You are not logged in. Please register or login.

#91 Re: Guns N' Roses » Slash eyed Rose for solo album » 768 weeks ago

Axlin08 wrote:

I look forward to a new album everyday, even though I think a reunion is more likely at this point. I'm excited by the 2010 band, but Axl kills all dreams, because I know he'll never do a fucking thing other than cash grab tours.

I'm with you Naltav, my mouth drools over the prospect of another album or more. I'd love to see Axl stick with this lineup and release music.

But when he has no intention, that's when I get, "well if you're just gonna tour the hits, get the guys back that wrote the songs, otherwise release new music". Even Chinese Democracy has worn out it's welcome now, it's time for something new, and Whole Lotta Rosie ain't it.

I think you're right. I honestly don't think we'll ever see another album, not even if the original lineup reunited. Some think the old guys could get it out of him, but I think the pressure and stakes will be so much higher that it would never happen. Of course I also don't believe a reunion will ever happen either because he will never get over his bitterness. The man has not evolved at all in all these years. It's wishful thinking to expect it to happen suddenly over night.

#92 Re: Guns N' Roses » Slash eyed Rose for solo album » 768 weeks ago

Mikkamakka wrote:

If Axl thinks CD was perfect enough to get released, then the guy does not have an ounce of perfectionism at all.

Who said he thought it was perfect enough to be released? From where I sit it seems like it was only released because he was backed into a corner and needed the monkey off his back. He certainly was not happy with it and wanted nothing to do with it. If it wasn't for Azoff I am not sure it ever would have seen the light of day.

#93 Re: Guns N' Roses » Slash eyed Rose for solo album » 768 weeks ago

Axlin08 wrote:

Yeah, i'm starting to see it that way too. Axl is in no way Trent Reznor. He's either too lazy, too burnt, or too creatively exhausted, or a combo to continue to go on.

I know i'll get flamed for this, but I really think he knows, and doesn't want to admit, that guys like Izzy, Slash & Duff really fed him like a gas pump to a 4x4 pickup truck. He needs those guys and doesn't want to cop to it.

Although he enjoys playing the hits, and performing seems to have fun, creatively he's seemed bored since 1991.

CD, despite ending up a good album, is the clusterfuck of all rock albums. When you listen to it, it almost comes across as a man who doesn't want to work or can't phoning it in, because he got a bug up his ass in 1999 or a pile of bills, and decided to take another run at it. Obviously with the album's release in 2008, he regretted committing to it.

It saddens me, but I wonder if Axl blew his creative load on UYI and that's it. CD is almost like a collection of fragments of good ideas that other contract players whipped up into songs.

I always thought Axl was the best of his generation, but in alot of ways he was a one trick pony. He's like rock's Mark Prior. Prior was touted as the next great pitcher in baseball history. He was the power of Roger Clemens but with the finese of Greg Maddux. He was gonna be a legend. He finally makes it to the majors, has one real bonafide significant season in 2003 with the Cubs nearly making it to the World Series, and bam... the dude fades away, and within a few years was out of baseball completely. He's now a back-end rotation guy on a Double-A ball team in the sticks in the Rangers organization.

Why did I bore everyone with a baseball metaphor? Because Axl Rose is Mark Prior. And it bugs the hell out of me. Axl should've gotten to be Mick or Steven, like it was supposed to be.

Yeah, but Mark Prior's career was derailed by injuries. It's not like he just some one year phenom that burnt out, wink

I honestly think the issue is that Axl is such a perfectionist and an insecure person that he just isn't satisfied with anything he does. I think the burden of having to follow AFD and Illusions just magnifies it.

To me Axl is just like Lee Mavers of the La's, except Mavers was never able to get it together even for a brief moment unlike Axl.

For those that don't know the story the La's signed their first record deal around 86 or 87. The recording of their debut album was a painstaking process due to the constant lineup changes, revolving door of producers, and the constant need to re-record everything (sound familiar?). The problem was with Mavers who was never satisfied with the sound. Eventually the record company grew fed up and scrapped the sessions. The final producer they worked with ended up piecing together an album from his sessions with the band and it was released in 1990. The album well received by critics, but Mavers himself hated it and wanted nothing to do with it.

Since then the La's have done squat except for a handful of tours playing the same old stuff. Mavers has earned a reputation for being an eccentric recluse and a perfectionist. It has been said he is working on their second album, but no one knows if or when it will ever see the light of day.

IMO musicians like Mavers and Axl are just perfectionists who are never satisfied with what they do. They create these impossible standards for themselves and it cripples them.

#94 Re: Guns N' Roses » GUNS N' ROSES Belgrade Rider Revealed » 772 weeks ago

I like that he specifically asks for the honey in the bear shaped bottles. 16

#95 Re: Guns N' Roses » Alice's take on Axl » 772 weeks ago

monkeychow, I think those lyrics from Scraped pretty much sum up what a day in the life of Axl Rose is like. No doubt that was the reason behind all of those false starts over the years.

From a complete outsider's perspective it seems like the issue is that Axl has never been able to move past whatever demons that plague him. It seems like he has never been able to find a place of general contentment with his life. He's like a tortured soul which makes for a great artist but it's painful to watch.

