You are not logged in. Please register or login.

#71 Re: Guns N' Roses » NIN imploding? Finck coming back? (NOPE!) » 863 weeks ago

I always forget the C in Finck. Sorry...

Robin Finck will tour with GNR in 2009

#72 Re: Guns N' Roses » Disecting Chinese Democracy: Album Art » 863 weeks ago

I think the pic of Axl sucks, there are better to choose from. The artwork feels rushed.

#74 Re: Guns N' Roses » what are we disappointed with? » 863 weeks ago

Mikkamakka wrote:

displaying the flop by acting like it'd be some huge art that people cannot understand is an Axl-type normalcy.

what is Axl-type normalcy? THAT is indeed a new one. I personally never have said CD was a work of art people don't get, and used it as an excuse. I am not making any excuses for Axl. But, at the same time I'm not going to sit here and pretend he's something he's not. Most people on here expected when CD dropped that his mental illness would be cured, and that he would parade around the scene kissing babies and co-hosting the morning show. I really don't understand how any of you could be shocked by his behavior. Yes, I will admit that record sales and the general excitement surrounding Guns N' Roses was/is a bit below my expectations, but Axl made his bed and he must now lie in it. However, none of that takes away from how much I love GNR and how truly happy I am that CD has been released. Just because it wasn't the biggest commercial success ever, doesn't take away from the integrity of the project in my eyes. Axl is 45+ plus years old and times have changed, the world is different from the time he was "on top". Even the most successful rock bands of TODAY aren't nearly as successful as GNR,Pearl Jam, Nirvana, RHCP, R.E.M. etc, etc where back when rock n' roll was still king. Times have changed my friends, CD is a great album, but even it has it's limitations - it can't turn back time. Also, when bringing AC/DC into this picture one must understand that they have an entire generation of fans that came before GNR ever existed, and they haven't pissed nearly as many people off. There are boat loads of people who hate GNR and/or just simply want to see them (Axl mainly) fail... the term "fuck Axl" has been around since 1990... So if you're gonna say it, then say it, "fuck Axl", but stop acting like this record sold 87,000 copies and is DOA for GNR, because I promise you all that is not the case here

#75 Re: Guns N' Roses » what are we disappointed with? » 863 weeks ago

Saikin wrote:

We will continue being realistic

Okay, you do that 22

#76 Re: Guns N' Roses » what are we disappointed with? » 863 weeks ago

NickNasty2009 wrote:

I'm not disappointed with anything. I saw Axl perform live 3 times and I got the record I wanted since I was a teenager and it by far met my expectations if not at points exceeded them.

The promotion, what critics think, what other people on think in alot of ways just doesn't matter. It's subjective and if we were all the genuises we sometimes think we are on these (and really any) internet forums then we'd all be living in little utopias where our every dream and command is realized. Fuck it. It's entertainment and it's a great piece of art that I thought I'd never see. And if nothing else ever comes, so be it.

Now, this is a well founded opinion/argument. 5

#77 Re: Guns N' Roses » what are we disappointed with? » 863 weeks ago

Saikin wrote:

I think CC has a strong way of looking at this.  It's a well founded view.  I'm pretty sure most of us aren't wanting Axl to be Bon Jovi- at least i know i'm not wanting him to do a country album anytime ever.

CC does not have a well founded point, what he says makes no sense. I would love to hear Axl do a country record, that wouldn't make him "Bon Jovi", it would just make all the "marks" scratch their heads... I don't think most of you even understand what the hell I'm talking about. Just ignore me and continue on with your useless and pointless off-base observations and opinions....It don't really matter

#78 Re: Guns N' Roses » what are we disappointed with? » 863 weeks ago

Communist China wrote:

Sure the album's awesome. But instead of re-launching GNR, it signals its final and complete cretaive death.

Make up your mind, is it a great album or does it signal death? You can't have it both ways. Creativity and album sales are NOT the same thing. Those of you  wanting/expecting Axl to "appeal" to the masses and be this "Bono" or " Bon Jovi" type of icon are in for a big dissapointment 16

#79 Re: Guns N' Roses » what are we disappointed with? » 863 weeks ago

madagas wrote:

All I ever wanted was the album and I got it. I wanted Axl Rose singing on record again. In the end, I am a little disappointed at sales SO FAR but really don't care what happens after this as long as Axl is doing something. Reunion? Fine. New band Chinese tour? Fine as long as Tommy is a part of it. Whatever happens, happens. The record is what I expected and I enjoy it as much as I enjoyed the Illusions....no need to debate what is better because I enjoy both. I enjoyed the old band and some things about the new band. The odyssey is over for me. Cheers.......or daggers to you few crazies killing each other over in the TWAT section.

I feel the same way as madagas about everything. GNR has never ever had "normalcy", and I don't see that ever changing. GNR has always been dangerous and unpredictable and that is what we are still seeing here. That being said, Axl is 45+ and things aren't the same. I don't think he needs to prove or impact the world in any kind of way to justify his existence. If GNR (old or new) tours again there will be riots, cancelled shows, and time when Axl is in a bad mood. This won't change. So, even if this record had sold 750,000 copies it's first week in the US, there was hevy promotion, and a massive tour kicked off this weekend (December 12) we would still have plenty to complain and shake our heads at, because Axl is Axl and there would be "bumps" in the road.

#80 Re: Guns N' Roses » Time magazine makes fun of the saga » 863 weeks ago

dr_love6977 wrote:
-Jack- wrote:

Cocaine and the new GNR is about as far away apart as it was close to the old band.

Have you ever really looked at Tommy Stinson?

I'm sure the guy who wrote that doesn't even know who Tommy Stinson is. It's a mute point. They are trying to say Axl does coke, it's obvious. If they are talking about Tommy, then the article is even lamer than I thought, as that really has nothing to do with anything. Plenty of great albums have been made by people doing plenty of drugs.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB