not.


As a registered member (register here if not), you can post rating/reviews (& edit later), comments reviews and submit new albums.

You are not logged, please complete authentication before continuing (use forum credentials).

Forum user
Forum password

Copyright Prog Archives, All rights reserved. | Legal Notice | Privacy Policy | Advertise | RSS + syndications

Other sites in the MAC network: — jazz music reviews and archives | — metal music reviews and archives