I've always felt that fame was overrated and I imagine it messes with your head when you're someone as insecure as Axl is.


I think Axl would be a lot more productive if he was able to let go of the past and all of the anger that comes with it and find whatever it is that makes him truly happy. But the fact that he is closing in on 50 and hasn't seemed to experience any personal growth makes me doubt he will ever find that place which is quite sad.

#96 Re: Guns N' Roses » Reading, United Kingdom - August 27, 2010 (Reading Festival) » 773 weeks ago

misterID wrote:

Acquiesce, completely disagree. People (haters, disgruntled fans, whatever) would be totally putting up with all kinds of bullshit if it were the old band, just like people did back in the day when he and Slash were doing things "their way." I think the line up has a lot more to do with it than anyone is willing to admit. You've already said you prefer the old line up, stopped really caring about this band. I'm not calling you a liar, but its very difficult for me to see someone who wants/wanted the reunion to not be willing to put up with THIS shit with "their" favorite band, or not care that they were back together. Because being a GNR fan from the very start -- YOU HAVE PUT UP WITH THE SAME SHIT. That's part of being a GNR fan, no matter who's in the group. Of course if you don't have that attachment to the current line up you're not going to want to put up with any shit. So its hard for me to buy that his behavior has "suddenly" caused people to be fed up.

I'll admit it. I would totally be more "positive" if Robin and Bucket were still in the band. And I would put up with all kinds of shit to see them live. That's me being honest.

Okay, I get what you're saying. I think some fans would definitely be willing to put up with this garbage if they were more attached to the old lineup to the new. There would certainly be there fair share of old lineup nutswingers as there are for the new lineup, maybe even more.

I just don't think the frustration is because of the lineup. Certainly there are some fans that just don't accept this lineup and will be hard on them no matter what, but most people on the forums are/were fairly pro Axl and willing to give this lineup a chance. The forums now are day and night from what is was in 2002. The majority of the people posting then were pro Axl/new lineup, but the tide has been changing since around 06. It's not because they suddenly became old lineup supporters. It's because they are fed up with a band that doesn't respect their fans and keeps shooting themselves in the foot.

I don't agree that it's the same as it's always been. Sure, Axl was always a jerk with erratic behavior, but it was easier to overlook and tolerate back then when they were the biggest band in the world and there was a lot going on. However, with this band there isn't much going on to make it easier to gloss over the BS because Axl doesn't care to be a full time musician any longer. It's also a completely different world now. We're in a world where  bands can instantly connect to their fans due to the web and various social mediums. Bands feel more intimate now than ever but for the most part GNR refuse to participate in that which makes them seem further away and less fan friendly than ever.

Don't you think the tone of the forums would be a heck of a lot different if say CD was released in 06 with proper promotion and a proper world tour and then say a follow up was released last year with proper promotion and a world tour all the while the communicates with the fans? Even if Axl still continued his erratic behavior, don't you think a slew of activity would tide many fans over?

#97 Re: Guns N' Roses » Reading, United Kingdom - August 27, 2010 (Reading Festival) » 773 weeks ago

misterID wrote:

Acquiesce, I still don't understand why you would, at any point or time, have expected anything to be different, no matter who was in the band. Seriously, nothing has changed, outside of who's in the band. If you got the reunion at any point in the last 20 years, it would be exactly the same as what you got now.

Now that I think of it, Axl has always bragged about how a show/tour/band might go down in flames at any moment even in front of the other bandmates, since the very first interview I ever saw of him. He's said it to the point that it's now pretty generic. But I really don't see a difference in how he conducts himself from any other time hmm

Personally I don't expect anything other than what we see which is why I rarely visit this forum. I have been fairly apathetic about this band for the last year or so. I just happened to see a tweet about Reading and surfed on over to see what the drama was. Sadly the drama is far more entertaining than the actual band, IMO.

You're right it's not going to be different no matter who is in the band and that's my whole point in responding to you. People aren't upset with the lineup, it's the actions. I hear you though, this is who the band is and nothing is going to change. It just sounds like some fans who were able to accept it are suddenly at their breaking point. I've already met mine.

I think the difference between the past and now is there was a lot to look forward to during their heyday despite the BS. Now we get very little and that little is usually clouded with BS. Some fans are just happy their favorite band is active and just look at the positives and that is okay. Others just can't overlook all of the negative and it becomes aggravating. I guess those people just need to figure out whether it is worth it or not. For me it isn't.

#98 Re: Guns N' Roses » GN'R Twitter Updates » 773 weeks ago

faldor wrote:
russtcb wrote:
Neemo wrote:

unfortunately these guys asre in a position that they cant win right now...it doestn matter what they do at this stage cuz there are people (around here and elsewhere) that will slam them regardless

I completely disagree.

How about they show up on time? Early even? Play a little more than usual. Apologize for THEIR part in what happened at Reading? Any of those things would stop the bashing immediately.

It might stop the bashing HERE and at other forums, well at least lessen it, but I don't see the people THERE taking too kindly to them tonight.  Hope I'm wrong though.

They could easily get the crowd on their side right away if they owned up to their mistake. Axl could just say something like "I apologize for the band going on late last night. We thought we could finish our set before curfew, but obviously we were wrong and it was a mistake. We should have went on time to make sure you got your money's worth. I would like to thank the festival organizer's for all their work and extending curfew to 12. Most importantly, I would like to thank you fans for sticking with us and spending your hard earned money to come see us. I hope we could start to make it up to you by giving you a show to remember." Then proceed to give a killer performance.

He'd win a lot more people over to his side if he just owned up to his actions and act like the fans matter instead of shuffling the blame elsewhere and acting like he is the victim once again.

#99 Re: Guns N' Roses » Reading, United Kingdom - August 27, 2010 (Reading Festival) » 773 weeks ago

misterID wrote:

I might be brainwashed, but I'm really interested in what happens tonight. Axl treats fans like shit. We've known that for over 20 years. Along with the late starts and lame excuses. Been that way since the start. Nothing new.

I do think its kind of hypocrytical of people acting like this is so awful when its been going on forever, and its actually written in all their bios (pre nuGNR) that this shit is what made them a "bad ass" rock n roll band.

I have no doubt in my mind that the same people blasting him right now woud be licking Axl's ballsack if the 1988 line up was on tour right now, doing the same shit -- Meaning: the majority (not everyone) of the outrage on these boards has more to do with the who is and who isn't in the lineup than it does with Axl's childish behavior, imo. 

I can understand being fed up with the non production and arrogant fan interaction with the GNR camp, though. I just don't think that's the whole reason for the outrage. And the average Joe making fun of them and hating them? Meh, lived through the 90's. Nothing new there, either.

The only thing that would probably irreversibly make me hate this band is hanging around HTGTH and the Axlites for any long length of time.

I don't think it has anything to do with the lineup at this point. I can't speak for everyone, but personally I'd be far more disappointed if the 88 lineup reunited and he was still pulling this crap. I've never made it any secret than I prefer the original lineup to  the current band, but the absolute last thing I'd want to see is a reunion only to deal with a same ol' BS. I'd lose respect for Slash and co if they decided to come crawling back to Axl without making him eat some humble pie. I'd hate to see them sell out their integrity like that. To me that would be far more disappointing than what is going on now. There was a time where a reunion would been a dream come true for me, but I don't want any part of one if it would be like this. I don't ever want a reunion unless Axl gets over himself but that's never going to happen. So while musically I prefer the old band,  I've long been over the idea of a reunion.

For me the outrage stems from the fact that there has been far more lows than highs  with GNR in the past 15 years and they make no effort to turn it around. The hardcores stuck around regardless and they just get more BS slung their way. They like to pretend they care about the fans, but their actions always prove otherwise. It's just disrespectful for them to treat their fans that stuck around through all of the lows this way. I would honestly just rather the GNR name to finally be put to rest because this is just a sad pathetic shell of what was once a great band. It's nothing to do with the new guys either. The problem is this band revolves around Axl's out of control ego and he is incapable of leading this band into anywhere but the gutter.

To me this band seems like it's been stuck in limbo. Axl has an entirely new band and the hardcores have stuck around to move forward with him and watch him usher in a new era, but it's never really happened. All we got was  one record that should have been one of the most anticipated releases in the last decade, but instead it was totally anti-climatic and half-assed. Occasionally we get  a tour that temporarily rejuvenates the base, but it always ends with them self destructing in the same predictable fashion. Even before the self destruction the tours end up disappointing the fan base because instead of moving forward the band relies largely on the old material. The fans either want them to focus on the new era or if they are going to live in the past they should do it properly and reunite with the old band. No one wants a half-assed mish-mash of both eras.

The fact is this band is boring and it's nothing to do with who is in the lineup at this point. It's because there is little excitement. The little crumbs they do throw us are never done right and always end up in disappointment. This is a half-assed band due to their half-assed leader. That's the problem.

The fans are tired of the same ol' shit. They just want something new. They want a pay off for sticking around this long. Following a band should be fun, but the fun is far and few between with this band. It's just disappointment after disappointment. And we all know nothing is going to change. Who really expects anything but another period of silence when they are done touring?

The one thing I could say for a reunion is that it would bring excitement, but that excitement would only take us so far if Axl never bothered to change. I imagine the bitterness and disappointment would be at all time high if a reunion ended up like this. The band would be done for good, IMO.

#100 Re: Guns N' Roses » Just listened to Chinese Democracy again... » 794 weeks ago

The new Slash album inspired me to dust off my copy of Chinese Democracy as well as the two Velvet Revolver albums last week. I hadn't listened to any of them in ages.

I think listening to it so far removed from all of the drama has made me appreciate it more in a sense, but my opinion on it hasn't changed too much. I appreciate Shackler's more than I did and it's now one of my favorite tracks. On the other hand I like If the World a lot less than I did although it was never one of my favorites.

As for the demos vs the final album, I think I now prefer the album to the demos although the album version of Catcher is an abomination and I cringe every time I hear that track. The demo with Brian May is far superior.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB