Queen as a legacy act

Discuss current and upcoming Queen projects.

Queen as a legacy act

Postby Sir Didymus » Fri Sep 30, 2016 9:40 pm

I saw a post from fairydandy elsewhere, and while I'm not sure this was his intent, it chimed with my feelings on the band in recent years.

fairydandy wrote:QPL must be reading these comments wondering what the hell they have done now! Or more likely, someone at QPL is sitting there saying, 'I fucking told them what would happen if they release it like this'....

Queen is a nationally treasured band, but essentially the big sales are over. They don't have to give us anything at all, but to give us half-baked stuff like this, is always going to attract criticism.

I think it will sell moderately well though, 'cause despite our objections, we all want the sessions in good quality.


Moving to Universal Island (and somehow, back to Virgin EMI) should have been the start of Queen's reappraisal. And for a brief time there, when the reissues came out, it was. The London exhibition, the new compilations, the press interest... there was a real buzz about the band for the first time in years.

And then - nothing.

Look in your local record stores at the records that are heavily promoted from 'legacy artists'. Look on music websites and newspaper polls of great rock bands, classic rock songs, greatest riffs etc etc. Hell, look at the merchandise on sale everywhere from alternative stores to Primark and back again.

AC/DC - Check. Bowie - Check. Rolling Stones, Prince, Nirvana, Beatles, Led Zeppelin - check.

Why, oh, why, are Queen continually forgotten about? There's a whole new generation of younger music lovers out there, going back and rediscovering classic rock bands of the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s. And Queen are categorically NOT one of them: their music is still being marketed at the 'dads' who are now, in all likelihood, 'granddads'.

This vinyl revival and retrospective culture was the perfect time to finally make Queen 'cool'. And as per usual, it seems someone messed it up. Was it the Adam Lambert nonsense? Was it the lack of a new hook for the old hits? Was it simply that people only know the 'cheesy' singles? Was it the truly awful cover artwork for EVERYTHING they've released over the last ten years except Queen Forever?

Either way... something's going wrong. Universal spent a lot of money securing the band, and I'd be surprised if they're not regretting it by now...
"Years will come, years will go, and politicians will do f*** all to make the world a better place. But all over the world, young men and young women will always dream dreams and put those dreams into song."
The Count
 
Sir Didymus
Suburban Wonderfox
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 2374
Images: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:58 am
Location: Manchester, mostly.
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 91 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby TheHero » Fri Sep 30, 2016 10:09 pm

I wonder who decides the tracklistings ? John ? :shock:
The cover art includes always Freddie, not the 3 others. Thank God Queen On Air is neutral.

Now we get a bonus live CD with songs like Allright, Allright.. Clearly the decision makers prefer Freddie. I don't think it' s Brian.
 
TheHero
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 3175
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: Europe
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 254 times
Been thanked: 122 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby QueenVault » Sat Oct 01, 2016 2:23 am

There are obviously some problems with QPL, it's project team, and those who have the final say of releases. After a very promising Rainbow release, it seems as though the amount of content available for releases is getting thinner and the amount of filler is increasing. I would imagine once a core product is decided upon, Universal requests bonus content for a deluxe edition, which appears to be standard practice for current artists and legacy releases. Universal seems to be interested in many formats to reach the most consumers as possible, which I think is a smart move.

The Rainbow release had an excellent core product, the November CD and DVD. They had the next step up, which was both concerts, and finally an excellent Super box with 2 CDs, a DVD, Blu-Ray and book. The result was a release that went to #11 in the UK and #66 in the US. A very good result, especially for a live product. Quality equaled sales.

Forever is a product that was structured in a similar way. The core CD, a 2 CD, and a vinyl box. I was more than pleased with this product because of the new songs. It is a compilation format that many have used. New songs to support a compilation that will appeal to a general audience. The Who come to mind with their Now And Then release. The result was a #5 in the UK and #38 in the US. Of course, this product is a lot of filler, but it's a compilation, so I can get behind the concept. Worthwhile new content equaled sales.

Odeon should have followed the format of Rainbow. Instead, we got a very overpriced Deluxe Box with all filler. Paying that much to get one more song (on just vinyl no less) is ridiculous. I'm not completely against the memorabilia that's included in these boxes (it worked well for Rainbow), but the balloons should have been an indicator that something was really wrong. Could you imagine The Who Live At Leeds or Hendrix Live at Woodstock packaged with balloons? The result, #40 in the UK and not charting in the US. What would have been better? Maybe some other live content from that era? Perhaps the full soundcheck audio (in all fairness, if it exists)?

