You misread what I was trying to say. People have been looking for a reason to rip on Muse, and they've always went to the wrong argument this whole time. Muse are unabashed Queen fanboys. I mean, it's BLATANT. They had their quick Radiohead fascination with Showbiz, and it's basically been a Queen love fest for the last 10+ years.

I mean, really, how can you listen to a song like "United States of Eurasia" or "Survival" and NOT see the Queen influence? They beat you over the head with it!

You mean musically right?
I just looked USOE and it reminds me of Bohemian Rapsody
And Madness is kinda similar to I Want to Break Free

meh Smashing Pumpkins in the 90s pulled of the Queen stadium rock grandiosity better than Muse does now, even though I see the comparisons , they dont have the songwriting capabilities to match the bombast.

No, they're very local, very niche, compared to real legends. And they lack the memorable hits. Most people would have trouble even naming one of their songs, let alone hum one. They are icons of the emo kid generation, but they're certainly not legendary.

See, I don't think you can really compare Queen and the Pumpkins. They're two different entities. Queen always had a tongue-in-cheek persona whether performing live or in-studio, whereas the Pumpkins seemingly only had that sparsely. Besides, the Pumpkins were primarily inspired by metal bands and early gothic rock bands. If they happened to reach grandiosity on the scale of Queen (and I don't think any other band has...I wouldn't even say Muse has), it wasn't because they were directly inspired by Queen.

Both musically and how each band carried/carries themselves. I like to refer to Muse as the 21st century version of Queen because, basically, they do everything like Queen did back in the day, only they strive to be even more grandiose and even more tongue-in-cheek. As much as I love the boys, though, it's practically impossible to match Queen's bombast. I still contend that they have come closest to it, though.

Yes. One of the best bands ever.

One of their weird stans tried to strangle me a few weeks ago so no.

They will be in the future.

Matthew Bellamy's vocals are seriously reminiscent of Thom Yorke. Obviously they have influences other than Radiohead though.

I think my anger with the Radiohead comparisons has much more to do with the musical comparisons than with the voice comparisons, because, honestly, they're vocally similar, though there are subtle differences. The primary difference is that Thom rarely overstretches his vocal boundaries, whereas Matt thrives on it. I guess it has something to do with how they USE their voices that separates them ultimately.

I think, although they are mostly known for one song