On to my main point, which is On Air. Unless you are in the top stratosphere like Led Zeppelin or The Beatles, BBC Sessions are not a release that is going to be bought by the general public. This is a fan-based release. Hendrix's BBC sessions went to #42 in the UK and #50 in the US. The Who's BBC sessions went to #24 in the UK and #101 in the US.

I imagine that when it was agreed that the next release would be On Air, Universal wanted a deluxe edition. If the main release isn't fan-oriented enough, a deluxe edition, in theory, is really the definition of fan service. So what do the fans get? Three incomplete concerts and a bunch of interviews that no one wants. I think ideally, the live concerts would be better served as individual live releases or as a live box project. No one wants incomplete concerts. LIve Magic and Rare Live are despised by the fan base as products. Compilations are fine for studio records, but are awful for live discs. I'd rather have none of the live stuff than have it butchered like this. I think a better deluxe edition would be the studio sessions, all of golders green and then maybe a single interview disc and put it all together at a lower price.

I honestly think that the product team at QPL do come up with some great ideas for products. For whatever reason, I think their suggestions are being ignored or watered down to the point of being useless. It's a shame because I'm sure a lot of work went into On Air. There's a lot of work to be done restoring and mastering audio,, obtaining raw materials, getting rights and clearances, etc. How will On Air sell? I'll predict #30 in the UK and not charting in the US at all.

So, what's next for Queen releases? It is glaringly obvious that they are getting thinner on content and are more and more likely to fill out product with useless filler (balloons, interviews, a singular sound check recording, etc). Anthologies aren't happening. I feel it's almost a miracle that we got the bonus material that we did in 2011. I guess a few more live releases are feasible, but again, how will they perform? Hyde Park may be the biggest draw as a concert, but may not be an attractive product for the consumer because of similar products available (Hammersmith, Rainbow). The mid 70s period is almost as well covered as the Magic period now. So, a revisited Live Killers maybe? What about after that? Some sort of revisited singles set with extended versions and B-sides? We're reaching the end of line for material that is deemed releasable.

Signing with Universal felt like a good, fresh start for the band. I think the 2011 releases were a step in the right direction. Rainbow will be remembered as the best product released in the Universal era. It has gone drastically downhill since then. It seems that QPL Management is unwilling to provide suitable, sellable content at this time. I think Greg and Gary know what the fans want. Roger and Brian do seem somewhat supportive of releasing material (most 2011 bonus tracks were Brian/Roger demos). What needs to change?
http://www.QueenVault.com
Updated November 5, 2017
 
QueenVault
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 2:50 pm
Location: State College, PA USA
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby soxtalon » Sat Oct 01, 2016 5:27 am

Quite honestly, I've said it before and I hate saying it again cause I don't wish it at all...but I think once B and or R join Freddie, we aren't going to get much. They see Queen as an active band and Brian certainly is headlong into a ton of things right now.

If you look at Freddie's solo releases, he has had the best releases of the bunch overall...And that's because it doesn't have somebody to precious to the material behind it. JB is far more clinical about the whole thing I would bet.

The best bet we have is the Live Killers box. We know they have a ton of material for it. There doesn't seem to be any format holding anything back. We know even B&R are not happy with the original Live Killers so would want a revisited version to be better anyways. I think this has the best chance to be a decent set.

Beyond that...it's probably a waiting game...
 
soxtalon
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:57 am
Location: Albany, NY
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 178 times
Been thanked: 135 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby musicalprostitute » Sat Oct 01, 2016 9:36 am

Sir Didymus wrote:I saw a post from fairydandy elsewhere, and while I'm not sure this was his intent, it chimed with my feelings on the band in recent years.

fairydandy wrote:QPL must be reading these comments wondering what the hell they have done now! Or more likely, someone at QPL is sitting there saying, 'I fucking told them what would happen if they release it like this'....

Queen is a nationally treasured band, but essentially the big sales are over. They don't have to give us anything at all, but to give us half-baked stuff like this, is always going to attract criticism.

I think it will sell moderately well though, 'cause despite our objections, we all want the sessions in good quality.


Moving to Universal Island (and somehow, back to Virgin EMI) should have been the start of Queen's reappraisal. And for a brief time there, when the reissues came out, it was. The London exhibition, the new compilations, the press interest... there was a real buzz about the band for the first time in years.

And then - nothing.

Look in your local record stores at the records that are heavily promoted from 'legacy artists'. Look on music websites and newspaper polls of great rock bands, classic rock songs, greatest riffs etc etc. Hell, look at the merchandise on sale everywhere from alternative stores to Primark and back again.

AC/DC - Check. Bowie - Check. Rolling Stones, Prince, Nirvana, Beatles, Led Zeppelin - check.

Why, oh, why, are Queen continually forgotten about? There's a whole new generation of younger music lovers out there, going back and rediscovering classic rock bands of the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s. And Queen are categorically NOT one of them: their music is still being marketed at the 'dads' who are now, in all likelihood, 'granddads'.

This vinyl revival and retrospective culture was the perfect time to finally make Queen 'cool'. And as per usual, it seems someone messed it up. Was it the Adam Lambert nonsense? Was it the lack of a new hook for the old hits? Was it simply that people only know the 'cheesy' singles? Was it the truly awful cover artwork for EVERYTHING they've released over the last ten years except Queen Forever?

Either way... something's going wrong. Universal spent a lot of money securing the band, and I'd be surprised if they're not regretting it by now...


Spot on. I feel exactly the same way...and as a loyal fan it frustrates me so very much.

There was a real buzz around the band after signing with Universal - especially the first few years of that contract (the exhibition, the Days Of Our Lives documentary, the Rainbow release...) and it felt a little like a second coming...hell, even the music critics were respectful and full of praise; but here we are in 2016 and things have definitely changed.

I think we are seen as a greatest hits band. Whereas other bands like The Beatles, Led Zep, Pink Floyd are respected for their complete bodies of work, Queen are overlooked time and time again and seemingly only prominent when it comes to talk of popularity and the big hits. Of course, the band themselves don't help this perception when they re-release the hits over and over again (as well as allowing many of those hits to be used in every advert going).

Queen are the rock ABBA now. Now, I love a bit of ABBA (I think they were great, classy songwriters) and am not stating this in a derogatory way; but, I find it incredibly depressing that a band who were so incredibly diverse and so very original in so many ways are now perceived as a popular, greatest hits band for the masses: I find it heart-breaking that the uniqueness and real talent of our band is repeatedly overlooked, while every man and his dog now claim to love Queen (with the same lack of passion one would say they loved the summer, for example).

Queen are truly popular, the hits have become part of the public consciousness, and there is a real affection for them on the whole...

...but at what cost?
 
musicalprostitute
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

Defend yourself, I bring catastrophe

      
 
Posts: 3011
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Essex and Cardiff.
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 361 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby Kes » Sat Oct 01, 2016 10:23 am

I thought back at the time of the 2011 remasters, that putting them out Genesis style, as single albums, double versions with surround mixes, and boxsets of five albums, with a bonus disc of B sides, extended versions, and other bonus tracks, was the way to go.

Shame, Queen II as a surround mix, would have been stunning, I'm sure.
What is left of your dream?
Just the words on your stone.
A man who learnt how to teach,
But forgot how to learn.
 
Kes
Moderator
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 14558
Images: 747
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 8:41 am
Location: London, England
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 338 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby JLP » Sat Oct 01, 2016 10:36 am

Call me an optimistic old fool but maybe when and if they stop touring and playing the greatest hits all the time, they just might settle down and put some decent releases out there.

I am reasonably happy with On Air bar the magic tour stuff but it could have been better ig GG was the whole gig.
Come on you Tigers.
 
JLP
Site Admin
 
User avatar

 

Growing old disgracefully

      
 
Posts: 10614
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:33 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 401 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby Sir Didymus » Sat Oct 01, 2016 11:18 am

I'm pretty happy with On Air too, and might even plump for the deluxe edition. As a standard 2-disc release, it's pretty solid.

But as mentioned above, the grossly inflated deluxe editions, the cost of vinyl copies of these new titles (£80+ for a 'mainstream' compilation album is ridiculous), and the limited marketing appeal are killing off the chance to find new audiences.

Queen sells to Queen fans, most of whom have been with the band since their real 1970-1991 lifespan. Queen doesn't appear to be selling to new people, and I think in time their legacy beyond a couple of hits will be reduced to a niche interest. They'll be less like The Beatles, and more like The Dave Clark Five. Less Led Zeppelin, more Rainbow. Less David Bowie, more Brian Eno.

And they can be so much more...
"Years will come, years will go, and politicians will do f*** all to make the world a better place. But all over the world, young men and young women will always dream dreams and put those dreams into song."
The Count
 
Sir Didymus
Suburban Wonderfox
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 2374
Images: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:58 am
Location: Manchester, mostly.
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 91 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby JLP » Sat Oct 01, 2016 12:17 pm

I doubt we will ever see a set like the Beatles Anthologies. I have all three but don't listen to them often as some of the quality is not that good. I think Queen are too precious to do that.
Come on you Tigers.
 
JLP
Site Admin
 
User avatar

 

Growing old disgracefully

      
 
Posts: 10614
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:33 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 401 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby Hernán » Sat Oct 01, 2016 3:21 pm

Sir Didymus wrote:I'm pretty happy with On Air too, and might even plump for the deluxe edition. As a standard 2-disc release, it's pretty solid.

But as mentioned above, the grossly inflated deluxe editions, the cost of vinyl copies of these new titles (£80+ for a 'mainstream' compilation album is ridiculous), and the limited marketing appeal are killing off the chance to find new audiences.

Queen sells to Queen fans, most of whom have been with the band since their real 1970-1991 lifespan. Queen doesn't appear to be selling to new people, and I think in time their legacy beyond a couple of hits will be reduced to a niche interest. They'll be less like The Beatles, and more like The Dave Clark Five. Less Led Zeppelin, more Rainbow. Less David Bowie, more Brian Eno.

And they can be so much more...


Sorry, buddy. But most of what you are saying just doesn't make much sense.

If there is any avenue through which the younger generations consume music these days, it is obviously Spotify and similar platforms. The days of physical releases, either on vinyl and CD, are well over. It is mostly about streaming now.

If you have a look, you will realize that Queen are way ahead of virtually any other classic band.

Up to about 2 months ago, Queen had 1.4 billion streams on Spotify. By comparasion, Led Zeppelin had 600 million, Pink Floyd and U2 about 800 million, etc.

Queen appeal more to the newer generations than probably any other "old" group, in some instances even more than The Beatles.

And I also think it is actually the likes of Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, etc., who rely more on their fanbases than anything else. Queen are more of a crossover act with a much higher and wider appeal.

I have a lot of respect for you, of course. But in this particular debate, I think you couldn't be more wrong.
 
Hernán
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 470
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 4:44 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 22 times
Been thanked: 27 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby Another_Roger » Sat Oct 01, 2016 3:46 pm

Calm down. I work as a teacher in primary school. When we talk about bands from the 70s and 80s Queen are one of the few bands with songs EVERYBODY has heard. Queen's biggest songs have such a wide appeal. If often amazes me. Everyone in my class (6th grade) have heard songs like We Will rock you, Don't Stop me Now, We are the Champions and Bohemian Rhapsody. In fact the 3 first is the ones they know the best.

If you ask them to name a song of Led Zeppelin, David Bowie, Nirvana etc they go: "Who are they? Never heard of them". So Queen's music is very strong in itself. And who can we thank for that? Queen's creative genius in their glory days. They had the abiility to create songs witha loooooong life span.
Last edited by Another_Roger on Sat Oct 01, 2016 4:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Another_Roger
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 9:18 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby Hernán » Sat Oct 01, 2016 3:51 pm

Another_Roger wrote:Calm down. I work as a teacher in primary school. When we talk about bands from the 70s and 80s Queen are one of the few bands with songs EVERYBODY has heard. Queen's biggest songs have such a wide appeal. If often amazes me. Everyone in my class (6th grade) have heard songs like We Will rock you, Don't Stop me Now, We are the Chamspions and Bohemian Rhapsody. In fact the 3 first is the ones they know the best.

If you ask them to name a song of Led Zeppelin, David Bowie, Nirvana etc they go: "Who are they? Never heard of them". So Queen's music is very strong in itself. And who can we thank for that? Queen's creative genius in their glory days. They had the abiility to create songs witha loooooon life span.


I totally agree with this, very well put. But I'm calm myself, my apologies to Sir Didymus if I sounded rude, it wasn't my intention.
 
Hernán
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 470
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 4:44 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 22 times
Been thanked: 27 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby action » Sat Oct 01, 2016 5:50 pm

the reason Queen isn't regarded as high as, say led zeppelin / AC/DC / black sabbath / rolling stones etc, is, Queen as a rock band doesn't really cut it.

that's why you always see freddie first on polls regarding best performer ever, but you rarely see Queen as best rock band ever.

the big problem here is the incredible uncharismatic / uninspired guitarist in the band. Brian doesnt have the looks, nor the coolness to come up with memorable riffs.

the cool players want to play jimmy page, Slash, iommi, hendrix. but brian? be serious. he couldnt write a cool riff if his life depended on it. it's just generic harmonies all over the place.

take the 2012 olympics for example. the freddie montage was cool but brians part was a big borefest (playing that stupid brighton rock solo again. cringeworthy), and if it wasn't for freddie's video brian would have no place in the ceremony. brian can't kiss Slash's feet when it comes to performing a cool solo.

when all is said and done, brian will be the weakest link in Queen's story, and the main reason why Queen, the band, won't be regarded higher.

Led zeppelin is remembered for killer riffs. so does sabbath. guns n roses. aerosmith.

Queen isn't remembered for the riffs. Queen is remembered for freddie.

in the meantime, brian and roger do everything in their power to tarnish the Queen legacy even further, touring with a travestite, releasing sub par product, and making a mockery of their fanbase.
.
 
action
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

.

      
 
Posts: 2357
Images: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:58 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 177 times
Been thanked: 196 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby Another_Roger » Sat Oct 01, 2016 5:55 pm

action wrote:the reason Queen isn't regarded as high as, say led zeppelin / AC/DC / black sabbath / rolling stones etc, is, Queen as a rock band doesn't really cut it.

that's why you always see freddie first on polls regarding best performer ever, but you rarely see Queen as best rock band ever.

the big problem here is the incredible uncharismatic / uninspired guitarist in the band. Brian doesnt have the looks, nor the coolness to come up with memorable riffs.

the cool players want to play jimmy page, Slash, iommi, hendrix. but brian? be serious. he couldnt write a cool riff if his life depended on it. it's just generic harmonies all over the place.

take the 2012 olympics for example. the freddie montage was cool but brians part was a big borefest (playing that stupid brighton rock solo again. cringeworthy), and if it wasn't for freddie's video brian would have no place in the ceremony. brian can't kiss Slash's feet when it comes to performing a cool solo.

when all is said and done, brian will be the weakest link in Queen's story, and the main reason why Queen, the band, won't be regarded higher.

Led zeppelin is remembered for killer riffs. so does sabbath. guns n roses. aerosmith.

Queen isn't remembered for the riffs. Queen is remembered for freddie.

in the meantime, brian and roger do everything in their power to tarnish the Queen legacy even further, touring with a travestite, releasing sub par product, and making a mockery of their fanbase.


I agree with your two final lines. The rest of the post: Utter rubbish.
 
Another_Roger
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 9:18 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Queen as a legacy act

Postby DREAMASTER » Sat Oct 01, 2016 7:04 pm

Sir Didymus wrote:I saw a post from fairydandy elsewhere, and while I'm not sure this was his intent, it chimed with my feelings on the band in recent years.

fairydandy wrote:QPL must be reading these comments wondering what the hell they have done now! Or more likely, someone at QPL is sitting there saying, 'I fucking told them what would happen if they release it like this'....

Queen is a nationally treasured band, but essentially the big sales are over. They don't have to give us anything at all, but to give us half-baked stuff like this, is always going to attract criticism.

I think it will sell moderately well though, 'cause despite our objections, we all want the sessions in good quality.


Moving to Universal Island (and somehow, back to Virgin EMI) should have been the start of Queen's reappraisal. And for a brief time there, when the reissues came out, it was. The London exhibition, the new compilations, the press interest... there was a real buzz about the band for the first time in years.

And then - nothing.

Look in your local record stores at the records that are heavily promoted from 'legacy artists'. Look on music websites and newspaper polls of great rock bands, classic rock songs, greatest riffs etc etc. Hell, look at the merchandise on sale everywhere from alternative stores to Primark and back again.

AC/DC - Check. Bowie - Check. Rolling Stones, Prince, Nirvana, Beatles, Led Zeppelin - check.

Why, oh, why, are Queen continually forgotten about? There's a whole new generation of younger music lovers out there, going back and rediscovering classic rock bands of the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s. And Queen are categorically NOT one of them: their music is still being marketed at the 'dads' who are now, in all likelihood, 'granddads'.

This vinyl revival and retrospective culture was the perfect time to finally make Queen 'cool'. And as per usual, it seems someone messed it up. Was it the Adam Lambert nonsense? Was it the lack of a new hook for the old hits? Was it simply that people only know the 'cheesy' singles? Was it the truly awful cover artwork for EVERYTHING they've released over the last ten years except Queen Forever?

Either way... something's going wrong. Universal spent a lot of money securing the band, and I'd be surprised if they're not regretting it by now...



Simple. Since they moved from EMI to Island/Universal there's no promotion at all and the prices for queen stuff are always high and there is Never promotional sales with better prices. On the other hand, I keep seeing lot's of promotions and good deal prices for bands like The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, The Doors, David Bowie, The Who, Deep Purple, Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd just to name a few old artists too.

Queen releases old and new are forgoten quicky and are collection dust while the artist I mention before, are in the front line of the consummer and selling well. So "half-baked stuff" releases like the deluxe edition don't hel it either.
I'm Back to the 3rd Round.
Bring It On.
 
DREAMASTER
Spread Your Wings
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 7:50 pm
Location: Portugal
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Next

Return to The Show Must Go On

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests